I think the argument goes something like: if racial groups and socioeconomic outcomes are correlated due to previous inequalities, and social mobility is limited, then doing nothing further entrenches the inequalities.
Then discriminate on the socioeconomic inequalities. A poor white person and a poor black person should get aid. Obama’s daughter (black, but rich and powerful) doesn’t need any aid or discrimination in her favor.
Discriminating on the basis of race for these programs is so stupid. Ask why and people say “because socioeconomic status”, but then why don’t you discriminate on that? I think people know this but it’s a political move (black people vote for democrats for the vast majority, so making it means tested instead wouldn’t be popular with them).
I disagree that poor whites are specifically against welfare because they think it helps black people more. That’s just another way of saying they are all racist.
Ive grown up around poor whites and dislike for welfare among them was pretty much always a dislike of government generally, and the perception that welfare makes people lazy (often because they knew other poor people who would take advantage of welfare. One of whom got their kids taken away because they couldn’t financially support them, were told they could get them back if they could hit some financial milestones, then proceeded to use their tax return to buy a used mustang).
But isn't that really the issue at hand? You have different data points from the person you replied to. That means that you are both correct, for some subset of people. But do your data points generalize to the larger population, or does the other person's?
I don't think these conversations need to devolve. Where are the large-scale studies that show that your data point is the one that's the most common? I'm willing to believe that it is, but everyone seems to just prefer to assume their data point is the one we should be acting upon.
The problem is you have people who have anecdotal experience that says whites don’t act in racist ways. I have a bunch of data that I could drop here (100s of sources that say otherwise). I’ve seen these debates online before and I’ve never seen a single opinion changed.
The problem is the things being challenged for many (of not most or virtually all) people is their identity and morality. Not simply an experiment about if blueberries have more antioxidants than blackberries. Data and evidence simply don’t matter in these sorts of discussions. And that’s why they tend to devolve quickly.
Of course there are whites that act in racist ways, but it is a very significant accusation that all white act in racist ways, are driven by racist motives, or even that a significant fraction of whites are (poor whites).
When you make such a significant claim denigrating an entire people, you better have evidence. For example, in recent studies I’ve seen, whites have the LEAST in group bias (bias towards their own race), and blacks have the most BY FAR. Whites were the only group that even showed net out group bias (white liberals). At a glance, that suggests to me that whites are the least likely to be racist across the board, often to the point of racism towards their own race.
