NOTE: THIS POST IS NOT DIRECTED AT G3 PERSONALLY (OR ANYONE ELSE FOR THAT MATTER) AND THE EXAMPLES ARE NOT AIMED AT ANY ONE PERSON'S EXPERIENCE. WHENEVER THE TERM "YOU" IS USED, IT IS AIMED AT ABSOLUTELY NO ONE IN PARTICULAR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I have no problem with stopping the nicey-nicey stuff (you all know how sweet I am) and getting pissed at this convention of chicken hawks and bigots (that's your party, SEC). But given the overall incredible idiocy level they display, it's hard to resist dealing with them with snark and a bit of trolling and actually confront the stupidity head on.
Really, how do you argue with people who just hate immigrants, regardless of any discussion of economic impact, humanitarian issues, security issues and all the things you can talk about rationally? You make those rational points to a jackass like Cruz and you just get back illogic and hate. How do you argue with hate?
|
For me, it's about driving ignorance, hate, and stupidity into a corner. Most people who think we should register Muslims and/or ban them from coming into the country or who think black people deserve to be shot by police or who think gay people should have no rights are stupid and/or isolated (live in communities where small-minded jackasses are everywhere). If they never get pushback they are emboldened. If they aren't corrected, they think they're correct. One may not be able to have a rational conversation with them, but you can let them know that you don't think that shit is ok. They need to hear that as often as possible.
This is a small thing. This isn't my mother fighting her own family, the entire neighborhood, many of her friends, and society in general when she married a black man. This isn't gay people having to protect themselves from attacks on the streets in NYC. This isn't Mexican-Americans having to constantly prove that they are indeed citizens. This is letting someone know that they are being small-minded, hateful and stupid. Sure it can create an uncomfortable atmosphere, but is that really an answer? Who gives a shit? Why the fuck would you want to maintain comfort around a bigot? Fuck them. Sure it's frustrating arguing with someone who is immune to facts, but if everyone who experienced ignorant shit pushed back, we'd all experience less ignorant shit.
I come across black people who think Jews run everything and try to screw people all the time. I
never let that shit go. I come across people who think gay people should be discriminated against. Again, I let them know it's not acceptable. I am not singling you out, of course. I just think that this whole idea that it's inconvenient to let someone know when they're being a fucking jackass is crazy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
One other thing, this language of "privilege". Fuck that. It's a stupid concept. I have no interest in feeling guilt or shame about where I am (insert snark about this), but am happy to help others get here too. Let's get everyone their piece of the privilege.
|
I don't like that 'privilege' has become shorthand for everything. The word is now like the term 'politically incorrect' in that it has taken on a life of its own. But the flaw with what you just wrote is that there is the chance for everyone 'get their piece of privilege.'
Capitalism is designed such that there will always be winners and losers. And that's okay. The three issues, as I see it, are (i) how do we keep the number of losers as low as possible, (ii) how do we ensure that people lose or win for the 'right' reasons, and (iii) how do we create a system that provides everyone the same opportunity to win (understanding that some people are trying to work their way out of a hole that you have never found yourself in)? Those may actually all be the same thing, I don't know. But this "I'm not going to feel guilt for what I have" sentiment is a red herring. It's a way to avoid the issue about what one is prepared to do going forward.
If you're a white kid who has substandard grades such that you can't get in to UT even though you would have qualified as a legacy if things were done the way they used to be done (and even though you went to another great school, graduated and got a great job in finance), is it privilege to sue all the way to the Supreme Court (on which sits a judge who suggests that blacks should stick to less prestigious universities) because you think that automatic entrance is the natural state of things? I'm not saying that you should spend your time feeling guilty about your own legacy entrance, if that may be a reason why you got in to a great school. I'm asking you to change how you think about college admission and what white people believe they deserve. I'm asking you to take a fair look at a system that is currently set up to give an inordinate amount of opportunity to one group and to understand that when one white kid misses out on a fantastic opportunity, it is not a federal fucking issue.
If you're a white person in the suburbs who has only ever had positive experiences with the police and you are confronted with clear police brutality based on the implicit bias that black men are criminals and dangerous and have superhuman strength, I'm not asking you to address your privilege by feeling guilty about your positive interactions with police. I'm asking you to rethink the presumption of honesty you grant the police based on your privilege.
Tons of examples. But I'll tell you this, if a side-effect of this exercise is you feeling a little guilty about what your privilege got you, I don't really care.
TM
