One way to shut up a White bigot/supremacist…

Racial discrimination exists all over the world.  No big surprise there.  If you are among your country’s majority race, you likely have it a lot better, racially, than your country’s minority counterparts. 

Here in mostly White America (71% according to Wikipedia) discrimination is also alive and well and doing its negative, destructive thing.  Most if not all of us here on this forum acknowledge that discrimination still happens within our “shining city on a hill.”  If we are White, we already know about and have experienced our “White privilege” by way of good jobs and other connections/benefits.  I know I have.   Any White person who denies that is only fooling themselves and lives in an alternate reality; they are not seeing things clearly.  If you are not White, you also know very well the “other side of the story.”

Granted, discrimination-wise, things have gotten a lot better here in the U.S. since the ‘60s.  In general, that’s fair and accurate to recognize. But it’s far from the “more perfect Union,” for which we are supposedly striving.  So please don’t try to pull the “But Card” on me, just because things have gotten better.  No “but whataboutism” here, thank you very much. 😉 

So, here’s the magical question to ask a White bigot:

Would you want to be non-White?  (Expect a “no” answer.)  Follow it up with a “why not?”

Boom… I think we have a bingo here. 

Q1: Would you agree that the likely answer to that question is proof positive that discrimination still exists?

Q2: Do you know any person of color who would like to remain a person of color here in the U.S.?  If so, tell us that story. We’re listening. 

(by PrimalSoup)


Bonus video:

Here’s some more fascist food for thought:

If you agree, please repost (share) on any social media sites you frequent.

Mission: Democracy!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more