Are poor whites really better off than poor minorities?

[Os Cangaceiros]

This excerpt from a good book recently got me thinking about this topic again:


To be white and poor or just making it is a paradox in America. Whites, especially white males, are supposed to have an advantage that they exploit mercilessly. Yet slightly over half of all the poor people in the United States are white. Poor whites outnumber all poor minorities combined. Black poverty consumes a larger portion of black society, to be sure. But that does not negate the fact that there are 19 million poor and working class whites and their numbers are growing. (By the way, most poor people work. About half find employment for at least half the year; public assistance accounts for only one quarter of the income of poor Americans. Beyond that, the distinction between poor and working poor may well be a meaningless moral distinction shaped by the Protestant work ethic. Poor is poor, whether you have to work for your poverty or not.) In fact, as of this writing, according to the 2005 Census Bureau data, poor whites are the only group that is both growing in number and getting poorer.

Do the aformentioned people have "white privilege"? Because my understanding of that term is that it's universally applied to all white people. But I fail to see how some dude who makes 14,000 a year and lives in a trailer on a rented piece of land has really any privilege compared to, say, a working poor member of another race. Except maybe a marginally better treatment by law enforcement, although even that is definitely not a given.

[jake williams]

The idea of some abstract "race privilege" that exists immaterially and ahistorically is totally absurd. Of course racism exists, as does, in many circumstances, "white privilege", but it's not a meaningful concept to try to apply to many poor whites.

Does a 13-year-old sex slave from Russia have white privilege?

[Robocommie]

Typically the distinction made as part of white privilege, something which even applies to a lot of poor and disenfranchised whites, is that the perceived "moral" failing that the Victorian work ethic brands poor whites with is not taken to be a categorical flaw. One poor white person is not taken to be a blemish against his "race" whereas a poor black man who has a criminal record is often seen to reflect poorly on all blacks.

It's a categorical question, white privilege in a racist society like the US allows whites to have individuality and social complexity, while minorities generally do not. That's very little comfort to the poor whites, but then, this racial privilege is not meant to really help the poor whites, in fact it serves to enlist white proletarians against their black counterparts.

[Kamil]

white privelage is very subtle. heres a good example: directions from a black boss on a jobsite is taken with a grain of salt because some suspect he only has that position because of affirmitive action, contrariwise, the qualifications of a white boss are not questioned on the same jobsite. Get it? its VERY easy for white people (myself included) to forget to what extent white hegemony STILL persists in practice, if not in theory.

[Mr. Cervantes]

Typically the distinction made as part of white privilege, something which even applies to a lot of poor and disenfranchised whites, is that the perceived "moral" failing that the Victorian work ethic brands poor whites with is not taken to be a categorical flaw. One poor white person is not taken to be a blemish against his "race" whereas a poor black man who has a criminal record is often seen to reflect poorly on all blacks.

It's a categorical question, white privilege in a racist society like the US allows whites to have individuality and social complexity, while minorities generally do not. That's very little comfort to the poor whites, but then, this racial privilege is not meant to really help the poor whites, in fact it serves to enlist white proletarians against their black counterparts.


in fact it serves to enlist white proletarians against their black counterparts.

Against, how exactly? By the way I am white and working poor so I'm really knowledgeable in actual expiriences beyond theoretical discussion.




Kamil:
white privelage is very subtle. heres a good example: directions from a black boss on a jobsite is taken with a grain of salt because some suspect he only has that position because of affirmitive action, contrariwise, the qualifications of a white boss are not questioned on the same jobsite. Get it? its VERY easy for white people (myself included) to forget to what extent white hegemony STILL persists in practice, if not in theory.


Trying being a white minority working at a place which is 45 percent African American and 35 percent hispanic that is also 15 percent Asian.

I have worked at such places and yes in such locations where whites are a minority they do get discriminated upon really easily.

In the United States we call such areas or places minority - majority which roughly means places where whites are a minority. Such areas are also growing too if population statistics when it concerns future patterns are to be trusted.

I know it may be hard for some people here to realize given the accepted metanarrative here but discrimination against whites does happen especially to those like myself that are apart of the working poor social strata.

I believe the creator of this thread with his questions regarding this subject are quite relevant.

[Crux]

Against, how exactly? By the way I am white and working poor so I'm really knowledgeable in actual expiriences beyond theoretical discussion.



Trying being a white minority working at a place which is 45 percent African American and 35 percent hispanic that is also 15 percent Asian.

I have worked at such places and yes in such locations where whites are a minority they do get discriminated upon really easily.

