Learning about white privilege is anti-white, studies prove

[Ostroeuropa]

I note plenty of the progressives here backpeddling and saying all it proves is that we need to include class in order not to be anti-white have implicitly conceded by doing so that the media is massively racist against white people on a regular basis.

I am not backpeddling in the least. I have always held classism and gaslighting of the working classes is a cornerstone of our media and entertainment industry and I still believe this highlights its existence as opposed to the existence of racism against white people.

We've established at the very least that discussion of white privilege without inclusion of class privilege reduces sympathy for white people in poverty, how is that not racism? Especially when the media pushes that narrative routinely.
That's assuming that proposed solution would even work, which hasn't been shown by data.

Personally i'm inclined to think a race privilege narrative is going to be racist no matter what modifiers you tack on to it because of the emotional impetus behind it.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explor ... 0privilege

Here you go. The media environment is precisely the same as the study conducted, ergo, widespread anti-white racist media campaign reducing sympathy for whites, but not actually helping black people by doing so. Literally not enough news articles with the term class privilege to make google notice them.

[Caracasus]

I am not backpeddling in the least. I have always held classism and gaslighting of the working classes is a cornerstone of our media and entertainment industry and I still believe this highlights its existence as opposed to the existence of racism against white people.

We've established at the very least that discussion of white privilege without inclusion of class privilege reduces sympathy for white people in poverty, how is that not racism? Especially when the media pushes that narrative routinely.
That's assuming that proposed solution would even work, which hasn't been shown by data.

Personally i'm inclined to think a race privilege narrative is going to be racist no matter what modifiers you tack on to it because of the emotional impetus behind it.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explor ... 0privilege

Here you go. The media environment is precisely the same as the study conducted, ergo, widespread anti-white racist media campaign. Literally not enough news articles with the term class privilege to make google notice them.

I mean, racism and sexism does tend to be the byproduct of any attempt to understand power relations in a capitalist society that refuses to take into account material circumstance and class, but the thing here isn't that we should somehow not bother understanding or unpicking racist attitudes, it's that a marxist lens is needed when understanding power relations in our society.

You know, literally the first point I made. You're getting wound up about the wrong thing here.

[Ostroeuropa]

We've established at the very least that discussion of white privilege without inclusion of class privilege reduces sympathy for white people in poverty, how is that not racism? Especially when the media pushes that narrative routinely.
That's assuming that proposed solution would even work, which hasn't been shown by data.

Personally i'm inclined to think a race privilege narrative is going to be racist no matter what modifiers you tack on to it because of the emotional impetus behind it.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explor ... 0privilege

Here you go. The media environment is precisely the same as the study conducted, ergo, widespread anti-white racist media campaign. Literally not enough news articles with the term class privilege to make google notice them.

I mean, racism and sexism does tend to be the byproduct of any attempt to understand power relations in a capitalist society that refuses to take into account material circumstance and class, but the thing here isn't that we should somehow not bother understanding or unpicking racist attitudes, it's that a marxist lens is needed when understanding power relations in our society.

You know, literally the first point I made. You're getting wound up about the wrong thing here.

You've offered no justification for framing the discussion around privilege and white people instead of disadvantage and black people.

[Sanctum and Ultima]

Obviously, even from a socialist perspective

[Former Citizens of the Nimbus System]

To be honest, unless it clearly and unambiguously fits and is inappropriate for the given people to have at all, we should probably throw out "privilege" as a concept altogether. The way the dominant group is treated is the way all should be treated.

Would it be better for white people to be treated more like black people for instance, or better for black people to be treated more like white people?

If being treated the way white people are treated should be the standard for everyone, then white people don't have privilege - they have the "standard" treatment, and we need to work on raising black people up to that level of treatment. If everyone should be treated the way black people are treated, then focusing on white privilege makes sense - as you need to tear them down to the level of black people to get equality.

