White Privilege Is A Racial Slur

White Privilege Is A Racial Slur used by non-white people to stigmatize all white people as rich, evil and stupid.

All white people are the same bad is the message.

Black people reject individuality in European white people. Maybe because black people speak in one voice, they see others the same way.

Well, if everybody speaks in one voice, no matter the group, then there is some major discrimination thus oppression going on within that group.

When people fear calling American cheese white, that stigma has already taken control of the white populace. That’s enslavement when one group seeks to control the thoughts of another group, no matter the group. Blacks act as if they invented American cheese. Coming from New England, my mother made her macaroni and cheese with extra sharp Vermont cheddar, which was not orange.

I grew up on Kraft American white cheese. In two-three pound blocks; that’s how it was sold. My mother bought a box every two weeks. Frankly, I preferred a cheese sandwich to peanut butter and jelly, but that was just me and my tastebuds.

Now, try to call the cheese that I ate growing up in New England by its name, white American compared to orange American in the presence of black Americans brought up on orange American cheese and they’ll bristle with contempt. I’ve seen it. Some will say, then just call it American cheese.

Why should anyone have to? There’s white and there’s orange and I prefer white. It’s not that I didn’t also like orange, but I preferred white. I certainly shouldn’t feel uncomfortable calling white American cheese white. So a white person can’t even differentiate between colors of cheeses without some black people being offended? That’s not just discrimination. That’s just plain bizarre.

I suppose they could invent a black American cheese and level the field as it were, but there doesn’t seem to be any interest, except to bristle when they hear the word white associated with American. It almost seems as if the tag American is reserved for usage by black people only. That’s discrimination too.

I suppose white people could, and maybe should, start calling themselves white Americans, so there’s no discriminatory ambiguity when black Americans call themselves a color with the word American attached.

We all came from a different place, many times unwillingly. In other words, people weren’t escorted out, they were forced out due to unsurvivable conditions and they had to leave secretly. There were no large bus caravans and fleets of ships announcing to the world every step of their journey to America. The children had no say in the immigration aspirations of their parents. So now to punish those children, because their parents lived in oppressive times, seems harsh to say the least. That’s discrimination too.

African American and European American. That sounds okay too, but it’s not okay for one, and not the other. Equal means equal.

Call people what they want to be called. Nobody ever asked the white populace if it was okay to deny their individual ethnicity in lieu of a white label.

They can’t be Irish, they’re white, and all white people are the same.

white white white

Yeah, I’ve heard it. A lot. Living in Cleveland.

Just because you’re reticent to have your DNA checked to see what country you’re really from, don’t deny others their ethnic roots, because yours are generalized to one continent. Most white people are surprised to learn that their ethnic roots aren’t as limited as they thought. Non-white people’s ethnic roots may not be either.

There appears to be an uneven, thus unfair, amount of accommodations to which one group is forced to comply/submit via fear tactics used by the enforcer group. That’s discrimination. It will always be discrimination.

It should never be a particular group’s turn not to be discriminated against. That’s the brain child of social engineers who call themselves scientists, who work for governments. Remember that scientists are the ones who devise torture strategies to control everybody’s behavior, not just the behavior of one group over another or over many.

The strategy is based on, ‘you can’t satisfy all the people all the time’, so select a group and then rotate from group to group every now and then, but not everybody at once to give each group a portion of what they need.

The problem is obvious; the slogan is faulty. Yes, you can satisfy all the groups by treating all groups equally all the time, but so many groups, maybe all the groups, are continually gaming the system and being successful, that it appears that some are better at the game than others, and actually end up taking away from some groups what they need to survive, throwing off the entire system of allocation.

It shouldn’t be looked upon as a game or even having to game the system, but that’s what rich people and large companies do too; they’re always gaming something for preferential treatment or financial benefit. The cards are not stacked in favor of rich people, since they’re such a small minority in the world. Everyone is controlled – even the rich. They do not by any means live stress-free lives.

Of course rich people and rich businesses aren’t starving, but we all could do better in the money management category. Some will immediately knee-jerk with, ‘if we had money to mange, we could do really well’. There is no satisfactory response to that statement, which means it’s a non-starter. The smart thing to do is offer a solution along with the gripe. Most don’t. All they can muster is, ‘take money away from the rich and give it to the poor, simple, see??

Well, if it were so simple, then why aren’t people doing it? Maybe they are, and that’s why so much of the poor-world steals. Why be forced to do something that is against the law and against cultures and against your own neighbor and against your own value system?

In a capitalist society a grounds keeper can’t expect to make as much money as a neurosurgeon. That’s what the poor peoples want until they get it – everybody gets paid the same no matter the job. Then they realize they don’t like the system; there’s no room for competition, for reward. All one gets is their basic needs met – end of story. Why leave a socialist regime to go to a democratic regime for the purpose of changing it into a socialist one?

Then those scientists and social psychologists people will say that a job well done is reward enough. That’s fine for them to say, when their jobs challenge and utilize their potential and capabilities. Somebody has to do the menial work, so my across the board suggestion is to raise the pays of those doing the jobs that don’t allow workers to challenge themselves and each other. Boredom should pay. You want me to be bored with my job, because the country needs me, then increase my wage so I can at least daydream about how I’ll spend it.

