White supremacy run amok

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
Locked
Chad
Posts: 3844
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Chad »

@C40
The other part, which I implied, but didn't say directly is the massive amount of change going on. It's similar to when all the buggy, buggy whip, etc. manufacturers fought the use of cars. In principle, the same thing is happening now and is as inevitable now as then.

Unfortunately, now the valued jobs are not just another physical labor job where they can go from making buggies to assembly lines for cars. The new jobs are a completely different skill level, which is generally out of reach for these guys.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by BRUTE »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:12 pm
"a decade of PC has revived the Nazi/white supremacist movement and therefore caused the death of that lady."

A decade of sad losers believing in fictional oppression by PC, you mean.
details. fact is, PC caused the rise of white supremacy and the death of one human female Charlottesville resident. who was, incidentally, white. the supremacists must be confused or incompetent.

OTCW
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:55 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by OTCW »

Great read on the subject

https://www.davidlamotte.com/2016/kkk-a ... h-respond/

I witnessed the 3rd way, and the 4th happened in my hometown (Memphis), a place with an awful history of racial problems, and the response worked wonderfully.

Riggerjack
Posts: 3178
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Riggerjack »

Yes! OTCW, great link.

That is exactly the way to deal with this. Just imagine that had been the planned response to this rally, instead.

But of course it would require treating these guys as the jokes they are, which is in direct opposition to the narrative of the radical left, the same people who used to do this sort of thing...

Is it just me, or didn't the left have more fun back in the days when they weren't in power?

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Campitor »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 8:48 am

@Campitor:

"Until you get someone in power who may feel otherwise. This type of abuse was one of the reasons why we revolted against the established monarchy."

I would argue we already have people in power who not only think anti-fascism should be a fringe opinion, but would happily take any excuse to deny more rights to ordinary citizens. It's still a slippery slope argument to assume censoring Nazis will lead to censoring everyone else. I'm curious if there are actual examples of this happening. Again, the most obvious counter-example is Germany, who neatly removed Nazism from its rights to speech and assembly.
https://www.cir-usa.org/2000/12/halt-that-criticism/: HUD tried to curtail the free speech of 3 citizens engaged in lawful protest against a development for recovering homeless and drug addicts adjacent to their property and nearby liquor stores. HUD harassed them and tried to intimidate them using anti-discriminatory laws. The 9th circuit court ruled against HUD:

There was no justification for “the extraordinarily intrusive and chilling measures” HUD officials used during their investigation, the appeals court said. “[R]easonable government officials would have known that they could not conduct an eight-month investigation into the vocal but entirely peaceful opposition of residents to a housing project proposed for their neighborhood, or into their efforts to persuade the appropriate government agencies of their point of view,” the court said. “They would also have known that accusations of law-breaking, threatened subpoenas, improper broad demands for documents and information, and admonishments to cease nonfrivolous litigation and the publication of ‘discriminatory’ statements would chill ‘uninhibited, robust, and wide-open’ debate on public issues.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1204232.html
 The investigation by the HUD officials unquestionably chilled the plaintiffs' exercise of their First Amendment rights.   It is true that the agency did not ban or seize the plaintiffs' materials, and officials in Washington ultimately decided not to pursue either criminal or civil sanctions against them.   But in the First Amendment context, courts must “look through forms to the substance” of government conduct.  Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 67, 83 S.Ct. 631, 9 L.Ed.2d 584 (1963).   Informal measures, such as “the threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion, persuasion, and intimidation,” can violate the First Amendment also.  Id.8 This court has held that government officials violate this provision when their acts “would chill or silence a person of ordinary firmness from future First Amendment activities.”  Mendocino Environmental Ctr. v. Mendocino County, 192 F.3d 1283, 1300 (9th Cir.1999) (citation omitted).   Here, the type of investigation conducted and the manner in which the individual defendants carried out their functions more than meets that standard.

