Logical Thoughts On White Privilege And Racism

In my last article, I thought I’d show why I have an issue with Critical Theory. A few people got that and stepped in defense of it, arguing that Critical Theory is essential to the social studies, as scientific theory (Positivism) can not be applicable with qualitative research. Perhaps I could have better articulated that I was arguing that quantitative research is a possible alternative through methods like Critical Rationalism. Of course, even today there are debates and pieces written on this matter that stem back decades.

But this is not what most people saw. My use of the topic of Institutional Racism and the concept of White Privilege was to help illustrate my criticisms of Critical Theory and it’s methodology. Of course the two concepts are hot-button issues, but I still took it upon myself to write an opinion piece about it. I accepted from the beginning there would be little praise and a lot of opposition to what I would have to say. When I said that I believe Institutional Racism and White Privilege just wasn’t there, many people jumped on the SJW (Social Justice Warrior) bandwagon about how I was a racist and a bigot and (my personal favorite) how only a white person could make such stupid claims. It seems that the original point of my topic, criticizing Critical Theory, was over shadowed by my choice of critique.

Then enters Patrick Johnson. Another SJW with a white savior complex. He writes a piece in response to mine, that not only just argues numbers, but had the audacity to claim that I argued racism isn’t real.

When we look back at what Institutional Racism is, it’s simply defined as “any system of inequality based on race”. As Pat (mind if I call you Pat?) started off by saying that not only am I uneducated to the history of colonialism, slavery, and interment camps, (because a Dutch national would have never heard of The Dutch Slave Trade, or believe that colonialism was possible with the Nederlands-koloniale Rijk (aka: “What is the colonizing of New Amsterdam?”), or ever would have ever heard of Kamp Vught, or that the very city I live in was partly rubble almost 74 years ago during the Rotterdam Blitz.) but that I’m in denial and gives a list of 8 points that prove his position, while attacking my character. I can’t help but laugh at the response, because all he’s done is reinforce the deeper meaning what I’m trying to point out, and making things worse for him and other SJWs.

The average SJW can’t seem to understand the hypocrisy and irony in their own rhetoric. And while I can imagine many assume I’m only going to try to argue numbers with numbers, it seems that you didn’t understand what I pointed out in my first article. To show what I’m talking about, lets start with Pat’s first choice of evidence. Pat decided to show the institutional racism of the education system, and erroneously claimed that black children do not misbehave more than white children while giving facts regarding the rate of suspension and how it is much higher for black children than other races. This information is HALF true. Looking at similar sources, in a 2008 study, it showed that black children ARE being suspended from school at a much higher rate than any children in school. While the first study was done in the 1970s, black children were always being suspended more than white children, but never near the same rate as today. Now, nobody is going to argue that institutional racism didn’t existed in the US in the 1970s. But how exactly did the numbers shoot up so much? What were these kids suspended for? Weren’t they misbehaving just the same as white kids as Pat stated? Well, if you read the article, you’d see that neither study states what kids were suspended for. The source I provided did show that suspension rates dropped 21% all across the board if schools stopped enforcing mandatory suspension for tardiness or truancy. Of course, you need to ask if it’s wise to let kids think they won’t get fired for being late or not showing up for work.

Now what I just did is exactly what I said the problem was. While the statistic suggest that there is racial motivation behind the suspensions, I’ve pointed out that not only are the numbers incomplete due to lack of information, but that there just might be a bigger issue at hand. Is it institutional racism? I’ll get back to that later. We can waste time and go through everything Pat pointed out, only to be countered with other statistics. But it only takes away from the point I was trying to make.

So what’s my original point? I’m merely reinforcing the argument that Critical Theory is flawed in its application. I argue for Critical Rationalism, because I believe that it could give us a better understanding of all the numbers and lead us to a conclusion of what the larger problem might be. Beyond it’s standard application of logical fallacies, the problem I see with Critical Theory, is that it has a lovely tendency of allowing it’s tactics to grow and be used in the schools of post-modernism and post-structuralism. What’s wrong with that? Why pick on institutional racism? Because it let’s people start arguing idiotic things like how peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are racist.

But let’s backtrack just a moment. Let me make another point. Remember those numbers I showed regarding suspension? Notice how few Asian children are suspended. It’s funny to point out, because while Pat showed “evidence” of institutional racism in business by how high the number of unemployed blacks are in US, he missed an opportunity to show that Asians are not only the least unemployed among all races in the US, but they’re also more well paid than the white majority themselves. Of course any kneejerk reactionary SJW will come up with “BUT ASIANS DIDN’T FACE THE SAME SLAVERY AND COLONIALISM AS BLACK PEOPLE YOU RACIST!” to which I would respond “Tell that to Suey Park”. A half intelligent SJW would point out that the same data shows that Asians make 8% less than a white person at the same job, but would (deliberately) leave out the part where it says that the gap is closing there. While I understand that black people in the US have quite a few issues, I really believe these issues have less to do with the American system being built a racist values, and more to do with a flaw in the American system itself. Pat points to higher incarcerations rates of black people for drug offenses, I point to the War on Drugs has been being a war on all underclasses. Pat points to white privilege, and I laugh at him. Did you think I forgot about that?

