Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

White Man's Guilt, for those who do not know, is the idea that all white people today are responsible for the actions of their ancestors in slavery, segregation, and other things. I personally don't believe it's right to feel guilt for those things, as I did not participate in them.

That's why I appreciate this so much.

_________________

How could someone born in 1988 be responsible for the deaths of millions in the centuries of the past? Sure, I'm not proud of what my people did back then, but that doesn't mean that white people are doing it now.

_________________

I actually find the arrogance of that "pardon" to be kinda insulting. The idea of it, namely "White people are 'pardoned' for the crimes of their ancestors" is rather dumb. There's no need to pardon me for what my ancestors may or may not have done, as I am not responsible. Reminds me of a heated discussion in my English 300 class back at WKU. This guy was talking about how white people should have to pay him for what "they" did to "his" people. I asked him why I should pay. He said because I was guilty, strangely enough, when asked what I done to him, he couldn't respond with anything other than nonsensical drivel. As best as I can remember, it was something like "It's not what you've done to me, it's what your people did to mine." or something similar.

Bad things WERE done, and that's shameful, but nobody alive today did any of those horrible things to any people who are alive today.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

I think the guy who wrote the "pardon" is referring to the way apologetic white people act around him, and is basically telling them to relax.

My own ancestors were too busy fleeing Stalinist purges to oppress anyone, so none of this bothers me personally.

Mike

_________________
Logical fallacies ahoy! I'd also like to say: graaaaagh!

i think the film Crash identified this problem interestingly, but i'm really not going to get all the way into it. I wrote a paper about it if anyone wants a more in-depth rundown then PM me.

but I think that guilt for the past is pointless personally. and guilt in general isn't good. I think everybody is responsible for some degree of racism (and i don't mean everyone is a KKK person, i mean "racism" in a broader, non-pejorative way) its really tough to explain this an i'm going to look foolish if it doesn't come across right, but everyone is guilty of some degree of racism (again i mean that all people see race and no matter how open minded people are, we think of "us" as "us" and "them" as "them") and that in itself is not a bad thing if it is acknowledged for what it is. and in that case everybody is responsible for some degree of racism: black, white, asian, pacific islander, whatever. Note one more time that I use racism in an academic sense and do not associate hate in any way with this broader definition of racism that some scholars and writers who adress the topic use.

That's exactly it, StrongRad. Walter Williams is a great writer and works hard to fight against reverse discrimination, while arguing for personal responsibility and hard work.

Good quote from his Wikipedia page:



I like him a lot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_E._Williams

_________________

actually, that was Mike

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Yes, I know, I was just seconding Mike's post for your benefit.

_________________

What... Mike?

What?

_________________

That tickled me.

For the most part, I agree. However, it doesn't give the right to forget these atrocities. Modern-day Germany isn't responsible for the crimes committed by Nazi Germany, but they do not forget what happened, and that is what prevents these very tragedies.

_________________
Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

Mike D.

_________________

White Man's Guilt is a phenomenon I've seen especially in English culture, and it certainly is behind this so-called "positive discrimination".

Though I think the cause of it is not so much what was done in the past. Rather, it comes from the benefits Western nations are still drawing from the atrocities of old.

I mean, would America and Western Europe be as wealthy as they are today if they didn't build that wealth on the backs of poorer nations and peoples?

Esprobably not.

Though I don't condone White Man's Guilt - it's a waste of energy. All you have to do is acknowledge the mistakes of the past, like the freakyblueman says.

Fine with me. I'm all for remembering the past. The fact that Iran's president and assorted Europeans, even, refuse to believe that the Holocaust even happened is a joke.

_________________

Speaking of Nazi Germany, there's something I would like to say.

My family, mostly on my mother's side, are directly related to Germany. About 60% to be accurate. 30% is Scottish, and the other 10% we don't know.

My ancestors immigrated to America in 1849. We have a watch that they brought from Germany, which my grandparents still have.

Now, if they hadn't immigrated, I might very well be speaking in German instead of English, my grandparents and my great-grandparents would have a very good memory of Nazi Germany, my mother would have been born during the completion of the Berlin Wall, and I would have been born during it's destruction.

