[Vision2020] Posturing Ennui: Deja Vu All Over Again

Wed Mar 28 18:27:07 PDT 2012

I don't have the time right now (and for the next couple of days) to do 
this article justice. I will say that the author makes some good points 
that hit home about unearned power that I enjoy based on my race alone.

I think the author is being a little to literal in her slicing and 
dicing of privilege and it's rewards, though. For example, there are 
many reasons why I might not be assured of a good or neutral 
relationship with neighbors if I moved into a new area, even assuming 
that those neighbors are white. I'm a white collar worker, for one, 
working at a University in an IT job. This may not be so welcome in some 
areas, and the reverse is certainly true. I'm a computer geek, for 
another, and am also a loner who normally keeps to himself, lives alone, 
and is in his 40's and has never been married. All these things can work 
against me in the same way that being the only racial minority in a 
gated community can, even without actual racism. I'm not talking about 
violence or hatred, I'm talking about mutual points of reference. People 
generally gravitate to people who are like them, in what ever measure 
that interests them the most.

Some of her other points I can agree with, and would happily argue are 
bad and need changed, such as store detectives profiling non-whites in 
Malls or tax auditors singling people out because of race.

I'll give you a better answer when I have the time to give this more 
attention.

Paul

On 03/28/2012 03:28 PM, Rosemary Huskey wrote:
> Paul,
> I would appreciate your thoughts on the following article.
> http://www.library.wisc.edu/EDVRC/docs/public/pdfs/LIReadings/InvisibleKnaps
> ack.pdf  I don't limit white privilege to gender.  I also am the undeserving
> recipient of un-earned advantages due to my color and income status, minus
> the additional icing you enjoy of gender advantage as well.  Of course you
> and anyone else is free to think the world is flat, the pope is infallible,
> and fascism is dead.  However, when anyone trumpets those opinions, they
> place themselves, in my mind at least, in the category of stupid and quite
> possibly dangerous.
> Rose Huskey
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Rumelhart [mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 12:07 PM
> To: Ted Moffett
> Cc: Rosemary Huskey; thansen at moscow.com; vision2020
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Posturing Ennui: Deja Vu All Over Again
>
>
> I'm still amazed that I can be called "basically disinterested in universal
> human rights" because I don't care what a person's opinion on antebellum
> slavery is.  I didn't say that I don't care about the plight of slaves in
> that time frame, mind you, just that I don't care what someone else's
> opinion on the subject is.  Do people here know or care what their grocer
> thinks about the Bataan Death March?  Or what their hair stylist thinks
> about Nagasaki or Hiroshima?
>
> The doubly amazing part to me is that this can be directly attributed
> automatically to my ethnicity, gender, and economic level without causing an
> outrage on this list.
>
> For the record, I have this belief that people should be allowed to think
> what they want, believe what they want, and hold whatever opinions they want
> whether or not I agree with them.  Crazy, I know.
>
> Paul
>
> On 03/28/2012 10:32 AM, Ted Moffett wrote:
>> There's no harm in repeating important points, indeed it is often
>> necessary, unavoidable, so this post is not meant as criticism of
>> anyone.
>>
>> When I read the recent March 2012 exchange under the subject heading
>> "Posturing Ennui" as indicated in the altered subject heading of this
>> post, I was amazed to recall that these three individuals (Tom, Paul,
>> Rose) in 2009 exchanged dialog where the exact same wording was used
>> about roughly the same subject, implying that being "white, male,
>> middle class" was an influence in one of the respondents views on how
>> to deal with racism or slavery or hate crimes:
>>
>> http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/2009-August/065757.html
>> [Vision2020] Officials Counter Racist Acts Rosemary donaldrose at
>> cpcinternet.com Sat Aug 22 16:50:32 PDT 2009
>>
>> Tom is dead on to raise the alarm about this guy. Paul, your sense of
>> white, male, middle class entitlement is showing.  I guess you don't
>> understand that silence is assent - or you don't care.
>> -----------------------
>> And in March 2012 in the post below:
>>
>> "I’m guessing that you are basically disinterested in universal human
>> rights because you are lucky enough to be born male, white, and middle
> class..."
>> On 3/25/12, Rosemary Huskey<donaldrose at cpcinternet.com>   wrote:
>>
>>> You have identified the nub of the problem, Paul when you write:  “I
