I agree with much of the rich part, but struggle with the white part. There are numerous historical routes to being rich, surely the point is that some people are rich and others are not. If you see major wealth inequalities as a problem then it doesn't matter very much how someone got there. Lots of non-white people are rich too and they have exactly the same "benefits" you outline. For example, I struggle with people owning the homes of other people "rental properties" no matter who they are. BTW I am also reluctant to judge individuals, as everything is relative. I'm sure some people struggle with me having a well paid, fairly secure government job (as a university professor) and I totally get that.
Yeah, I have to say I was having fun with this one as a rhetorical/satirical gag, rather than a more considered analysis - but it chimes with the racist aspect of some of the politics in NZ at the moment, as well as the long lasting tail end of global European colonialism that they express and I live in. I would disagree that non-white rich people have exactly the same benefits, although they may have their own versions of them. (I can imagine a child of a high ranking politician or wealthy magnate in a non-white, non-colonialised country, for example, also being able to say they lived in a system entirely designed for their benefit. But I would not say the same for a rich black person who grew up in the UK). I too understand the philosophical reluctance to judge individuals, but even the delightfully measured Daniel Schmachtenburger points out that many of our most vicious cycles are actually kicked off and/or perpetuated by seriously damaged humans. So that 'we're all as bad as each other' approach only gets us so far as an analysis and basis for useful action. There are some people who are just wrong. As activist and singer Utah Philips said: "The Earth is not dying, it is being killed, and those who are killing it have names and addresses.” And yes, I'm a well-paid wealthy English white male who owns a rental property. So my name might well be on that list too.
So are you saying that rich people who aren't white are less bad (according to your definition of bad), even if they own lots of rental properties, go on luxurious holidays and drive big cars and all the rest? On what grounds?
I didn't say any of that. It would be helpful if you could you reframe your question referring to what I've actually written? What I gather from your question is whether I am running some kind of sliding scale of badness over people. I'm not. There are complex webs of complicity, responsibility, agency and action involved, which of course can't be captured in a single satirical post. But I also don't believe in moral equivalency. I would say that the more a person benefits from the status quo then the more they are culpable for its condition. But that doesn't mean they necessarily have all the agency required to change their actions (although they are likely to have more than someone who hasn't benefitted to the same degree). Skin colour, as you point out, is not the major factor in that. I am not intending to make it so. It does seem to be a major factor in the politics I am lampooning in the post.
Sorry Andy, I displayed a reckless disregard for the evidence (i.e. what you wrote) in my paraphrasing! Perhaps I've slid into my own concern for 'whiteness' being used in general discourse - and I'm not commenting on your piece - as the key to both privilege and disadvantage. Wealth - that is drawing intensively from the commons - natural 'resources' and human labour - seems to me a clearer and more precise issue. That is, even if non-white people and women were equally represented in the wealthy, the problem would remain. The issue of 'badness' isn't really what I was getting at, although I accept I phrased my comment that way.
All part of the fun! :-) Yeah I too have more concern with the 'rich' part than the 'white' - although I have to keep reiterating that I am both! And I do think that trying to work out who is 'most' to blame for our predicament is largely a waste of time. But then, again, as a rich male from a colonial power in a colonial country many might say I would say that! Adding to that, in that context I do think the possibilities and potential of meaningful post colonial reparations and a return to the indigenous (i.e. normal human) knowledge systems does present a possible pathway to resilience and, given a few generations and a couple of civilisation collapses, even a route to a new form of sustainable living, albeit this time in the slowly regenerating ruins of post-industrial infrastructure and the ecology, rather than the more pristine pre-industrial state.
Well one thing we do agree on is that something - the narrative, our way of being in the world, our relationships with each other and 'nature' - has got to (and will) change. Our trajectory is out of touch with the reality of ourselves as embodied creatures of planet Earth.
I found myself cringing because I may think it, but would be unable to say it out loud.
