The journey from there to here

Let's assume I put together an article discussing the plight of the inner city minorities. Along the way, i peppered it with words like "thugs", "criminals", "trash", and in the context of the conversation made it clear that the majority of these individuals in these particular neighborhoods were minorities.

Racist, right? Nope, calling them as I see them. Walk by Cabrini Green sometime (if you dare) and do a brief racial survey of the occupants there. You will find very few whites there; in fact, according to anecdotal evidence, whites are denied housing there because the people who push the papers are afraid of what would happen there. Sadly, if the colors were reversed, a Fair Housing Discrimination lawsuit would be in the offing, and you can bet some heads would roll.

The standards of political correct discussion change, however, when discussing the plight of the souther rural poor. The same people who would pop a vein if you referred  to these thugs by the color of their skin quickly toss out the phrase "white trash", and impute racist philosophies upon them without knowing the individual. While racist attitudes run rampant among the southern rural poor, they are no more (or less) rampant, in my experience than criminality among the inner city minorities. In fact, just as in the inner city, most of the citizens of the southern rural poor are simply trying to get by, and realize the best way to do that is not to expose the attitudes for what they are.

The term "white trash" is no more an appropriate label for someone living poor in the south than the various racial invectives that are hurled at the inner city minorities. Yet somehow, in the push towards political correctness, it became OK to discriminate, as long as the target was white. In fact, according to the definition of racism spelled out in the Seattle Public Schools' policy, blacks and other minorities cannot be racist because racism only exists when it is someone with greater social influence acting towards someone with less.

I've learned to live with the label "white trash". In fact, I can hyuck it up with the best of them. But when it is used as an insult, I can't help but wonder why it is acceptable while similar insults directed at persons of different skin colors are not.


Comments
on May 26, 2006
Because PC isn't about fairness, feelings or even judging people.. it's about shutting up anyone who doesn't share the views of the PC elites. It is about punishing people simply for their thoughts and views. PC is the elitists way of telling everyone else what to think.
on May 26, 2006
We should be a bunch of niggards in giving respect to elitist blowhards. ;~D
on May 26, 2006
Haven't you noticed?

Redneck is the new derogatory term of endearment for White people. ( sorta like that N word for "colored people" )

Redneck used to be just a inflamatory as the N word, now it adorns album covers, is featured in song, and feathers the bank account of the likes of Jeff Foxworthy and Company..."White Trash" is nothing more than uber redneck.

Damn, us white folks always followin' the trends of them minorities...first it was Elvis and their music, then fashion, and now self depreciation....next thing you know white chillren won't even know who dey daddy is.....
on May 26, 2006
Like Dynosoar says, we empower people to use the terms by embracing them ourselves. Usually around here it is 'trailer trash' etc., but I hear white trash a lot, too. Hell, I've even used it many times. Many of the people I hear it from would in turn be CALLED white trash by other people, who would probably be called the same by people higher up on the totem pole.

I guess maybe that's it. We don't feel bad because no one really self-identifies with it. You can't be so white trashy that you would feel odd to call someone else white trash. If you are you probably don't recognize your status. The "white" part just differentiates you from other shades of "trash", so the racial part of it really isn't derogatory.
on May 27, 2006
white trash and redneck are bad things?
on May 27, 2006
Walk by Cabrini Green sometime (if you dare) and do a brief racial survey of the occupants there. You will find very few whites there; in fact, according to anecdotal evidence, whites are denied housing there because the people who push the papers are afraid of what would happen there. Sadly, if the colors were reversed, a Fair Housing Discrimination lawsuit would be in the offing, and you can bet some heads would roll.


for more than a half century, chicago was extremely successful at preventing its black residents from living anywhere outside two designated areas within the city. by the early 1950s, virtually all housing units within those zones were occupied by multiple tenants (as in two or three families living in shifts since there simply weren't enough beds or dining space to accomodate all at one time).

even the dumbest racists in and outta chicago government in the 50s realized both the extreme volatilility the situation and the potential for castastrophe it presented.
despite all that, they refused to cede even a single block of 'white' chicago, eventually leading to the decision to expand the black ghettoes upward rather than outward, using the cabrini projects (created in the early 40s as a means of protecting white chicagoans from possible contamination by italians, but most especially sicilians) as a sorta launch pad for their new shining ghetto in the sky.

ultimately the cabrini sites and william-green highrises (which officially opened in 1962) melded together in the american mind as cabrini-green.

considering their raison d'etre was keeping black people enclosed rather than keeping whites out, it's a wonder non-jewish europeans haven't demanded compensation from 'da jews' for having been excluded from auschwitz or bergen-belsen.
on May 27, 2006
"ultimately the cabrini sites and william-green highrises (which officially opened in 1962) melded together in the american mind as cabrini-green.


