As America continues to make progressions in issues of race, certain actions still create controversial issues. As people evaluate certain racially sensitive proposals from virtually every ethnic group, a fair and impartial mind is necessary to understand their causes.
Two months ago, Harris County Deputy Daniel McCool formed a new organization geared toward addressing issues among white people.
McCool’s group, the Caucasian Law Enforcement Association, has struck a nerve in many people, while others find the organization perfectly reasonable.
“In our own department, as far as the command structure, the Caucasians are actually the minority, and it trickles all the way down,” McCool said in an interview with KHOU Channel 11 reporter Courtney Zubowski. McCool said he isn’t a racist and is only attempting to attain fair and equal opportunities.
In American society, some white people are unfairly regarded because of America’s history. McCool is well within his rights to create such an organization.
It is easily forgotten that black people are not the only group discriminated against and are not the only race categorized as inferior or even barbaric by some.
McCool’s actions point out what is inherently wrong with some in the general population — the notion that all those of white ancestry and race are born with automatic privilege.
There are white supremacists who view blacks and other minorities as inferior, but it is important to acknowledge that there are also those who maintain a degree of animosity toward whites simply because of the color of their skin.
Those people need to understand that being white does not automatically entail privilege upon birth; situations occur every day in which a person is given an opportunity over another based on race, and this is not confined to whites only.
This issue is also indicative of the animosity held toward whites by the fact that there exists controversy over an organization designated for them. There are those who point out that whites were not subjected to what other races were in the past. But there is no consideration given to the fact that some people hold all whites in low regard, and some even advocate policies that are fundamentally unequal.
There have been three notable unions affiliated with the Harris County Sheriff’s Office: the Afro American Sheriff’s Deputy League, the Mexican American Sheriff’s Organization and the Harris County Deputies Organization.
We all need to take a closer look at the message we send when we tell every race that it is acceptable for them to have groups, associations or even months dedicated to their history while simultaneously telling one group that it cannot.
Patrick Levy is a communication freshman and may be reached at [email protected]
“We all need to take a closer look at the message we send when we tell every race that it is acceptable for them to have groups, associations or even months dedicated to their history while simultaneously telling one group that it cannot.”
McCool has a right to create such an organization, people have a right to join it and the public has a right to scrutinize or support it. Historically, most minority-based organizations were created to enfranchise minorities that otherwise might not receive equal treatment. For instance, historically black universities stem from an era when blacks could not attend other colleges, the NAACP was born out of the early civil rights struggle and so forth. Of course, new organizations have come into creation since the passage of greater civil rights legislation, but data indicate that people of certain ancestries are more or less likely to have access to X, Y and Z. Because whites have historically been favored in American history, it is worrisome to some observers when white-based groups are created. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but because of historical precedent, it’s worrisome.
The month part — which you qualify with “even,” seeming to indicate some level of incredulity — is even easier to understand, I imagine. For decades American history revolved around a very narrow narrative focusing on only certain people and events, excluding an entire rich and detailed American social history. Just look at the historical treatment of Juan Seguin for an example of education’s unfortunate possibilities. This has come to slowly change (although efforts by the SBOE are ensuring otherwise), but that you have things like Black History Month — which is older than de-segregation, is evidence that greater attention to such subjects is/has been warranted. No one is prohibiting white history month, for instance, because it is so ridiculous on its face that I doubt any serious effort has been made toward establishing it. Prior to the mid-20th century virtually all institutional history in the U.S., with the exception of advanced or niche studies, was almost exclusively white history.
Hmm, this is an extremely touchy subject to say the least. But John, is it not a given fact that whites who we honor, respect, and revere today have earned it?
For instance, we celebrate George Washington, John Hancock, and other non-minority achievers. These “people” aren’t made notable for the fact that they were white, but for what they achieved at the time. Not a single history book mentions George Washington being the first “white” President, and the list can go on and on.
As rights and abilities were expanded, we saw the culmination of the entire African American culture and its achievement, and subsequently, other minority groups also gained their rightful equality in America. It is 2010. It is time to look forward and end the division which only proves detrimental to society, especially if we cannot fully advocate equality for ALL races, regardless of what has occurred in the past.
This isn’t to say that history be entirely forgotten; but there is too much emphasis being placed on race nowadays, that whenever an African American accomplishes something, many simply resort to exalting that person in part because of his or her race. Tell me, what would people think if that happened in the Caucasian community. We’d all be screaming unfairness and inequality because someone had gained prominence because of his or her “white” skin.
There are economically disadvantaged Whites, just as there are Blacks, Hispanics, etc.
There is a double standard that whites are held to and that is entirely unfair.
I understand your sentiment, Patriot, and don’t seek entirely to disagree. We have, as a nation, come a long way, thanks to the effort of many from all sorts of backgrounds. Doubtless Washington, Hancock and others earned their accolades as well — the point was that history books decades ago seldom touched on the fact that they were part of a wealthy, landed gentry and ignored other social strata. Their very background allowed them to be power brokers (with some exceptions), while slavery and indentured servitude (be they of African, European or indigenous origin) usually went relatively unmentioned. We shouldn’t ignore Washington, but we shouldn’t ignore the yeoman, slaves and others who didn’t leave a strong written history, either. As educators and researchers we’re making progress, though.