My thesis will share some of this sentiment albeit in a much more subdued way. In the meantime, i'm quite partial to the concept of Hegemonic whiteness. Have a read of:
‘‘What Group?’’ Studying Whites and Whiteness in the Era of
I agree with much of the rich part, but struggle with the white part. There are numerous historical routes to being rich, surely the point is that some people are rich and others are not. If you see major wealth inequalities as a problem then it doesn't matter very much how someone got there. Lots of non-white people are rich too and they have exactly the same "benefits" you outline. For example, I struggle with people owning the homes of other people "rental properties" no matter who they are. BTW I am also reluctant to judge individuals, as everything is relative. I'm sure some people struggle with me having a well paid, fairly secure government job (as a university professor) and I totally get that.
Yeah, I have to say I was having fun with this one as a rhetorical/satirical gag, rather than a more considered analysis - but it chimes with the racist aspect of some of the politics in NZ at the moment, as well as the long lasting tail end of global European colonialism that they express and I live in. I would disagree that non-white rich people have exactly the same benefits, although they may have their own versions of them. (I can imagine a child of a high ranking politician or wealthy magnate in a non-white, non-colonialised country, for example, also being able to say they lived in a system entirely designed for their benefit. But I would not say the same for a rich black person who grew up in the UK). I too understand the philosophical reluctance to judge individuals, but even the delightfully measured Daniel Schmachtenburger points out that many of our most vicious cycles are actually kicked off and/or perpetuated by seriously damaged humans. So that 'we're all as bad as each other' approach only gets us so far as an analysis and basis for useful action. There are some people who are just wrong. As activist and singer Utah Philips said: "The Earth is not dying, it is being killed, and those who are killing it have names and addresses.” And yes, I'm a well-paid wealthy English white male who owns a rental property. So my name might well be on that list too.
So are you saying that rich people who aren't white are less bad (according to your definition of bad), even if they own lots of rental properties, go on luxurious holidays and drive big cars and all the rest? On what grounds?
I didn't say any of that. It would be helpful if you could you reframe your question referring to what I've actually written? What I gather from your question is whether I am running some kind of sliding scale of badness over people. I'm not. There are complex webs of complicity, responsibility, agency and action involved, which of course can't be captured in a single satirical post. But I also don't believe in moral equivalency. I would say that the more a person benefits from the status quo then the more they are culpable for its condition. But that doesn't mean they necessarily have all the agency required to change their actions (although they are likely to have more than someone who hasn't benefitted to the same degree). Skin colour, as you point out, is not the major factor in that. I am not intending to make it so. It does seem to be a major factor in the politics I am lampooning in the post.
Sorry Andy, I displayed a reckless disregard for the evidence (i.e. what you wrote) in my paraphrasing! Perhaps I've slid into my own concern for 'whiteness' being used in general discourse - and I'm not commenting on your piece - as the key to both privilege and disadvantage. Wealth - that is drawing intensively from the commons - natural 'resources' and human labour - seems to me a clearer and more precise issue. That is, even if non-white people and women were equally represented in the wealthy, the problem would remain. The issue of 'badness' isn't really what I was getting at, although I accept I phrased my comment that way.
All part of the fun! :-) Yeah I too have more concern with the 'rich' part than the 'white' - although I have to keep reiterating that I am both! And I do think that trying to work out who is 'most' to blame for our predicament is largely a waste of time. But then, again, as a rich male from a colonial power in a colonial country many might say I would say that! Adding to that, in that context I do think the possibilities and potential of meaningful post colonial reparations and a return to the indigenous (i.e. normal human) knowledge systems does present a possible pathway to resilience and, given a few generations and a couple of civilisation collapses, even a route to a new form of sustainable living, albeit this time in the slowly regenerating ruins of post-industrial infrastructure and the ecology, rather than the more pristine pre-industrial state.
Well one thing we do agree on is that something - the narrative, our way of being in the world, our relationships with each other and 'nature' - has got to (and will) change. Our trajectory is out of touch with the reality of ourselves as embodied creatures of planet Earth.
I found myself cringing because I may think it, but would be unable to say it out loud.
My thesis will share some of this sentiment albeit in a much more subdued way. In the meantime, i'm quite partial to the concept of Hegemonic whiteness. Have a read of:
‘‘What Group?’’ Studying Whites and Whiteness in the Era of
‘‘Color-Blindness’’*
By Amanda E. Lewis
Ha! Was wondering about you so good to know you've been keeping busy in Seymour's comms office.
Brutal and unfortunately honest.