White Privilege

 

Recently I have been attacked by various liberals as being the product of “White Privilege” as the root cause of my “insensitivity”.    My insensitivity of course seems to be related to my expectation that people should be held accountable for their actions and that those actions can and do have consequences.  However, none of these liberals have ever  defined or illustrated exactly what they mean by “White Privilege”, but this morning some liberal college professor was kind enough to define this term, and to my horror I found that indeed I am a product of White Privilege.

It seems my parents were married to each other through out the life and childhood of myself and my brothers so we all have the same father, this is one of the many “privileges” I enjoyed.  My brothers and I from the age of 8 had to go every morning – rain or shine – to the neighboring farmer and get fresh milk; this was in addition to our other chores, like making our beds, setting the table, lawn and yard duties, and various other routine chores.  After age 14 we were expected to get a job because “work” was one of those privileges that would set us apart and prepare us for our future.   But of course my parents worked at jobs that today are called “blue collar” and set an example that work is what is expected and is an end in itself.  In effect work is a “privilege”.  They never got any assistance from the government and would have been humiliated had they had to accept charity, which is how they viewed “government assistance”.  Charity and government assistance would have negated the white privileges they were trying to provide to my brothers and me.

My brothers and I went to school everyday and at various times that required walking to school in both fair and foul weather and I arrived at school on more than one occasion soaked to the skin.  My parents were unsympathetic and did not blame the school or God for soaking me to the skin; it was the schooling that was important.  My brothers and I went to school everyday unless we were sick and being sick meant there was no faking it – unless there was a fever or vomit or bumps – we went and this was the rule through grade 12.  But this was where the white privilege thing kicked in because with a high school diploma in hand we were given some options – we could join the military, get a job – really a trade to guarantee our future, or college.  These were the white privileges we enjoyed at age 17 and all in their own way involved work and personal responsibility.

I chose to go to college which meant that I had to find a way to pay for this privilege.  This entailed working all summer full time and part time in school.  Fortunately I joined ROTC and their stipend helped a great deal but of course the price was active military service – as an officer.  This certainly demonstrated that I was a direct product of white privilege, because no under privileged person could ever be an officer – or at least that is what the liberal establishment would have you believe.  The fact that my first commanding officer was Black doesn’t count or even hint at the possibility that some one other than a white could enjoy any of the White Privileges that I had.

But let’s review not what I did to enjoy all of the privileges of my white ethnicity.  I had parents who were married and set an example of personal responsibility and provided me a disciplined and structured childhood.  What I did was go to school every day, stay out of trouble in school.  I did not skip school or disrespect the teachers who were trying to help me.  I did not cheat or fail my classes, I studied my lessons.  I picked friends who were similar and did not steal or vandalize school property. In effect I was enjoying all of the privileges of being a responsible youth who happened to be white.

But what did I do personally to give me these white privileges other than being born white?  I did not do drugs or sell drugs.  I did not abuse alcohol.  I did not indulge in promiscuous sex or get one or more girls pregnant before or after high school graduation.  I did not go to prison for rape, theft, murder, or any number of felonies that separate me from those who do not enjoy white privileges.

But why exactly are my life events called “White Privilege”?  I submit that parallels to my life can be found in every ethnic group and are not limited to Caucasians.  In fact many Asian, Black, and Indian families have sons and daughters whose accomplishments exceed those of Caucasian families.  So this is a term used by the Liberal establishment to excuse those people who have become dependent on government handouts, who fail to work, who have no skills, who have a sense of entitlement that they shouldn’t have to work and have no accountability or responsibility for their plight.   The Liberals and their “War on Povery” have created this Plantation environment which they now want to shift their guilt and the blame onto those who don’t buy into their programs of guilt.  The very term “White Privilege” is a racist term and it would never be applied to any other ethnic group. White Privilege is a fiction and at its core racist.

