Kristen Gillibrand Gives a Powerful Explanation of White Privilege

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TL;DR

She is irrelevant and is actually hurting her chance to remain in office the longer she stays in the race.

+1

old news

She just needs to stop.

OP here. I don't think she should be running for President but that doesn't mean her answer to that question wasn't spot on. It was really good.

White privilege is excusism.

It’s a ploy to make whites feel guilty for showing up to work in time, doing their best, applying for jobs.
Some whites, like gillibrand clearly but into it.

Not me.

Not DJT.


And if it’s such a big problem, why haven’t the open wallet dems fixed it after $60 Trillion dollars spent?

Didn’t you guys just control the whitehouse and both houses of Congress?

Why would anyone ever vote for you?

And here’s this guy bringing the rich, bold taste of ignorance and racism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people think that the term white privilege is some way to say all white people are horrible?

Because that is not at ALL the point

Tell that to the school systems & companies that require "white privilege" training. Sure it's a mixed group - but guess who the "target audience" is?

At this point, white is white is white. This country loves its labels, and it loves to lump people into separate categories.

But feel free to tell me what I've perhaps overlooked in my training sessions.

I cannot roll my eyes hard enough

You obviously didn’t learn anything at these trainings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Institutional racism explains Asian success.

Not an Asian but hard work, delayed gratification, and parental pressure explain why the Asian kids in my classes do much better than all but a few whites, even fewer Hispanics, and no blacks.

I'm not sure why this comment is useful in this conversation unless you are encouraging parents to pressure the school system to be able to remove disruptive students. Teachers hands are tied due to the changes made disciplining students: we pulled our DC out of the chaotic environment of some classes, against teacher recommendations, and voila.

God bless the teachers (aka magicians) who are on the front line of our societal crisis.

It is your comment that is not useful. As a high school physics teacher, I was stating the reason why I see the Asians succeed in my classes compared to whites, Hispanics, and blacks. My classes are nit filled with dusruotive students but some who are lazy and do bot have tge parental pressure to make them succeed in school.

I don't think you can lump all Asians together. The Japanese aren't the same as the Koreans. Would you lump all Europeans together? It doesn't work that way.

I've seen kids from African nations turn sour in the US despite high expectations parents have set for them. But b/c of the chaos in the US school system, their behaviors aren't addressed. So they sink.

I agree that most of the responsibility should be put on parents. But at the same time, if a school system is allowing kids to act out, it becomes a tug of war between the home and the school, with kids as the pawns.

I wish you all would see what a sh*t show education has become. Open your eyes and stop making excuses. No child - despite horrible obstacles s/he is facing - should be allowed to disrupt another child's learning. We need to address their needs but not at the expense of classroom instruction for the majority of the kids who want to learn.

+1,000,000

Yup.

[Anonymous]

Do the democrats think their racist pandering is going to work if they nominate a white candidate? They're basically telling their racist progressive base to stay home if they do. It's stupid as a strategy unless they nominate Booker who is hopeless or kamala la

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The term is only toxic because Faux told idiots to be mad about it

Well whatever the reason, it’s still toxic. The Democrats really need to stop using this term if they want to beat Trump, whose entire campaign strategy is targeting aggrieved poor whites.

The Democrats can’t just target aggrieved poor whites. They are also targeting all of the minority voters who stayed home last time.

Black women are the only voters that can be counted on to vote rationally. Stop taking them for granted and pandering to voters who dangle their votes and beg for attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TL;DR

She is irrelevant and is actually hurting her chance to remain in office the longer she stays in the race.

+1

old news

She just needs to stop.

OP here. I don't think she should be running for President but that doesn't mean her answer to that question wasn't spot on. It was really good.

White privilege is excusism.

It’s a ploy to make whites feel guilty for showing up to work in time, doing their best, applying for jobs.
Some whites, like gillibrand clearly but into it.

Not me.

Not DJT.


And if it’s such a big problem, why haven’t the open wallet dems fixed it after $60 Trillion dollars spent?

Didn’t you guys just control the whitehouse and both houses of Congress?

Why would anyone ever vote for you?

Well said.

"DJT"--a man who never worked an honest day for an honest dollar--represents people who work hard and show up on time? Oh, dear God.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do people think that the term white privilege is some way to say all white people are horrible?

Because that is not at ALL the point

Tell that to the school systems & companies that require "white privilege" training. Sure it's a mixed group - but guess who the "target audience" is?

At this point, white is white is white. This country loves its labels, and it loves to lump people into separate categories.

But feel free to tell me what I've perhaps overlooked in my training sessions.

Tell me you are kidding? White privilege training sessions!

[Anonymous]

Tell that to the school systems & companies that require "white privilege" training. Sure it's a mixed group - but guess who the "target audience" is?

That's what they call it now? Back in the '70's they called it "race relations." Probably hasn't changed. Started by telling us how even the word "black" denotes evil or something. "Black magic." "Black denotes fear." "Black heart." Al sorts of metaphors that had nothing to do with race. It was a stupid class and I think we played 'Lifeboat." It did not help at all--in fact, it brought out resentments.

Educating people is one thing. Creating confrontations is not helpful.

People need to treat all others with respect and as individuals. We were actually making strides towards that, but it has turned inside out. The woman that Gillibrand was addressing didn't need a lecture--she needed help Gillibrand does not get that.

Gillibrand is an opportunist. Is she sincere? Who knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is holding back poor whites from progress?

No Affirmative Action
No scholarship designated solely on your skin color
No privileges in hiring for government jobs that keep quarters for minorities, but not poor whites
No landing programs designated for them like the one for AA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:White womansplaining.

Brava!

You all are forgetting that she was asked by a voter to explain it.

[Anonymous]

A black-tie event is super-nice and classy, and the LBD is synonymous with “what you wear if you want to look your best.” So stuff it with the victimization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is holding back poor whites from progress?

No Affirmative Action
No scholarship designated solely on your skin color
No privileges in hiring for government jobs that keep quarters for minorities, but not poor whites
No landing programs designated for them like the one for AA

so undoing any program that might try to make a dent in institutional racism/white supremacy? Great.

There are merit and needs based scholarships all over the place for white students. I mean, bootstraps and all that? Come on....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do the democrats think their racist pandering is going to work if they nominate a white candidate? They're basically telling their racist progressive base to stay home if they do. It's stupid as a strategy unless they nominate Booker who is hopeless or kamala la

Yup.

Same thing happened with HRC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is holding back poor whites from progress?

No Affirmative Action
No scholarship designated solely on your skin color
No privileges in hiring for government jobs that keep quarters for minorities, but not poor whites
No landing programs designated for them like the one for AA

so undoing any program that might try to make a dent in institutional racism/white supremacy? Great.

There are merit and needs based scholarships all over the place for white students. I mean, bootstraps and all that? Come on....

I think even you know that you omitted the word "poor" when you mentioned white students. There are white families that have also endured poverty for generations, and those kids can barely catch a break. ALL of our impoverished kids deserve a chance in this world, and we need to be doing more for them.

[Anonymous]

Being generationally poor just sucks, period. Maybe being poor AND a minority is worse.

But I’d rather be UMC and black than LMC and white.