In the United States we call such areas or places minority - majority which roughly means places where whites are a minority.

I know it may be hard for some people here to realize given the accepted metanarrative here but discrimination against whites does happen especially to those like myself that are apart of the working poor social strata.
How did this discrimination take form?

[Mr. Cervantes]

How did this discrimination take form?

Your the only white in your department where out of thirty somthing people working in your warehouse area you are the only person your black manager and supervisor criticizes the most not to mention patronizes repeatively.

It's quite simple really in how it takes form.

[Kamil]

Trying being a white minority working at a place which is 45 percent African American and 35 percent hispanic that is also 15 percent Asian.

I have worked at such places and yes in such locations where whites are a minority they do get discriminated upon really easily.

In the United States we call such areas or places minority - majority which roughly means places where whites are a minority.

I know it may be hard for some people here to realize given the accepted metanarrative here but discrimination against whites does happen especially to those like myself that are apart of the working poor social strata.

Preaching to the choir brother, I was born and raised in Southern California. My entire life I've always been the only white guy, I grew up and live in a hispanic neighborhood. During my junior high years I got jumped a few times by people I didn't even know just for being a "whiteboy". But even still, there have been situations where I KNOW FOR A FACT I would have been treated differently if I had been darker.

[Mr. Cervantes]

Preaching to the choir brother, I was born and raised in Southern California. My entire life I've always been the only white guy, I grew up and live in a hispanic neighborhood. During my junior high years I got jumped a few times by people I didn't even know just for being a "whiteboy". But even still, there have been situations where I KNOW FOR A FACT I would have been treated differently if I had been darker.

In both incidences it happens whether your white, black, hispanic, asian, or whatever.

I'm just tired of people making it where they view they are more oppressed or privileged than another. That view to me is just assinine.

Discrimination happens everywhere in a variety of forms.

[Kamil]

let me clarify my statement a wee bit: I knew I would have been treated in a negative manner had I been of a darker complexion.

[BlackMarx]

I wrote a recent article on this on my blog, RedJefferson! I will transcribe a paragraph from it.


"America has always had this myth of being a classless society that has been with us since Alexander De Tocqueville's, “Democracy in America,” where he made the claim of America being an 'exceptional nation.' America, as we all know, is very much an exceptional nation. Not only in its wealth and democratic possibilities is American exceptional, but it also is exceptional in its socio-economic relations. Not only does America have the hierarchy of class, we also have the hierarchy of race. Not only do we have a struggle between capital and labor, we also have a struggle against the notion of White supremacy/hegemony and racial equilibrium, if you wanna call it that. Now, Marxist and many other radical leftist have done great deal of work concerning class in America. But, there has not been enough theory applied to the systemic nature of racism in America and the socio-ideological role it plays in maintaining the legitimacy of the capitalist mode of production, as well as stifling the development of a class consciousness in our country. In the aforementioned article, Professor Cooney referenced the 'racial tripartite thesis in explaining this phenomenon.


The tripartite thesis argues that while you had the friction between the landed aristocracy, farmers and tenants alike; which is referenced in late and deceased Howard Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States,' you also had the struggles between black and the white workers; who like blacks were primarily coming to America as indentured servants before racial slavery came into being. One thing that people do not realize is that black people did not come to America first as slaves, but came as indentured servants just like white Europeans did in the 16th century. It wasn't until the latter half of the 17th century, that race-based slavery began. In fact, the first black born in America was not a slave, but a free child by the name of William Tucker; the child of two indentured servants by the name of Anthony and Elizabeth Tucker in 1619. Once slavery became race-based, the distinction between bosses and workers is blurred by racial consciousness; which was a consciously created social construct. Why is all this important? Its important because you realize that a major, if not primary, dialectic in American society is between class and race, especially when it comes to the distribution of wealth, power and representation; which synthesizes into a social-schema where you have a bourgeois ruling class that rules and exploits all and then a privileged white petty bourgeoisie; which due to the introduction of a racial caste system, also includes the white proletariat. An expanded white middle class, if you will. To put it simply, you get a picture that shows America as a country with two competing elites, not entirely antagonistic, not entirely friendly, but not necessarily on equal ground either.


This dichotomy between these two elites creates a picture where you have a politic that fully represents bourgeoisie interest in the modern day GOP. On the other hand, in the more conservative parts of the Democratic Party, and the burdgeoning Libertarian movement, you have a politic that represents and addresses the interest of the expanded white middle class; consciously protecting their privileged status from being invaded and eroded. This is carried out and is primarily instigated by ideological falsehoods regarding the upward social mobility of blacks and other historically oppressed groups on the false pretense of meritocracy and liberty from state intervention.


