Is the Concept of and Messaging Regarding "White Privilege" Useful/Working?

[Mithrae]

That said, we appear to have reached, if not a turning point, at least an inflection point in terms of public willingness to do something about race. So some may say that the recent focus on "white privilege" is achieving its goal. Maybe the only solution to get white people to act is to make them feel like less than innocent bystanders?

I would guess that more important factors include
> the ugliness and obviousness of the responses to America's first black president, notably the 'birther' movement begun by Clinton's campaign and carried forward by Trump and Republicans
> increasing prevalence of camera phones recording incidents of racism or police brutality
> social media forcing attention towards issues which more people consider important, where previously major news outlets may have under-reported some stories and over-reported others relative to actual public interest
> the ugliness of Trump's presidential campaign and the shock that he was actually elected
> widespread zealous defense of any and every Jim Crow era statue to Confederate slavers and traitors

I doubt that the term "white privilege" has caused many people to realize that widespread racism remains an issue or caused them to decide to "do something" about it; if anything I'd suspect that most white people's instinctive reaction to hearing the term would be defensive, a hard sell for liberals and a solid propaganda point for the white-victimhood conservative narrative. What has caused more people over the past decade or so to realize that racism remains an issue is how much more obvious and widespread it's being seen as compared to before.

The actual problem is not "white privilege"--it is black disadvantage, and in some cases exclusion from the privileges that all Americans should share.

As I understand it 'white privilege' started out as a term used purely in academic circles going back to the 1960s, so inevitably there's going to be something lost in the translation into popular usage - sometimes intentionally so. I'd say that it's not a very helpful term in popular usage for several reasons:
> Most obviously the potential for misunderstanding, white folk from poor backgrounds indignantly (and correctly) insisting that they were not privileged in any usual sense of the term
> As you've noted, the actual problem in society is not the privilege of white people but the unacceptable hindrances against others, particularly black people
> Possibly most important in my opinion, it not only misdirects the focus of attention (toward 'privilege' rather than hindrances or injustices) but misdirects the ultimate source or nature of those injustices as being fundamentally racial or based in bigotry, rather than fundamentally economic using race and bigotry as tools. As Lyndon Johnson once said, "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

A historically elite group in any society will obviously want to remain elite, to ensure that their children and grandchildren would remain elite too, and usually that the country would continue to be predominantly influenced by people whose worldviews would with some consistency be similar to their own. In America that group was wealthy white Protestant men; so whatever influence they've had over the country's laws, banks, media and other institutions - which is obviously substantial - therefore skewed them to varying degrees in different periods against non-landowners, and against poorer and working class folk, and against women, and against non-Protestants and non-Christians, and against Irish and Italian and Greek and Jewish waves of immigration... and especially against those who are most strikingly ethnically distinct by the colour of their skin, and a generally poorer former slave class, and owners of distinctive sub-culture as a result of those historical circumstances.

People in general tend to be prone to tribalist tendencies over religion, nationality, political parties and obviously ethnicity. But the way in which those tendencies are shaped and exploited - until very recently mostly favouring the 'respectable' gentlemen, the wealthy people, the white people, the Christian people, the cis hetero male people - can be attributed largely to the disproportionate influence in government, society and media of wealthy white 'Christian' males who've obviously wanted themselves, their heirs and people who think like them to be favoured. There's a lot to be said about the history and current implications of the concept of 'white' identity, but as far as 'privilege' goes it merely happens to be one of the few ways in which the field is not stacked against the majority of non-elite folk.

 

[Cameron]

You have articulated very well the main problem I have with the concept. The problem in our society is not that most people don't suffer racial prejudice, the problem is that some people do. It's the prejudice that's abnormal and needs fixing, not the lack of it.

Very succinctly put, thank you. I'd only add that being blind to how life is different for various groups is also part of the problem.

 

[Phys251]

I'm not sure why you think I'm being defensive. If you would like to quote what I'm missing rather than making me guess and accusing me of being defensive about it, I'm happy to discuss further.

Second time: Your "concerns" are literally covered in the article. You simply don't want to read it.

You are not going to get one inch with me on this issue until you can at least prove that you've read the thing and its follow-up.

