Peterson's 12 Rules For Life, have you heard of this?

[bennyboy]

It's a bit more specific, Benny.  Not every rural white is a redneck or trailer park trash.  Hell.  I'm a redneck.  Thing is, whites aren't historically disenfranchised in any meaningful sense...that's just some ground leveling business in the normalizing effort.  People who weren't regarded -as- whites, were, constantly, but we've all congealed into a single mass nowadays..even the miscegenated ones.  lol

Whites as a group aren't disenfranchised, but a fair percentage of white individuals, especially at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale, are. I'd say in a sense they are DOUBLY disenfranchised-- not only are they less than the average American, but they are members of a supposedly privileged group, and are not receiving any of that privilege. That notwithstanding, they are expected to bear part of the moral responsibility for that prilivilege-- i.e. that white people have taken too much, and in too oppressive away, that they should be willing to voluntarily give back, either by accepting personal abuse, or by accepting public policy that helps others, and disadvantages them, without regard to individual need or merit.

Well, this argument has been made in this thread, has it not?  That white people who express pride are racist, because they selectively choose not to focus on the harm that white people have done?  Are black people who express pride expected also to present a balanced view, and present the harms done by black people?  How about Asians?  How about Natives?

I've already said that I'm not particularly proud or ashamed of being white. That being said, I perceive a double standard, and I do not agree with a philosophical position which seeks explicitly to support it.

I'm more of a "why don't you poor fuckers realize that you're all one class and stop attacking your peers to the benefit of your owners" kinda guy.....but tell me more about how the ideologies explicitly opposed to racism are, in fact, the real racists.  

See, now you're speaking my language. If any individual feels he's being mistreated, he has a perfect right to stand up and speak, or otherwise act, on his behalf. If he can talk others into standing with him, fucking rock on. Every time I see another black kid shot, for example, I think "This is when every pissed off black guy with a firearm is going to storm that shitty police station and teach them what's what." But so far, they never have.

Yeah, you're super-opposed to racism-- ALL of it, right? No, you are not. You seek first to establish a moral balance-- to give back, or enable the taking back, of enough power that black people (or gay people or women) are on an equal footing in every way. That's the PC mandate-- look at which groups are victimized, and work to bring them as nearly as possible to a true equality-- by social pressure if necessary, and by legislation if possible.

I get that principle, but as I've already shown, I think much of the work of ACTUALLY restoring equality is done by careful general policies, not by differential treatment based on demographic membership.

For example, we know that most people in prisons are black, and that many of those have been imprisoned unfairly. Instead of racial sensitivity training and all that, I would recommend an independent review process that completely REMOVES race in arbitration, and looks specifically at the severity of the case, and then removing people on their own recognizance with a contract meant to encourage productivity. I'd do arbitration in one of two ways: (1) completely blind-- no names even, just a description of charges and sentences; (2) true peer review-- i.e. a jury or tribunal could go through cases of people who share membership in the same demographic group-- i.e. let black people decide if they want a particular person back in their communities. I vastly prefer (1), but if we are going to insist on demographics, I'd go even FURTHER, and make sure to minimize the class war-- where say a group of only white adjudicators have the power to determine whether black people should be released. Because we already know, don't we, that that would fail horribly?

The result of either should be that the majority of prisoners released are black, giving a net shift toward equality among demographics, without bringing one demographic group into opposition with another.