6 ms·

The title of this article is pretty offensive. I don’t want to read it. Is there some context that makes the racial slur appropriate here? Or we allow it bec

The title of this article is pretty offensive. I don’t want to read it. Is there some context that makes the racial slur appropriate here? Or we allow it because racism against white people is in vogue?

TurkishPoptart 4y ago
I agree that it is offensive. He's an elite, based on his education. And I guess he was high-IQ, too. He's probably Jewish, too, and history tells us that (some, not all) Jewish people have only been considered "white" until recently. Lesson: race is relative, and this author of the article is race-baiting for clicks.
- klyrs 4y ago
  Italian American here, my mom wasn't considered "white" until she was an adult. That was then, I'm white now. Did you read the article? I'm not sure it counts as "baiting for clicks" when he spends half of the article talking about the history and structure of the American caste system and how SBF's (perceived) status as a white male impacted his trajectory. I don't think it's bait, when it's the thrust of the essay.
  - richbell 4y ago
    > how SBF's (perceived) status as a white male impacted his trajectory. I don't think it's bait, when it's the thrust of the essay. It's provocative and dishonest for him to not once acknowledge SBF's privileged circumstances or well-connected family, something which directly aided in his success and that the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to replicate. The post is generally well-written and makes some salient points, but it's obvious that the author shoe-horned in SBF. A different person, like the topically relevant Elizabeth Holmes, may have made a more cohesive argument. > It's still clearly provocative to suggest Bankman-Fried's Stanford educated, genuinely "privileged" upbringing as the son of well known Stanford professors is somehow reflective of hundreds of millions of people rather than his own circumstances. Doing something for clickbait doesn't somehow make it not provocative. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33662014 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33662014
    - klyrs 4y ago
      What? The article talks specifically about his upper-crust background and his professor parents. You're the one laser-focused on race here. You got triggered by the headline, and you missed the forest for the trees.
      - richbell 4y ago
        > What? The article talks specifically about his upper-crust background and his professor parents. It vaguely alludes to his parents being upper-class Stanford law professors. It does not specifically talk about SBF's father being an influential law professor and scholar[0], SBF's mother leading a powerful democratic PAC[1], SBF's brother having worked on Capitol Hill and the "Democratic Party-aligned consulting firm Civis Analytics"[2][3] — let alone Caroline Ellison's alleged family connections. I am not insinuating that there's a grand conspiracy theory — this should all be taken with a grain of salt — my point is that SBF's unique personal circumstances gave him access to capital and connections in government and industry that were pivotal to his success. It would be like saying that the disgraced "DreamWorld" project was able to scam thousands of people and receive funding from Y Combinator because the founder was an upper-class white male; there's obviously a grain of truth in that statement, but it's a dishonest portrayal of events because it does not mention that his co-founder was friends with someone at Y Combinator and that perceived endorsement was what lead so many people to trust the project. [0] https://twitter.com/JagoeCapital/status/1590805884556673024/photo/1 https://twitter.com/JagoeCapital/status/1590805884556673024/... [1] https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/1/6/21046631/mind-the-gap-silicon-valley-democratic-donors-stanford https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/1/6/21046631/mind-the-gap-si... [2] https://archive.ph/GndX4 https://archive.ph/GndX4 [3] https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/guarding-against-pandemics/ https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/guarding-against-p... > You're the one laser-focused on race here. You got triggered by the headline, and you missed the forest for the trees. I did not get "triggered by the headline", I read the entire article and pointed out that it fails to acknowledge SBF's personal privilege and family connections because the author was dead-set on writing an article about race and needed an archetype — he literally admits to this in the article. ) I have been itching to write this essay for some time, but lacked a foil and context to make it relevant to my readers. As I've said in another comment it's a worthwhile read, but his explanation of why SBF was able to dupe so many people falls a bit flat.
klyrs 4y ago
I missed the memo, is "white" a slur now?
- richbell 4y ago
  The title is saying "white boy" not that he's white and a boy. "White boy" can be a derogatory term.
  - klyrs 4y ago
    I see what you mean > In Pax Americana, it is verboten to suggest that the caste system is alive and well.
    - richbell 4y ago
      > In Pax Americana, it is verboten to suggest that the caste system is alive and well. If you are approaching this essay with that mentality and you aren’t interested in opening your mind, please stop reading here. If you’d prefer to continue believing in the fairytale of American exceptionalism, you can subscribe to the establishment’s whitewashed narrative of the implosion of the Death Star by just picking up a copy of the New York Times. I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with that quote; I am not American, nor do I believe in American exceptionalism. I also don't think that SBF is a “well-meaning wunderkind [who] tried to do too much good at once”, but that doesn't mean I agree with the article.
      - klyrs 4y ago
        If you're not American, I can see why you wouldn't understand the cultural context that the article, and my response above, presumes intimate knowledge of. If you're curious, you could read Zinn's A People's History of the United States which is a pretty good primer.
        richbell 4y ago
        > If you're not American, I can see why you wouldn't understand the cultural context that the article, and my response above, presumes intimate knowledge of. Where did I indicate that I didn't understand it? I have American family and friends. I simply pointed out why calling someone a "White Boy" could be considered inflammatory, and you responded with a non-sequitor implying that I'm trying to ignore America's problems.
PhasmaFelis 4y ago
Are you saying that white boy is a racial slur? As a white boy, this is pretty funny to me.
moistly 4y ago
- leereeves 4y ago
  Not nearly so tiresome as people assuming white=privileged. Being white doesn't mean you know what every white person experiences.
  - hackerlight 4y ago
    Let me try to bridge the gap as someone who used to find it offensive but no longer does. When people complain about "whiteness", they're talking about the social construct of the racial majority in the US and how this prevents certain disadvantages from being conferred on the individual based on that individual's race. The lack of race-based disadvantage is labelled "privilege". It's a shame that such divisive terms like "whiteness" were chosen, because the phenomenon is broader than a specific skin color. Han Chinese in China also benefit from their version of "whiteness", with Uyghurs and other minorities being disadvantaged. But they aren't white. Same with Jews in Israel, Turks in Turkey, and so on. There is undeniably an advantage (privilege) to bring a Turk in Turkey and not a Kurd. If you're part of the racial majority, there can be an empathy gap that leads you to not see the disadvantages that certain minorities face. So then any claims that you have privilege (defined as the absence of race-based disadvantaged) seem farfetched if not malicious and racist. But it isn't racism, it's a sociological explanation of cause and effect. Now, many people go to far and do actually turn it into clear cut anti-white racism. I really don't think that was what Arthur Hayes was going for, though. He was aiming for a sociological explanation of SBF's rise. Which, in those case, I happen to believe was rather flimsy and unsupported by evidence.
    - leereeves 4y ago
      > There is undeniably an advantage (privilege) to bring a Turk in Turkey and not a Kurd. Certainly. And there was undeniably an advantage to being white in America fifty years ago (and even twenty, probably). But we now live in a nation where the stated policy of many institutions is to favor non-whites. And in California, non-Hispanic whites aren't even the largest ethnic group. The assumption that white people have never experienced "race-based disadvantage" seems to be likewise rather flimsy and unsupported by evidence. As for SBF, I suspect that being wealthy and well-connected was far more helpful than being white. Indeed, if he had been black or Hispanic, he would have been celebrated for that reason alone, whereas, as we see in this article, being white is cause for opposition.