The class dialectic is obfuscated by the racial dialectic which in turn creates the delusion of inclusion for the white middle/working classes who operate under the ideology of America as a equal opportunity society. The synthesis of these dialectics creates a sense of mutual loyalty between the bourgeoisie and the middle class on the pretense that they might be them one day. Hence, in my opinion, you have an expanded white middle class that does the bidding of the ruling class; voting in force for tax cuts, and increasing property rights, in exchange for more opportunity and prosperity at the expense of Americans who do not fit the mold of this protected group. In effect, this creates an consequence that pacifies the expanded white middle class - which includes white proletariat- and creates a sense of privilege and entitlement. Effectively, it also keeps people of color and other oppressed minorities in line politically and economically, voting for 'fiscal conservative' politicians who serve both ruling class interest in relieving the tax burden on the rich and keeping up the privileged middle class Disneyland that exist in the many vanilla suburbs of America; a 'suburban welfare state' as professor Joseph Schwartz once described it to me at a conference.


Well what does all of this have to do with equal opportunity? Well it says a couple of things. For starters, equal opportunity is a politic of privilege,which is directed at a white-dominated middle class. It also strengthens socio-economic barriers that keep a true sense of equal opportunity of being realized. It also reveals the role of privileged groups as a social buffer for the ruling class from the potentially indignant who were exploited to build the American capitalist system; be it the descendant of slaves, indigenous peoples, and women. Lastly, it is also a politic that exist to deny the existence of structural inequalities in American society; which ironically also creates the existence of 'invisible groups' that are kept from the sight of the middle class that they might have sympathy with and might challenge their conception of reality - poor whites in Appalachia being a prime example.

[Coach Trotsky]

Typically the distinction made as part of white privilege, something which even applies to a lot of poor and disenfranchised whites, is that the perceived "moral" failing that the Victorian work ethic brands poor whites with is not taken to be a categorical flaw. One poor white person is not taken to be a blemish against his "race" whereas a poor black man who has a criminal record is often seen to reflect poorly on all blacks.

Oh I beg to differ. Ever heard of the COMMON saying "white trash"? Bourgeois and 'middle class' whites COMMONLY describe whites on welfare and poorer more precarious workers (especially those who are currently unemployed, stuck living in "the wrong neighborhoods", and also rural poor white "rednecks") as "white trash".



It's a categorical question, white privilege in a racist society like the US allows whites to have individuality and social complexity, while minorities generally do not. That's very little comfort to the poor whites, but then, this racial privilege is not meant to really help the poor whites, in fact it serves to enlist white proletarians against their black counterparts.
Then let's stop calling it "white privilege" and start calling it divisive racist poison.

[Fulanito de Tal]

This excerpt from a good book recently got me thinking about this topic again:



Do the aformentioned people have "white privilege"? Because my understanding of that term is that it's universally applied to all white people. But I fail to see how some dude who makes 14,000 a year and lives in a trailer on a rented piece of land has really any privilege compared to, say, a working poor member of another race. Except maybe a marginally better treatment by law enforcement, although even that is definitely not a given.

By amount, whites are the majority most groups because they are the most prevalent. There are more whites in general, so there will be more of them every where, even in the poor. Still, Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented amongst the poor within their groups.

Unemployment
Blacks = 16.1%
Whites = 8.8%

Median income
Blacks = $33,436
Hispanic = $39,923
Whites = $53,131

Below Poverty Line (within their group)
Blacks = 25.8%
Hispanics = 23.5%
Whites = 11.7%

Life expectancy
Blacks = 73.2
Whites = 78.2

Data is from the American Community Survey

[Manic Impressive]

By amount, whites are the majority most groups because they are the most prevalent. There are more whites in general, so there will be more of them every where, even in the poor. Still, Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented amongst the poor within their groups.

Unemployment
Blacks = 16.1%
Whites = 8.8%

Median income
Blacks = $33,436
Hispanic = $39,923
Whites = $53,131

Below Poverty Line (within their group)
Blacks = 25.8%
Hispanics = 23.5%
Whites = 11.7%

Life expectancy
Blacks = 73.2
Whites = 78.2

Data is from the American Community Survey

Black poverty consumes a larger portion of black society, to be sure. But that does not negate the fact that there are 19 million poor and working class whites and their numbers are growing.
No one who supports whiteness theory bothered to try and argue their case against this article posted by Jimmy Higgins

http://www.isreview.org/issues/46/whiteness.shtml
A lecture from Dr Michael Parenti on identity politics follow the links
WlSvO-czbpk

[Os Cangaceiros]

Typically the distinction made as part of white privilege, something which even applies to a lot of poor and disenfranchised whites, is that the perceived "moral" failing that the Victorian work ethic brands poor whites with is not taken to be a categorical flaw. One poor white person is not taken to be a blemish against his "race" whereas a poor black man who has a criminal record is often seen to reflect poorly on all blacks.