The Alien and Sedition Act of 1798: Congress made it harder for an immigrant to become a citizen (Naturalization Act), allowed the president to imprison and deport non-citizens who were deemed dangerous (Alien Friends Act of 1798)[2] or who were from a hostile nation (Alien Enemy Act of 1798),[3] and criminalized making false statements that were critical of the federal government (Sedition Act of 1798). It was mostly used to imprison people who were critical of the administration at that time.

Margaret Sanger: In these early years of Sanger's activism, she viewed birth control as a free-speech issue, and when she started publishing The Woman Rebel, one of her goals was to provoke a legal challenge to the federal anti-obscenity laws which banned dissemination of information about contraception.[33][34] Though postal authorities suppressed five of its seven issues, Sanger continued publication, all the while preparing Family Limitation, another challenge to anti-birth control laws. This 16-page pamphlet contained detailed and precise information and graphic descriptions of various contraceptive methods. In August 1914 Margaret Sanger was indicted for violating postal obscenity laws by sending The Woman Rebel through the postal system. Rather than stand trial, she fled the country.[2]

Limiting speech is never used as intended and laws that were never intended to limit speech often are used as clubs to silence critics. We should never ban any speech that remains peaceful in its expression no matter how vile the content may be or we risk losing our ability to speak out for a just and moral cause. Our government does great things which is why I'm an American citizen by choice. But it's also capable of behaving poorly if citizens don't remain vigilant.

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Campitor »

@OTCW that link rocked - logs of good ideas for defusing and dis-empowering racist messages in a peaceful and non-confrontational way.

@Riggerjack - Nice commentary on how hatred and attention only strengthens racist narratives.

Chad
Posts: 3844
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Chad »

@Riggerjack
Are you advocating...soft power? Letting culture, inertia, etc. do the work? Hmmmm...who is always telling me it's not all it's cracked up to be? Lol

I don't entirely disagree.

OTCW
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:55 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by OTCW »

NM
Last edited by OTCW on Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OTCW
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:55 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by OTCW »

Another link to the last KKK rally response in Memphis ( the previous rally ended on riots), so everybody wised up

https://www.google.com/amp/wreg.com/201 ... names/amp/

The Memphis president of the NAACP, Keith Norman, says the KKK has the right to rally but he hopes nobody will show up to witness it, “Don't even give the Klan an audience. That is the best thing we can do.”

OTCW
Posts: 437
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:55 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by OTCW »

One last thing, and I know most people who identify as such want to do good things, but the 'social justice warrior' terminology is just a huge mistake in swaying opinions of anyone in my opinion. Never mind the people you want to war against, it's just a huge turnoff to mainstream people that probably havent even given an issue much thought because they are busy in their own lives. You can't force stuff on people, you can only lead by example.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@OTCW: That is a good article, thanks. Reminded me of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsF-_frgN40

Gotta say, I'm also loving this strategy:

https://www.gq.com/story/nazis-free-speech-problem

Free speech with consequences. "From there, the free market works its magic in short order. Ah, capitalism!" Indeed. Sadpepe.jpg

Or wait, does this count as PC run amok? Hmm, it's almost like "PC" is a political bogeyman invoked whenever someone faces social consequences for their own stupid behavior...

@Brute: Whether the persecution narrative that feeds directly into white supremacy is complete bullshit or not is more than "details". I don't even know what that is anymore, but it doesn't resemble any logic I can follow.

@Campitor: Cool, I'll look into those examples in a bit. Like I already said, I'm inclined to agree that trusting government-enforced limits on free speech is not the best course of action.

@Chad: Long-term, I'm interested in "cultural" solutions, too, I suppose. Everything else is just buying time until we can change the material conditions that cause white supremacist ideologies and socioeconomic structures.

The objective truth is straight white American males have been playing life on Easy mode (ETA: notably, since the days when that Easy mode was facilitated by slavery) and have gotten quite used to it. Now the balance of the "game" is so tilted toward so few of the players, that even Easy mode has gotten pretty damn hard these days. White supremacists want to "Make Easy Mode Easy Again" by making the Hard modes even harder. Other identity politics seeks to make the Hard modes easier at the expense of the Easy mode--certainly a more equitable exchange for the majority of players, but not really solving the problem. The real solution seems to be noting which rules are broken and rewriting them. Sorry, that was a clumsy metaphor, but yeah.

