I have a simpler definition:
white privilege is thought-terminating cliché which doesn't actually exist
I guess dictionary,com joins the ranks of unreliable dictionaries. And no, the disclaimer right at the end doesn't count:
This is not meant to be a formal definition of white privilege like most terms we define on Dictionary.com, but is rather an informal word summary that hopefully touches upon the key aspects of the meaning and usage of white privilege that will help our users expand their word mastery.
If the disclaimer where placed before the definition it would be acceptable. But not at the end,
What Does white privilege Mean? | Pop Culture by Dictionary.com
It means if you're "white" your grandparents weren't denied home-loans simply because of their skin color.
It means if you're "white" your grandparents and parents weren't the target of laws specifically designed to destroy your core family unit.
None of this is the average "white" person's "fault", they are not individually "responsible" for the "privilege" they've unwittingly enjoyed.
However, there should be some acknowledgement that many of their neighbors did not enjoy the same unspoken, invisible "privilege".
IMAGE SOURCE
Skip to 124 seconds,
"White Privilege" is a Bolshevik Marxist Weaponized attack label. It exists in the minds of the mind controlled, and has no place in Logic.
Oh, they weren't? Do you mean they were only denied based on their 'class' status?
How about my parents? Were they denied because of their skin color or something else?
What about me? Did I get a home 'Loan' of fiat, because I am white colored? Or did it have something to do with an 820 credit score?
The blacks that DID get home loans, and were homeowners during the time my grandparents were not able to acquire one, did they get one because of...hmm, I can't logically think of why...
This is more marxist, illogical, tripe. Applying 'Guilt' across the board, is not only ridiculous, but a detrimental attack applied by foreign marxist Communists. Saying it isn't 'their fault' is still, nothing but an attack, designed to castrate the European race into self-hate/guilt/suicide.
Why don't you do an experiment. Move to China for a while. Start a movement telling them they have too much "Chinese Privilege". See if they call you a Baizuo :)
I completely disagree.
I recommend undoing some of the cultural marxist programming that has shaped so many of our realities, making us think that this is 'our thoughts' when they are not. Acting on falsehoods, lies, fake history, causes us to think we are doing things that are 'of ourselves' and they are simply not. It takes a breakdown of self, a 'surrender' if you will, that you accept that you have been fooled...It starts there.
I don't listen to anything 'Adam Ruins', either, for the reason I stated above. His delivery of cultural marxist brainwashing is catchy and 'comedy' which makes it sink into the masses without being detected for what it is....Like the Daily Show, and well, anything on the mainstream...
I agree with you that it's important to keep in mind that only 2% of "white people" owned slaves.
And I hope we can agree that there's no reason for the average "white person" to feel an ounce of guilt about slavery because they did nothing to promote it themselves.
HOWEver, "white people" have gained an advantage (however slight in some cases), generally, especially the Brits and Americans, from the historic oppression of the "other".
This is not a new phenomenon. The Hindus practically worship their history of systemic racism that spans thousands of years. The Egyptians and Romans built empires on the backs of slave labor.
Can you understand the plight of the characters in movies like "FIRST BLOOD" and "FALLING DOWN"?
2 minutes,
2 minutes,
Now imagine millions of people who feel the exact same way.
Sure their frustration should be focused on the BILLIONAIRES.
Sure, but our owners are very skilled at TURNING US AGAINST EACH OTHER.
We have a lot to 'undo' in the programming department!
First of all, when you say "White People" are you referring to Slavic, Germanic, Caucasian, Latin, Turkic, Celtic, Scandinavian.....or can't you tell?
We'll start there ;)
I'm putting quotes around the term "white people" specifically because it is an extremely unscientific catch-all that generally refers to non-latin, non-asian, non-african, non-middle eastern, non-native relatively lighter skinned people of very generally western european ancestry.
Of course there was a time when the Italian immigrants were not considered "american".
And of course there was a time when the Irish immigrants were not considered "american".
And of course there was a time when the Greek immigrants were not considered "american".
And there was even a time when the German immigrants were not considered "american".
Thinking about it some more, it's almost like "white" (in modern lingo) is now a stand-in for "real american" (in stark contrast to "native american").