 

[jnug]

You folks should rename this the word salad thread. Thousands of keystrokes of mumbo-jumbo and whitewashing (pardon the pun). For once I can report that there is no false equivalency between the Left and the Right in this thread. There are equal amounts of blather from both sides.

 

[Cameron]

I dont know what the concept and messaging of white privilege is so I dont know

but from my experience, the majority of people I know understand and know what it is

what it isn't and its a common mistake for those confused is a fault or something to be blamed on every individual. Thats where those that don't know or fully understand it make their mistake and its the mistake you made above in the bolded areas. I don't know where that common misinformation and defensive comes from with people that don't know or understand this relatively easy issue IMO but it is common but the bolded things have nothing to do with white privilege. no biggie though, we all can learn.

I just want to make sure I'm on the same page as you. You're saying that you don't think that when people talk about white privilege, there is generally a negative connotation or accusation tied to it? I acknowledge it does vary sometimes. Some people talk about it only in the sense that, yes, white people have it easier. But I also feel like it's frequently discussed as a problem in and of itself.

 

[Cameron]

Second time: Your "concerns" are literally covered in the article. You simply don't want to read it.

You are not going to get one inch with me on this issue until you can at least prove that you've read the thing and its follow-up.

I've read the article carefully twice in an attempt to continue this discussion, which leads me to believe that we are talking past each other and we are not on the same page about the point I'm making. Either that or you are not approaching this in good faith, but I generally think you are a good poster and I'm not going to assume that. But I don't know how to move forward if you are not willing to work with me.

I didn't see anything in the article I disagree with.

 

[Phys251]

I've read the article carefully twice in an attempt to continue this discussion, which leads me to believe that we are talking past each other and we are not on the same page about the point I'm making. Either that or you are not approaching this in good faith, but I generally think you are a good poster and I'm not going to assume that. But I don't know how to move forward if you are not willing to work with me.

It's hard not to laugh at that when you keep telegraphing that you don't want to listen to what Scalzi said. He literally, directly, that he's "been thinking of a way to explain to straight white men how life works for them, without invoking the dreaded word 'privilege,' to which they react like vampires being fed a garlic tart at high noon."

Literally, directly, addressed your point. It is neither my fault nor his that you refuse to grasp it.

 

[Cameron]

You folks should rename this the word salad thread. Thousands of keystrokes of mumbo-jumbo and whitewashing (pardon the pun). For once I can report that there is no false equivalency between the Left and the Right in this thread. There are equal amounts of blather from both sides.

Haven't you just described all of Debatepolitics?

 

[Cameron]

It's hard not to laugh at that when you keep telegraphing that you don't want to listen to what Scalzi said. He literally, directly, that he's "been thinking of a way to explain to straight white men how life works for them, without invoking the dreaded word 'privilege,' to which they react like vampires being fed a garlic tart at high noon."

Literally, directly, addressed your point. It is neither my fault nor his that you refuse to grasp it.

I already understand what white privilege is, and I don't need anyone to call it something different to understand it. My point is that I don't see the fact that white people aren't discriminated against as a problem. The problem is that many white people seem unable to relate to people who are, or have been, discriminated against. Scalzi's article is a clever way of helping those people relate.

 

[Phys251]

I already understand what white privilege is, and I don't need anyone to call it something different to understand it. My point is that I don't see the fact that white people aren't discriminated against as a problem. The problem is that many white people seem unable to relate to people who are, or have been, discriminated against. Scalzi's article is a clever way of helping those people relate.

Maybe. Whites commonly choose to mishear "white privilege" as "privileged whites," when it never makes such a claim. Privilege is relative, and on multiple spectra: All other factors equal, a Black person is likely to have it harder than a white person in a given situation.

You are right about the empathy gap and white people's unwillingness to get out of their own heads. Incidentally that's what set off a red flag about your responses, cause I've been down this road way too many times to not notice a derailing of a conversation about race.

 

[AGENT J]

1.) I just want to make sure I'm on the same page as you
2.) You're saying that you don't think that when people talk about white privilege, there is generally a negative connotation or accusation tied to it? I acknowledge it does vary sometimes.
3.) Some people talk about it only in the sense that, yes, white people have it easier. But I also feel like it's frequently discussed as a problem in and of itself.