Campitor
Posts: 1227
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Campitor »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:47 pm

The objective truth is straight white American males have been playing life on Easy mode (ETA: notably, since the days when that Easy mode was facilitated by slavery) and have gotten quite used to it. Now the balance of the "game" is so tilted toward so few of the players, that even Easy mode has gotten pretty damn hard these days. White supremacists want to "Make Easy Mode Easy Again" by making the Hard modes even harder. Other identity politics seeks to make the Hard modes easier at the expense of the Easy mode--certainly a more equitable exchange for the majority of players, but not really solving the problem. The real solution seems to be noting which rules are broken and rewriting them. Sorry, that was a clumsy metaphor, but yeah.
Perhaps the EZ mode wasn't as easy as you think...American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics


Korean War: Blacks killed 3,075, Hispanics killed 306, Whites killed 29,269.
Vietnam War: Blacks Killed 7,243, Hispanics killed 350, Whites killed 49,826.
Persian Gulf War: Blacks killed 63, Hispanics killed 14, Whites killed 280.
Operation Enduring Freedom wounded in action: Black 1,408, unknown 1,463, Whites 16,365.

NATIONAL CENSUS OF FATAL OCCUPATIONAL INJURIES IN 2015

Occupational deaths 2014: Whites 3,332, Blacks 475, Hispanics 804.
Occupational deaths 2015: Whites 3,241, Blacks 495, Hispanics 903.

I doubt anyone who made the list (Black, White, Hispanic) would say they had an easy life. Whites may have had advantages but it's never been EZ mode.

User avatar
C40
Posts: 2747
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:30 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by C40 »

Well, of course it sucks for those guys that died.

We already spoke about how, in my opinion, economic and family factors have a much bigger impact than race. My black and mexican and asian and south american and white friends who were born in families and cities with comparable wealth and love have all done about the same for themselves in life.

The thing is, there's correlation between race and these economic & family starting points, with black folks and native americans being born at the bottom of both scales.

Here's the rates of children belonging to single parent households, with huge differences between races:
http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/ta ... 13/432,431

And here are median family incomes by race:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... old_income

If using these two indicators, there's no debating what races kids would want to be born as if they had a choice. I'd sure as hell rather have two parents who love each-other and make $70k per year as opposed to a single mother making $30k.

If we use those two indicators, and just consider the hand babies are dealt at birth, the gap from easy mode to hard mode (just within the U.S) is huge.

Asians - 84% chance of two parents in family - $75k median income
Whites - 75% chance of two parents in family - $60k median income
Hispanic/Latino - 60% chance of two parent family - $??k median income
Blacks - 35% chance of two parent family - $36k median income

Red dot Indians would be the overpowered group in this game. Median income $107k. Probably 90%+ chance of two-parent family. (it's slanted from doctors coming to the U.S., right?)

bryan
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 2:01 am
Location: mostly Bay Area

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by bryan »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:27 am
> As for punching nazis or free speech.. the more interesting (and maybe scary) thing to me is how the determination in such matters is made (this guy is a nazi or this subject can be freely spoken and protested for).

Well, when they wear swastikas, beat black people and hold them captive in churches surrounded by torch-wielding mobs, chant "Jews will not replace us", and call themselves Nazis, I don't think there's a lot of ambiguity in saying "this guy is a Nazi".
So far so good..
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:27 am
Which is why the "How do we choose who to restrict" arguments strike me as needlessly complicating and equivocating on an issue that is clear and obvious in this case and most cases that matter. It's an implicit slippery slope argument that if we restrict the free speech and gathering rights of Nazis, KKK, and other problematic ideologies we must eventually necessarily restrict the rights of everyone. Well, slippery slopes are logical fallacies for a reason.
Doh!