I actually disagree with this, and not just because of the white trash labelling. The fact is that a lot of "well to do" whites are terrified of their lower-class counterparts. The "Protestant work ethic" (mentioned in the excerpt) brands the poor universally as parasites, regardless of their race, and regardless of the more crude far-right racist talking points about welfare queens etc. Both "white trash" and poor minorities receive the same railroading by the court system, the same swindling when they take out a home loan (as evident by the last couple years), and I'd wager to say the same treatment at their shitty McJob.

White privilege is bullshit. It certainly applies to me, as I'm both white and privileged. I think that has less to do with the fact that I'm white and more to do with the fact that I have a stable steam of income from working in a valuable commodity market that when compared to many people in the USA makes me fairly well-off, and when compared to the developing world makes me a decadent hedonist pig, but whatev. The whole metaphysical white privilege self-flagellation that's popular among a lot of guilty liberals and is devoid of class analysis (or maybe includes it as an afterthought) is what I'm refering to anyway.

[Os Cangaceiros]

By amount, whites are the majority most groups because they are the most prevalent. There are more whites in general, so there will be more of them every where, even in the poor. Still, Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented amongst the poor within their groups.

Unemployment
Blacks = 16.1%
Whites = 8.8%

Median income
Blacks = $33,436
Hispanic = $39,923
Whites = $53,131

Below Poverty Line (within their group)
Blacks = 25.8%
Hispanics = 23.5%
Whites = 11.7%

Life expectancy
Blacks = 73.2
Whites = 78.2

Data is from the American Community Survey

Thanks, but you're not exactly bringing forth any mind-blowing new info for me. Especially considering the fact that the ol' USA has gone through two hundred years of raw chattel slavery, followed by another hundred years of offically mandated and enforced racism through segregation in the South and other methods in the West and East (red-lining, denying loans to blacks, etc.) created a bedrock of structural racism that continues to this day, having only become taboo about three or four decades ago.

That's not really the crux of my OP, though. For more info look at the first sentence after the quoted excerpt.

[¿Que?]

We can talk about the experience of being marginalized all day, and hey, guess what, you'd probably find a lot of commonalities between poor whites, and poor blacks. I'd be hard pressed to make any qualitative argument as to the nature of marginalization. However, taken on quantitative terms, terms more favorable to a true Marxist paradigm, we find that white privilege exists. Structural racism exists, it is a statistical fact for all but those who place the onus of responsibility square on the backs of victims of oppression. So, where does that leave poor whites? Well, I can tell you it's not a question of race. It's an epistemological question about statistical minorities, and nothing more. To pose this question in the context of race and racism theory is like using Newtonian physics on atoms. It's a misapplication of knowledge.

qft

By amount, whites are the majority most groups because they are the most prevalent. There are more whites in general, so there will be more of them every where, even in the poor. Still, Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented amongst the poor within their groups.

Unemployment
Blacks = 16.1%
Whites = 8.8%

Median income
Blacks = $33,436
Hispanic = $39,923
Whites = $53,131

Below Poverty Line (within their group)
Blacks = 25.8%
Hispanics = 23.5%
Whites = 11.7%

Life expectancy
Blacks = 73.2
Whites = 78.2

Data is from the American Community Survey

[Jose Gracchus]

White privilege exists in the interstices of certain social relations. For instance as a multi-racial person, I've encountered...different treatment depending on who I was with and what I was wearing...and it definitely showed up in the police report: Hispanic, not white.

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

Privilege merely means advantage. It doesn't mean that a privileged person is living like Trump and Gates. For example, a poor heterosexual black man in America is privileged. Compared to who? To a poor homosexual black man. American society will bestow upon the former certain benefits and opportunities that the latter is denied. A poor homosexual black man not only faces racial and class prejudice, but also homophobia on top of all that. To claim that this amalgam of stigma doesn't put him at a disadvantage, either economically or socially, compared to his heterosexual counterpart would be absurd. It would entail that homophobia has no tangible effect on homosexuals. The same applies with race.

Privilege is a relative concept. There is of course class privilege, male privilege, heterosexual privilege, and indeed, white privilege along with other forms of privilege here in the US anyway. And if you find the word "privilege" disagreeable then switch it with "advantage". It's the same shit though.

