on being a white middle class male (me) who was just followed down the subway platform at 14th & 6th and repeatedly threatened on sunday night by two black men twice my size who only withdrew because the train pulled up and saved my honky ass at the last possible moment:

the problem is that this survey only quantifies; it does not qualify.  it does not explain that the way in which white people often feel discriminated against by black people has nothing to do with the difficulties black people face in comparison to white people in america.  those difficulties are real.  those adversities are not manufactured by black people, but are rather something that has been deeply ingrained into their experience as americans, since well before the declaration of independence was even delivered to the british.

that being noted however, the way in which white people feel discriminated against is in black people's response, in part (though not entirely), to those adversities.

because white people are still commonly viewed as the dominating force in the shape and direction of the american experience--and watching a largely bleached flour house or senate session on c-span, it's not hard to figure out why white people are commonly viewed that way, despite there being a black president--some black people, in direct proportion to education and income, do absolutely discriminate against white people as a defense against the way things unfortunately still are.  particularly because there is a greater population density of poor black people in urban centers than elsewhere, that "reverse discriminatory response" is more prevalent in our nation's cities.

so in a wee little metropolis like new york, it goes like this, re: "the wide range of disparities that still exist in society," vis a vis "income, home ownership, health and employment":  because you view me as the guy who didn't hire you or give you a mortgage, you vent on me.  because overall, white-run american society treats you like crap and i'm white, you figure you're down on your luck, it's whitey's/my fault, i've got $500 in my wallet--you know being white, as i am, i must have at least some hefty amount of cash on me to dole out to you as restitution for shit my great great great grandparents didn't even do to you, because they were too busy being persecuted against as jews living in poland, russia and austria--you follow me down the subway platform with the intent of mugging me or worse.

well, guess what, two black men twice my size on the subway platform on sunday night:  i had $12 in my wallet that evening, and i'm not the fucking person who denied you a job or a home mortgage.  hell, i don't even own my own freaking home!  oh, also, your culture's sob story doesn't even pretend to hold a candle to mine and i'm still at least pulling a middle class income and paying my way without accosting innocent people whose greatest crime against you was having a different skin color.  we're all in the same shit-storm here and if those of your people intent on following white people down subway platforms to commit violent acts against them can't grow the fuck up, then you're far, far away from being part of the solution.

that's all i got...let 'er rip, pending incendiary responses to my vitriol.

No vitriol for this post?  No talk about how white on black crime is actually much higher (nonsense)?

Very good point about how this is mainly a problem in urban centers.  When I moved to New York six years ago I was the biggest multiculturalist/liberal you could get your hands on.  After having to live with the crap I get for being white here, Mr. Hippy has gone bye bye.

A Look at the Myth of Reverse Racism Posted: Monday, June 24, 2002
By Tim Wise

Recently, when speaking to a group of high school students, I was asked why I only seemed to be concerned about white racism towards people of color. We had been discussing racial slurs, and a number of white students wondered why I didn’t get as upset about blacks using terms like “honky” or “cracker,” as I did about whites using words like “nigger.”

Although such an issue may seem trivial in the larger scheme of things—especially given the more significant discussions about racism in the educational system that I had hoped to engage in that day—the challenge posed by the students was actually an important one. In fact, it allowed a discussion about the very essence of what racism is and how it operates.

On the one hand, of course, such slurs are quite obviously inappropriate and offensive, and ought not to be used. That said, I pointed out that even the mention of the words “honky” and “cracker” had elicited laughter; and not only from the black students in attendance, but also from other whites.

The words are so silly, so juvenile, so utterly pathetic that they hardly qualify as racial slurs at all, let alone slurs on a par with those that have been historically deployed against people of color.

The lack of symmetry between a word like honky and a slur such as “nigger” was made apparent in an old Saturday Night Live skit, with Chevy Chase and guest, Richard Pryor.