TurkishPoptart 4y ago

I agree that it is offensive. He's an elite, based on his education. And I guess he was high-IQ, too. He's probably Jewish, too, and history tells us that (some, not all) Jewish people have only been considered "white" until recently. Lesson: race is relative, and this author of the article is race-baiting for clicks.

klyrs 4y ago
Italian American here, my mom wasn't considered "white" until she was an adult. That was then, I'm white now. Did you read the article? I'm not sure it counts as "baiting for clicks" when he spends half of the article talking about the history and structure of the American caste system and how SBF's (perceived) status as a white male impacted his trajectory. I don't think it's bait, when it's the thrust of the essay.
- richbell 4y ago
  > how SBF's (perceived) status as a white male impacted his trajectory. I don't think it's bait, when it's the thrust of the essay. It's provocative and dishonest for him to not once acknowledge SBF's privileged circumstances or well-connected family, something which directly aided in his success and that the vast majority of people wouldn't be able to replicate. The post is generally well-written and makes some salient points, but it's obvious that the author shoe-horned in SBF. A different person, like the topically relevant Elizabeth Holmes, may have made a more cohesive argument. > It's still clearly provocative to suggest Bankman-Fried's Stanford educated, genuinely "privileged" upbringing as the son of well known Stanford professors is somehow reflective of hundreds of millions of people rather than his own circumstances. Doing something for clickbait doesn't somehow make it not provocative. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33662014 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33662014
  - klyrs 4y ago
    What? The article talks specifically about his upper-crust background and his professor parents. You're the one laser-focused on race here. You got triggered by the headline, and you missed the forest for the trees.
    - richbell 4y ago
      > What? The article talks specifically about his upper-crust background and his professor parents. It vaguely alludes to his parents being upper-class Stanford law professors. It does not specifically talk about SBF's father being an influential law professor and scholar[0], SBF's mother leading a powerful democratic PAC[1], SBF's brother having worked on Capitol Hill and the "Democratic Party-aligned consulting firm Civis Analytics"[2][3] — let alone Caroline Ellison's alleged family connections. I am not insinuating that there's a grand conspiracy theory — this should all be taken with a grain of salt — my point is that SBF's unique personal circumstances gave him access to capital and connections in government and industry that were pivotal to his success. It would be like saying that the disgraced "DreamWorld" project was able to scam thousands of people and receive funding from Y Combinator because the founder was an upper-class white male; there's obviously a grain of truth in that statement, but it's a dishonest portrayal of events because it does not mention that his co-founder was friends with someone at Y Combinator and that perceived endorsement was what lead so many people to trust the project. [0] https://twitter.com/JagoeCapital/status/1590805884556673024/photo/1 https://twitter.com/JagoeCapital/status/1590805884556673024/... [1] https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/1/6/21046631/mind-the-gap-silicon-valley-democratic-donors-stanford https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/1/6/21046631/mind-the-gap-si... [2] https://archive.ph/GndX4 https://archive.ph/GndX4 [3] https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/guarding-against-pandemics/ https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/guarding-against-p... > You're the one laser-focused on race here. You got triggered by the headline, and you missed the forest for the trees. I did not get "triggered by the headline", I read the entire article and pointed out that it fails to acknowledge SBF's personal privilege and family connections because the author was dead-set on writing an article about race and needed an archetype — he literally admits to this in the article. ) I have been itching to write this essay for some time, but lacked a foil and context to make it relevant to my readers. As I've said in another comment it's a worthwhile read, but his explanation of why SBF was able to dupe so many people falls a bit flat.