That the black community has somehow “culminated” is arguable. Draconian narcotics laws disproportionately affect minority communities (see: crack vs. cocaine punishment), banks have been shown to charge higher interest rates to minorities of equitable credit ratings as whites (see: AIG, February 2010 settlement) and inner-city schools, which in many regions are attended by minority-majority populations, are some of our country’s poorest, a fact in the South sometimes tied to property taxes and white flight/blockbusting following desegregation. Not everyone starts on an equal playing ground, and this is especially true for minorities. Regardless, things are a lot better than they were 50 or even 20 years ago, and that’s something we can all be proud of.
Well, we saw African American personalities gain prominence within their culture; Frederick Douglass who was able to escape slavery, was the author of several works, and his North Star publication being among them.
And you are correct in saying that the playing fields have not always been level, but in terms of modern day society, we are far more along than then we could have ever hoped for with the election of an African American President and the achievements that the Black race have accomplished in spite of an oppressed past.
You make great points, John. This debate has some great arguments being made on either side. Hopefully one day, race will be a thing of the past. I realize that is wishful thinking, but it would make for an ideal situation in where no one’s skin color (or the lack thereof) will play a role in gaining credence.
Cheers to that.
lmao a bunch of soft white children complaining about racial oppression
“And you are correct in saying that the playing fields have not always been level, but in terms of modern day society, we are far more along than then we could have ever hoped for with the election of an African American President and the achievements that the Black race have accomplished in spite of an oppressed past.”
lol why do they even NEED the NAACP? we ended racism forever by electing a black guy
“There are white supremacists who view blacks and other minorities as inferior, but it is important to acknowledge that there are also those who maintain a degree of animosity toward whites simply because of the color of their skin.”
lol we’re white separatists, not white supremacists!
okay seriously: the overwhelming social privilege that white americans take for granted far outweighs some black dude calling you a lily-white ofay, hope this has been illuminating
This article reminds me of this:
http://www.libwolf.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/concise.png
I do not understand this article’s reason. It obviously exposes an opinion, but it seems very emotional. The piece talks about racism against whites, but it does not give concrete examples. The closest it gets to give an example of racism against whites is mentioning a white person was criticized by “some” about founding an organization which would address issues of whites. But then again, this argument is so incomplete. What minority organization has not been criticized by “some” for addressing issues of minorities?
Lola, do you really need specific examples of racism against whites? If you do, then you really need to get a dose of reality. You can’t possible mean to say that you need someone to provide you with evidence of things that are completely OBVIOUS.
But if you insist, I’ll fill “hole” Patrick left, and offer two instances:
Five white professors in North Carolina filed suit against Livingstone College.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49793,00.html
Then there was the case where a white man who was passed up for a supervisory job, filed suit and WON his case.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-12-22/bay-area/17274003_1_court-rules-city-fees-city-s-favor
Just because it is not politically correct in your viewpoint doesn’t mean these types of things occur in America. Racism and preference to any race, white or NOT, is undoubtedly wrong.
The argument, from what I understand it to mean, addresses the lack of fairness across the board. I don’t think he was criticizing the fact that minority organizations address issues, but that as soon as someone tries to do it for a NON-minority, it’s called racist.
I don’t mean to make this a pissing contest about who gets it worse, but although there have been instances of anti-white racism, as you pointed out Patriot, across the board minorities still experience a level of institutionalized racism.
Some points of interest:
–White convicts are more likely than blacks without criminal records to get a job
–The death penalty is more likely to be sought in a case with a black defendant than a white one
–Although whites smoke more marijuana per capita, blacks are more likely to be charged with possession
–Blacks face a higher rate of prosecution
–The median wealth for black women aged 36-49 is $5
–People with “white sounding names” are more likely to receive a job call back
Sources:
http://www.dmiblog.com/archives/2007/09/white_convicts_as_likely_to_be.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2010/03/study-finds-median-wealth-for-single-black-women-at-5/37395/
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/26/news/economy/applicant_names/index.htm
It’s not about blame or victimization, and it shouldn’t be. Discrimination is wrong, no matter who is discriminated against. It’s about changing the structure through embracing diversity, extending friendships and giving equal chances.
being a straight white male in america does not involve significant racial hardship. ignoring this fact in favor of whining about how mistreated white people are is a pretty monstrous demonstration of white privilege.
why do you think advocacy groups are founded in the first place, you oaf?
White americans do not have a history month because there is nothing to celebrate. All accomplishments amongst white people are at the expense of another race. So that’s why they do not have a history month. As far as policemen are concerned that part should have been left out because more than 85% of police brutality is committed by a white male. So for them to say they are a minority amongst their field it is for a good reason.
White Americans do not have a history month not because there is nothing to celebrate, but because they do not associate themselves as being part of some community on the basis of their skin color. Furthermore, if white Americans’ history is examined it will be seen that their past comes from Great Britain, from whom they have tried to distance themselves for centuries, for various reasons. They have no connections to the country from which they originally came.