In the skit, Chase and Pryor face one another and trade off racial epithets during a segment of Weekend Update. Chase calls Pryor a “porch monkey.” Pryor responds with “honky.” Chase ups the ante with “jungle bunny.” Pryor, unable to counter with a more vicious slur against whites, responds with “honky, honky.” Chase then trumps all previous slurs with “nigger,” to which Pryor responds: “dead honky.”

The line elicits laughs all around, but also makes clear, at least implicitly that when it comes to racial antilocution, people of color are limited in the repertoire of slurs they can use against whites, and even the ones of which they can avail themselves sound more comic than hateful. The impact of hearing the antiblack slurs in the skit was of a magnitude unparalleled by hearing Pryor say “honky” over and over again.

As a white person I always saw terms like honky or cracker as evidence of how much more potent white racism was than any variation on the theme practiced by the black or brown.

When a group of people has little or no power over you institutionally, they don’t get to define the terms of your existence, they can’t limit your opportunities, and you needn’t worry much about the use of a slur to describe you and yours, since, in all likelihood, the slur is as far as it’s going to go. What are they going to do next: deny you a bank loan? Yeah, right.

So whereas “nigger” was and is a term used by whites to dehumanize blacks, to imply their inferiority, to “put them in their place” if you will, the same cannot be said of honky: after all, you can’t put white people in their place when they own the place to begin with.

Power is like body armor. And while not all white folks have the same degree of power, there is a very real extent to which all of us have more than we need vis-à-vis people of color: at least when it comes to racial position, privilege and perceptions.

Consider poor whites. To be sure, they are less financially powerful than wealthy people of color. But that misses the point of how racial privilege operates within a class system.

Within a class system, people tend to compete for “stuff” against others of their same basic economic status. In other words, rich and poor are not competing for the same homes, bank loans, jobs, or even educations to a large extent. Rich competes against rich, working class against working class and poor against poor. And in those competitions racial privilege most certainly attaches.

Poor whites are rarely typified as pathological, dangerous, lazy or shiftless the way poor blacks are, for example. Nor are they demonized the way poor Latino/a immigrants tend to be.

When politicians want to scapegoat welfare recipients they don’t pick Bubba and Crystal from some Appalachian trailer park; they choose Shawonda Jefferson from the Robert Taylor Homes, with her seven children.

And according to reports from a number of states, ever since so-called welfare reform, white recipients have been treated far better by caseworkers, are less likely to be bumped off the rolls for presumed failure to comply with new regulations, and have been given far more assistance at finding new jobs than their black or brown counterparts.

Poor whites are more likely to have a job, tend to earn more than poor people of color, and are even more likely to own their own home. Indeed, whites with incomes under $13,000 annually are more likely to own their own home than blacks with incomes that are three times higher due to having inherited property.

None of this is to say that poor whites aren’t being screwed eight ways to Sunday by an economic system that relies on their immiseration: they are. But they nonetheless retain a certain “one-up” on equally poor or even somewhat better off people of color thanks to racism.

It is that one-up that renders the potency of certain prejudices less threatening than others. It is what makes cracker or honky less problematic than any of the slurs used so commonly against the black and brown.

In response to all this, skeptics might say that people of color can indeed exercise power over whites, at least by way of racially-motivated violence. Such was the case, for example, this week in New York City where a black man shot two whites and one Asian-Pacific Islander before being overpowered. Apparently he announced that he wanted to kill white people, and had hoped to set a wine bar on fire to bring such a goal to fruition.

There is no doubt his act was one of racial bigotry, and that to those he was attempting to murder his power must have seemed quite real. Yet there are problems with claiming that this “power” proves racism from people of color is just as bad as the reverse.

First, racial violence is also a power whites have, so the power that might obtain in such a situation is hardly unique to non-whites, unlike the power to deny a bank loan for racial reasons, to "steer" certain homebuyers away from living in “nicer" neighborhoods, or to racially profile in terms of policing. Those are powers that can only be exercised by the more dominant group as a practical and systemic matter.

Additionally, the "power" of violence is not really power at all, since to exercise it, one has to break the law and subject themselves to probable legal sanction.