klyrs 4y ago

I missed the memo, is "white" a slur now?

richbell 4y ago
The title is saying "white boy" not that he's white and a boy. "White boy" can be a derogatory term.
- klyrs 4y ago
  I see what you mean > In Pax Americana, it is verboten to suggest that the caste system is alive and well.
  - richbell 4y ago
    > In Pax Americana, it is verboten to suggest that the caste system is alive and well. If you are approaching this essay with that mentality and you aren’t interested in opening your mind, please stop reading here. If you’d prefer to continue believing in the fairytale of American exceptionalism, you can subscribe to the establishment’s whitewashed narrative of the implosion of the Death Star by just picking up a copy of the New York Times. I'm not sure what you're trying to imply with that quote; I am not American, nor do I believe in American exceptionalism. I also don't think that SBF is a “well-meaning wunderkind [who] tried to do too much good at once”, but that doesn't mean I agree with the article.
    - klyrs 4y ago
      If you're not American, I can see why you wouldn't understand the cultural context that the article, and my response above, presumes intimate knowledge of. If you're curious, you could read Zinn's A People's History of the United States which is a pretty good primer.
      - richbell 4y ago
        > If you're not American, I can see why you wouldn't understand the cultural context that the article, and my response above, presumes intimate knowledge of. Where did I indicate that I didn't understand it? I have American family and friends. I simply pointed out why calling someone a "White Boy" could be considered inflammatory, and you responded with a non-sequitor implying that I'm trying to ignore America's problems.

PhasmaFelis 4y ago

Are you saying that white boy is a racial slur? As a white boy, this is pretty funny to me.

moistly 4y ago

leereeves 4y ago
Not nearly so tiresome as people assuming white=privileged. Being white doesn't mean you know what every white person experiences.
- hackerlight 4y ago
  Let me try to bridge the gap as someone who used to find it offensive but no longer does. When people complain about "whiteness", they're talking about the social construct of the racial majority in the US and how this prevents certain disadvantages from being conferred on the individual based on that individual's race. The lack of race-based disadvantage is labelled "privilege". It's a shame that such divisive terms like "whiteness" were chosen, because the phenomenon is broader than a specific skin color. Han Chinese in China also benefit from their version of "whiteness", with Uyghurs and other minorities being disadvantaged. But they aren't white. Same with Jews in Israel, Turks in Turkey, and so on. There is undeniably an advantage (privilege) to bring a Turk in Turkey and not a Kurd. If you're part of the racial majority, there can be an empathy gap that leads you to not see the disadvantages that certain minorities face. So then any claims that you have privilege (defined as the absence of race-based disadvantaged) seem farfetched if not malicious and racist. But it isn't racism, it's a sociological explanation of cause and effect. Now, many people go to far and do actually turn it into clear cut anti-white racism. I really don't think that was what Arthur Hayes was going for, though. He was aiming for a sociological explanation of SBF's rise. Which, in those case, I happen to believe was rather flimsy and unsupported by evidence.
  - leereeves 4y ago
    > There is undeniably an advantage (privilege) to bring a Turk in Turkey and not a Kurd. Certainly. And there was undeniably an advantage to being white in America fifty years ago (and even twenty, probably). But we now live in a nation where the stated policy of many institutions is to favor non-whites. And in California, non-Hispanic whites aren't even the largest ethnic group. The assumption that white people have never experienced "race-based disadvantage" seems to be likewise rather flimsy and unsupported by evidence. As for SBF, I suspect that being wealthy and well-connected was far more helpful than being white. Indeed, if he had been black or Hispanic, he would have been celebrated for that reason alone, whereas, as we see in this article, being white is cause for opposition.