**Bumped Up From TamWire. Posted By rosebud2186**
Held in Madison, WI. Where else?
Via examiner.com: White privilege conference: White people were invented in 1681
According to progressives attending a white privilege conference in Madison, Wisconsin, white people were invented in 1681. This was just one highlight of a video posted Tuesday at Progressives Today, a site dedicated to exposing the far left win agenda….
Speakers called for replacing America’s capitalist system with socialism, arguing that blacks will never advance in a free market economy. They also seek to either reduce or eliminate the influence of Christianity…claiming that it is simply a tool to oppress blacks and others….
Related:
Daily Caller: White Privilege Conference: Being white is like being an alcoholic
It gets worse! This conference found a partner in the local YWCA.
http://www.ywcamadison.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=cuIWLiO0JqI8E&b=7964743&ct=12944013¬oc=1
I thought that the left claimed to be knowledgeable about science. White people were “invented” in 1681? How sloppy is their “thinking” to come up with something like this.
Sorry lefties. Racial groups have been around for a very long time, if you have been paying attention to what the latest science says. Human racial differences arose due to the fact that humans migrated to different parts of the globe over the course of several hundred thousand years. Natural adaptation to local climate and conditions made us different (i.e. specialized) over this very long period of time. Politics had nothing to do with it. Why is this a mystery to the left?
My understanding is the concept of race does in fact have political origins: the idea of “white,” “black,” etc., separating people into groups according to skin color. The science you’re talking about is in regards to genetics, which controls skin pigment. The concept of race that we commonly use historically has had cultural and political connotations that’s been conceptually tied to genetics. However, as the Tea Party is illustrating, genetics do not have to dictate your politics, for example. What I’d like to see us do as a people is also illustrate that genetics does not have to dictate your culture, though I wouldn’t like to see us try to separate people from cultures with whom they identify. Instead of using culture as our yardstick, we could compare what we value to the outcomes of different outlooks, which have been invented by various cultures, and choose them based on which produce the outcomes we want.
And now Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government will have a White Privilege (or Check Your Privilege) orientation class. Didn’t realize any Kennedy needed White Privilege orientation, but Check Your Privilege, Hah.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/harvard_school_of_government_adds_a_check_your_privilege_course_to_orientation.html
Article contains this interesting experience from a young woman at Harvard. “…herself once walked out of a class on implicit cognitive biases when the professor told her, “This isn’t a discussion about racism.”…” Really? A class on, Implicit Cognitive Biases, the prof. says ‘this isn’t about racism’ and she walks out? Jeesh, can’t a student ostensibly in class to learn just reply something like, how is it not involved please explain.
I believe we’re having an effect. Appears to be a walkback on what the revised Harvard orientation session will say. BBC is trying to pass off as a one blog item that conservatives took off with. Eg, hoho, those silly conservatives, they see conspiracy everywhere, educational talk is for liberals. http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27417109
It’s nice to have someone to blame. (I blame Emmanuel Goldstein.)
Quoting from the Examiner:
The conference even claimed that white people giving charitable donations to blacks is racist. One white attendee claimed that after donating to a disadvantaged minority family, her family realized they were engaging in racism.
“It’s that savior mentality… ‘we need to think of them and give them our sympathy and our charity and our generosity,’ which is so demeaning to the people on the receiving end,” Radersma explained. “It’s so demoralizing and disempowering to be receiving it.”
Great argument for segregation! George Wallace would be proud! I guess while we’re at it, we should be separating out white tax money from black tax money, because after all, spending white tax money on blacks is SO patronizing to them! We can spend the white money on white gov’t services, and black money on gov’t services for blacks. I’m being sarcastic, of course. I’m sure that’s not what these people intended (since that would only perpetuate white privilege), but you know, these people are off in la-la land. They have no idea how they’re chasing their own tail. That’s what happens when you reject reason (which they say was invented to perpetuate “white privilege”), as these people clearly do.
So amazing how people can convince themselves of ideas that don’t work. “You’re actually dead. If you kill yourself, you will be born!” People can say these things only so long as they don’t have to try them!
This isn’t new. Ever heard of the Tower of Babel?
It sells.
The problem here is that this is a conference for educators. These people are responsible for the environment in which our children receive their “education”. I can assure you that our public school districts in WI afford “minority” students privilege over “white” students EVERY SINGLE TIME. There are programs for “minority” students only. When there is a disciplinary issue, often times the “minority” student gets a pass in order to avoid the accusation of racism. When the “white” student is the victim, they often receive consequences equal to their offender in order to give the appearance of fairness. This is the norm….has been since the mid ’60’s through the present. Ironically, WI was a destination point in the Underground Railroad. Jim Crowe never existed here. I realize that this is a national conference, but knowing the WI educators I sure they flooded the Mad City in droves for this.