As someone who typically finds himself aligned with the American left's position on social issues, I think this is genuinely quite insightful and makes a good deal of sense.

That has sparked another, similar thought: while I still find myself horrified by the way that the term 'social justice warrior' has been corrupted in recent years, there is a big problem with it in that the typical conception of 'justice' is centred on retribution, even if that has fallen behind philosophy and enlightened legal practice. I can see how it caught on - 'justice' also has connotations of strength that would be appealing - but it suggests a flawed objective for a social movement, at least in my eyes.

Society is not a zero sum game; both of these terms imply exactly that, however, and poor terminology can have a powerful negative influence on understanding and, through that, debate. I am not entirely sure what we could replace these with but I suspect that that replacement might be in order.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Groundbreaking study(!)

[Des-Bal]

Wait a minute- learning a bunch of reasons one group has it easy doesn't make you sympathetic to other groups it just makes you less sympathetic to the target group? The fuck you say.


Seriously compare the way people talk about white privilege and the way racists talk about welfare queens and affirmative action. Why would taking that persective do anything but encourage hate, distrust, and dehumanization?

[Threlizdun]

I'm a bit curious about actually obtaining their full data set, as well as the studies on white privilege they provided to the subjects. Variables such as the class composition of the respondents appears to be missing, which could offer considerable insight into the manner in which the respondents held familiarity with class inequality and the struggles it presents.

The findings of the study strike me as odd, which makes me really curious about the materials being shared with the respondents. I know of few classes that will teach about white privilege without also touching on class inequality and the systemic barriers provided by it, as well as its relation to racial and sexual inequalities.

The specifics of the situations provided to the respondents as examples also are important to consider. We know that the example provided to them is identical aside from Kevin being identified as black in one example and white in another, but the situations Kevin finds himself in for the example remains unclear to the reader. The difference of Kevin's race actually could drastically alter the manner in which he experiences the situation offers.

This is an interesting study, but the number of variables not included within the report gives me pause as someone who has conducted social research. If the findings indicate that teaching of white privilege without also including discussion of class inequality reduce empathy for the white poor, then obviously such a lack of an intersectional analysis needs to be addressed. This does not in any way indicate, as many in this thread have been suggesting, that white privilege is fake and some conspiratorial ploy to reduce sympathy for white people, or that the evidence for it should be discarded and lessons on it discontinued from classes concerning racial identity and inequality.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm a bit curious about actually obtaining their full data set, as well as the studies on white privilege they provided to the subjects. Variables such as the class composition of the respondents appears to be missing, which could offer considerable insight into the manner in which the respondents held familiarity with class inequality and the struggles it presents.

The findings of the study strike me as odd, which makes me really curious about the materials being shared with the respondents. I know of few classes that will teach about white privilege without also touching on class inequality and the systemic barriers provided by it, as well as its relation to racial and sexual inequalities.

The specifics of the situations provided to the respondents as examples also are important to consider. We know that the example provided to them is identical aside from Kevin being identified as black in one example and white in another, but the situations Kevin finds himself in for the example remains unclear to the reader. The difference of Kevin's race actually could drastically alter the manner in which he experiences the situation offers.

This is an interesting study, but the number of variables not included within the report gives me pause as someone who has conducted social research. If the findings indicate that teaching of white privilege without also including discussion of class inequality reduce empathy for the white poor, then obviously such a lack of an intersectional analysis needs to be addressed. This does not in any way indicate, as many in this thread have been suggesting, that white privilege is fake and some conspiratorial ploy to reduce sympathy for white people, or that the evidence for it should be discarded and lessons on it discontinued from classes concerning racial identity and inequality.

Prejudice and incompetence doesn't need to be a conspiracy. White privilege is a story you tell about facts to frame them in a narrative, it is not a fact in and of itself, and it involves selecting certain facts and ignoring others to present that narrative. If the result is lower sympathy for white people, that makes it a bad narrative. "fake" or "real" doesn't enter into it.

