Is “half-white privilege” like being “half-pregnant”?
Saturday Night Card Game: White privilege is the political Swiss Army Knife of the progressive movement.
White privilege is the political Swiss Army Knife of the progressive movement.
There is literally nothing that happens in the country for which white privilege does not serve as a tool. If you are white, you have white privilege. If you are not, you suffer from lack of white privilege. The insane White Privilege Conference exposed recently is just one example, but certainly liberal websites partake as well.
But what to make of our increasingly multi-racial society? How do you squeeze white privilege into the actions of multi-racial perps?
We know that with George Zimmerman, the problem of half-whiteness was solved by labeling him just plain old white, or at most, a white Hispanic. Never was Zimmerman just Hispanic.
What to make of the UCSB mass murderer who was half white and half Asian?
Salon.com is a long-time purveyor of all manner of white privilege political arguments. Joan Walsh has twisted into an intellectual knot to justify bringing white privilege to bear while also acknowledging the half-whiteness. The answer? Half-White Privilege.
Elliot Rodger’s half-white male privilege:
Not that I have a lot of sympathy for Rodger, but it twists his already twisted story to label him simply white….
Why is it so hard to recognize Rodger as of mixed racial descent? It certainly doesn’t negate the role white entitlement and privilege played in his “syndrome.” Rodger is at least partly a victim of the ideology of white supremacy, as well as its violent enforcer….
This is not to suggest that mixed-race people suffer from emotional problems (aside from the fact that all humans do). That’s a danger, because people of mixed racial descent have long been stigmatized as unhappy or somehow lacking, going back to the awful “tragic mulatto” stereotype. “He had some really serious and deeply clinical mental anguish beyond these concerns [of identity],” writes Daniel, who has long argued against notions (found among people of all races) that all mixed-race Americans are somehow troubled or racially untethered.
The Rodger coverage underscores that our traditional American black-white, victim-victimizer view of American race relations is failing us in a world where Asians are the fastest-growing “minority” and Latinos the largest. Dismissing Rodger as white implies that Asians can’t be racist on their own, that it was only his white half that made him hate black people and Mexicans. Labeling him Asian, or making the preposterous suggestion that he committed an anti-white hate crime, ignores that he was both the prisoner of white entitlement and supremacy as well as its avatar.
To suggest that other races and other cultures don’t treat women as property is to miss how prevalent that attitude is. Sadly, misogyny and male entitlement come in every color and culture.
So it is possible to be half pregnant?
(Featured Image: “What’s the Matter with White People?” with Joan Walsh]
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
What?! Is Joan Walsh insane?! How can anyone twist themselves up so completely with such irrational pretzel logic?
On another note, I didn’t watch his video, or read his tome “manifesto” so perhaps I missed it, but was Roger anti-Latino or anti-black?
Given this statement:
He “hated” black people and Mexicans?! So it would seem…….
If Zimmerman is white, ignoring his African and Hispanic roots, and Roger is white, ignoring his Asian roots, then:
That makes Obama white. He should not gotten those affirmative action benefits.
Perhaps we can revert to a new version of the “one drop” rule, except in reverse. Any white blood makes you white. If so then pretty much all the descendants of American slaves are white. problem solved…
I’m pretty sure my maternal grandfather was white…so how do I go about claiming my 1/4 of white privilege…?
Ask Joan Walsh.
“Why is it so hard to recognize Rodger as of mixed racial descent? It certainly doesn’t negate the role white entitlement and privilege played in his ‘syndrome.’ Rodger is at least partly a victim of the ideology of white supremacy, as well as its violent enforcer….
Rodger is half white only upon research of his parentage, done in hindsight. Every visual I’ve seen makes him like plain old vanilla white kid. Nobody seeing him as a stranger would say, ‘look at the half Asian kid’ or half white kid.
All this racial crap is cobbled out of thin air after the act because not only is a crisis a terrible thing to waste, so too is a nice little schizophrenic rampage too valuable to waste. Per Walsh, white privilege and white entitlement played a role in Rodger’s ‘syndrome’, schizophrenia. Huh? Schizophrenia is a brain wiring issue with zero social causation.
I struggle to comment because Walsh makes zero sense whatsoever, there is not even a starting point. We speak English; Walsh speaks… Klingon? Whale whistle? I honestly don’t know.
Do people really read crap like that, nod, and say, “hmm, interesting..” ???
“Rodger is … a victim … of white supremacy, as well as its violent enforcer.”
“Walsh was hospitalized and arrested for playing the knockout game against herself.”
All this race talk is tiring and annoying. When can we see each other just as Americans, as people? Not as long as there is a Democrat party, fer sher.
Joan Walsh is a first class idiot. She has nothing to say beyond the stock leftist talking points on any given issue, and frequently can’t even keep those straight.
Salon was always a pretentious concept, but with Walsh at the helm it has become a sorry parody of its self-image.