Power is much more potent when it can be deployed without having to break the law to do it, or when doing it would only risk a small civil penalty at worst. So discrimination in lending, though illegal is not going to result in the perp going to jail; so too with employment discrimination or racial profiling.

There are plenty of ways that more powerful groups can deploy racism against less powerful groups without having to break the law: by moving away when too many of "them" move in (which one can only do if one has the option of moving without having to worry about discrimination in housing.)

Or one can discriminate in employment but not be subjected to penalty, so long as one makes the claim that the applicant of color was "less qualified," even though that determination is wholly subjective and rarely scrutinized to see if it was determined accurately, as opposed to being a mere proxy for racial bias. In short, it is institutional power that matters most.

Likewise, it’s the difference in power and position that has made recent attempts by American Indian activists in Colorado to turn the tables on white racists so utterly ineffective.

Indian students at Northern Colorado University, fed up by the unwillingness of white school district administrators in Greeley to change the name and grotesque Indian caricature of the Eaton High School “Reds,” recently set out to flip the script on the common practice of mascot-oriented racism.

Thinking they would show white folks what it’s like to “be in their shoes” and experience the objectification of being a team icon, indigenous members of an intramural basketball team renamed themselves the “Fightin’ Whiteys,” and donned t-shirts with the team mascot: a 1950’s-style caricature of a suburban, middle class white guy, next to the phrase “every thang’s gonna be all white.”

Funny though the effort was, it has not only failed to make the point intended, but indeed has been met with laughter and even outright support by white folks. Rush Limbaugh actually advertised for the team’s t-shirts on his radio program, and whites from coast to coast have been requesting team gear, thinking it funny to be turned into a mascot, as opposed to demeaning.

Of course the difference is that it’s tough to negatively objectify a group whose power and position allows them to define the meaning of another group’s attempts at humor: in this case the attempt by Indians to teach them a lesson. It’s tough to school the headmaster, in other words.

Objectification works against the disempowered because they are disempowered. The process doesn’t work in reverse, or at least, making it work is a lot tougher than one might think.

Turning Indians into mascots has been offensive precisely because it is a continuation of the dehumanization of such persons over many centuries; the perpetuation of the mentality of colonization and conquest.

It is not as if one group—whites—merely chose to turn another group—Indians—into mascots. Rather, it is that one group, whites, have consistently viewed Indians as less than fully human, as savage, as “wild,” and have been able to not merely portray such imagery on athletic banners and uniforms, but in history books and literature more crucially.

In the case of the students at Northern, they would need to be a lot more acerbic in their appraisal of whites, in order for their attempts at “reverse racism” to make the point intended. After all, “fightin” is not a negative trait in the eyes of most white folks, and the 1950’s iconography chosen for the uniforms was unlikely to be seen as that big a deal.

Perhaps if they had settled on “slave-owning whiteys,” or “murdering whiteys,” or “land-stealing whiteys,” or “smallpox-giving-on-purpose whiteys,” or “Native-people-butchering whiteys,” or “mass raping whiteys,” the point would have been made.

And instead of a smiling “company man” logo, perhaps a Klansman, or skinhead as representative of the white race: now that would have been a nice functional equivalent of the screaming Indian warrior. But see, you gotta go strong to turn the tables on the man, and ironic sarcasm just ain’t gonna get it nine times out of ten.

Without the power to define another group’s reality, Indian activists are simply incapable of turning the tables by way of well-placed humor.

Simply put, what separates white racism from any other form, and what makes anti-black, anti-brown, anti-yellow, or anti-red humor more biting and more dangerous than its anti-white equivalent is the ability of the former to become lodged in the minds of and perceptions of the citizenry.

White perceptions are what end up counting in a white-dominated society. If whites say Indians are savages (be they of the “noble” or vicious type), then by God, they’ll be seen as savages. If Indians say whites are mayonnaise-eating Amway salespeople, who the hell is going to care? If anything, whites will simply turn it into a marketing opportunity. When you have the power, you can afford to be self-deprecating, after all.