Musings on a Wednesday

So many things astonished me today – not because I was surprised at them but because I was so accurate in the expectation of their occurrence. But before I launch into that discussion perhaps we should review the liberal establishment in general. The most basic thing about the liberal establishment is that they love people and want to help them no matter how much they hurt them. Take the black community for example. Under Jim Crow they had intact families and a cohesive community. While this isn’t a plea to return to segregation, the reality is that the death of Jim Crow brought white guilt to the surface. Suddenly we had affirmative action, busing, handouts, and government programs aimed at redressing past wrongs. Then the professional racists like Jesse Jackson emerged along with the Reverend Wright who saw racism in any attempt to enforce the law or expect civil behavior – the result has been a generation dependent on welfare and government handouts along with the demise of the nuclear black family and a cohesive community. The liberal community continues to fight poverty and injustice within the black community no matter how morally destructive their solutions are, because they are convinced they are right. Now we have the Occupy Wall Street movement, endorsed by the liberal community in the form of the President, Nancy Pelosi, the SEISU, Acorn (under various names), and of course George Soros. On May day – the International Communist Holiday – the OWS die hards were out once again – rioting, destroying property, but only on the bastions of liberalism on the West Coast and of course NYC. The turnout was pathetically small but the participants – when interviewed for TV – demonstrated such ignorance of even basic economics that it was astonishing. One young man – representative of them all – came down squarely against any idea of personal responsibility. He wasn’t actually against capitalism because it wasn’t clear that he even understood the term, but he was for government programs. He felt the government should give “free stuff” like food, shelter, healthcare, and “other stuff”. Nothing was mentioned about employment or who was going to pay for all of this stuff – it was the government’s responsibility to just give this “stuff” to the people. This really demonstrates the essential liberal philosophy which is that the government should take care of all people and that the rich should be forced to share their wealth through confiscatory taxes. The of course we have that genius in the White House who has just committed $2B to Afghanistan even though that country is a country in name only and one of the most corrupt in the world. He has just announced his campaign slogan of FORWARD which I presume is intended to prevent people to look backward and to evaluate his track record. That track record is littered with broken promises, unfulfilled promises, and failures. This is a president whose track record is even more pathetic than Jimmy Carter’s. It was easy to predict that he would ignore his track record and simply promise to do better while his opponent will undo all of the giveaway programs and entitlements. The only surprise was that he didn’t blame George Bush as part of his campaign.

Obama & Racism

I continue to be amazed how the mainstream media continues to ignore or gloss over the blatant racism and incompetence of Obama and his entire administration. This man has made sure his thin track record is kept in the background and that his early years and writings are kept secret – literally secret. He has never published his master’s thesis and his records at Harvard are kept sealed. He was editor of the Harvard Review – a prestigious position that usually goes to the most promising law student based on their writings but none of Obama’s articles or writings have ever been made public. This is a point totally ignored by the media as they publish paean after paean to America’s first black president. Of course on inspection the color of his skin seems to be his only qualification. Apparently only white folks can be racist because the media has systematically failed to exposed the racism expressed by Obama – racism that would have led to outrage had these things been said and done by a white conservative.

For example Obama spent 20 years attending the Church of Reverend Wright a blatant racist. The media took note of this then simply glossed over it as if it had no bearing on Obama. Of course the fact that he spent 20 years attending that church means either he agreed with the Reverend or he didn’t. If he didn’t then he is a hypocrite and if he did then he is a racist – something the media just ignored. Then during his campaign he referred to his grandmother as a “typical white person”. Had any white person referred to him as a typical black person they would have immediately been branded as a racist bigot but not Obama. Once again the media gave him a pass because they seem to be unable to see this man for what he is – a racist given the highest job in the land with no qualifications whatsoever.

But once in office Obama has continued to demonstrate his racism because when a white police officer doing his duty and acting in accordance with approved procedure arrested a black professor, Obama immediately charged the police officer for acting stupidly and being a racist. This led to his patronizing and condescending “beer summit” apparently on the premise that no white police officer would know how to behave in the White House. Then when the black panthers were charged with voter intimidation he kept his Justice Department from investigating or taking any action. Clearly when the action is white on black it is racism and should be condemned but when it is black on white then Obama does not see that as racist – blatant hypocrisy and racism on his part once again.

