<p>The larger point is my questioning why should there be a need for anyone…especially Peterson to be engaging on an issue which should have definitively settled in 1865 or moreso the 1960’s in 2014? Especially considering some southern states introduced the stars and bars into their state flags in the '50s as a deliberate gesture of defiance against the Civil Rights movement and its sympathizers. </p>
<p>As I said before, that’s the equivalent of asking members of the biological scientific community to waste their time debating with creationists/ID proponents even though their beliefs have been soundly debunked in tests using the scientific method. </p>
<p>Indeed. Princeton was known as the “Southern Ivy” during the antebellum period for enrolling a large number of southern planter sons. Considering Lawrenceville’s connections to Princeton…not surprising. </p>
<p>@spencerg011 I mean, I guess throwing the “Confederate” label on all white kids isn’t “totally ok” in that it might damage their delicate egos, but to equate it with racism is totally missing the point. </p>
<p>No white person, at least in this part of the world, has ever been systematically discriminated against on the basis of their race. If you’re going to talk about racism as a silly abstract thing describing the way some people feel about some other people, then sure, it’s universal, but if we’re talking about an overwhelming societal norm which /still/ economically and socially disadvantages black people in almost all facets of life and is almost entirely perpetuated by white people, then racism is 100% limited to certain groups. </p>
<p>Like, if somebody is mean to whitey and he gets his feelings hurt, I’m sorry. But racism is about an interplay of systematic power and prejudice, not about trivial individual cases of people getting their feelings hurt. There is no system of oppression in America that actively works to oppress and subjugate white people. Sorry to break it to you, but whitey’s individual suffering is just that, individual. The individuals acting against whitey do not have the institutionalized power to actively oppress him in every facet of life, nor would their racism be upheld and supported by government, media, and legislation if they did. Because he’s white.</p>
<p>Damage their delicate egos? “Whitey”? Seriously? Do you really think that white people are immune to insults, that they do not care deeply about this issue, and that all white people are guilty for the evils of slavery? Even those whose ancestors who were in the country at that time fought for the other side? You think that it is a light thing to all white people? How about Andrew Goodman and Mickey Schwerner, or James Reeb, or Viola Liuzzo? All just “whitey”?</p>
<p>Look, it is one thing to acknowledge the existence of white privilege (I do) and take the position that reverse racism isn’t possible at this time in our society because of the innate power imbalance (which I disagree with in that I see racism as both societal/institutional and individual). It’s another thing to deliberate stereotype people and sling around racial insults, which is what you are doing. Ultimately, the only way to eradicate such behavior is to eradicate it against <em>everyone</em>; to cease to view people in that way, to recognize the innate worth and dignity of every human being.</p>
<p>Those who accept the concept of white privilege or privilege of other types like higher SES would reject the second part of your statement. To them, holding the second part either means you don’t fully understand the concept of privilege with the unequal institutionalized power dynamics which go with it and/or you don’t really accept it. </p>
<p>It’s similar to reasons why people aren’t sympathetic to complaints by various politicians of a certain leaning and wealthy CEOs that the angry backlash and satire against the top echlons of the upper SES…especially those who equate it with racial bigotry or even more outlandishly…to historical genocides. </p>
<p>Cobrat, I frequently get the feeling that I’m being lectured and condescended to when I read your posts. Could you perhaps try to occasionally add qualifiers like “I think,” or at least stop assuming that the only possible reason a group of educated adults might disagree with you is that they’ve never heard of Jim Crow or need a lesson on the Civil War?</p>
<p>And the funny thing is, in this particular case, I more or less agree with you, at least as your comments pertain to this particular incident.</p>
<p>The picture could be funny in the right context but if she actually said the below then she deserves to be “fired.” as her quote is in extremely poor taste for someone who is representing the campus and does absolutely nothing positive or humorous for the community she was living in. </p>
<p>Honestly, the only thing that is funny to me about the photo is the critter pants–one of the very few fashion trends that is embraced by both preppy teenagers and frumpy grandmas.</p>
<p>I don’t know her so couldn’t say whether she was poking fun at her environment or just mean in general, but perhaps she learned her lesson about the fine political line between poking fun at something she didn’t like and just being a mean, angry person which is never a positive trait. She apparently got elected so something must have set her off or she had an agenda she kept hidden. Maybe she’ll find her inner peace at Wes (said with tongue in cheek.).</p>
<p>Julie, I’d say the vast majority of college paying parents are probably the exact opposite of what you “suppose.” There is a huge, huge ideological sea between socialism and communism by the way. </p>
<p>There is such a thing as an individual. To suggest that there is no individuality apart from socio-economic group, which is what you seem to be suggesting, is repugnant to me. And frankly, to link me to people who make this kind of claim is mindbogglingly insulting: “especially those who equate it with racial bigotry or even more outlandishly…to historical genocides.”</p>