1.) no problem
2.) No I've never gotten that from anybody that understands it and knows what it is. Why would there be that wouldn't make sense.
Now people who dont know what it is, yes I've seen them get very defensive and feel attacked but thats their issue to learn about and overcome.
3.) See already even that statement isn't what white privilege is so much or true, and well its existence IS a problem in society among our many but not in the sense of all those previously bolded items.

White privilege is simply the reality that our society, in general, is geared towards white people . . thats it really. Not the same at all but as far as gearing is concerned just like our society is gear towards right-handed people, abled people, people of an avg height etc etc

These gearings are natural in some ways because its based on the majority, but where it gets tricky and bad is when it takes on whole new levels and bigotry and racism get involved in the pillars of these gearings, increasing them to levels they should never be at and that are NOT natural.

am an example of natural gearing that could happen is bandaids and makeup and wigs . . something so simple but until recently there weren't black bandaids in name brands readily avaoiavble
thats a natural gearing

but gearing based on bigotries are not


I also have male privilege and straight privilege . . I've never felt attacked for those or that its a negative against me or im at fault etc because i understand them, i acknowledge them and I do my best to be conscious and when i can use them to level things for female and nonstraights

 

[Cameron]

Maybe. Whites commonly choose to mishear "white privilege" as "privileged whites," when it never makes such a claim. Privilege is relative, and on multiple spectra: All other factors equal, a Black person is likely to have it harder than a white person in a given situation.

You are right about the empathy gap and white people's unwillingness to get out of their own heads. Incidentally that's what set off a red flag about your responses, cause I've been down this road way too many times to not notice a derailing of a conversation about race.

I get it; I honestly think we were just talking past each other, didn't mean to make things tense or anything (for once).

 

[Phys251]

I get it; I honestly think we were just talking past each other, didn't mean to make things tense or anything (for once).

It's all good. These discussions can get dicey, and even if we mess up (myself included!), it's important to keep having them.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Only idiots deny white privilege so it's doing a great job. It's practically a sign that racists can wear. What more could we ask of a concept than to serve as a sign for racists to hold high and identify themselves for all to see. What better result?

To teach them? Don't make me laugh. Getting them to identify themselves is more than a concept can hope for.

Bravo, concept, bravo.

Plenty of white people have had no hand up. Worked hard through plenty of disadvantages, family problems, low self esteem, economically strapped, and yet they rose above by hard work and persistance and not blaming everything on someone else. Teaching people to be victims is the democrat playbook. Wait, how to they explain the millions of middle class, successful black men and women? Even worse, what about the black millionaires. That just can't be, it defies the democrat playbook. You people who preach white privelege, victimization, systemic racism, never accepting that you are responsible for you and you have to make your breaks a lot of times, everyone does, you aren't helping anyone. Except, you are if you are a politician who makes his money by getting elected by people that he has convinced they are victims and he's going to help them. Of course he usually only helps himself.

 

[eohrnberger]

Those that won't open their eyes are just determined to not see.

But the derangement of one obsession is not just for pitiable televangelists. Freudianism, economics, Marxist theories of history’s inevitable turns, all have become the single-cause explanation of every wicked deed or act. But lately another obsession is taking over our intellectual class. It explains every inequity in our society, and every unjust act. It’s white supremacy.

Jennifer Ho, who has somehow overcome this omnipotent force of oppression to become a professor at the University of Colorado-Boulder, explains that even anti-Asian hatred is rooted in white supremacy, and that white supremacy is to blame for attacks on Asians, even attacks by non-whites.

The point I’ve made through all of those experiences is that anti-Asian racism has the same source as anti-Black racism: white supremacy. So when a Black person attacks an Asian person, the encounter is fueled perhaps by racism, but very specifically by white supremacy. White supremacy does not require a white person to perpetuate it.

A black man attacks an Asian person. Could it be white supremacy? Or the Latino man in Texas accused of stabbing a Burmese family in March 2020, claiming he did so because they were Chinese and bringing the coronavirus into the U.S. Could that be white supremacy? Yes it is.