Great references, John.
I only mean to convey an understandng that there is discrimination against whites as well as other minority races; but people like Gomm think that being white allows for any white person to be shielded from any of it, and that anyone with white skin doesn’t deserve fair consideration among social issues.
Gomm, hardship isn’t specific to any ONE race, nationality, or ethnicity. Why is it that the so-called “pioneers” who claim they are continuing toimprove race relations able to parade around the country advocating that blacks only donate to BLACK charities? If a Muslim said something like that, we’d think it’s extremist-oriented. I shouldn’t have to say what it would be if a white person said something along those lines.
Because whites had privelege before, are we supposed to automatically infer that all whites enjoy that same privelege today?
actually, my claim was that white people are not significantly discriminated against in a white-dominated society. my point is that white people are granted social privileges that they take for granted.
this white privilege is why you almost never have to consider your own race in social interactions, it’s why there’s no racial slur that can make you feel humiliated and angry, and why people seem to be more at ease with you than they would be if you were not white.
to sum up, trying to equate casual racism against white people with the constant social and legal barriers that have separated minorities from their equal rights is really gross.
It’s almost become unacceptably outrageous for any white person to claim he or she feels discriminated against. The ones with this mentality that “All whites are bad and don’t deserve equal treatment” are perpetuating the very same mentality that supremacist and money-hungry slave owners held toward Black slaves.
I respectfully ask you then, when have I ever equated things that Caucasians experience with those of mnorities?
This topic merely goes to show that it does exist, despite it not being on a level as others have experienced.
hmm probably when you said this:
by saying that their is “lack of fairness across the board”, you are purposely trying to draw equivalencies between discrimination against whites and discrimination against everyone else. sorry, the people with the biggest advantages in society do not need a NAAWP or whatever it’s called.
also, this whole “let’s forget about all of the atrocities white people have committed against minorities” line of thinking is always advocated by people who refuse to own their white guilt like adults.
I can’t speak for Patrick, but the fairness I am talking about is consideration in certain aspects of American life. No, there is no need for an NAAWP or anything like it, but there is no denying the fact that there are some who think that every white man and woman is Satan in the flesh, same as some whites think Blacks are naturally inferior.
Instead of division, we need to make America better for everyone, and stop creating these lines among which racism thrives.
i’m glad you’ve backpedaled to the more defensible (if not bland and vapid) “let’s stop all the racisms” position.
oh hey i just ran across this comment you made earlier:
please explain why a muslim who advocates donating exclusively to muslim charities would be considered “extremist-oriented”
Gomm, please tell me you’re not picking apart every little word in my comments now.
What I meant there was that there are too many among us who make sweeping generalizations about the culture if Islam, just like some of us make sweeping generalizations of races (black, white, etc)
Granted, I’m not expert on that subject, but I’m pretty sure that all Muslims don’t want to see America wiped off the face of the Earth. Agree?
okay i think the website ate my post so take 2:
i didn’t know it was bad etiquette to ask someone to defend their statements. sorry for being gauche, i guess
earlier you were trying to convince us of how terrible it is when black leaders advocate giving money to black charities. to make this point, you say WHAT IF MUSLIMS WERE GIVING MONEY TO MUSLIM CHARITIES, PRETTY SCARY NOW, HUH? i called you out because i believe you have a negative attitude about muslims and islam in general. you reply with WELL I WAS JUST SAYING WE SHOULDN’T GENERALIZE
honestly i would respect you more if you just would own up to your beliefs instead of trying to hide behind meaningless platitudes
It was merely an example of stereotyping. You are reading way too much into it, hoping that you’ll find something negative in order to give your argument more credibility.
so you’re saying that you were just pointing out the racism inherent in thinking that giving to muslim charities is an “extremist” thing to do. okay.
so wouldn’t it also be racist to paint black people giving to black charities in a negative light?
you know, how you did when you said:
“Why is it that the so-called “pioneers”…[are] able to parade around the country advocating that blacks only donate to BLACK charities?”
i am only reading and drawing conclusions from what you wrote, friend patriot. i just think you automatically connected islam to extremism without noticing.
come back, friend patriot, i want to hear more about stereotyping!
Gomm, you are thinking way too limited here. It IS negative for someone to say to give to black charities ONLY. Why? Because Blacks aren’t the only ones that have social issues! It seems you couldn’t derive the meaning of what he meant there either.
There was a time we considered ourselves Americans; Not hyphenated Americans. Don’t hold onto all of the cultural baggage that only continues to drum up negativity.
When I donate to a good cause, I give to the Red Cross and Salvation Army without question as to what color the person is that receives aid due to my contributions. Imagine is someone said “Give to a white charity only”.
equating the hardships of being white with those of being black in america is a disingenuous self-serving rationalization. i’m not really sure how much further i can dumb it down, especially when you don’t even know what white privilege means.
tell me this mythical time in history where we were all americans and i will effortlessly prove you to be a myopic dullard
while it is good you donate to charity, you should consider donating to an organization with a higher efficiency rate. try direct relief international, which has a 99% efficiency rate.