It's not the first study to draw similar conclusions. A while back there was a study with homeless people that noted if the subject was white, sympathy was reduced, and that took place in a radically different environment with different things being studied.

Wait a minute- learning a bunch of reasons one group has it easy doesn't make you sympathetic to other groups it just makes you less sympathetic to the target group? The fuck you say.


Seriously compare the way people talk about white privilege and the way racists talk about welfare queens and affirmative action. Why would taking that persective do anything but encourage hate, distrust, and dehumanization?

Hence poll option one. But apparently some people need this shit proven to them, and even then, some still don't accept it.

"Hey guys, talking about white privilege means you have the same level of sympathy for whites as conservatives do for black people. You know, those MAGA guys you think are neo-nazis."

[East Angria]

Learning about white privilege is anti-white, studies prove

[T]he privilege narrative does not actually provide an emotional impetus for anything except resenting white people by placing the focus with them, instead of on disadvantages others face.

The concept of privilege makes people dislike the privileged group, rather than increasing support for the disadvantaged group.

It is not pro-minority, or pro-equality, but anti-white. The data shows that to be the case.

I'm gonna go principle of charity all the way on you here. First, this study did not prove that "[l]earning about white privilege is anti-white". I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. The study showed that a vague "lesson on white privilege" decreased sympathy for a white person popping up in a text in conservative US citizens only. That's not a whole lot of evidence to prop up the claim that "[l]earning about white privilege is anti-white".

You do raise an important point, and that's how we should tackle the problem of racism and inequality between the races in our present societies. I think you're right. It probably doesn't help a whole lot to focus on privileges and advantages that one group undoubtedly has. As was shown in the study, that only breeds jealousy and enstrangement. It reduces empathy. So what should we do instead?

You say we should focus on the disadvantages that other groups face. We should do something pro-minority, pro-equality. I agree. Now, how do we do that without teaching and learning about advantages and privileges that one group has over the others? You can't learn that black people are more likely to be poor, to be imprisoned, to get murdered by police etc. without learning at the same time that white people are less likely to have those things happen to them. Even if you don't explicitly state it, the implicit information is still there. So, is all you're suggesting that we should change the framing and focus more on disadvantages and challenges that affect certain groups, instead of the other side of the coin? Or are you suggesting that we shouldn't talk about race disparities at all, and that we should just leave things be the way they are?

We've established at the very least that discussion of white privilege without inclusion of class privilege reduces sympathy for white people in poverty, how is that not racism? Especially when the media pushes that narrative routinely.
That's assuming that proposed solution would even work, which hasn't been shown by data.

Personally i'm inclined to think a race privilege narrative is going to be racist no matter what modifiers you tack on to it because of the emotional impetus behind it.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explor ... 0privilege

Here you go. The media environment is precisely the same as the study conducted, ergo, widespread anti-white racist media campaign reducing sympathy for whites, but not actually helping black people by doing so. Literally not enough news articles with the term class privilege to make google notice them.

Stop me if you've heared this one before, but it cannot be stressed enough:

There is no such thing as racism against white people.

You've probably stopped reading this post at the last sentence, but in case you haven't, please hear me out. Thank you very much.
Racism isn't just negative attitudes towards another group based on "race". It is the systematic exclusion, segregation, colonialization, conquest, slavery, rape, genocide, and oppression of native Americans, black people, Asians, and other groups at the hands of white people.

This guy explained it in a quick and funny way, give it a watch if you like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw_mRaIHb-M

[Liriena]

I'd like to congratulate Ostro for independently discovering the need for intersectionality by figuring out that social liberalism is not guaranteed to be conducive to a more egalitarian and just worldview unless it goes hand in hand with class consciousness and left-wing economics.

[Liriena]

I'm a bit curious about actually obtaining their full data set, as well as the studies on white privilege they provided to the subjects. Variables such as the class composition of the respondents appears to be missing, which could offer considerable insight into the manner in which the respondents held familiarity with class inequality and the struggles it presents.