The day that someone produces a newspaper ad that reads: “Twenty honkies for sale today: good condition, best offer accepted,” or “Cracker to be lynched tonight: whistled at black woman,” then perhaps I’ll see the equivalence of these slurs with the more common type to which we’ve grown accustomed.

When white churches start getting burned down by militant blacks who spray paint “kill the honkies” on the sidewalks outside, then maybe I’ll take seriously these concerns over “reverse racism.”

Until then, I guess I’ll find myself laughing at the thought of another old Saturday Night Live skit: this time with Garrett Morris as a convict in the prison talent show who sings:

Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see. Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see. And once I kill all the whiteys I see Then whitey he won’t bother me Gonna get me a shotgun and kill all the whiteys I see.

Sorry, but it just isn’t the same.

Tim Wise is an anti-racist essayist, activist and lecturer. He can be reached at timjwise@msn.com  

Whites are the new blacks? Really? Really? One affirmative action job or two and your world is going to hell right? You poor people, all this "suffering" and "hardship" you are going through. The following information just  "proves" how things have turned against whites.

80% of middle, upper, and executive level corporate postions are still helps by white professionals.

According to the wall street journal a white man with a FELONY record and a High School diploma has a 64% better chance of being hired or called back for a second job interview than a black man with a college degree and no criminal record.Black boys are placed in special ed classes at the ratio of 3 to 1 over white boys which gave the white young men more liberty to shoot up their schools.

Blacks are turned down at 3 times the rate vs white borrowers for loans (home and business) with the same credit history and annual income.According to the Small Bussiness Association 85% of women owned small business are owned by white women with average receipts of $175,000 only 8% are owned by black women with averge annual reciepts of $41,000.

All this "overwheming"  evidence just proves how bad whites have it in america. Your suffering is so apparent. I weep for you.

On a serious note, whites could not survive a day in the trenches of real racial injustice and discrimination, they would either resort to shooting up post offices,high schools, former places of employent or jumping out of windows to their deaths. I watched a program where a young white man decided to participate in an expereiment where his skin was medically darkened and he would live his life as a black man for a month. He quit after a week; he could not deal with the mistreatment by people and the harrassment by the police.
When white people have suffered  "lynched from trees, cross burning, jim crow segregation type" discrimination then complain about your so-called suffering. until then an occasional "lost" job to affrimative action or bathroom wall type sentiment (as displayed in the photo above) does not equate to the injuctices blacks continue to suffer to this day in the 21st century. Until then go have a starbucks, review your 401 k and call it a day.

Listen Tina, whites have been slaves for thousands of years.  I am sure you know that.  In recent history the mistreatment of the Irish comes to mind, and they seem to have been able to do alright.  You can make as many excuses as you want, but there is a problem with black culture that can't be fixed by the tiny violin that you play every day as you weep for the black plight.  

Japan has around 128 million people. They are 98.5% Japanese. Sure there are some "guest workers". But when they get shipped out there is little dissent from the international community. If a white country closes the border they scream bloody murder.

Just because a liberal think tank puts up a website saying Japan should let in Non Japanese. That doesn't mean Japan will do so. They are hardly facing pressure. This website and the groups attached go back quite a ways. They do not appear to be making a dent into Japan.

There is a big difference between a few Korean workers being allowed to live in certain buildings in Tokyo. And what you will read below happening in California. Again this type of "forced integration" is for all White countries and ONLY White Countries.

Obama administration: California’s whitest county MUST BE FORCIBLY INTEGRATED.
http://cofcc.org/2011/03/obama...

Non White countries do routinely have guest workers and such. However, they do so at their own leisure. No White Country has ever been allowed a vote on this subject.

By the way, China has tried to force immigration (and integration of groups like Tibetan Nomads) into Tibet. This has routinely been labeled Ethnic Cleansing and Genocide by the UN. You will never hear a peep about the above clear and consistent Targeting of White Children.