So then you see how it is socially acceptable to generalize white/black? Not good. There are over 50 countries in Africa. Many of the African people VASTLY VARY between countries. Just like 'Europeans'.
The most heinous attack on our peoples was done by the Communist Banker class, and that was to say "White People", "Black People". They effective eviscerated ALL of our roots with a phrase. Without roots, you get this shitshow.
And after they were considered American, the usa removed that status in the snap of a finger, and put Germans into Concentration Camps (along with the Japanese), and stripped them of everything.
I don't get or see that at all. I only see that with 'foreigners', not blacks. Blacks are considered 'real americans' if they are patriotic. Whites are considered Communist Demons if they support communism.
Hollywood has melted the brains of most. Discussions like this are an uphill battle at best. The programming is so vast that it mostly cannot even be recognized by the programmed, let alone addressed.
I recommend making #1 goal for everyone, to first undo the programming, so that objectivity can be, at least sniffed.
I don't think Adam's 100% "right" about "everything", maybe closer to 65%, but I also enjoy entertaining viewpoints that I disagree with.
He made a very interesting point, in front of a live audience in Portland, that their city was founded as a white supremacist utopia and remains to-this-very-day the least diverse city in the united states.
I found that interesting.
Can you define what that means please?
I get called a 'white supremacist' if I say the phrase, "The european race has some great accomplishments"
And the hypocrisy tells me who I am dealing with at the very moment it happens. It takes all my patience not to throw rationality out the window.
Was Portland literally sanctioned and set up to be 'for whites only' or did it just declare that it is a utopia for 'white supremacists'?
I personally, would like to live with my own race, and visit others.
When Oregon was granted statehood in 1859, it was the only state in the Union admitted with a constitution that forbade black people from living, working, or owning property there. It was illegal for black people even to move to the state until 1926.
https://gizmodo.com/oregon-was-founded-as-a-racist-utopia-1539567040
I knew about the constitution, but I wasn't aware of anything specific to 'Portland'.
Things are just starting to heat up.
Castrated, weak, soft, GUILT RIDDEN whites, now think it is 'racist' to even defend themselves, in any way...
Time to start changing the tune.
https://peakd.com/hive-181335/@tonygreene113/tztedtyv
Statistically speaking, you are much more likely to be the victim of someone of the same color.
Statistically speaking, you are much more likely to be the victim of someone in your own family (or someone you know).
This type of sample-biased fear fuel only serves the agenda of our OWNERS.
Let's stop playing their games and shoveling money into their pockets.
That's true, but the statement overlooks the massive difference in Black on White crime:
https://www.aim.org/special-report/black-criminals-white-victims-and-white-guilt/
You're doing it again.
This is about POOR PEOPLE.
POOR PEOPLE are disillusioned with "the system" and will take matters into their own hands (like BATMAN).
Just like in "FIRST BLOOD", just like in "FALLING DOWN".
If someone injures a family member or friend, they're not going to "call the police" because the police won't do anything to fix the problem and will most likely make matters (far) worse.
Do you know what causes POVERTY?
Try targeting men for a fabricated "non-crime" like recreational drug use.
This creates "single parent homes" and effectively makes sure it's almost impossible for most of these targeted men to get any sort of decent paying job for the rest of their lives.
Try red-lining real-estate so all the POOR PEOPLE are clustered in the same areas.
These aren't the only causes of POVERTY, but they're certainly significant contributors.
Even "targeting the police" is MISSING THE POINT.
The police are simply brainwashed lapdogs of the OWNERS.
Many police officers are living barely above the poverty level themselves.
Wow, that disclaimer is really hard to find. (what with all the adverts popping up and flying around)
White privilege:
Your father had a strong work ethic and so it is assumed that you do too.
It is assumed that you have strong judeo-christian values (such as that aforementioned hard working)
It is assumed that you had decent schooling, because your forefathers paid for the schools with their sweat and tears.
And that is what white privilege is.
Kinda like women are assumed to be good mothers.
It doesn't take too long before these assumptions get questioned.
It means if you're "white" your grandparents weren't denied home-loans simply because of their skin color.
It means if you're "white" your grandparents and parents weren't the target of laws specifically designed to destroy your core family unit.
None of this is the average "white" person's "fault", they are not individually "responsible" for the "privilege" they've unwittingly enjoyed.