While I don't feel very close to Germany, my grandparents do. When they were first married, they went there because my grandfather (who joined the army) had been ordered to go there by the United States Army.

They brought an entire culture home when they came back.

Because I had the knowledge that I was German, I felt responsible for the Holocaust. I would accually deny that I was German, untill a few months later I accepted the idea that I wasn't responsible for what my ancestors did. Infact, they weren't even in Germany. They were here in America.

But it isn't right to blame anyone for something someone else did. No matter what time or place it is.

And that is that.

But many wrongs in human history were committed in behalf of the wrong-doers' people or their nations. Does that mean it is wrong for a people or a nation to atone for their past wrongs? Is remorse fundamentally wrong? Is guilt fundamentally wrong? Can one have reconcilliation with another without acknowledging the hurt one has inflicted on that other? I'm wont to think not.

_________________
My Last.fm Weekly Top Tracks:

It's not wrong, just not necessary. Acknowledging the past is all well & good, but if the people involved aren't alive anymore, what does it matter? I didn't whip any slaves, so why should black people be mad at me for it?

_________________

Yeah, same here. Like, exactly same here.

People always call me a nazi when they're mad at me, and that really annoys me.

I hate to stoop to this level but,

Raceists

_________________

Y'know, there's no "e" in "racist".

_________________

I know this is a little off topic, but I think "Nazi" is WAY over used today. I mean, people always joke about Hitler and stuff and I think it's a little annoying. So even though I'm not German (at least I don't think I am),I understand your feelings about not liking being called a Nazi, extremejon. Toastapaint.

_________________
Dag, yo.

I really dislike this sort of reverse discrimination. At the risk of making myself sound like a racist, Black people have a lot of special privaleges these days that, if White people tried to have equally, would be called racist--All-Black organizations, All-Black television channels, and other things just for the sole purpose of having it be exclusive to Black people. Of course, I hear the argument similar to, "Well, all OTHER channels on TV are White-Man Channels!"...which is not true. The other channels generally operate color blind...or else I just watch color blind and don't take notice to the number of times someone of a particular skin color comes on screen, unless it's a channel that makes it a point to tell everyone that it's concentrating on a certain skin color.

I can understand the desire to celebrate one's ethnic roots and culture and such, but there are limits, and I think a lot of these organizations break those limits by taking it too far. A lot of the things I enjoy in this world--great music, literature, art, movies, and even basic every-day services and products--have the entire color spectrum of people behind their production, and I really couldn't care less. Not because I'm racist, but because I feel that the color of a person's skin--no matter what your own history is--should be given as much thought as what wood grain is used in your neighbor's coffee table. To quote from the character of Gary Coleman from Avenue Q, "Bigotry has never been exclusively White." ...A line from one of the best songs from an awesome musical.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

I agree with you in principal about reverse discrimination, PMG. But to play devil's advocate, you could argue too that a black organisation isn't the same as a white organisation.

Because white culture is the dominant culture, pretty much anyone could work for, say, a (predominantly) white television station. Because everyone of every colour has that dominant culture in common.

But black/minority culture revolves around a very exclusive community. So only people from within that community can really relate to that culture. So a black television station would really be looking for employees who'd know black culture - and that's mostly going to be black people.

(Actually, this is very much something I believe to be true in relation to my own community - the Gaelic-speaking regions of Ireland. I do hate it when public-service jobs especially in these regions go to English-speakers. Not because I'm discriminating, but because native Irish-speakers would know the culture much better, yet alone the language itself.)

Didja ever think that a white person could be part of the black culture too? I know a white guy who grew up around black people. He's part of their culture too but he's not black! I'm trying to say that It shouldn't be called Black Television but something that would cover everybody!

_________________

But that's what it IS called...Black Entertainment Television.

And also a white guy who knows a lot about black culture and is in a even MORE exclusive part of society.

_________________
Dag, yo.

Yep, that's pretty much my answer. Of course there exceptions to every rule, Weststarrunner. But it's usually black people who'd be the experts on black culture.

But toastpaint.