My friend Jim Hines made this post in response to someone else's post. I like Jim's post better, but it still has some issues.
Now, once again, I see the "White males are privileged" meme with the unspoken, "And are greedy bastards holding the rest of them down" tag. Except, of course, that in some cases it is spoken (Jim did not say this. It is covered in comments).
Now, if I were to say, "Black males are largely criminals," I'd be called a racist, and with good reason. There are a higher percentage of blacks in jail, and in the criminal world, and this is the fault of white males.
No, there are more blacks in jail because they commit more of the type of crimes that land one in jail, and often "culturally" present as both non-remorseful and antagonistic. Much like the (white) guy in the red Ferrari is more likely to get a ticket than the mother with kids in the minivan, if he threatens the cop with a lawyer, and she says, "Sorry, sir, I was a bit distracted and I apologize."
There are certainly poverty and cultural issues behind this. Absolutely. If your culture has learned that the cops are the enemy, one is going to react that way. These issues absolutely must be addressed, and will resolve a few of these issues. Poverty is more complex.
But, why is the alleged "Success" of white males not attributed to culture?
Look at the figures again.
Follow me here:
White males have a culture. Accepted.
Okay, hold on. AMERICAN white males have a culture. To suggest that ALL white males globally have the same culture is ridiculous and racist. Russians are not Americans. Nor are New Zealanders, and certainly not say, Hungarians.
So, let's look at [one particular definition of] American white male culture, which is what these figures are all based on (conveniently ignoring other white male cultures that don't fit the meme). For comparison purposes, we'll number that baseline as 1.
So, in various factors –income, employment, crime, poverty, X group scores .78, Y group scores .69 Z group scores .57. Etc.
Each of these "minority" groups has a culture. (Actually more than one, because of course, Hispanics in Texas are like Hispanics in Detroit, and blacks in Atlanta are just like blacks in Bangor, Maine.)
Each culture is different, and can be COMPARED TO EACH OTHER.
If group X becomes the baseline, White Males become, say, 1.3, but group Y is STILL below group X.
Ergo, by the figures provided by this study, American white male culture actually IS superior. (These are THEIR figures, not mine.)
Various other American cultures are less superior, in various areas, in various amounts.
The check is that worldwide the cultures that adopted SUCCESS (not "White Male") culture, do better than their neighbors who don't.
Because, really, [ruling class] white males don't sit there deciding "Blacks will score X economically, Hispanics Y, Asians Z." If you do believe this, I will call you a fucking idiot to your face.
Those cultures score how they do because of themselves. And if they really were superior cultures, they'd win out, because an inferior culture doesn't hold down a superior one in the real world. (It's amazing how "liberals" refuse to accept evolution in the marketplace and social world. It's real. It exists. It applies.)
Now, let's step back to a global basis. Europeans did, in fact, conquer most of the world, because their culture and technology was superior. This is a fact. Americans didn't come to Europe. Aborigines didn't. Not even the Polynesians.
Now, this is not to say these other people are stupid. They simply have a culture that works in their environment, but was not conducive to global spread. The Polynesians mastered deepwater sailing and navigation a millennium before anyone else. Metals were slow to develop in the Americas because the environment was far less hostile in the ways that counted, so instead, they developed stone tools to a fine art not seen elsewhere. (But, Scandinavian Neolithic tools are equally advanced in other ways.)
Jared Diamond covers this in "Guns, Germs, and Steel." The !Kung Bushmen survive in a desert that would kill you or me in hours, and have done so for 30,000 years. They are neither stupid nor incapable. But, that environment hinders them from becoming the dominant group in Africa or anywhere else.
In Asia, Singapore and Indonesia are very successful, and largely westernized (vs Malaysia and the Philippines nearby). China, Japan and India have all adopted elements of Western culture, and benefited thereby. And China, of course, has had a very successful culture and one of the largest economies on the planet for 3000 years, because they're white males.
Japan is the third largest economy on the planet, and has accomplished this since WWII, because they're white males.