The findings of the study strike me as odd, which makes me really curious about the materials being shared with the respondents. I know of few classes that will teach about white privilege without also touching on class inequality and the systemic barriers provided by it, as well as its relation to racial and sexual inequalities.

The specifics of the situations provided to the respondents as examples also are important to consider. We know that the example provided to them is identical aside from Kevin being identified as black in one example and white in another, but the situations Kevin finds himself in for the example remains unclear to the reader. The difference of Kevin's race actually could drastically alter the manner in which he experiences the situation offers.

This is an interesting study, but the number of variables not included within the report gives me pause as someone who has conducted social research. If the findings indicate that teaching of white privilege without also including discussion of class inequality reduce empathy for the white poor, then obviously such a lack of an intersectional analysis needs to be addressed. This does not in any way indicate, as many in this thread have been suggesting, that white privilege is fake and some conspiratorial ploy to reduce sympathy for white people, or that the evidence for it should be discarded and lessons on it discontinued from classes concerning racial identity and inequality.

Interesting how Ostro just straight up ignored your sampling and methodology concerns.

[Proctopeo]

In all honesty, not that surprising. Explains a lot tbh

Can you find that study? Please, by all means.

I have better things to do with my life than fighting meaningless wars with MRAs who will never account to anything in the long run.

Please listen to what I'm telling you Ostro.

"I won't prove my assertions but just believe me that you're wrong and also fuck you"
Real classy, and not even remotely a contribution, much less a helpful one.

Vice Media founded by the same person who founded neo-fascist group The Proud Boys.

He hasn't been associated with Vice for over a decade. And to show how little it matters, Huffington Post was co-founded by Andrew Breitbart, for example.
Oh, yeah, by the way, the man you mentioned was only one of three co-founders.

[Ostroeuropa]

Learning about white privilege is anti-white, studies prove

[T]he privilege narrative does not actually provide an emotional impetus for anything except resenting white people by placing the focus with them, instead of on disadvantages others face.

The concept of privilege makes people dislike the privileged group, rather than increasing support for the disadvantaged group.

It is not pro-minority, or pro-equality, but anti-white. The data shows that to be the case.

I'm gonna go principle of charity all the way on you here. First, this study did not prove that "[l]earning about white privilege is anti-white". I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. The study showed that a vague "lesson on white privilege" decreased sympathy for a white person popping up in a text in conservative US citizens only. That's not a whole lot of evidence to prop up the claim that "[l]earning about white privilege is anti-white".

You do raise an important point, and that's how we should tackle the problem of racism and inequality between the races in our present societies. I think you're right. It probably doesn't help a whole lot to focus on privileges and advantages that one group undoubtedly has. As was shown in the study, that only breeds jealousy and enstrangement. It reduces empathy. So what should we do instead?

You say we should focus on the disadvantages that other groups face. We should do something pro-minority, pro-equality. I agree. Now, how do we do that without teaching and learning about advantages and privileges that one group has over the others? You can't learn that black people are more likely to be poor, to be imprisoned, to get murdered by police etc. without learning at the same time that white people are less likely to have those things happen to them. Even if you don't explicitly state it, the implicit information is still there. So, is all you're suggesting that we should change the framing and focus more on disadvantages and challenges that affect certain groups, instead of the other side of the coin? Or are you suggesting that we shouldn't talk about race disparities at all, and that we should just leave things be the way they are?

We've established at the very least that discussion of white privilege without inclusion of class privilege reduces sympathy for white people in poverty, how is that not racism? Especially when the media pushes that narrative routinely.
That's assuming that proposed solution would even work, which hasn't been shown by data.