Forced immigration into all white countries and only white countries (anywhere else is labeled genocide)

Forced integration in all white countries and only white countries (anywhere else is labeled genocide)

Then they push interracial relationships in all white countries and only white countries .......hmmmmm....there is a pattern emerging here

then they promote a Brown future for ALL White Countries...hmmmm

.......SURE is difficult to see how the word Genocide applies here

Antiwhite:"there are no such thing as white children"
ProWhite:"Of course not! In your visions of the future, you have killed them all".

Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

Anti-whites like to say, White people deserve to have their countries taken over by non-whites, because whites invaded colored lands.

“So they’re admitting to genocide and they’re justifying genocide.”

Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

- Define "white".

Me. I am white.
Native / indigenous European
A native European like me.
Define Native American.

– What is a "white" country?

A country founded by Native Europeans.
A country you anti-whites insist needs diversity.

 Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

Drug dealers don't respect the law.
Pedophiles don't respect the law.
Rapists don't respect the law.
Murderers don't respect the law.
Anti-Whites don't respect the UN Genocide Law.
All crime is a matter of personal choice.

As an anti-white, do you think White GeNOcide is a matter of personal choice?

How to identify if someone is anti-white and is inciting white genocide:

1) they deny there is such a thing as white people or white countries.

2) they scream about how evil white people are.

3) they justify white genocide using one of a thousand different reasons.

4) they wish for white genocide/celebrate it.

5) they say pro whites should not be allowed to speak, because we are "evil".

A “white” country is any country, anti-whites >insist< has an obligation, to import huge numbers of third world immigrants.

No one is flooding Africa, Asia, India or the Middle East, with millions of people that are not their race and telling anyone that objects, they are a nazithatwantstokillsixmillionjews.

Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

White leaders, representing white interests, are called naziswhiowanttokillsixmillionjews.

Non-white leaders, representing non-white interests, are celebrated and are well paid by the establishment.

Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

Asia for the Asians
Africa for the Africans.
White countries for everybody.

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are more crowded than Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and "assimilating" with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to "assimilate," i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I'm not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?"

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn't object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for Anti-White

"African-American studies" celebrates blacks

"Asian-American studies" celebrates asians

"Chicano studies" celebrates hispanics

"Whiteness studies" denies that white people even EXIST, and that these white people (who don't exist) have unearned "white privilege"

Who are they kidding? "Anti-racism" is just a code word for anti-WHITE

But anyone can be guilty of racism.

White people aren't the "new black people", it is finally just starting to sink into some folks brains that others ethnic groups are just as racist.

Articles like these (and especially comment threads like these) always do a terrific job of proving how incredibly ignorant most people are about what the term "racism" means.  It has nothing to do with someone calling someone a name--it's a power & control play when a race that holds all the cards demeans a race that doesn't, whether via economic means or degradation of their character.

Say what you want people, but the vast majority of money & power in this country belongs to white males.  To say that group is a victim of "racism" is not only wildly incorrect, but downright laughable.

You seem to have mistaken economic well being to not being a victim of racism.  They are not the same.

No, you seem to have mistaken "racism" for "prejudice".  Racism is about power and control, economics is simply one of the ways such things can be exerted, an especially powerful one in a capitalist society.

Racism implies not only a dislike of another race, but an ability to disenfranchise them because of their race.  To think that any minority race in this country is limiting the power of white people is absurd.  The only thing limiting white people is white people.

Blacks can succeed when and if they want to (look at Oprah's $300 million/year and our President).   In fact, many would argue that certain minorities (Hispanics and Blacks) are being offered opportunities that whites equally capable whites aren't.  For example, on the admissions to medical school there is a little box in the upper corner labled "URM." Under Represented Minority, and it means they get preferential admission status.  But, guess what?  Guess which minorities (which makes up a much smaller percentage of the population) doesn't get to check that box.  Asians and Indians. 

I guess just because you are a minority isn't an excuse for poor performance for some races. 

What's your excuse?