People judge others by a multitude of criteria, not solely class, its importance notwithstanding.

[Coggeh]

White workers are privileged over black workers. So are male workers over female etc (using the definition of privileged accurately explained by Lumpen Bourgeois).

I have been "discriminated" i guess on the basis im male. I do childcare, when inside the course i constantly have jokes made about me. When i apply for jobs i often get asked who are u asking on behalf of ? your spouse? your sister?

But the point is in our society as a whole, it is a male, white dominated (in terms of power and wealth) society. There may be certain circumstances where it could be said its a disadvantage to be white, or to be male, but these are quite rare. the vast majority of the time it is an advantage. People need to look past there personal immediate conditions and look at the conditions as a whole.

[Principia Ethica]

I think white privilege is most of the time very subtle and you simply don't notice because you are white. One privilege is the fact that you aren't constantly reminded of the hue of your skin in every day menial situations. It's not a concern for you in most of your daily interactions.

Examples: I have a white boyfriend and we were looking at buying a house last year. When we were being shown houses, I was keenly aware of the neighbors coming to look and felt the need to analyze how they looked at us. It wasn't a thought in my boy friend's head at all because he has never had to deal with. . ."oh god. . .there goes the neighborhood. . .a white is moving in." I have to deal with the fact that most of the time, an individual black person is considered a representative of their race. So I take pains to be a model neighbor. . .I even tell the boyfriend to tone down his behavior (loud music, letting the dogs bark too much etc) because I'm sure it is attributed to me and not him.

Shopping sometimes is a pain. I get followed around when out with him. They don't even give him a second look. My bags for some reason get checked against receipts. . .he rarely gets that done to him.

I've been told at several salons that they can't do "my kind of hair." I don't think too many white people have had that experience.

A several jobs, I've gotten a LOT of praise for doing very menial things. Almost a look of shock that I could do it. I didn't see whites (or full asians) getting treated as if they were somehow needing that sort of excessive reinforcement.

Can someone please tell me when Chanel or Guerlain comes up with make up colors other than light white, white, and medium white please? ;)

I got into an okay university. (Ga Tech) I've been told many times that I got in because I'm black. Funny how I left the ethnicity part blank because I'm 1/2 Japanese and 1/2 black so didn't want to chose one or the other (there was no option for multi racial at the time.)

I'm sure with a lot of these instances, it wasn't about how much I made but the perception that somehow the ethnic background from which I'm a part either 1) has questionable morals or 2) lacks the intelligence of the ethnic background the person comes from 3) I'm fucking up the "chi" of the neighborhood or workplace with my presence. 4) that I'm a representative for ALL people of my ethnic background. . .I can't even be an individual.

I'm pretty sure even a poor white person wouldn't have to deal with issues such a these. A lot of it is really subtle. . .and unless someone was walking around in a darker shade of skin, they wouldn't notice. I don't blame them. Why would they? How could they? But just because they haven't experienced it or can't even imagine it. . . .it doesn't mean it isn't there.

[A.J.]

This excerpt from a good book recently got me thinking about this topic again:



Do the aformentioned people have "white privilege"? Because my understanding of that term is that it's universally applied to all white people. But I fail to see how some dude who makes 14,000 a year and lives in a trailer on a rented piece of land has really any privilege compared to, say, a working poor member of another race. Except maybe a marginally better treatment by law enforcement, although even that is definitely not a given.

Perhaps more psychological than economic.

I mean if the ruling class is of the same ethinicity as yourself, you might easily be decieved into thinking you have the intersts in common with "the rich" even if you're on skid mark row.

Often re-inforced during times of economic recession when jobs are scarce via discrimanatory employment practices.

[Summerspeaker]

As a whole and on average, yes, they are. Whiteness helps out in so many different ways - it's historically been and remains a club of privilege. With the cops would be a solid example. Being part of the traditionally and present dominant group matters. Poor whites in rural areas - "white trash" - receive their own racialization as possessing inferior cultural and genetic traits, but it's far more fluid and malleable than with people of color. We need to abolish the whole narrative and concept of whiteness as it's essentially oppressive. How to do so remains tricky, but reifying any racial identity worries me and I feel confident no good can come from positive identification with whiteness. As one of my comrades once said, "White? White? Well, as long as you don't think white." It's an illusion that functions to promote cross-class unity and deceive folks into accepting masters for a tiny slice of the pie stolen from those excluded Others.

As a side note, making $14,000 a year sounds awfully good to me right now.