Candyman... Candyman... Candyman...

What has always annoyed me, though, is when people try and suggest righting that wrong and dispersing the ghettoized folks into safer and more comfortable neighborhoods, that's seen as an attack on their culture. It must be a chocolate New Orleans, you know.

Jesse was right there complaining that the people needed to be able to go back and settle in the same ghettoized fashion and not have their "communities" broken up. These areas now, in my opinion, are Democrat camps with "Voting Makes Free" over the gate.
on May 27, 2006
the definition of racism spelled out in the Seattle Public Schools' policy, blacks and other minorities cannot be racist because racism only exists when it is someone with greater social influence acting towards someone with less.
I've learned to live with the label "white trash". In fact, I can hyuck it up with the best of them. But when it is used as an insult, I can't help but wonder why it is acceptable while similar insults directed at persons of different skin colors are not.


seattle public shools is one of many organizations and individuals--including myself--subscribing to a definition of racism you described; it's highly unlikely they originated the concept.

to answer your title's question, it's no more acceptable than any of 1000s of mean-spirited insults. unlike the term you and others continually seem to want to consider its equivalent, i'm nearly positive it came first outta the mouths of white people and was used openly solely by whites for a considerable amount of time.

this is possibly the fourth time i've responded to one of your articles dealing with some variant of this issue by asking you why you'd wanna use any racial slur and why you feel such a need to justify being able to demean yourself just because others are doing it?
on May 27, 2006
What has always annoyed me, though, is when people try and suggest righting that wrong and dispersing the ghettoized folks into safer and more comfortable neighborhoods, that's seen as an attack on their culture.


it all boils down to a matter of choice?

cabrini-green was just one element of a policy to prevent blacks from living even so much as across the street from the area to which they were restricted. it was pretty much a nationwide phenomenon 50 years ago and, sadly, this kinda shit hasn't been totally done away with yet.

the chocolate city thing--as it was used--was deplorable and i was just as disgusted by nagin's reelection as i was by the 2004 presidential result.

i don't have a problem with people from similar backrounds, cultures, places of origin, etc. wanting to live as neighbors--as long as they don't restrict or interfere with anyone else who finds the same block or neighborhood to their liking.

i can't explain how i've so far managed to miss new orleans (furthest south i've been in louisiana is shreveport) and my only knowledge of life in the lower 9th is 2nd hand and after the fact. i've lived in communities with somewhat similar demographics; most of the people i knew allowed (at least on occasion, but sometimes fairly frequently) as to how they'd much rather be somewhere else, but i doubt they woulda elected to suddenly find the place flattened and themselves on a bus to somewhere else.
on May 27, 2006
I don't think "cracker" is acceptable, even though it means rich Southern white people.
on May 28, 2006
seattle public shools is one of many organizations and individuals--including myself--subscribing to a definition of racism you described; it's highly unlikely they originated the concept.


kingbee,

I have a huge problem with this, though. Do you really think you can erase racism with racism; eg, by allowing blacks to hate white because of the color of their skin? Doesn't that just create an endless cycle of racial hatred when the oppressed strive to become the oppressors.

Racism from blacks to whites CAN and DOES exist; we cannot solve these problems by allowing young black men to sneer at me and call me a "white devil" anymore than we can solve them by allowing me to sneer at them and call them "N-----s". True equality only comes out when we fail to see skin color as relevant to anything more than the amount of sunblock you might need on a summer's day.
on May 29, 2006
It doesn't matter what PC dictionary says racism is. In a REAL dictionary if a negro or caucasian does'nt like the other because of their skin THEY ARE A RACIST, regardless of the "power" BS.
on Jun 03, 2006
Your comments are so right on! In the realm of white-trashiness, I am what one might call a thoroughbred. I've worked very hard to distance myself from the stereotypical 'southern white trash', but it has been difficult. Don't misunderstand me, I am not ashamed of my family. I love them, but they must realize that it is not acceptable to have an old couch and washing machine in the front yard. At any rate, I have the same question you have:Why is it subject poor white people to ridicule and slurs and unacceptable to do this to any racial or ethnic group. I don't understand. I appreciate you bringing this topic into full view.
on Jun 05, 2006
Here is the best article I have ever read on this subject:

www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=527

As a white person, the term white-trash never bothered me that much (except in the rare cases where it was directed at me.. and in that case i was more offended by the term "trash" that was involved), but I was never really able to articulate why it didn't bother me that much. One day I randomly found this article, and it became entirely clear. Hope it will make some of you think a bit more..