reparations & exploitation

[kelley]

At 02:20 PM 3/9/01 -0500, Doug Henwood wrote:
>kelley wrote:
>
>>i don't think anyone here doesn't believe that!  what is at issue isn't 
>>that!  what is at issue is whether you can say that white workers benefit 
>>from racism by calling that exploitation.   does the woman who hires a 
>>housekeeper exploit that housekeeper?  does the couple who buys all the 
>>meals preprepared and eat off disposable dishes exploit the people who 
>>make the disposable tableware and the food they eat?  does the dot.com 
>>worker or lawyer exploit the physician's assistant who checks out his 
>>strep throat and prescribes antibiotics?
>
>I thought you said we were talking about groups, not individuals. The 
>woman who hires a housekeeper is highly likely to be white and 
>professional/managerial; the housekeeper is highly likely to be a recent 
>immigrant, and quite possibly an illegal one. The former group enjoys 
>certain social benefits at the partial expense of the latter group. I 
>don't know how that would fit into a SV model, but it sure smells like 
>exploitation to me.

heh heh heh. sure smells like male privilege to me when a man prattling on 
about groups oppressing and exploiting other groups can't wrap his head 
around the groups identified in the first two sentences.

gotcha!