Now in a recent speech Obama made to a group of Latino’s – some of whom I’m sure were in this country legally – he stated that Republicans should be sent to the “back of the bus” and then referred to the American Public as “our enemies” -- placing himself as a minority opposed to the white majority. Never in the history of the country has any major politician ever referred to the American people as his “enemy”. This President is a racist that is aided and abetted by a slavish and politically correct media. This is a man who is an internationalist who believes in World Government. He clearly sees the role of government as being paramount to the people’s wishes and that it is the role of government to rule over the people not to govern at the will of the people.

This President is a person who has never held a real job, never met a payroll, and never had to show a profit. He seems to think that the money he so freely spends comes from the mint and not from the people. He has no grasp of practical economics or business. He has been educated by Marxists, socialists, and left wing academics. He has surrounded himself with more incompetent and inexperienced people than any president in our history. He is not just incompetent and a racist, he is an embarrassment.

Undefined Politics

It is truly amazing how politicians throw around words without ever being challenged to define or explain. Instead the media simply goes along and reports what was said, the population accepts what was said without questioning, and nothing ever seems to change because these same people with the same squishy positions keep getting elected by a people who are either too dumb or too lazy to question what is being said.

In recent days the stock market has reached record highs, retail businesses are reporting solid profits, the unemployment is at the lowest point it has been in years, the trade deficit is declining and the economy in general is humming along. Ordinarily this would be a reason for the politicians to gloat and attempt to take credit, but instead we find the liberal establishment shaking their heads in despair as they attempt to put a negative spin on what would ordinarily be signs for cheering.

It seems that among all of this good news the politicians have discovered that instead of cheering over the low unemployment they are concerned about how the “working poor” are not sharing in this general prosperity. But the unasked question is “who precisely are the working poor?” In fact who are the “poor”working or not. These terms are never defined with any precision even when pushed, which is rare. The poverty line in the US is $20,000 for a family of 4 and with this measure the people living in poverty in the US is approximately 37 million. But of course poverty is a relative term and who precisely is included in this figure? The reality is that people in poverty rarely stay there instead they cycle in and out of poverty. But the point is who is “poor?” Again the reality is that in any given year approximately 12% of the population would be regarded as “poor” but then these people are rarely permanently poor but are only poor for a period of time and then move on up the economic ladder. It is also worth noting that these figures include people under 18 years so the number of adults living in poverty or being poor is substantially smaller and even so – none of this defines or explains “the working poor”. After all poor people are not necessarily impoverished and these figures include people under 25 which mean students who rarely work full time, but work at minimum wage.

Furthermore, no profile is ever offered regarding the poor or the working poor. What is there age? How much education do they have? Have they been arrested? How many smoke marijuana or take other drugs? How many of these poor people abuse alcohol? What is the employment record of the average poor person? How many families are in this category and how many in that family are working? Obviously answers to these questions would be very revealing and could easily make the politician claiming that there is a problem and that the minimum wage must be raised look foolish. Any family who cannot find and keep a job paying more than minimum wage has much greater problems that must be addressed if the poverty issue is to be addressed with any hope of success. Still, the politicians cry about the working poor and no one seems to want to look very close at this problem.

So the working poor is a relative term that is very controversial and rarely defined by the politicians who bandy it about. But if the term ‘poor” is not well defined and understood what about “rich”. The liberal establishment is constantly calling for the government to “tax the rich” but they never really define precisely who is rich. The call is always to raise the taxes on the “rich” but in practice the tax changes impact everyone so in effect the "rich" are the employed.

What about “racism”? We have politicians and wannabe politicians like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Julian Bond who accuse anyone with whom they disagree of being “racist” when in fact they seem to be the most racist of all. If race is considered and weighted in terms of blacks – that is good and not racist in their eyes. They justify this on the basis of “leveling the playing field”. However, that level playing field never seems to include competition or merit. If the only thing considered is qualifications and performance that is viewed as racist. Hence affirmative action which is nothing other that racism against whites is viewed as good. Therefore, it an effort to garner the black vote politicians extol the value of affirmative action and spout rhetoric in favor of stamping out racism, when in fact racism has been on the wane for some time.