Seriously, this whole, "White males are holding us down" bullshit is tiresome, folks. Even in response, you'll hear apologists saying, "Well, you personally as a white male may not be an oppressor, yadda yadda, but as a group…"
Really. Are some of your best friends black, too? Or Jewish? Sidebar: Have you noticed how many scientists and doctors are Jewish? This must be due to the privilege and advantages Jews have been accorded throughout history.
What color is America's president right now? Who voted for him?
And what is one of the criticisms of Mr Obama? That he's "not culturally black."
No, his father was a well-connected diplomat, his mother college educated when that was uncommon for American women. They adopted, not "white culture," but "SUCCESS CULTURE."
"Gee, those people over there eat better than we do. Let's find out what they eat and how they acquire it. That group knows how to make their own fire."
When something works, you adopt it, or you get displaced. This has nothing to do with being white --the very white French never adopted the very white Welsh longbow that the very white English did adopt. As a result, the English spent a century and more kicking French ass in the 100 Years War. Which language is more prevalent now? HINT: The one spoken by white males.
Oh, wait. It's the language spoken by SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE WORLDWIDE, as at least a second language.
If you act like a ghetto punk, people will treat you like one. People like, say, black cops. Who have adopted success culture.
I'm a white male. I also belong to four minority culture groups if I wish to claim them (I do, privately, and am proud of it. I see no reason to demand notice from anyone else. It's a personal matter). My wife could claim five.
I grew up poor by American standards. My family made the decision to move to Canada, then America. I left home at 18, enlisted in the military. When I got out, I was unemployed, not very employable, and living hand to mouth. I've documented this elsewhere.
Twenty-six years later, I'm in a very tough field (freelance writer) and somehow in the upper quintile income wise.
This has nothing to do with being white and everything to do with CHOOSING TO EMBRACE SUCCESS CULTURE. I present as clean, well-kempt, professional, courteous, without visible tattoos, visible piercings or trashy slang. This applies if you're white or black---a white hick with a mullet, tattoos, a torn shirt and using racist slang is no more likely to get hired on Wall Street than some ghetto punk with bling and pants around his ass. Really. No, REALLY. He's "white culture," except, as is conveniently overlooked by some people, there are different types of white culture. Because of course, Billy-Bob Carfixer, privileged white guy, has advantages that Barack Obama, Herman Cain, General Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, et al, don't have.
And of course, American blacks are no better off than African blacks.
If you go to Asia, the successful cultures are still Asian, but have adopted some European successes, just as we've adopted kanban from the Japanese, maize from the Americans, numerals from the Indians (even if the intermediary Arabs get the credit), and everything else from the successful cultures that preceded ours.
Otherwise, what you're arguing is, "I am every bit as good as a white male, all white males are the same, they're holding me down, they need to fix this problem for me."
"Liberals" love to scale people and groups on their "privilege" to avoid debate on why some groups do better than others, and that there are numerous variations that have nothing to do with skin color. Yes, let's go with the magic of "privilege," not actual factors we can fix, because that would take actual thought. They completely miss that whether you accuse someone of being worse or better, if you base it on their skin color, IT'S RACIST. If you base it on their gender, IT'S SEXIST. If you base it on their religion, IT'S DISCRIMINATORY.
This might even be projection on the part of "liberals." I have transsexual friends. They are constantly depressed and angered that when there's any kind of debate on gay rights, the heteronormative gays toss them under the bus. "But we'll come back for you later. Trust us."
Just like the Occupussies want the Americans in the global 80% to be equal to the Americans in the global 99.99%, but they'll come back for the global 30% later. Trust us.
As soon as those evil white males are persuaded to give up the magic potion of "privilege." We'll have the white males fix the problem for us.
Yeah, genius, you're sort of acknowledging there that you are both a racist, and inferior. Because we white males not all the same, and if you really think I can fix all your problems, or have control over them, you're acknowledging to yourself that you believe I am superior.
I am a white male. I am not your god, I am not your superior, please don't treat me like one.
WILLIAMSON'S SECOND LAW: Invocations of "White privilege" mean you've abandoned any logical argument for your position, concede your inferiority in the moral, intellectual and/or economic spectra, and expect that your superiors will fix your problem for you, while claiming to be equal.