Ho blames white supremacy for “a nearly 150% surge in anti-Asian hate crimes in 2020,” a figure reported by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. That sounds like an unbelievable wave of hate and violence. But when you look at the numbers, you see why the percentage is cited. In Los Angeles the number of anti-Asian hate crimes reported rose from seven to 15. In New York, from three to 28. In a city where tens of thousands died from COVID-19, made up of millions of people, the number of anti-Asian hate crimes seems relatively small. By contrast, in the previous year, 2019, over 1,000 anti-Semitic incidents were reported in New York City.

Seeing White Supremacy Everywhere | National Review

It explains every inequity in our society and every unjust act.

www.nationalreview.com

Continue on with your leftist induced derangement, if you must, or, alternatively, become better informed. Strictly up to you.

 

[Cameron]

1.) no problem
2.) No I've never gotten that from anybody that understands it and knows what it is. Why would there be that wouldn't make sense.
Now people who dont know what it is, yes I've seen them get very defensive and feel attacked but thats their issue to learn about and overcome.
3.) See already even that statement isn't what white privilege is so much or true, and well its existence IS a problem in society among our many but not in the sense of all those previously bolded items.

White privilege is simply the reality that our society, in general, is geared towards white people . . thats it really. Not the same at all but as far as gearing is concerned just like our society is gear towards right-handed people, abled people, people of an avg height etc etc

These gearings are natural in some ways because its based on the majority, but where it gets tricky and bad is when it takes on whole new levels and bigotry and racism get involved in the pillars of these gearings, increasing them to levels they should never be at and that are NOT natural.

am an example of natural gearing that could happen is bandaids and makeup and wigs . . something so simple but until recently there weren't black bandaids in name brands readily avaoiavble
thats a natural gearing

but gearing based on bigotries are not


I also have male privilege and straight privilege . . I've never felt attacked for those or that its a negative against me or im at fault etc because i understand them, i acknowledge them and I do my best to be conscious and when i can use them to level things for female and nonstraights

I think what happens is someone says something like "black people should obey the law and get married and stop complaining" (to paraphrase an earlier poster) or whatever, and the response is something along the lines of "check your privilege" or, more often, "typical privileged white male." Which makes it sound like it's the "privilege" (or being white/male) that is the problem, and not the gross lack of empathy.

Maybe that's just the result of not thinking critically enough, but lord knows we have a lot of people in this country who don't think critically, and so I feel like there's maybe a better way to talk about it? I'm not trying to be all white victimy here--lol, being called privileged hardly compares to what black people have been called and had to experience over the years. My concern is more about what potentially alienating people could mean, practically, for progress. And I think it's a mistake to act like it's totally unreasonable for white people who are just observing these types of conversations to feel alienated when something like "typical privileged white person" is being bandied around as a dig.

 

[mrjurrs]

​

But the derangement of one obsession is not just for pitiable televangelists. Freudianism, economics, Marxist theories of history’s inevitable turns, all have become the single-cause explanation of every wicked deed or act. But lately another obsession is taking over our intellectual class. It explains every inequity in our society, and every unjust act. It’s white supremacy.​

​

Jennifer Ho, who has somehow overcome this omnipotent force of oppression to become a professor at the University of Colorado-Boulder, explains that even anti-Asian hatred is rooted in white supremacy, and that white supremacy is to blame for attacks on Asians, even attacks by non-whites.​

​

​

A black man attacks an Asian person. Could it be white supremacy? Or the Latino man in Texas accused of stabbing a Burmese family in March 2020, claiming he did so because they were Chinese and bringing the coronavirus into the U.S. Could that be white supremacy? Yes it is.​

​

Ho blames white supremacy for “a nearly 150% surge in anti-Asian hate crimes in 2020,” a figure reported by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. That sounds like an unbelievable wave of hate and violence. But when you look at the numbers, you see why the percentage is cited. In Los Angeles the number of anti-Asian hate crimes reported rose from seven to 15. In New York, from three to 28. In a city where tens of thousands died from COVID-19, made up of millions of people, the number of anti-Asian hate crimes seems relatively small. By contrast, in the previous year, 2019, over 1,000 anti-Semitic incidents were reported in New York City.​

​

Seeing White Supremacy Everywhere | National Review

It explains every inequity in our society and every unjust act.

www.nationalreview.com

​

Continue on with your leftist induced derangement, if you must, or, alternatively, become better informed. Strictly up to you.