What is considered racism today is largely an example of class-ism. Turn on any TV channel in any city and you will see black faces reading the news. These are people who got their jobs on the basis of ability – not through affirmative action. What sets them apart from those blacks who are perpetual victims of racism? Perhaps the distinguishing factors are education, speaking proper English, and dressing appropriately. We hear complaints from blacks about racism every time they get into trouble with the law. Perhaps if they obeyed the law they wouldn’t have difficulty with the police. Yet, all of the black leaders maintain their power and influence by perpetuating the idea of racism. So when it comes to politicians a little critical thinking is in order but this must be done at the individual level because the media, academia, and the politicians cannot gather the courage to tell the truth or to be precise.

Forecasts and Past Observations

Periodically I review what I have written and sometimes I am surprised at what I have forecasted or described. In this case this is an excerpt from a larger series of comments and observations that I did for Madonna University in 1993. I think my comments are still timely and some of what I have described seems to be coming true. The acceptance of same sex couples seems to have grown and this in turn seems to have reduced the expectation that an executive should have a wife or husband. The rampant racism inherent in the civil rights movement seems to be coming under increased pressure and more and more people see organizations like the NAACP as racist and counter productive. Affirmative action is under attack and is gradually being repealed -- which demonstrates that racial divisions are eroding and that preferential treatment of blacks is eroding the progress they have made. The acceptance of women in the workplace is certainly present today and many top level executives are women. While not all of this has come to pass I think many of these observations have turned out to be relatively accurate.


OCT 15, 1993
I read an article last night titled "Women In Management: The Spare Sex". For the most part this is the same tired old litany of complaint and abuse put out by the feminist movement in increasing quantities. Nevertheless, it does have some points which caused me to think about things.

"Top jobs are designed for people with wives". This is a true statement. They are also designed for people with mistresses, low morals, and a complete disregard for the feelings of others. From personal experience, I have found very few top corporate executives worthy of respect. But this is beside the point. The point is "What is the role of women in business in the future?". Will top jobs then be designed for women with "consorts" ? I think not. We owe the feminist movement our thanks for killing the business suit, for rearranging our priorities, and I think for changing the way we do business. Personally, I think we will see more and more women in top jobs, not because they are women, but because women are nurturing by nature. As our management style changes to one of team play and peer-to-peer relations, women seem to be better at this. I think families and personal priorities will come to the forefront. This means that the forced participation of wives and husbands will fall by the wayside. Why you ask ? Because many top executives will not have wives or husbands. Many will not have any consort, others will have homosexual partners. The logistics and protocols will simply become too difficult.

This same article also quotes a study of contributions made by men and women in meetings. The basis of measurement was the amount of time spent speaking. I was reminded of the sign outside of Cuyama, Calif. which states:

Founded: 1870
Population: 200
Elevation: 910
_____________
Total 2980

From the fact that the women spoke for a shorter total time, the author draws the conclusion they were intimidated and contributed less. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. You could just as easily conclude they expressed themselves better or that the subject being discussed was prostate problems. Yet I am confident the average feminist doesn't see this article and its conclusions as an insult to women, but as verification that they are abused and subjugated. This raises the question " What is the future of the feminist movement?". Again I don't know. I think the feminist movement, multi-cultural diversity, political correctness, and racism are tied very closely together and the fate of one is a harbinger for them all. Perhaps a better question might be "What is the future of the White Male ?" Personally, I am offended by much of the press, the media, and the universities and I am not alone. I think there could be a rebound effect with white males becoming much more militant. For instance are any of these institutions racist?
The White Horsemen's Association ?
The Governor Wallace Academy
The White Students Collegiate Scholarship Fund

If I substitute the word Black for White are they still racist? Is the movie "Blackmen Can't (fill in the blank)" racist ? Why are Negroes " Afro-American" and I am "White" Why aren't I "Euro-American" Why is the "Citadel" wrong for being all male while all women's colleges are necessary and needed. Why are organizations and seminars dealing with women and women's issues correct and those dealing with male issues are not ? The list can go on and on, but it leads me to the conclusion that the growing unrest among males in general and white males in particular may manifest itself in the future.