So I find it interesting (the determinations) because it's pretty complex. Best case you have some fairly objective* measures and some fair method of taking those as inputs and making a determination (AI overlords, maybe?). Unfortunately, a lot of the time the method is more like "Look at that MAGA hat-wearer that just told that brown dude to "Go back to Mexico" He's a fucking Nazi, let's beat the shit out of him!" That's still a contentious situation, but it shows how determinations can be haphazard. It doesn't take much searching to find instances of witch hunts and "burnings". Plenty of instances on social media where people are misidentified and we know extreme biases are present in media the median individual chooses to consume.

[*] of course I'm not a big believer in the word "objective" when it comes to soft systems e.g. human stuff
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:27 am
Germany--which presumably has the most experience dealing with these people--managed to "de-nazify" and ban Nazi symbols and open gatherings while retaining rights to free speech and assembly for everyone else.

Shouldn't that fact alone be sufficient to defeat the slippery slope argument?
Maybe Germany has found a better solution? Honestly I don't know. Maybe us Americans can improve what we have for future generations.. Though I'm not so keen on the state of our government organizations (executive powers, toxic Congress, less effective governance, policing, etc). Some states are more prone to slippery slopes than others..

If I were a dictator of the USA, maybe I would send "nazis" to re-education camps?
BRUTE wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:18 pm
the data seems to indicate that brute is correct in not thinking too much about white supremacy. white supremacy is less dangerous than melanoma, butt cancer, smoking, car accidents, probably bees, even though bees didn't make the list.
I think racism is a pretty bad thing and I'm sure it has led to huge detrimental effects. I think what you are getting at (in other posts..) is that terrorism has a larger effect on humans than other, more objectively* dangerous things?
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:47 pm
In a world full of maybes... Maybe the nation's largest hate rally in decades isn't a sign of white supremacy run amok.... And maybe, just maybe, political correctness has a bigger impact
SJW/PC culture seems like a turn away from rational thought, facts, reality, to me. It seems like a newer, bigger cultural phenomenon with a lot of younger people on board than the latest racism crap.
Riggerjack wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:15 pm
From my perspective, severely uninterested in Nazis and nazi hating, there doesn't seem to be a difference between fascists and antifascist. Same tactics, same rhetoric, equally full of shit.
Agreed.
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 2:30 pm
I'm curious about how much this is happening compared to the recent past. Is there really an increase? Am I just hearing about it more now? This would probably be worth a whole other thread (if there isn't already one(?))
Probably so (needing a thread of its own). Certainly the internet allows for some new spin on what has probably been a pattern throughout history. Of course it would pull in the PC/SJW topic as well.
Riggerjack wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 3:03 pm
On the subject of protest security, while the suggestions that c40 came up with could help, I am concerned about the cost to taxpayers.

So might I suggest, we 'Mericanize it!

Fascists and antifascist, going head to head for the hearts and minds of the American people! We'll hold the next rally/antirally in a stadium. Keep it on camera, sell tickets, and TV rights! Pay per view! UFC ain't got nothing on this!
Now we have to pick teams and allegiances like other sports? But with politics and ideology attached? I'll pass.
Riggerjack wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 3:03 pm
Or, maybe we could all just calmly turn our collective backs on these poseurs, and do something productive for a while.
But terrorism and thuggery and civil liberties!

The number of distractions (and how quickly they change, to keep attention) in the last couple years (from more important matters) really is astonishing.
Spartan wrote: This guy's proposal seems to be to just ignore them and they'll go away. Again, as I said on page 1, that seems like a demonstrably wrong approach when the metrics that would seem indicative of "going away" are in fact moving the opposite direction.

Ignoring the problem seems like a great way to let their ideology continue to spread to a population caught in one of the crises of end-stage capitalism and thus particularly susceptible to fascism, as history has shown. Especially if it is also taboo to discuss much less dispel the thought processes and motivations that lead these ideologies to thrive.

