It’s something a teenager would write in between bouts of self-pity and jerking off.

Nailed it!

been a white people for 72 years.

Race-critical theory is so uncomfortable for white people precisely because it acts against the controls that govern the race-based system we live in.

"White" is a negatively-defined concept ("not a drop of blood" ) , which means those of us who play that role play it without a positive identity.

This is not a study, there are no references. All these white people OP's are more mind fucking and guilt tripping.

Post some real studies not opinions

of it's supporters. That is a very convenient and supporting thing to do. Dismiss dissent not as a disagreement but as proof of the original text. When in all actuality this is not reality.

This is not sociology This not professional research. It is opinion that some latch onto for what ever reason and I don't think it is a healthy one.

male white privilege is a fact of life doesn't mean you're 'guilty' or 'responsible' for it. Recognizing it the objective.

If you don't think there is a 50+ year old male white privilege at work look at these photos:

?1478180014



Even the gallery is almost all white.



No male white privilege here.



No white privilege here in the Senate.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0147e15079e8970b-600wi

The House .......

as truth.

here are critical of folks who don’t accept the OP word for word.

Just wondering, did you know indigenous people fought with other indigenous people and enslaved captors.

Do you know who captured the people who were sold into slavery for the white men?

Does that mean they have no culture?

Did you know that for centuries Europeans enslaved other Europeans in Whitelandia, perfecting hate before taking it overseas?

It's too bad that your education stopped there to basically say Africans and 1st Nations people did it to themselves. It's too bad that you take a well-known but awful truth about humankind to absolve yourself of the most brutal, barbarian scourge upon this Earth.

If you were the least bit curious and understand human beings further you'd look and find the most amazing stories of one African kingdom after another relentless fight to stop slavery on their lands.

Here's a snippet from a group I follow.

RESISTANCE: AFRICAN RESISTANCE TO SLAVERY

Chattel slavery, as it existed, was the worst kind of human bondage. Africans fought against and resisted slavery in their (1470 - 1800) homeland, on the seas, and in America. There was continuous resistance against Europeans during every phase of the slave trade. Because the rebellions of the African slaves increased, the slave traders created laws designed to reduce African resistance.

Much of the information about the resistance to slavery came from written documents kept by the European sailors. There is enough information, includling historical facts, examples of resistance, and dislike of the European slave trade, to establish that the enslavement of Africans was not accepted by African people.

African leaders and those opposing the European slave trade, organized and assigned large groups to keep watch for slave ships traveling to the East and whose crews were well-known for kidnapping Africans on the coast. For example, King Ansah of Ghana (1470-1486) had the Fante people watch for European ships, and prevented them from coming ashore. Many other African leaders did not permit Europeans in their kingdoms. In Benin, the people had heard of the intentions of the Europeans, so they killed them as soon as they came ashore. There were some kings who agreed to trade with the Europeans, but attempted to stop it once they saw the problems that were created in their lands. Through the tactics of several African leaders and kings, they were able to minimize the European slave trade but they could not stop it completely. The treachery and greed of the Europeans, hurt the African economy and, therefore, damaged trade relations. African King Nzenga Maremba tried to stop the slave trade in the Congo only after he originally participated in the trade in exchange for military items and support from Portugal. King Maremba agreed to release his African prisoners of war to the Portuguese who wanted the best (1470 - 1800) young African men as a bargaining chip to be sure the King kept his word. The Portuguese promised to train and educate the young men to become priests and later to return them to the Congo. King Meremba let the Portuguese convince him to take the Christian name, Alfonso, as a show of support. When Alfonso asked for the return of a few of his former prisoners, who had been trained to serve as physicians, surgeons, pharmacists, assistants for shipbuilders and carpenters, his requests were denied. After having his requests denied several times, King Alfonso learned that his prisoners of war had been sold as slaves in Portugal. In 1526, King Alfonso wrote to King John III, the former King of Portugal, and asked for his help in ending the slave trade in the Congo. He explained the freedoms that were given to the Portuguese, who had set up shops, become merchants in the Congo and had amassed fortunes. The people in the Congo could not do the same because they had complied with the agreement and now did not have the same abundance of wealth as the invaders. King Alfonso related that the damage was so great that his people and land were being seized daily. King Alfonso ended his letter to King John III with another request for his help because it was the will of the people in the Congo and other kingdoms that there should not be any trading of slaves nor markets for slaves.

