What are you getting at?The only "white privilege" that early Irish Catholics, Italian, Jewish immigrants, etc. knew was to study hard and work hard to achieve social and economic success.
Yes, they faced discrimination too, but nothing like African Americans and they had a much easier time "passing"The only "white privilege" that early Irish Catholics, Italian, Jewish immigrants, etc. knew was to study hard and work hard to achieve social and economic success.
+1 Skyrider usually has biased opinions anyways...:frusty:Yes, they faced discrimination too, but nothing like African Americans and they had a much easier time "passing"
Yes, they faced discrimination too, but nothing like African Americans and they had a much easier time "passing"
Who was white and who wasn't became obvious during the Jim Crow era, by that time Italians and Irish people were white. Through hard work and studying I'm sure. In all seriousness, gradually as time went on as Irish people became popular athletes during the early 1900s, and politicians people started calling them white.“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
― Booker T. Washington
I know my Irish Catholic Gram had some stories, even worse ones from her parents. The big difference was that they could dress up, put on an accent and no one would know they were Irish.The only "white privilege" that early Irish Catholics, Italian, Jewish immigrants, etc. knew was to study hard and work hard to achieve social and economic success.
I just finished a biography of him. Fascinating gentleman, a true pioneer.“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.”
― Booker T. Washington
Agreed. Racism against white people is still racism. Calling it "reverse racism" gives it special meaning it doesn't need.There is no (that is to say, absolutely no) difference between "reverse racism" and racism.
Life was so damn easy during the starving times, be that Virginia prior to 1620 or the Old Colony and the Massachusetts Bay Colony prior to 1700 or early Nouvelle-France, or being a United Empire Loyalist in the Maritimes or Upper Canada in 1783-1785.Yes, they faced discrimination too, but nothing like African Americans and they had a much easier time "passing"
You got pretty quiet, there's a question for you here. https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ing-Ceremony&p=5301324&viewfull=1#post5301324you just post crap everywhere.
No doubt African Americans were poorly treated as were many other ethnic minorities (the Japanese were interned in WW II and all their assets seized but they resumed normal life after the war ended). If Portuguese are considered white, I should tell them about white privilege as they vacuum my office carpet and empty the trash cans. BTW: As badly as African Americans were treated in the U.S. at least 2 million of them did not starve to death .I know my Irish Catholic Gram had some stories, even worse ones from her parents.
Yep. Proves it all. Good thing there's no videos around the internet about white people (or presidential candidates) blaming minorities.