For some reason, Pat seems to think that by telling someone to “check their privilege”, he and many SJWs have some how done something good to combat racism. I love that Pat illustrated what white privilege entails because I’m going to show you SJWs why white privilege is not only nonsensical to use as a point of rhetoric, but accusatory and will only lead to more racial tension.

Let’s chose subject Bob. Bob is 38 year old CIS white male with a wife who works part time and 2 kids. Bob went to university and graduated, and got himself a job with CorpX. Bob makes the average $37k a year after taxes, and makes sure his mortgage, bills, and kids stuff including day care, are paid off. Bob went through the economic recession like everyone else. During the first year of recession, CorpX decided to let people work 60-70 hour work weeks while only paying for 40 hours to ensure that CorpX can stay afloat. This is besides the fact that American Employment stands out as some of the most harsh in the civilized world. Lucky for Bob however, he was not one of the many people let go from CorpX over the years to help the company stay afloat. As Bob is walking back to work after grabbing his lunch, he is stopped by 24 year old college student, Pat. Pat wants Bob to sign a petition to stop racism in America. Bob had learned about racism since he young. He knows the racist past of America, and knows that minorities tend to have it rather hard in America. Bob wants to sign, but informs Pat that he needs more info and doesn’t have time as he’s on his lunch break. Pat tells Bob that institutional racism is alive and well in America, and one of the problems is white people are not understanding their privilege. Bob asks Pat what exactly he’s talking about. As Pat explains that Bob is better off because he’s white, within the blink of an eye Bob tells Pat to fuck off and get a job as he walks away. Pat is offended, and yells at Bob calling him a racist.

What Pat didn’t understand back there, is that by telling Bob about his “white privilege”, Pat underhandedly marginalized Bob’s experience by suggesting that he never really had to work for anything he has, and that he only got his position in life by being white. Maybe that’s not what Pat was trying to tell him, but Pat and his reactionary mentality couldn’t fathom such reasoning to come from such an obviously privileged white male.
So what I’ve done here, is illustrate what I’ve said before. The notion of white privilege doesn’t just come off as accusatory, but it also insults the hard labor of many white people have had to go through to have the things they have. It subconsciously accuses them of having any part to do with a system of oppression. By suggesting that the white majority only gets what they get for being white, and then telling them to allow more taxes to be taken to support giving minorities privileges above whites, only adds more racial tension. And It also makes you seem like a bit racist yourself. What do I mean? By accusing someone of “not understanding something, or only getting something because they are white”, you’re doing nothing different than saying “you don’t understand something, or are you only getting something because you are **insert minority race**. It’s racist. For all SJWs who pointed out my skin color and didn’t argue my points, you don’t seem to understand the hypocrisy of your argument. Simply put, when you judge an argument, you judge that that argument by its merits. You know what we call people who judge arguments based on skin color?… Racists.

But now the most important part for me. Am I a racist? Do I deny the existence of racism…

Of course not, you dumbasses! And of course racism is real! Racism is something we’re all born with. But don’t let my words be misconstrued once more. Just because something is natural, doesn’t make it right. And just because something feels right, doesn’t mean it is. For any idiot that read anywhere in my article that “racism doesn’t exist”, you don’t know how to read, because I never said it. You are reading too deep into the wrong topic, and are only trying to justify your own self loathing and feeling of privilege. TC mark

More From Thought Catalog

  • http://davenappi.wordpress.com/2014/04/11/argue-merit-not-skin-color/ Argue Merit, Not Skin Color | Create Reset Revamp

    […] Argue Merit, Not Skin Color […]

  • https://thoughtcatalog.com/patrick-johnson/2014/04/hate-to-break-it-to-you-but-racism-exists-now-go-do-something-about-it/ Hate To Break It To You, But Racism Exists. Now Go Do Something About It. | Thought Catalog

    […] are actually several parts in Nappi’s latest piece. The first part is a reference to the long debate in American sociology over various ontological […]

  • http://thefilipinoerudite.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/week-1-description-of-the-blog/ Week 1 – Description of the Blog | What We Have To Say...

    […] The blog was written by the author in order to argue about his position with another Thought Catalog author, David Nappi. Nappi’s blog post can be found here.  […]

blog comments powered by Disqus