Other countries that were resisting the slave trade throughout the continent of Africa were Senegal, Ghana, Benin, Ni geria, and Angola. In 1777, King Agadja, a Dahomean monarch, captured an Englishman and his slave raiding party who had entered his kingdom looking for more Africans. The Englishman and his crew were released after they promised to return all the Africans they had captured. King Agadja gave the Englishmen a warning to take to the rulers of England, that if any other slave traders were sent to his Kingdom, or other kingdoms, they would be killed. In 1787, the Senegal King of Almammy, passed a law that made it illegal to take enslaved Africans through his kingdom. To let (1470 – 1800) Europeans know how serious the law was, the king returned the presents French slave traders sent as bribes. Queen Nzingha of Angola fought a successful 30-year war against the slave traders of Portugal until the Portuguese negotiated a treaty with her in 1656. Their treaty remained in effect until she died in 1663.

Substitute "black people" for "white people" in the headline and see how it comes across.

To me the very young white author of this piece has enough research to back up her claim about white culture - not Irish-American culture, Italian-American , Polish-American culture, et cetera - that has been studied now for at least 30 years and has moved from hypothesis to the category of theory, Critical Race Theory of the mid 1970s. She grew up with 100 million Google published research hits that are studies of whiteness or white culture before she was even born.

Whiteness studies have moved so far on from guesses or an attempt to explain something to, can you believe it, diversity training popping for years and everywhere based on substantial data.

Look it up because you really do sound like your republican brethren using words they do not understand but still deliver the same old regressive bullshit.

And who would want to divide Dems? Hmmm, I wonder....

This guy


And these guys

but see their support for the struggle for equal opportunity as a favor they bestow on deserving people and causes and feel entitled to withdraw it if they are made to feel uncomfortable or not appropriately appreciated.

Otherwise why would anything that is stranger writes about race on an anonymous political message board cause them to "divide" from anything or anybody?

what it is.

What specifically in my post was "racist?" And, when answering, be sure to define the term "racist" and what specifically in my post met that definition and why.

Or do you just like throwing that term around whenever someone says something about race that you don't agree with?

James Baldwin once said, "You - white people - have given me a terrifying advantage: you never had to look at me; I had to look at you. I know more about you than you know about me. Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is faced."

Stick around some more and you'll learn more.

Brother Baldwin always made it plain.

There are good and bad things about all cultures because humans make them up. We all have differing views about life and culture is our response to what life brings us.

White people have a physical and aesthetic milieu we grow up in. But we're never taught to (in fact we're discouraged from) consciously articulating that milieu as a constructed culture, but instead encouraged to accept it as "nature". It's why the (non-white) comedians' cliche "white people be like" jokes are funny to white people: we don't think of ourselves as having characteristics as white people.

I don't think of all Asians as sharing a universal culture. Saying that white people as a whole do this or that is like saying Chinese, Japanese, same thing! Europe has many cultures which are more distinct even than all the cultures in the U.S. There is a sort of culture that we share in the U.S., I'll give you that, but it's mostly about capitalism and mass consumption. It's a mile wide and an inch deep. I think it's really more of a common touchstone than a true culture.

But it was plain as day once I moved back...

analyzes another group of people.
Then when those who are analyzed, tell the analyzers to stick it, analyzers go, “see? Denial!”

And who would benefit from division among Dems...?

Who does it divide from whom and how?

I assume you're not serious.