Concept of White Privilege seems based on; we the progressives can look into your soul and see your racism. So on that look into your soul meme, let’s consider 2 past examples; 1) In 2000s, George W. Bush looked into Putin’s eyes and saw his soul. That hasn’t worked out well. 2) In 16th century, Queen Elizabeth I addressing the fractious religious life (Church of England vs Catholicism) said; “I have no desire to make windows into men’s souls.” She ruled for a long time.
Not pretending to look into people’s souls appears to lead to better outcomes.
http://www.proz.com/kudoz/english/poetry_literature/1096967-all_for_not_making_windows_in_mens_minds.html
From what I’ve been hearing, they’re attacking the idea of the U.S. structurally. They’re saying that rational thought from the Enlightenment was designed implicitly to enforce white privilege. They’re first making being white bad, and then attacking conceptions of reality, human relations, government, etc. as “white,” because they were invented by Europeans 200-300 years ago. Never mind that other nations, like China, and other countries in the Far East are using these ideas to prosper. But then the people at this conference would probably say that all these countries are doing is slaving away for us, again, enforcing white privilege. Never mind that they’re building their own non-white middle class…
After viewing the video above, one can’t help but get the sense that they’re attacking the Constitution itself as implicitly enforcing white privilege, not to mention the foundations of the Enlightenment. It’s using race as a political attack on the foundations of modern Western civilization.
It seems to me that this belief requires a belief in eugenics, that only white people can truly prosper in our system, because they’re genetically predisposed to prosper in such a system, or that it was designed to help improve the white gene pool to the disadvantage of all others. My, those Enlightenment thinkers 300 years ago must’ve been so smart to understand genetics before Darwin, Watson, and Crick! It must also come as a surprise to Charles Murray.
It’s a strange message about racism as well, because it removes responsibility from us for causing the problem. Instead it says we’re responsible for rejecting this system. It’s saying “our white ancestors did this, but we’re still living with it, and perpetuating it.” It’s not saying that *we’re* racist in our hearts. It’s saying that our society makes us act racist. We do it without even realizing it, because of the ideas we’ve accepted as givens, or as beneficial.
For many years there’s been this idea that’s been going around in the black community of “acting white.” It’s a charge that’s been thrown at some blacks, which is meant to be demeaning: “You’re acting like some other race besides what you are,” which was meant to convey a sense of falseness, or “working for the enemy,” when all they were doing was trying to speak with good diction, improve their education, and/or be upwardly mobile.
Ron Christie wrote a book about it, called, “Acting White: The Curious History of a Racial Slur.”
Evan Sayet had this to say back in ’07 at the Heritage Foundation, in a speech called “How the modern liberal thinks.” It dovetails very nicely with this:
How do they think they’re creating a better world? What I’ve discovered is the modern liberal looks back on 50,000 years, a 100,000 years of human civilization, and knows only one thing for sure: That none of the ideas that mankind has come up with; none of the religions, the philosophies, none of the ideologies, none of the forms of government; none have succeeded in creating a world devoid of poverty, crime, and injustice. So they’re convinced that since all of these ideas of man have proved to be wrong, the real cause of war, poverty, crime, and injustice must be found–can only be found–in the attempt to be right.
…
So what you have is people who think that the best way to eliminate rational thought, the best way to eliminate the attempt to be right, is to work always to prove that right *isn’t* right, and to prove that wrong *isn’t* wrong …
The way the elite does this is by teaching our children, starting with the very young, that rational and moral thought is an act of bigotry, that no matter how sincerely you may seek to gather the facts, no matter how earnestly you may look at the evidence, no matter how disciplined you may try to be in your reasoning, your conclusion is going to be so tainted by your personal bigotries, by your upbringing, by your religion, by the color of your skin, by the nation of your great-great-great-great grandfather’s birth, that no matter what your conclusion is, it is nothing other than a reflection of your bigotries, and therefor the only way to eliminate bigotry is to eliminate rational thought.
…
So what you’re left with is not only adults, citizens of voting age who cannot judge their own positions, but who are virulently antagonistic to any position other than their own. Why? Because when you’ve been brought up to believe that indiscriminateness is a moral imperative, *any* position other than their own must have employed discrimination. … Any form of discrimination *is* discrimination. They know that their position was arrived at through the moral imperative of indiscriminateness. Therefor *any* position other than their own *must* have been arrived at through the employment of discrimination. So this makes you not just wrong on your issues, and your stances, they don’t even *think* about your issues and your stances. They don’t have to. Even if they were willing to, even if they were able to, they don’t *need* to. You know, would you sit and contemplate Hitler’s Social Security policy? No, you would fight Hitler. So, what you’re left with is after 10, 12, 14, 20 years of these indoctrination centers … is people who quite literally cannot differentiate between good and evil, right and wrong, better and worse.
Did WI pass the MaryJane law??
Not yet, eleebee!