Okay, if you stop plagiarizing. When you use someone else's words, give them credit.

 

[Phys251]

Plenty of white people have had no hand up. Worked hard through plenty of disadvantages, family problems, low self esteem, economically strapped, and yet they rose above by hard work and persistance and not blaming everything on someone else. Teaching people to be victims is the democrat playbook. Wait, how to they explain the millions of middle class, successful black men and women? Even worse, what about the black millionaires. That just can't be, it defies the democrat playbook. You people who preach white privelege, victimization, systemic racism, never accepting that you are responsible for you and you have to make your breaks a lot of times, everyone does, you aren't helping anyone. Except, you are if you are a politician who makes his money by getting elected by people that he has convinced they are victims and he's going to help them. Of course he usually only helps himself.

Your comments are directly covered by the article I posted earlier. Specifically, part of the follow-up.

“Lowest Difficulty Setting” Follow-Up

It’s been a couple of days since I’ve posted the “Lowest Difficulty Setting” piece, and it’s been fun and interesting watching the Intarweebs basically explode over it…

whatever.scalzi.com

 

[AGENT J]

1.) I think what happens is someone says something like "black people should obey the law and get married and stop complaining" (to paraphrase an earlier poster) or whatever, and the response is something along the lines of "check your privilege" or, more often, "typical privileged white male." Which makes it sound like it's the "privilege" (or being white/male) that is the problem, and not the gross lack of empathy.

2.) Maybe that's just the result of not thinking critically enough, but lord knows we have a lot of people in this country who don't think critically, and so I feel like there's maybe a better way to talk about it?
3.) I'm not trying to be all white victimy here--lol, being called privileged hardly compares to what black people have been called and had to experience over the years. My concern is more about what potentially alienating people could mean, practically, for progress. And I think it's a mistake to act like it's totally unreasonable for white people who are just observing these types of conversations to feel alienated when something like "typical privileged white person" is being bandied around as a dig.

1.) well im totally lost by whatever story you are trying to tell BUT again i think you are confused or taking a defensive stance where there doesnt need to be one.
privilege most certainly can be the problem based on the individual
I most certainly can be an asshole based on my male or straight privilege if im ignorant of it, arrogant with it, dismissive about it or use it as a tool to keep others down

but see thats in INDIVIDUAL with their privilege, NOT the privilege itself. the privilege itself can also be used for good by an individual.

its basically an asshole who also happens to have privilege and abuses it or a good person who also happens to have privileges and use them for good. Does that make sense?


2.) thats probably exactly what it is
and to be VERY clear . . the person claiming "typical privilege" could very well be wrong and THEY could be using that as a tool just like INDIVIDUALS do with everything. Carrying wolf . .false racism etc . .its happens but those things are NEVER to create an idea those issues dont actually exist.

3.) well im going give you my opinion with this, its not meant to be offensive just my two cents and hopefully, it helps
in my opinion, anybody "alienated"on this topic has some issues they haven't figured out yet, dont understand, cant admit to or isn't aware of

basically, nobody is going to TURN racist or be turned off who already didnt have some of that wiring in them

for example, no matter what type of horrible women or non-straights I meet and how many and how many times they hit me with the male/straight privilege card etc etc its NEVER going to affect me. I still know what male/straight privilege is, I know I have it, im still not for being a bigoted and those individual jackasses will NEVER alienate me from being a better person and supporting positive moves to level the field and being an ally for the NORMAL non-males and non-straights..

anything else is stupid, it would be like judging all republicans based on the moron terrorists the stormed the capital . . thats not fair or logical.

 

[eohrnberger]

Okay, if you stop plagiarizing. When you use someone else's words, give them credit.

Citation was properly attributed.

 

[Mithrae]

Whites commonly choose to mishear "white privilege" as "privileged whites," when it never makes such a claim.

That's a pretty fine-tooth distinction and if it's commonly missed, maybe the problem doesn't always lie with the choice of the hearers?

