General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"We can't talk about racism until no white people are poor."
That's how it sounds to me when people say we should talk about class issues and wealth disparity only and that we should specifically not talk about racism because it takes away from the discussion of wealth disparity.
kicking my own post. Or we could just talk about acupuncture all day again.
cali
(114,904 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)gollygee
(22,336 posts)but that's the sentiment.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024279050#post24
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Now just look at how many important things that are actually happening today are being talked about here.
It is the same thing, done by the same people over and over and over for years.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I think that economic issues are very important of course; and there are racial issues that don't seem quite as important in comparison - areas of Political Correctness for example.
What would be an example of an racism issue you would like to discuss but you feel gets overrun by people telling you not to talk about it?
Bryant
gollygee
(22,336 posts)is that any discussion of racism at all is divisive and that the 1% loves to see us talk about racism because it keeps us from discussing the only subject that is REALLY important, which is classism and wealth disparity.
Though I think there are people who feel that way who at the same time feel it is very important to talk about the dangers of aromatherapy and acupuncture.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Or white privilege? I noticed that all of the posts you linked to above are related to white privilege. You do recognize that those are distinct but related issues?
Bryant
gollygee
(22,336 posts)If person A has a harder time (racism)
than person B has an easier time (white privilege)
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)Racism generally implies culpability; deciding that black people just aren't worth as much as white people. White privilege works differently. It's a set of unconscious reactions and beliefs. "I gave them all a fair chance, but Smith (white) was clearly more polished than Gleason (black), and I just think he'd fit in here better. I'll hire Smith."
Its harder to pinpoint that sort of racism, and it's also harder to get people to feel guilty for it. And then again, once you get people to feel guilty about it what's the next step? Other than being careful not to engage in such attitudes yourself.
Also of course, the economic warfare waged against the poor affects people a great deal more in my opinion.
Bryant
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)if person A has an easier time because he's rich (privileged)
than person B has a harder time because he's poor (not privileged)
All you have to do is make person A black and person B white and zip-zop, white privilege isn't worth the paper it is printed on.
Shandris
(3,447 posts)..."generalization is good and provides the best alternatives to helping individual people, so this theory that a segment of the population has elevated to the point of a near-religion can't be questioned, even if the questioning is simply to see if perhaps there isn't a better way to use it."
As I keep saying, if all focus goes onto one or two privileges and not how they interact you will -never- accomplish your goal. EVER. Because movements aren't made of vague numerical representations, they are made of individuals -- individuals who must be connected with.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)about privilege. None sounded to me like the quote you made.
Racism is discussed all the time on DU, it only becomes contentious when the inflammatory word "privilege" is used.
It's not surprising that people who are poor get angry when you start calling them privileged. Don't conflate that with the very positive, sympathetic threads we get going on racism.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)and yet some people think that talking about "white privilege" is the only, or best way, to talk about racism. Or that to deny "white privilege" is to deny racism.
MissMillie
(38,451 posts)they link it to race.
I don't see how you can have a discussion of one w/o the other.
struggle4progress
(118,032 posts)the class-structure it imposes
"Race" as a social notion, of course, is real: it has ugly ramifications in the real lives of real people, and for that reason it must be considered when trying to learn the lessons of history. But the point of emphasizing class issues, rather than "race" issues, is that the lower classes ought to be, and need to be, united to fight for common interests and that emphasizing "race" perpetuates imaginary divisions that benefit the status quo.
The proper understanding of race IMO is this:
Racist theories function in a manner similar to the sexist theories that impose "glass ceilings" on women: whether we're discussing chattel slavery, chain-gang labor, or the more recent anti-Hispanic "Juan Crow" system, the theory of "race" has always been used to obscure whose labor can be exploited on grounds of inferiority, criminality, or purported illegal presence in the country, just as anti-feminist theorizing has been effectively used to confine women to lower paying jobs
That is not to say that racist or sexist thinking has disappeared, nor even that any of us -- conditioned as we are by cultural context -- is free of such thinking. And it is not to say that we can ignore the realities and perceptions of racist or sexist experiences of our contemporaries: these matters require constant critical attention. But we will better understand the underlying political tasks we face if we proceed on the basis of a class-analysis