>>> don't particularly care what views a person holds about antebellum
>>> slavery, or who they think should be in charge of the finances in their
> marriage.”
>>> Why is antebellum slavery (and its unhappy, damning legacy)
>>> unimportant to you? Aren’t you appalled by a culture that frequently
>>> treated human beings with less regard than domestic farm animals?
>>> Don’t you find it obscene that anyone would glorify and defend the
>>> vicious, repulsive culture of the Old South?  Is antebellum slavery
>>> outside your realm of interest because it was a historic rather than
>>> a contemporary event?  If so, are you equally indifferent to modern
>>> slavery in parts of Africa, Saudi Arabia, and other Middle Eastern
> countries?
>>> Do recent hate crimes arouse a sense of outrage in you?  Do you feel
>>> compassion for the victims?   How do you feel about the murders of
> Matthew
>>> Shepherd or James Byrd?  Is there a gaping hole where your conscience
>>> ought to be? Are you are aware that your posturing ennui gives tacit
>>> consent to the hate mongering antics of sociopaths?
>>>
>>> I’m guessing that you are basically disinterested in universal human
>>> rights because you are lucky enough to be born male, white, and
>>> middle class – all of which are unearned privilege.  And, really, if
>>> you think the most damaging aspect of patriarchy is limited to who is
>>> in charge of family finance (the words “in charge” are particularly
>>> revealing, Paul) you are entirely, 100%, just plain old, ordinarily,
>>> wrong while concurrently demonstrating a profound ignorance about
>>> elements of successful relationships, marriage and/or partnerships.
>>>
>>> Rose Huskey
>>> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
>>> [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
>>> On Behalf Of Paul Rumelhart
>>> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:07 AM
>>> To: Tom Hansen
>>> Cc: vision2020
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Question, V-Peeps . . .
>>>
>>> This is a nice example of the intolerance I'm talking about.  I don't
>>> particularly care what views a person holds about antebellum slavery,
>>> or who they think should be in charge of the finances in their
>>> marriage.  I'll still sit down and have a beer with them.
>>>
>>> If the Intoleristas had instead been of the frame of mind of "sorry,
>>> we're not going to let you turn the Palouse into a theocracy, but
>>> we're still happy to have you as part of our community", then they
>>> might not have been so quick to accuse some of you of vandalism when
>>> they reported the incidents to the police.  Go out of your way to
>>> make yourself someone's enemy, and they will think of you first when
> something like that happens to them.
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> On 03/25/2012 04:37 AM, Tom Hansen wrote:
>>>
>>> Intoleristas
>>>
>>> (in tol er és ta), n.
>>>
>>> *	A person holding anti-slavery sentiments
>>> *	A committed feminist.
>>> *	A supporter of the Constitution, human rights, and equality for all,
>>> regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, economic status, or
>>> sexual orientation.
>>> *	A person with a wholesome proclivity for outing shifty hypocrites,
>>> shameless liars, and sham historians.
>>> *	A person who is neither intimidated nor silenced by right-wing,
> theocratic
>>> bullies, or their sycophantic toadies.
>>> *	A person who wears the title proudly as a reminder that he/she is
> about
>>> the business of democracy.
>>>
>>> "It is not so much what we are as much as what we are about."
>>>
>>> A flash from the past . . .
>>>
>>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/sounds/Intoleristas_020405.mp3
>>>
>>> Who can forget . . .
>>>
>>> http://www.notonthepalouse.com/documents/Crouch_LMT_071506.pdf
>>>
>>> Let the whine flow . . .
>>>
>>> http://www.notonthepalouse.com/Wilson_MPDcomplaint_071506.pdf
>>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/stuff/Dickison_RecReq.jpg
>>>
>>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/writofmandate
>>> ----------------------
>>> There is, literally, loads and loads more, Mr. Rumelhart . . . like
>>> letters sent from the un-pastor to then-Governor Kempthorne and
>>> then-UI President White . . . Doug "Charlie Brown" Wilson's speech at
>>> the Public Civility Forum at the Hamilton Indoor Recreation Center a
>>> few years ago . . . the Great Christ Church Debate between the
>>> Un-Pastor and the Intoleristas' own Keely Mix on KRFP.  I could go on and
> on and on and . . .
>>> I'll jus' leevya with His Whineyness' own words . . .
>>>
>>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/protest/Doug_Wilson_Liers_013107.mp3
>>>
>>> Thanks for the promo, though.
>>>
>>> image.jpeg
>>> Seeya there, Moscow.
>>>
>>> Tom Hansen
>>>
>>> Wallace, Idaho
>>>
>>> "If not us, who?
>>>
>>> If not now, when?"
>>>
>>> - Unknown
>