Personally i'm inclined to think a race privilege narrative is going to be racist no matter what modifiers you tack on to it because of the emotional impetus behind it.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explor ... 0privilege

Here you go. The media environment is precisely the same as the study conducted, ergo, widespread anti-white racist media campaign reducing sympathy for whites, but not actually helping black people by doing so. Literally not enough news articles with the term class privilege to make google notice them.

Stop me if you've heared this one before, but it cannot be stressed enough:

There is no such thing as racism against white people.

You've probably stopped reading this post at the last sentence, but in case you haven't, please hear me out. Thank you very much.
Racism isn't just negative attitudes towards another group based on "race". It is the systematic exclusion, segregation, colonialization, conquest, slavery, rape, genocide, and oppression of native Americans, black people, Asians, and other groups at the hands of white people.

This guy explained it in a quick and funny way, give it a watch if you like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw_mRaIHb-M

1. It wasn't conservatives only. In fact only Liberals found their empathy for white people reduced by a lesson on white privilege. I'm gonna go out on a humanist limb here;

If you lack empathy for people because of their race, that's like, bad. Mmkay?

2. Yeah, you can. "The police are more likely to do X to black people because of viewing them a particular way and because of economic effects like blah.". Real simple. Focus on discussing disadvantages. For one thing this also has the benefit of tackling inter-minority racism rather than pretending everything is down to the evil white man.

3. This study pretty much proved there is, you're basing the notion there isn't racism against white people on the same ideology and framework based in a lack of empathy for them.

4. Lowered empathy for working class whites can lead to rape cases not being taken seriously (see Rotherham and the "White trash" response of the police referring to victims). Maybe if they had higher empathy for whites they wouldn't have done that? Exclusion occurs, and so on, too. The rest are examples of racism, but do not define the totality of it.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'd like to congratulate Ostro for independently discovering the need for intersectionality by figuring out that social liberalism is not guaranteed to be conducive to a more egalitarian and just worldview unless it goes hand in hand with class consciousness and left-wing economics.

Aren't you someone who repeatedly denied the idea that anti-white racism was prevalent in the media? Besides which, this is merely a claim of yours that this would resolve the issue. It is not in itself proven.

[Nova Cyberia]

Almost as if constantly demonizing white men makes one less sympathetic toward them.

Who knew?

[Ostroeuropa]

Almost as if constantly demonizing white men makes one less sympathetic toward them.

Who knew?

Everyone who hasn't had to rebuild their house after a visit from the kool aid man.

[Liriena]

I'd like to congratulate Ostro for independently discovering the need for intersectionality by figuring out that social liberalism is not guaranteed to be conducive to a more egalitarian and just worldview unless it goes hand in hand with class consciousness and left-wing economics.

Aren't you someone who repeatedly denied the idea that anti-white racism was prevalent in the media?

And I still do

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

There is going to be a time when you'll regret spending so much of your time and youth defending white supremacists and MRAs in a niche nation-building forum, Ostro.

As for the study, is it a study. You could probably find a study proving the opposite.

You say "white supremacist" and "MRA" together like they're similar, like they're the same basic thing but just on different planes, one being race, the other being gender. This is not true. One is inherently supremacist, the other is not.

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm a bit curious about actually obtaining their full data set, as well as the studies on white privilege they provided to the subjects. Variables such as the class composition of the respondents appears to be missing, which could offer considerable insight into the manner in which the respondents held familiarity with class inequality and the struggles it presents.

The findings of the study strike me as odd, which makes me really curious about the materials being shared with the respondents. I know of few classes that will teach about white privilege without also touching on class inequality and the systemic barriers provided by it, as well as its relation to racial and sexual inequalities.

The specifics of the situations provided to the respondents as examples also are important to consider. We know that the example provided to them is identical aside from Kevin being identified as black in one example and white in another, but the situations Kevin finds himself in for the example remains unclear to the reader. The difference of Kevin's race actually could drastically alter the manner in which he experiences the situation offers.