Don't feel bad. Most people who accuse anyone who discusses race in a way that makes them uncomfortable of being "divisive" have similar difficulty explaining why and how such discussions cause any open-minded person to "divide" themselves from the cause of civil rights and racial justice and/or the people fighting it.

You're not alone in your inability to define your terms.

I guess I gave you too much credit; I generally assume Democrats have common sense.

Racial stereotypes (e.g. "White people have no culture" ) are created for the purpose of dividing people from each other along racial lines. If you are unclear whether a statement is racist, try substituting another race for that in the headline. For many people, that test is most pointed if they choose their own race for the test. (e.g. "Brown people have no culture." ) If it makes you feel uncomfortable, it's racist.

them? How does their saying something you think is racist divide you in any way that you find harmful?

And just because it makes you uncomfortable doesn't make it racist. But the fact that you believe that to be true does speak volumes.

People say things all the time about race that make me uncomfortable - sometimes it makes me uncomfortable because they are ignorant, sometimes it's because they see things very differently than I do, sometimes it's because what they say is it's true and they just held a mirror up to me, which is never pleasant, but is very helpful.

The insistence that conversations about race must only be conducted in ways that make no one in the conversation uncomfortable mean you really aren't interested in reaching solutions but just want to be assured that you're doing everything right and you have nothing to learn. That doesn't make the conversation divisive but it does mean that you may not really be ready to do the work necessary to make meaningful change in this area.

But you still have not explained how this particular article is "divisive," who it divides and from whom it divides them.

So rare to see real out there counter culture efforts. Reminds me of back in the day, so angry about war in Central America.

we're not ever supposed to say "white people," much less discuss them ...

Which I guess was the point

From anyone but her mother. Just saying.

(Now before you read any further... this is half-snark. Half-real too though. Full disclosure: I am white myself.)

White people go into schools and they butcher people, including kids and they invaded a Muslim nation because they thought they were freeing people or so they said, one of their many excuses for this in 2003.

The question is why?

Look at their culture.

They glorify violence. Everything is a "war on" something or something else. War on Coal. War on Drugs. War on Terror. Good lord, if you say "Happy Holidays", you are waging a "war on Christmas" against white people. They simply do not want peace and they are very war-like.

They have poor role models. Just look for they voted for to be President. They hold up billionaires, who if they hoarded cats and newspapers would be seen as disgusting and mentally ill, but change it to pieces of green paper, and all of the sudden we need to emulate them or else you are waging class warfare... see? Yet another war on something.

They don't accept personal responsibility. When they lose their jobs, it's because of minorities or immigrants according to them, they certainly don't want to accept their own agency and they definitely don't want to see that the person who didn't hire them is white just like them.

(Now notice how you see these same things being said about people of color, people from other countries, Muslims, etc. You will notice it not being called out and there won't be any complaints about it being divisive. White is the difference here?)

ideas fall apart. You can’t judge millions of people based on the actions of a few.


If anything you would be closer to say all white people opposed the Iraq war.

Toward white people?

After centuries of Western "progress", the "Renaissance", the "Enlightenment", the "Industrial Revolution" ... what do you get, among the most "civilized" nations on earth, crimes of mass violence and genocide on a scale of 60 million dead that the most "uncivilized" peoples could have never imagined.

Yes, Native American culture as a whole was absolutely beautiful, and yes, the US (among other countries) did commit systematic GENOCIDE against them (which hasn’t gotten better). However, can we stop “noble savaging” Native Americans as mystical, delicate beings that were just too pure for this world? There is no one “Native American” culture, and every society (some arguably countries) had its own culture and story.

The author does exactly what she derides in the article. She sums up a culture (actually, many that were too different to lump together) in an unrealistic, infantile way. It drives me crazy that Hollywood still does this crap in movies now.

Native American culture goes beyond pots and fires and drawings. That sounds like Disney World. I urge everybody to research the various different MesoAmerican and North American societies throughout history. It is tragic what happened to them, but their histories are highly interesting.

I personally love the Aztecs - they were a brutal but interesting society.