And nowhere does Walsh beclown herself more than on issues involving race in any way. She is always there finding racism in anything white people do, say, or think. All conservative ideas are racist because black people use some welfare programs. The woman is entirely irrational.
That she has kept her position as long as she has proves beyond doubt that Salon is not a serious website.
Here is another perspective that bears thinking about regarding the Lefties’ war on white privilege. Connecting the dots from the concept of white privilege to this really being a deeper attack, re: the privilege of being American. This writer examines what’s behind the ‘white privilege’ focus.
http://www.unifiedpatriots.com/2014/05/27/white-privilege-and-the-privilege-to-be-american/
Thank you for the link — antidote for the Walsh poisonous screed.
Oh, it’s even more strange than that. If you appear white, and can pass for white, and because of that you present yourself to the world as “white” then you are the beneficiary of “White Privilege,” regardless of your actual racial makeup.
On the other side, if you are any other ethnicity which could even marginally NOT pass for white, and choose to self-identify as non-white, then you have been denied “white privilege” and are thus entitled to some form of benefit in exchange for the “disproportionate” or “disparity” of treatment that you have suffered. This extension is given to any ethnicity EXCEPT those that cannot pass for anything OTHER than White.
There is a group that was set up by the Texas Health and Human Services Commission as the “Center for Elimination of Disproportionality and Disparities.” By sheer luck of working with a minority 501(c)(3) as business adviser and attorney, I was invited to join the committee by the Region 10 Chair.
Some of the work that they do is OK, especially regarding some of the distinctly disparate outcomes of certain groups, but they almost always default to race as the limiting factor, and I almost always have to say “show me the data” because I’m telling them it’s either a cultural issue, a geography issue, a resources issue or something else that has absolutely nothing to do with race and everything to do with the choices made by the individuals or groups involved.
By the way: On the committee of 15 for Texas Region 10, I am one of only 2 White non-Hispanics on the committee. The remainder are Hispanic or African American.
And why do ‘they’ need labels?
For the sake of “diversity;” paying homage for their vice to virtue.
And, ‘labels’ give the Socially Privileged the means to socially profile someone even though they supposedly “hate profiling” (i.e., SPLC).
Labels give all sorts of people ‘outs’ and disclaimers.
Labeling allows the ‘diverse’ to not have to bear responsibility for the mal-effects of their broad brush labeling: social programs, gov’t. policies and teaching (reprogramming) which defines who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’ under the Mad magazine-like masthead of “Diversity Means Inclusive.”
Labeling enables moronic activism and anti-social behavior (i.e., White Privilege Conference). The ‘Labelers’ label the ‘other’ as ‘bad’ – he/she is not one of us – invoking God-like privilege.
Being “diverse” means that you can appear all-wise “inclusive” with your ‘peeps’ while excluding, denigrating and literally hating people based on labels.
Talk to a homosexual about their homosexuality. You can’t because you are labeled “homophobic.”
You can’t disagree with Obama’s fiscal, domestic or regulatory policies, his back door fiats or his lack of foreign policy without being labeled “racist’ – you are not ‘accepting’ of his complete incompetence, his deception or his distaste of America in with your ideas carte blanche.
The religion of moral relativity or ‘Diversity’ is evangelistic. With its labels and bumper stickers ‘they’ preach to us, telling us to “COEXIST” in a world where you will be ‘redirected’ to be PC, to say what you do not believe and can never question.
For this “white privilege” to work as they intend, isn’t large amounts of “white guilt” needed?
Because, personally, I’ll not feeling it.
There simply aren’t enough individual incidents of white on minority racism to sustain the race-baiting industry, so they have begun redefining racism into something generic, pandemic, and completely irrefutable, a matter of faith, by adding the codicil that racists are unaware of their racism. Agree with them = good, disagree = you are unaware of your inherent racism.
That’s long been the point behind the idea of “institutional racism.”
Yeah, the liberal academics cook up the theories, such as they are, and then they explain them to the street race hustlers like Jackson, Sharpton, et al.
No need for contortions. The de facto rule is that anything which creates leverage is permissible. Essentially, these “progressives”, and the Left generally, are waging war, without the moderation enshrined in the Geneva Conventions.
Life is not a fruitful enterprise for timid individuals. The Left get it. They are not constrained by arbitrary rules of biology, morality, etc. Perhaps that’s why civilization always suffers progressive corruption then a dysfunctional convergence.
I’m waiting for Obama to stumble on the obvious, one-size-fits-all excuse: His white half has used racism to defeat his black half at every turn.
Obviously anybody who tries to call “privilege” to me is being racist, because they are placing a judgement on me that implies my behavior is linked to my apparent skin color. The proper response is to call them on their racist act, insist on an apology for their obvious racism, and if they refuse, to ignore them as unrepentant racists not worthy of my time.
That must explain why Obama gets away with everything – his white half….