There’s nothing wrong with identifying a stereotype with a zeitgeist, so long as you acknowledge the fact that it is a stereotype. That it wasn’t all peaches and creams in the '50s has no bearing on the number of people who identify “white male culture” with the stereotypical white evangelical male from that day and age.
My understanding is fentanyl is often sold as something else, e.g. cut and pressed into pills marked as some legit (if prescribed) drug. A junky who got hooked by her doctor after she tore her ACL and later turned to the black market to keep from feeling sick is way more sympathetic than one who started out by trying to get high in the first place. That is a prime difference between the two epidemics. Another is drug overdose death rate and scale; more of us know someone affected. And a third is violence and gang activity.
Never mind the decades of addiction science, which was barely a term being used thirty years ago. We simply know more now about addiction, and at least some of that had rubbed off on the general population.
That doesn’t preclude any differences because of who is addicted, and I’m sure that contributes. But the the attribution thus far had been grossly unscientific, which is expected for these boards.
Able bodied white man, you mean.
I’m not sure what your objection is. Are you denying that the oppression existed in the '50s? Most anti-Semites avoided explicit anti-Semitism back then, but Woody Allen was still joking about restricted clubs at the end of the decade.
Or is it that '50s lovers don’t explicitly love it because of the discrimination back then. True enough, but they do say that my type had it good, and don’t consider that their type didn’t.
Actually, I think most of these old white guys are nostalgic for the ‘50’s because they have fond memories of the days when they had a full head of hair and a dick that worked.
The one they never mention was the thing that made all this American Greatness possible, which was a top marginal tax rate of 91% . IMHO, it made employers less greedy and made it possible for your 50’s dad to support a family on a single blue collar income.
Sure there’s some. But compared to just being born in the USA, it’s pretty damn small. We dont realize how privileged we are, all of us here in the uSA.
White males are too diverse a group to have a culture, there’s the stoners, the ex-hippies, the Alt-righters, the millennials, the gun culture dudes, etc etc etc.
Is there a white female culture?
I am not even sure if there is a black male culture, even.
We had a 20 year mortgage, and both parents worked. In fact in many of the middle class households in Gardena CA, both parents worked. Latchkey kids were the norm.
I disagree. The benefit of the doubt is not something I associate with “white culture”, it is just a restatement of the presumption of innocence.
White culture can mean many things, but it is not productive to define it as merely being afforded one’s rights. Everybody ought to demand that their rights are not infringed, and to expect your rights will be curtailed by default is a form of pessimism. To identify white culture as the opposite of pessimism is to call it a form of optimism, or bliss. To the contrary, “white male culture” is often viewed as a form of privilege - to expect the presumption of innocence for yourself and other white males while being ambivalent or even hostile to same rights of others.
The discussion on white male privilege was by default focused on societies where white people are a majority or a controlling minority, until someone used the term “world”. (I concede that the countries you’ve named are not places where I’d want to live as a minority (racial, religious, etc.))
To answer your question:
… I would suggest you re-read Kimstu’s post, without trying to hijack the conversation to societies we’re obviously not talking about.
Are you saying that Americans who aren’t white males can’t be trusted with democracy, lest they turn the U.S. into a nightmare of white-male subjugation?
That’s what I am saying. I didn’t live through the 50s so I cannot say if the recollections are accurate of simply a part of rosy recollection or other things. I simply dispute the idea, stated as fact, that people loved the 50s because the blacks were kept in their proper place. I’ve never heard anyone say or imply that.
I don’t know. I just want to watch some old episodes of Seinfeld and How I Met Your Mother, enjoy a cold bottle of craft beer, change out of my Brooks Brothers work clothes in some flannel J Crew pajamas, throw on some Mumford & Sons and go to bed.
Are you sure it is that, or do you just miss the days of the 90s when gays couldn’t get married and could be arrested for sodomy?
Note: I know you really don’t believe that, but to me there is as much evidence for that as there is to say that people look back on the 50s for racist reasons.
Do you have cites for any of this or is it just a rant?
Service Sector v. Coal Mine Jobs–This has nothing to do with racism or sexism. Service jobs are generally viewed as dead end jobs and both parties want a way to leave those jobs to the teenagers and get adults out of those jobs into things that can pay a living wage, like coal mining. In my state, coal mining provided quality jobs for a couple of generations of people who made my state economically viable. Now those jobs are gone and it has devastated an entire region. It is debatable whether we should or even can bring back coal, but it is easily explained why the loss of those jobs are a larger issue.
Drugs–anyone who used drugs in their home and doesn’t bother anyone gets a very low enforcement priority–white or black. When drugs cause turf wars, dead bodies, and quality of life crimes, that is a serious issue–white or black.
This one is the most outrageous. The Dems have bought off black voters for years with their proposals. So much so that they get 90+ percent of the vote each time, reliably and without fail. They have been cared for so much in politics that their votes are taken for granted, and for either party, there is not much more each can do with the black vote to win an election.
White people in the rust belt? That was the key in 2016 and will be the key in 2020. One can hardly claim racism with a straight face when you are concentrating of the pivotal demographic that will decide whether you win or lose the election.
If the racial roles were reversed, you don’t think that there would be a dismissal of whites and a laser focus on blacks? You think a candidate would say, “Sure, I’ll probably lose this election, but at least I take care of the white boys!” That’s silly.
You seem to see everything through the tinted lense of racism when they have obvious, non-racial reasons behind them.
This is bullshit. For generations black folks in the US have had 2 basic choices for political parties: Side with the group that contains damn near every racist white person in the country or side with the group that is at least willing to pay lip service to our political concerns.
Why the fuck would any self respecting black person ever choose the side with damn near all the racist white folks? And in case you were wondering, yes, racist ass republicans are the main reason why most non-white people vote democrat.