However, there should be some acknowledgement that many of their neighbors did not enjoy the same unspoken, invisible "privilege".
IMAGE SOURCE
Skip to 124 seconds,
Curated for #informationwar (by @aagabriel)
Delegate to the @informationwar! project and get rewarded
It means if you're "white" your grandparents weren't denied home-loans simply because of their skin color.
It means if you're "white" your grandparents and parents weren't the target of laws specifically designed to destroy your core family unit.
None of this is the average "white" person's "fault", they are not individually "responsible" for the "privilege" they've unwittingly enjoyed.
However, there should be some acknowledgement that many of their neighbors did not enjoy the same unspoken, invisible "privilege".
IMAGE SOURCE
Skip to 124 seconds,
You might want to check my profile and my other postings to see where I come from. Anyway:
I am not responsible for what my grandparents did or did not do or get. Trying to instil guilt for that will only result in defiance from my site.
The core family has been destroyed by feminism and it has been destroyed for all races. Black are the canary in the coal mine where it shows up first. The rest of society will soon follow.
Feminism is and always was a movement of wealthy white women who tricked everybody else into there service.
You are looking at the wrong privileges:
I do agree that the war on drugs was a mistake and I'm in the legalise everything camp.
I agree with you that it's important to keep in mind that only 2% of "white people" owned slaves.
And I hope we can agree that there's no reason for the average "white person" to feel an ounce of guilt about slavery because they did nothing to promote it themselves.
HOWEver, "white people" have gained an advantage (however slight in some cases), generally, especially the Brits and Americans, from the historic oppression of the "other".
This is not a new phenomenon. The Hindus practically worship their history of systemic racism that spans thousands of years. The Egyptians and Romans built empires on the backs of slave labor.
Can you understand the plight of the characters in movies like "FIRST BLOOD" and "FALLING DOWN"?
2 minutes,
2 minutes,
Now imagine millions of people who feel the exact same way.
Sure their frustration should be focused on the BILLIONAIRES.
Sure, but our owners are very skilled at TURNING US AGAINST EACH OTHER.
I wonder if we talk past each other. Especially when you are quoting two videos of angry white men.
Brits, Americans, Egyptians and Romans — 🤔 — Which group of historic slave owner are missing from the list?
And while we are at it: The word slave comes from the word slavic and is a reminiscent from the times when the Vikings took the Polish and Russians as slaves. Everybody took everybody else as slave. Every group is both victim and perpetrator.
How very true.
But most people don't see the whole picture. AFAIK the only groups which does are men's rights activists.
Since your like videos, if you want to know how bad it really is I have two playlists for you:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLePIBGTG_9y1aE1Du8ITgxNAYgHoJVmJH
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjMscr0TpRqjE8WcuGrAnJ5KLZ8DeuY39
And yes that's a black woman talking at a men's rights conference right in the first video. She was not the only one.
I think you might like this,
https://tubitv.com/movies/399199/the_red_pill?start=true
It starts out skeptical, but ends up making a very strong case for "mens rights".
Of course I have seen the red pill. Have you seen the The Red Pill: Raw Files?
Is there some reason we can't simply call it a "human rights conference"?
+PROHUMAN
+PROFAMILY
I made a similar argument with regards to female genital mutation. My argument was: Could we not call it child genital mutilation? Almost always there was a huge pushback. I have given up. We have to do the fight against male genital mutilation on our own.
The urge to protect women at the expense of men is deeply engrained in the human physic.
In the 1970 some European countries had Ministry of Family Affairs. By now they have been renamed to Ministry for Women, Children and Elderly. Notice who is now missing?
The USA once had a law against domestic violence. By now this law has been replaced by the Violence against Women Acts. Notice which violence is now ignored.
Any "human rights conference" would focus on women's rights and eventually be renamed to ”women's rights conference“.
As such it is absolutely necessary fro men's rights to differentiate themselves from the more general human rights.
Good point. For some reason, Christians just love mutilating baby boys.
Ok, maybe they could call it "men's human rights movement"?
Or could they go with "EAT THE RICH"!!
oR, DON'T BE BRAINWASHED BY THE "HERO MYTH"!!
4 minutes,