3.) well im going give you my opinion with this, its not meant to be offensive just my two cents and hopefully, it helps
in my opinion, anybody "alienated"on this topic has some issues they haven't figured out yet, dont understand, cant admit to or isn't aware of

basically, nobody is going to TURN racist or be turned off who already didnt have some of that wiring in them

Pretty sure everyone has some of that wiring in them, tendencies towards tribalism over religion, ideology, political parties, nationality or ethnicity. Those tendencies are obviously not etched out, as it were, in black and white; there's a continuum from the actually genocidal Hitler types through white supremicists, white nationalists, white 'identarians'... and there are many, many people who simply haven't had the privilege of fully experiencing a diverse urban, sophisticated or cosmopolitan environment. (And out the other side of course, while it may be mostly a right-wing caricature, there are indeed some self-flagellating folk immersed in the guilt of having white skin and prostrating themselves to every black person they meet.) Phrases or messaging which are confusing at best if not outright off-putting to the many folk who aren't quite 'woke' yet but really have no issues with other ethnicities is, quite simply, bad messaging. In a slightly different area "defund the police" would be a comparable example. Sure there are valid ideas to be found beneath the phrases, but they're simply not good ways to widely communicate those ideas and will likely turn many people off as they stand, to say nothing of being easy pickings for contrary propaganda.

And as I suggested in post #26, it may well be that the term 'white privilege' even actively distracts from the important root issues in play. 'Whiteness' in America being an artificial social construct intended to differentiate between and desensitize the working class of European descent to the brutalities inflicted on black slaves - from which they gained no benefit and indeed suffered from labour competition - one would think that in the 21st century informed advocates of social justice would want to avoid reinforcing that artificial category through terms like white privilege. The real issue is the playing field stacked against most everyone in the bottom eighty-plus percent of the population, moreso against some than others. Perpetuating and reinforcing the perception of it as a 'white' issue, rather than as an issue of society's movers and shakers arranging as much as possible to have the system favouring people like them whatever that entails, seems likely to do more harm than good generations after the end of formal, explicit legal discrimination and with a gradually-increasing ethnic diversity among those elites.

Whiteness studies - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why can't we celebrate being white?

By David Barr White people often get defensive in conversations about race because it can feel to us like being white is always a bad thing. We have to be apologetic: whiteness is something to be...

www.forthesakeofarguments.com

 

[ecofarm]

Plenty of white people have had no hand up.

How ignorant.

 

[AGENT J]

1.) Pretty sure everyone has some of that wiring in them, tendencies towards tribalism over religion, ideology, political parties, nationality or ethnicity.
2.)And as I suggested in post #26, it may well be that the term 'white privilege' even actively distracts from the important root issues in play. Perpetuating and reinforcing the perception of it as a 3.) 'white' issue, rather than as an issue of society's movers and shakers arranging as much as possible to have the system favouring people like them whatever that entails, seems likely to do more harm than good generations after the end of formal, explicit legal discrimination and with a gradually-increasing ethnic diversity among those elites.

1.) yes no doubt but again if its that strong its clearly different than the average bear and its only something they can work on, help/support can be supplied but its their issue
2.) again i think it only does to those that already have issues though . . thats just based off my experience and myself of course though. .none of these terms bother me and i dont know anybody in real life bothered by them who doesnt already have issues in that department . .but its not like im worldly traveled lol
3.) again i think thats common knowledge based on all the people i know who understand white privilege or any other privilege . . i dont think thats a secret or not understood by basic common sense.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Plenty of white people have had no hand up.

I never did but I still know for a fact that I'll never get shot dead by a cop for a misdemeanor, even if I have outstanding warrants.
Ask me how I know this for a fact.

 

[vanceen]

I never did but I still know for a fact that I'll never get shot dead by a cop for a misdemeanor, even if I have outstanding warrants.
Ask me how I know this for a fact.

How do you know that for a fact? It's not as if it hasnt happened to plenty of white people. I wonder if Daniel Shaver also "knew for a fact" that he wasn't going to be shot by cops.

And yes, the incidence of police shootings is higher per capita for black people than for whites. But it happens to people of all "races".