So is there some fourth option that you would suggest? Not restricting their rights through government, not confronting them as private citizens, and not simply ignoring them in the hopes their ideas will fade?
I think @OCTW posted a nice link.. Anyway, there are many ways to counter some action you deem warranting reaction. It's just not usually wise to impulsively react (especially with effective tactics like terrorism!), playing into the hands of better players of the larger game.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by BRUTE »

bryan wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:20 pm
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:27 am
Germany--which presumably has the most experience dealing with these people--managed to "de-nazify" and ban Nazi symbols and open gatherings while retaining rights to free speech and assembly for everyone else.
Maybe Germany has found a better solution?
how'd that solution work out for them?
According to the annual report of Germany's interior intelligence service (Verfassungsschutz) for 2012, at the time there were 26,000 right-wing extremists living in Germany, including 6,000 neo-Nazis.
(from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism)

Riggerjack
Posts: 3178
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Riggerjack »

And more to the point, do we really want to follow Germany's lead on dealing with unpopular minorities?

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by BRUTE »

Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:47 pm
The objective truth is straight white American males have been playing life on Easy mode
yea, judging over 100 million humans by their chromosomes and skin color sounds like a great idea. what individual variance could possibly exist among 100 million humans?
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:47 pm
Other identity politics seeks to make the Hard modes easier at the expense of the Easy mode--certainly a more equitable exchange for the majority of players, but not really solving the problem.
brute assumes Spartan_Warrior really believes this, but brute is no longer convinced. from what he's seeing, identity politics seems to focus on making the lives of all humans hard, instead of making the hard ones easier.

this is why brute hates the concept of "privilege". there is no "privilege" in being an equal before the law and having economic security. it's not bad and doesn't need to he "checked". shouldn't the goal of a compassionate human be to give white cis straight male levels of privilege to all humans, even those currently lacking it?

brute would be on the "handing out privilege" bandwagon, but not on the "dragging all humans down to an equal level" socialist-style bandwagon. because that one historically ends with gulags and education camps.
Spartan_Warrior wrote:
Tue Aug 15, 2017 5:47 pm
The real solution seems to be noting which rules are broken and rewriting them.
exactly! this is what brute is interested in. unfortunately, it seems that 98% of humans care about yelling and tribalism more than solutions 98% of the time.

TopHatFox
Posts: 2322
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: FL; 25

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by TopHatFox »

So...does anyone want to talk about their favorite lentil recipe?

User avatar
fiby41
Posts: 1610
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:09 am
Location: India
Contact:

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by fiby41 »

People who think EREers only eat lentils are the same people who think the only furniture you can have sex on is a bed.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1659
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: White supremacy run amok

Post by Spartan_Warrior »

@Campitor:

Those were interesting articles. Sanger is the only one I knew about previously. I feel like the HUD example with the discrimination against homeless kind of is what the law was intended for, not a misuse or inappropriate extention of it. But I don't care to argue about this. Like I've said, I don't trust our government to make the right laws nor do I trust cops to correctly and equitably enforce them. Strictly between the two options of government vs. citizen intervention, I am firmly on the side of direct action by citizens/counter-protests.

As far as the deaths from US imperial wars... so? How many brown people did the Americans kill in those wars? And for what reason? Who benefited for all those deaths?

@Bryan:

"So far so good... Doh!"

I mean, if I were tasked to write a law about it, it would be something along the lines of: "Permits for public assembly will not be granted for rallies, protests, or other public gatherings in support of or sponsored by National Socialist Movements or the Ku Klux Klan. Symbols known to represent these groups will be considered 'fighting words' known to incite violence and thus public displays of these symbols will not be subject to protections of free speech."

That's what I meant by overcomplicating things. There doesn't really seem to be a need to posit an elaborate determination method when self-selection seems sufficient. They're Nazis if they identify as Nazis. Granted, they can always come up with new organizations, new symbols, etc, but is that really a reason not to decimate these decades-old ones? Maybe, I don't know.

"SJW/PC culture seems like a turn away from rational thought, facts, reality, to me. It seems like a newer, bigger cultural phenomenon with a lot of younger people on board than the latest racism crap."

