Privilege vs. Rights, Check Your Obedient Privilege

[PierzStyx]

From the Daily Anarchist, "Check Your Obedient Privilege" by Davi Barker.

"Let me begin with an apology. Normally I try to maintain some level of intellectual stoicism in my writing, but tonight I’m pounding on my keyboard. Over the years many events have inspired me to write about white “privilege,” whether it’s the Occupy Movement or the Knockout Game. This time it was an article by a courageous college student named Tal Fortgang who wrote Why I’ll Never Apologize For My White Male Privilege. Thanks to him the issue of white “privilege” is surging on social media to twerking Cyrus proportions. Usually I come to my senses before I publish these rants, but if you’re reading this it’s because this time anger got the better of me. Hopefully I can tease out some kind of teaching moment about race.

‎”When striking at the branches of evil few realize that the stick they swing is cut from the same tree.” ~me

I’m putting “privilege” in quotes because there’s a difference between a “privilege” and a “right.” A “right” being something innate and universal that should belong to all people, and a “privilege” being a special advantage, or immunity granted only to a particular person or group of people, often at the expense of others. Most examples of a white “privilege” that I’ve heard were not privileges granted to white people, but rights violations against people of color. The term suggests that the “privilege” should be taken away, rather than the right restored.

No one calls marriage as a “straight privilege.” They call it a “human right,” because they don’t want to take marriage from straight people. They want to give marriage to all people. Bring all the historical injustices, and modern statistics you want. It’s still the wrong word for the wrong concept. Yet, when I point out this simple distinction over the definition of a term I am circled by an echo chamber of cultural Marxists lambasting me as a white supremacist. One thing that sparks my skepticism of a social theory is when its adherence respond to scrutiny with hostility instead of curiosity.

Marginalized People

Some simpletons think my skin disqualifies me from speaking about race, and if you think that you’re part of the problem....."

http://dailyanarchist.com/2014/05/14/check-your-obedient-privilege/

 

[HVACTech]

I use the K.I.S.S principle when dealing with "race" issues.

there are only 3. and it is easy to tell them apart.

 

[Danke]

""No one calls marriage as a “straight privilege.” They call it a “human right,” because they don’t want to take marriage from straight people. They want to give marriage to all people."

Wrong.

Many of us want to do away with this state granted privilege.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

""No one calls marriage as a “straight privilege.” They call it a “human right,” because they don’t want to take marriage from straight people. They want to give marriage to all people."

Wrong.

Many of us want to do away with this state granted privilege.

Okay, some call it that, but you get his point, right?

 

[emazur]

I came up with an idea for a bumper sticker today:
"Check your liberal douche baggage at the door"

Would also make a good t-shirt

 

[Antischism]

"White privilege" means exactly what he's saying. It's not that white people have specific privileges, it's that they don't have some of the disadvantages minority groups do. He's arguing semantics, really. But as I've said before, this confusion is one of the reasons why I think the term itself is a bad one. White privilege = white people don't have specific disadvantages faced by minority groups. It's that simple.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

"White privilege" means exactly what he's saying. It's not that white people have specific privileges, it's that they don't have some of the disadvantages minority groups do. He's arguing semantics, really. But as I've said before, this confusion is one of the reasons why I think the term itself is a bad one. White privilege = white people don't have specific disadvantages faced by minority groups. It's that simple.

Because there's never been poor socioeconomically challenged white people and well-to-do Berkshire Hathaway tut-tutters from 'minority' groups. Can you name me one country in the world where the majority population is worse-off than the minority population sans chattel slavery or apartheid? Right..that's because statistically there would be a problem if such a group were in the minority and that would mean they are somehow the ones persecuted. Now, there are certainly disparate problems regarding so-called 'police services' and incarceration rates among minorities, but that's not what we are talking about here is it. When someone says 'white privilege' they mean that you're a bigoted douche as if merely my skin color engenders you to make such a broad generalization (certainly sounds like what racists do...).

Turning everything to race does nothing to actually help the real problems of racism, never mind calling the 60%+ of the country bigots or self-loathers. How about we fix the Judicial system eh? (Or is that too novel?)

 

[fr33]

"White privilege" means exactly what he's saying. It's not that white people have specific privileges, it's that they don't have some of the disadvantages minority groups do. He's arguing semantics, really. But as I've said before, this confusion is one of the reasons why I think the term itself is a bad one. White privilege = white people don't have specific disadvantages faced by minority groups. It's that simple.

It's stupid. The way you explain it can be applied to the disadvantages each group faces as well.

Inbred folks in Appalachia get no love or defense from Berkeley. Any other minority does.

There are many communities where black people don't even exist. You think certain white families in those areas don't get discriminated against? Any time I read from someone talking about white privilege, I know that they've never spent much time outside of a major city.

 

[Antischism]

Because there's never been poor socioeconomically challenged white people and well-to-do Berkshire Hathaway tut-tutters from 'minority' groups. Can you name me one country in the world where the majority population is worse-off than the minority population sans chattel slavery or apartheid? Right..that's because statistically there would be a problem if such a group were in the minority and that would mean they are somehow the ones persecuted. Now, there are certainly disparate problems regarding so-called 'police services' and incarceration rates among minorities, but that's not what we are talking about here is it. When someone says 'white privilege' they mean that you're a bigoted douche as if merely my skin color engenders you to make such a broad generalization (certainly sounds like what racists do...).

Turning everything to race does nothing to actually help the real problems of racism, never mind calling the 60%+ of the country bigots or self-loathers. How about we fix the Judicial system eh? (Or is that too novel?)

You're angry with people who use the term in a specific, hateful way, not what it actually implies. Those who understand the implications aren't asking anyone to feel guilty; it's simply asking them to understand that being white means they won't have to face certain disadvantages that minorities do. There are race issues, and there are poverty issues, yes. A poor white person still isn't as disadvantaged as a poor middle eastern person, for example. You can damn well bet that poor middle eastern person is going to face discrimination and profiling that the poor white will never have to worry about, especially post-911.

 

[Antischism]

It's stupid. The way you explain it can be applied to the disadvantages each group faces as well.

Inbred folks in Appalachia get no love or defense from Berkeley. Any other minority does.

There are many communities where black people don't even exist. You think certain white families in those areas don't get discriminated against? Any time I read from someone talking about white privilege, I know that they've never spent much time outside of a major city.

Yes, but what are the white families being institutionally discriminated against for? Or is this a poverty issue you speak of? There are poverty issues and race issues; both exist. It's okay to acknowledge you're much less likely to experience the disadvantages faced by specific minority groups and not feel bad about who you are as a result. I know I don't feel any guilt for being who I am, but I can still sympathize with those who do face disadvantages I'll probably never experience. I think we're all fighting for a better country where government will never be allowed to apply their "laws" in a manner that only benefits specific groups of people.

 

[PierzStyx]

""No one calls marriage as a “straight privilege.” They call it a “human right,” because they don’t want to take marriage from straight people. They want to give marriage to all people."

Wrong.

Many of us want to do away with this state granted privilege.

Actually, Davi is for getting government out of marriage altogether. But that isn't brought up in this article because it isn't the point. You do understand what he is saying and aren't having a knee jerk reaction to a few sentences taken out of context, right?