Who says the poorest white person gets a fair shot? I could flip the script on this.
I'm just a dumb little poor boy cracker wannabe to someone and I didn't get a fair shot until I proved myself. And to some, I always will be one.
People everywhere of every race, color, creed, religion, whatever hold biases. There's assholes everywhere, race doesn't play a factor in that.
First of all, being called a cracker in any sort of real sense is laughable. The etymology of the word aside, if someone actually called me a cracker, or told me I didn't get a job because I was a cracker, I would literally laugh. Hard. Know why? Because that is an absolutely ludicrous scenario.
Juxtapose that with a cop telling a black man, "I pulled you over because you're a n****r." I am a betting man. I will bet that somewhere in history, a black dude has been pulled over because he's black and he was not breaking the law at the time. Chris Rock posted 3 stops earlier this year. No tickets, no written warnings. How about this- have you, personally, ever been pulled over or detained by police because you are white? How about more than once? Have you received a sentence much harsher than a black (or Hispanic or Asian or other) person simply because you're white? I assume your knee jerk reaction here-
I don't do any of those things, I know they're illegal. And that's precisely the point. The argument from the other side of your argument is that black, law abiding citizens are detained, stopped, and punished at a categorically higher rate than whites, per capita. The reason why you, and others here (notably
@Ocoka One ) so flippantly answer "Welp, shouldn't break the law and sit around smoking dope all day and cry about oppression, it's not white privilege" is because you've never had to deal with the same situation, even if you insist you surely have.
You can flip the script all you want, but as you do it, you exhibit the behavior of what the SJW/BLM crowd would characterize as "white privilege".
Again- the entire concept is laughable. I dismiss the term 'white privilege' as fast as someone saying 'y u mad bro?' and 'you're just a hater'. For someone to tell me my opinions are based on my 'white privilege' I immediately assume that person has no more valid arguments to make about our discussion.
As soon as you fall into this nonsense about proving how *not* privileged you are, and how truly good that minority has it, you've lost. You're screaming at the ocean at that point.
For discussion, regardless of your stance on WP, would y'all rather be an able-bodied black woman/ man or a paraplegic white male?
And that, really, is a great question. For the gusto, let's hear who would want to be a black woman.
One could definitely argue that affirmative action has turned into reverse racism.
PS, there is no such thing as 'reverse racism'. Prejudicial treatment of one race in over another is racist. There is no reverse of that definition.
Seems like semantics, but the implication when you say 'reverse racism' is that whites are the preponderance of force for racist behavior; so when minorities are favored, that's not 'reverse racism', it's racism with a different primary actor. Calling affirmative action 'racist' is ok (if that's your opinion or supported). Calling affirmative action 'reverse racism' implies that the normal action (whites favoring other whites for jobs in this case) is reversed (whites are forced to hire minorities as opposed to whites fulfilling a quota).
That sort of works against your arguments for WP not existing. Whites hiring other whites was such an issue we had to have a government mandated program to hire more minorities. I suppose you could argue the bolded; but it pretty clearly demonstrates how privileged you truly are. JOKE THAT WAS A JOKE LOOK----->