This is an interesting study, but the number of variables not included within the report gives me pause as someone who has conducted social research. If the findings indicate that teaching of white privilege without also including discussion of class inequality reduce empathy for the white poor, then obviously such a lack of an intersectional analysis needs to be addressed. This does not in any way indicate, as many in this thread have been suggesting, that white privilege is fake and some conspiratorial ploy to reduce sympathy for white people, or that the evidence for it should be discarded and lessons on it discontinued from classes concerning racial identity and inequality.

Interesting how Ostro just straight up ignored your sampling and methodology concerns.

Referencing a second study isn't ignoring those concerns Lir. It's addressing them.

Aren't you someone who repeatedly denied the idea that anti-white racism was prevalent in the media?

And I still do

If constant reference to white privilege without inclusion of class privilege lowers empathy for white people and makes people less empathetic toward them than other races, how is that not racism?

For example, reference to black criminality without important context would be systemic media racism, yes?

Go ahead, what's your reasoning. Previously you could argue that just because an article references white privilege and doesn't mention class doesn't make it de-facto anti-white, we now know that is not the case.

[Nova Cyberia]

There is going to be a time when you'll regret spending so much of your time and youth defending white supremacists and MRAs in a niche nation-building forum, Ostro.

As for the study, is it a study. You could probably find a study proving the opposite.

You say "white supremacist" and "MRA" together like they're similar, like they're the same basic thing but just on different planes, one being race, the other being gender. This is not true. One is inherently supremacist, the other is not.

If you're a progressive then you probably don't see much of a difference, tbh.

[Skarten]

Insert Curb Your Enthusiasm Theme

[Des-Bal]

Hence poll option one. But apparently some people need this shit proven to them, and even then, some still don't accept it.

"Hey guys, talking about white privilege means you have the same level of sympathy for whites as conservatives do for black people. You know, those MAGA guys you think are neo-nazis."

I mean it's not like an accident, "whiteness" as a concept was developed as a means to prevent white indentured servants and black slaves from working together. It was this idea that poor whites were more like the rich whites holding them in bondage than the black slaves being held in bondage as well. I think that a lot of white privilege talk props up the idea that white people and black people are different and can't understand each other's experiences in a lot of the same way as the original conception.

[Hanafuridake]

"White privilege" is a myth that is used to destroy white people, and cause them to hate themselves. This myth then makes whites open up their countries' borders and social institutions even further, because they are afraid of being viewed with privilege. Total nonsense. Whites have worked and have fought long and hard for what they have, it is not through privilege that they have what they have.

Most European social institutions have been Christian throughout history which has a universalist and not racial character. Countries accept immigrants for a lot of reasons, not because they're scared of a college student calling them a name.

[Ostroeuropa]

Hence poll option one. But apparently some people need this shit proven to them, and even then, some still don't accept it.

"Hey guys, talking about white privilege means you have the same level of sympathy for whites as conservatives do for black people. You know, those MAGA guys you think are neo-nazis."

I mean it's not like an accident, "whiteness" as a concept was developed as a means to prevent white indentured servants and black slaves from working together. It was this idea that poor whites were more like the rich whites holding them in bondage than the black slaves being held in bondage as well. I think that a lot of white privilege talk props up the idea that white people and black people are different and can't understand each other's experiences in a lot of the same way as the original conception.

I heard it was traced moreso to westward colonization, where prior to that people were "English" "Irish" "Slavic" and so on. Chinese Christian families began adopting white children in one of the colonies states in the US, and the whites absolutely flipped their shit and developed a collective identity of those kids being "Theirs" because they were "White", banding together, seizing the kids, and driving the Chinese out of town. Then the media went ballistic about it and was like CHINESE STEALIN KIDS and so on, and from then on realized they could pitch "Whites" as a united group.

That might be more of a genesis for "White as One People" concept rather than "Whiteness" itself though. I kind of assumed that "Black" was the designation for slave, but people didn't refer to "White" for a while yet, instead referring to "Anglo-saxon" and so on.