It’s a long way to travel and a lot of money that could be better spent to immigrate to and change another country to meet your standards, rather than work to change the system in your own country of origin, the one with which you’re most familiar

It seems that democracies put the poor of their nations into a situation similar to a socialist system of government, nobody has much money with which to manage beyond their daily needs.

The problem with how democracies manage the poor is they develop programs with which to obtain goods and services for free, but the degree of bureaucracy involved through the application process plus the ‘poor’ stigma attached to it plus the design by social scientists to insert humiliating features to get people out of the poor category all serve to keep the poor in the poor category by demoralizing them to the point of accepting their fate. What it takes to get out of the poor category is just too much for a lot of people with little means to handle.

I’m wondering now if that isn’t part of the plan, so that governments don’t have to provide or at least find jobs above the subsistence level for the poor in any nation. Keep them where they’re at, we’ll feed them the crumbs nobody wants and keep them stressed; stress is good right?

This isn’t a color problem. Right away I can hear somebody say, yes it is because more black people are poor than white people, per capita, proportionately.

Maybe instead of focusing so much on percentages, spend more time on solving, then fixing the problem for all poor people, not just your color, but all colors. If black activists in America had their way instead of demanding fifteen dollars minimum wage across the board for all workers, they’d cite some discriminatory reason why blacks should get twenty dollars and whites ten dollars hourly wage. Again, when you do what you accuse somebody else of doing, no one takes you seriously. Oh, they will if we burn some more cities. Well if that’s the way you want to go, then you lost a whole heap of support.

And I say, there you go again, blaming the children of ancestors and making the children throughout history pay for past grievances and wrongs instituted by adults. It’s a non-starter. It’s too discriminatory. Again, you can’t cure a discrimination with a discrimination.

Claiming your people, or tribe or group incapable is like saying they’re all handicapped. I believe that prejudice and discrimination are forms of handicaps, but when the job is there and the worker is skilled and still won’t take the job, that is out of handicap territory.

When a woman is skilled and keeps having children to increase her monthly welfare check that is out of handicap territory. If a person can wheel and deal their way to fancy clothes, car, entertainment, then they can wheel and deal in a paying above the table job. That’s not a handicap.

When someone has the will and the skill and is refused jobs or advancements, then that’s a handicap. The problem is it happens to all colors.

It happens more to women of all socio-economic backgrounds. Prejudice and discrimination are not only about the color of skin. The poor in all groups are discriminated against the most – across the board.

Yet women, who make up fifty-percent of the human race of all groups – that’s one super large group – take a backseat to all non-women (males) all the time. Even a person who has a sex change operation from male to female notices the difference in how they’re treated – worse – as if they don’t matter.

It’s the women in the world who don’t matter, not the race.

The black people making mattering all about them, would have been more successful without the violence they required to increase the fear, which temporarily increased the status, if they had focused on an equal rights amendment for half the human race, instead of in the USA black people only and in reality, mostly black men. The proof is that highly paid black women are still crying all over cable talk shows as hosts.

Stigmatizing all white people as rich, evil and stupid by calling them privileged will not change black on black discrimination in the home, in black churches or at black schools. That’s a cultural condition that needs to change within the culture. Black people alone need to do that themselves. It is not the jobs of white people to become therapist, social worker and babysitter for black people, which is pretty much where the social engineers put the responsibility of addressing the needs of black people in the communities across the nation.

White people have a history of policing their own. Black people say they do, but their interpretation of policing or taking care of their own is different than that of white people. White people will call out bad behavior of other white people. I’ve been in Cleveland, Ohio for twenty-eight years and never once have I seen a black person call out another black person’s bad behavior. I was on a bus with a black woman driver speeding down the highway, making turns that leaned the entire bus to one side, making people slide in their seats. All black people on the bus, except for me and my husband, and not one black person even looked at another to raise an eyebrow. Nobody shouted at the driver to slow down. I found that alarming and telling at the same time.

Blacks don’t publicly call each other out for bad behavior, even when it could avert a tragedy. There could have been a catastrophic crash, yet not one black person even looked up at the driver. When Steve and I got off the bus the driver came over to apologize, citing some fight she got into with dispatch or whatever you call it, that made her see red. Even though no one reacted on the bus, there was a general air of relief when the driver stopped to let everybody off to wait for another bus. They mingled about, making grunting noises without interacting with anyone.

That situation would have been a good opportunity to police themselves as black activists say black people do.

No they don’t. And it shouldn’t matter who’s watching.

Finding common ground won’t be easy when terms like violence and threat and safety have different meanings for different groups of people. And as long as one group wants immunity for bad behavior based on past conditions, which have nothing to do with the people now, there will never be equity. The activists count on that ‘never’ word to keep the flames of prejudice dancing in the heads of white people to get preferential treatment and financial benefits over what they equally deserve.

By Sharon Lee Davies-Tight, artist, writer, chef

Chef Davies-Tight™. The Animal-Free Chef™. ANIMAL-FREE SOUS-CHEF™. FAT-FREE CHEF™. Word Warrior Davies-Tight™. HAPPY WHITE HORSE™. SHARON ON THE NEWS™. BIRTH OF A SEED™. Till now and forever © Sharon Lee Davies-Tight, Artist, Author, Animal-Free Chef, Activist. ARCHITECT of 5 PRINCIPLES TO A BETTER LIFE™ & MAINSTREAM ANIMAL-FREE CUISINE™.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.