Is the term "White Privilege" part of my Invisible Knapsack?

[bcholmes]

I'm trying to figure out what I think about this article on the term "white privilege".

Here's a quotation:

"White Privilege" is a misnomer for it suggests that white people enjoy socioeconomic advantages and benefits beyond a standard level of rights and opportunity (which presumably non-white people are afforded). however, the term does not account for the exploitation and disfranchisement of people of color that is a consequence of “White Privilege.” people of color do not possess the freedoms and protections of full and actualized citizenship. the legal and social structures of this nation do not merely demonstrate partiality towards white people but also simultaneously deny people of color the most basic of human rights, such as housing, health, education, justice, peace. the corollary to what some would term "White Privilege" is "colored degradation."

[...]

and so the white Leftists who think they are down because they have got the courage to lamentably declare, "We’ve got White Privilege," it would be more accurate and truthful to say instead, "We are beneficiaries of racism," or "We participate in a racialized system of oppression."

I get what's being said. And I find myself saying something very similar w.r.t. the phrase (used to describe Haiti) "the poorest country in the western hemisphere". The phrase seems to neatly avoid the full extent of the problem. It would be more accurate to say, "the country in the western hemisphere that we have most impoverished". I think there's an important point there.

Nonetheless, my first reaction to reading the North Star article is to think: "your sample set is university students." I'm sure that's not a good reaction, but there it is.

I find this article¹ really captures how much education needs to go on about white privilege, and how quick people are to close their minds to any suggestion that white people enjoy something that not all people get, and that has not been earned.

This article is another key article on white privilege.

¹ I think it was firecat who first pointed me toward that article.

Comments

[beaq.livejournal.com]

I *think* I think that, in the sense that in some cases resources and opportunities are limited, we do enjoy benefits beyond a reasonable base level. I think that we'd have to give some things up for other people to enjoy equality. I think we'd get something out of it, but that in the immediate future, what we'd get is less tangible than what we already have (cheap labor, scapegoats, bit parts, a largely-unacknowledged sense of superiority). It's how I feel about male privilege and class privilege (and the unsustainable consumer culture they're part of). The privileged life(style) couldn't be maintained in its current form without sucking something off the less-privileged.

On the other hand, yes, the underprivileged are denied, to a greater or lesser extent, a reasonable base level of human rights.

Or something.

[beaq.livejournal.com]

Hm. Did you add something while I was commenting? I go back to sleep.

[wild-irises.livejournal.com]

I do get what that article is saying, but I also think it's rearranging desk chairs on the Titanic--a fight about words that is potentially a destruction of alliances.

I also think the writer is blurring the point that many people of color are affluent and a few are rich, while many white people are pretty desperately poor. Conflating race and class doesn't help us understand anything.

At the same time, I am certainly a supporter of a minimum level of income and economic stability for everyone.

[jeffreyab.livejournal.com]

The "Economist" pointed out that Haiti looks much better if you compare it to African countries.

I think Jared Diamond makes a good argument for why Haiti is Haiti.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

Recent issue? Can you point me to an article? (Title, issue number?)

[cigfran-lwyd.livejournal.com]

i get the impression that things like this are meant less to actually enlighten, than to shame and make squeamish.

which only works if you're prone to such things, which it seems that "white leftists" are perceived as being.

which i'm not. so:

i benefit from a racist system that systematically oppresses people of color.

that was easy. and nothing is changed. and i think that people like you, BC, who act vigorously from conscience, aren't motivated by whatever it is that demands that such things be uttered. so i really don't see the point.

[firecat]

This is a bit orthogonal to what you're talking about, but a good definition of privilege was posted on alt.poly yesterday:

It may be true that anyone can succeed if they "want it badly enough".
But if you're a wealthy white kid, you can succeed even if you don't
really give a shit. -- a really good explanation of privilege from JK, who identifies zirself as "wealthy white kid."

The following clarification was necessary: The definition of privilege is not "wealthy white kid" but "being able to succeed even if you don't really give a shit."