Racism is certainly older and more subtle. I disagree that "political correctness" is a more widespread cultural phenomenon. Racism is part of America's DNA, from slavery to "manifest destiny", and is embedded into many of its laws, institutions, and cultural practices at a deep level.

"Agreed."

I don't know what else I can do to convince you guys that there is a fundamental difference between fascists and those who oppose them, even if they appear "equally violent" because the former ran people over in Charlottesville and stabbed people in Portland, but the latter beat up some trashcans and windows in Berkeley. Even Mitt Romney acknowledges the difference. I guess he's a commie extremist.


@Brute:

"How did that work out for them?"

Well, apparently they won't get to play Wolfenstein II.

It's a fair point, actually.

In Germany, Right-wing Violence Flourishing Amid Surge in Online Hate

Indeed, there seems to be something of a recent surge in right-wing violence there, the biggest since the 1990s. WaPo attributes some of the blame to online extremism, which is making the rise in right-wing extremism an international affair.

A worldwide trend is even more disturbing, and seems to lend credence to the 4Chan-Nazi origination theory.

@Riggerjack:

Again, political ideologies don't seem to fit the bill of being a class of "people" compared to racial minorities, so I'm not sure the comparison is fair.

@Brute 2:

"yea, judging over 100 million humans by their chromosomes and skin color sounds like a great idea. what individual variance could possibly exist among 100 million humans?"

Chromosomes and skin color have very little to do with it except to the extent that they form the social schema of "race". Rather, this is an analysis based on actual (note: not fictional) forms of oppression based on that social schema, and the historical and lingering material factors that result. C40's post is a good example of some of these disparities. Obviously it is dealing explicitly in aggregates and not individual variance.

"there is no "privilege" in being an equal before the law and having economic security."

Equal to what? There are in fact huge race-based differences in treatment by police and outcomes in the legal system, so I'm not sure what equality you're talking about. And yes, the ones that have the better outcomes are "privileged" for it. Much like economic security can be seen as a form of "privilege", especially when it is tied to historic oppression (or lack thereof). Again, see some of C40s posts as he seems to have a good grasp of this. TBH, I dread delving into "privilege" specifically because it seems like another loaded buzzword that will be twisted in all variety of directions.

"shouldn't the goal of a compassionate human be to give white cis straight male levels of privilege to all humans, even those currently lacking it?"

I think of "privilege" as a zero-sum game, in this way similar to the term "advantage". Privilege exists for one group necessarily because it doesn't exist for another group. To give the privileges of one group to every group would be to destroy the concept of privilege. I don't disagree with that.

You don't get to a place of abolishing privilege if you're too busy focusing on perceived threats to your own privilege (like political correctness). Indeed, white nationalism, like all identity politics, seems to focus on rearranging the deck of "privilege" between social groups like race and sex. This serves to stymie the conversation with games of "oppression Olympics", often patently ridiculous ones like comparing GDP effects from political correctness to murder numbers.

It is a fact based on material analysis that race and gender are factors in socioeconomic outcomes due to the lingering effects of historic (and current) practices of oppression.

But those considerations are not even necessary to confront the root problem, because it is also a fact (to which you agreed) that race and gender are not the main determining factor in socioeconomic outcomes. Not for whites, not for blacks, not for men, not for women.

That means we can skip the oppression olympics and just acknowledge that the rules of the game are broken for everyone--not necessarily to an equal degree, but they don't have to be--rather than squabble with the other players over the remaining advantages. White supremacy and complaining about political correctness are examples of the latter. Granted, to some extent, so are groups and movements like BLM and feminism, albeit with the crucial difference being that the historic and current oppression of such groups is actually real and significant, not simply the loss of previous privilege due to... what, exactly?
Stokely Carmichael wrote:“If a white man wants to lynch me, that’s his problem. If he’s got the power to lynch me, that’s my problem. Racism is not a question of attitude; it’s a question of power.”
How do we balance the power? How do we fix the broken rules of the game? Is it possible to erase the difficulty levels (privilege) and arrive at "Easy" mode for the majority of mankind without regard to race or gender?

Locked