Saying "it's okay to be white" is innocent statement only if you ignore any societal context around it.
And I’d argue the consequences aren’t that different. If someone is passed over for a job, pulled over by cops, denied the ability to purchase a house, those all have equal levels of consequence for the person on the receiving end.
I think the statement as art was brilliant. It forced those who play lip service to “all men are created equal” to put themselves and try to explain why a rather uncontroversial statement was so controversial. It was wild seeing them twist themselves into a knot trying to explain why it was so bad.
This is wrong. (Systemic) racism (still) exists. Someone who has natural advantages in society (white men) does not suffer the same consequences of the events you listed:
- "passed over for a job" Jobs are easier to get for white people in the US, no? - "pulled over by cops" really? - "denied the ability to purchase a house" redlining has denied a lot of wealth to black families in the US
> those all have equal levels of consequence for the person on the receiving end.
So, this is not true.
Whether I punch you once or twice in the face, it’s still bad, so both are against the law.
What you’re saying is “its ok to punch someone in the face once because it’s not as bad as punching them in the face twice”
Clearly an absurd position.
White men no longer have natural advantages. As a matter of fact the Supreme Court agreed that White and Asian males are now at a natural disadvantage.
Example:
Participants across experiments were twenty five more likely to shoot unarmed White suspects than unarmed Black or Hispanic suspects, and were more likely to fail to shoot armed Black suspects than armed White or Hispanic suspects
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/results-...
"More than a third of white students lie about their race on college applications, survey finds"
https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/57...
Instead of trying to tally up the racism against each group to decide which group is more victimized, all forms of racism should be abolished.
So you support impeaching Trump, then?
It's not that some other mean unfair woke people people are "associating it with racist groups", it's that racist groups came up with it themselves, and actively spread it online and in the physical world, printing it on divisive inflammatory flyers that they hang up around college campuses.
That's like saying some people are unfairly associating holocaust denial and claims of white genocide with Elon Musk and Grok, when they're the ones purposefully and repeatedly saying those things out of the blue, and promoting them to a worldwide audience, systematically pushing them into public discourse when it wasn't even the topic of conversation. And they're bald faced racist lies. Nobody else is to blame for forcing them to falsely deny the holocaust or maliciously lie about white genocide in South Africa.
Of course, the fact that you consider Elon Musk to be "highly compassionate" and "motivated for deep care for others" and praise his "political activism" may go a long way towards explaining why you try to play the victim by uncritically parroting and defending white supremacist claims about reverse discrimination, and have no problem with Musk's and Grok's false claims about white genocide and holocaust denial. And how did that "political activism" work out for you? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42587067
Grok Pivots From ‘White Genocide’ to Being ‘Skeptical’ About the Holocaust:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/elon-musk-...
>Elon Musk's Grok AI bot said Friday, "My skepticism about Holocaust figures was due to an unauthorized change to my programming"
>Elon Musk‘s company xAI has now addressed recent strange behavior from its Grok chatbot, claiming that an “unauthorized modification” caused it to bring up the myth of “white genocide” in South Africa in response to unrelated prompts.
>Meanwhile, Grok has started to dabble in Holocaust denial, saying that it is “skeptical” of the consensus among historians that six million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust and that “numbers can be manipulated.” It has also said that there is notable “academic debate” about whether that many Jews died as a result of the Nazi genocide — but that is not true. Whether these alarming comments were the result of the same internal programming change is unclear.
>Musk in March used xAI to acquire his social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, making the AI firm its parent company. He previously introduced Grok as an integrated feature on X.
>“On May 14 at approximately 3:15 AM PST, an unauthorized modification was made to the Grok response bot’s prompt on X,” xAI announced Friday in a statement on the platform. “This change, which directed Grok to provide a specific response on a political topic, violated xAI’s internal policies and core values. We have conducted a thorough investigation and are implementing measures to enhance Grok’s transparency and reliability.” The AI firm did not specify that Grok had repeatedly invoked the idea that white people face a campaign of systematic violence in South Africa, a falsehood often promoted by Musk. The same inaccurate notion has become the pretext for the Trump administration to welcome Afrikaners, white South Africans of Dutch descent, into the U.S. as refugees supposedly fleeing persecution.
It would help if the mainstream culture admitted that racism against white people exists too, and that it is unacceptable, as every other form of racism is.