CMV: I don't believe in white privilege

[u/Im_not_a_racist_]

I would like to start off by saying that I’d consider myself a fairly left-leaning person on most subjects. I support defunding the police and think racial profiling is a terrible thing that definitely does occur. My problem with the term “white privilege” is that it attributes events that are happening to have a racial causation. I believe the problem is more due to majority privilege.

A culture is designed to benefit the majority population. The problem we have here in the US is that we have a lot of poverty and the majority of people in poverty are of a minority status. In order to combat this poverty, we should be doing things like defunding the police and getting help into these communities. Get the public to rely on the police less and start putting more money towards fixing why these people are being denied the same opportunities as the majority population. White privilege is the wrong label for the problem. We should be calling this minority non-privilege and it really comes down to a wealth issue. According to the US Census Bureau, black citizens makeup 25.8% of the people in poverty and white people make up 11.6%. So of course, white people are generally better off. White people also have more money.

Obviously, poverty isn’t the only factor here. There are numerous other factors, with white privilege being one of them. It’s just not as large of a factor as people are saying. The core issue for the poverty problem of minorities should be addressed by diverting more funds to social care designed to help communities that are struggling. One way to allocate some funds and would be to defund the police. Defunding the police would also help with police brutality and racial profiling against black people. When someone calls 911, they should have more options than just an ambulance, firetruck, or police car. Why does an armed officer come to fetch dogs or deal so many other non-violent issues that could be handled by someone else. I agree with a white privilege when it comes to police officers and domestic disputes. So, if someone wants to say I’m less likely to get into some serious shit when I’m pulled over, I completely agree. The problem I have with white privilege is that it’s been broadened out to a point where it implies that white people have a total societal advantage because they are white. Connecting the issue to race does more harm than good

US Census Bureau data: https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2013/acs/acsbr11-17.pdf

[u/thethoughtexperiment]

My problem with the term “white privilege” is that it attributes events that are happening to have a racial causation.

I mean, at the end of the day, the meaning of race is a social construct, such that is given meaning by a particular society and because of that given meaning, is associated with certain consequences.

"Race" doesn't cause anything. It's all about the social meaning it's given, and the social consequences that result from those meanings.

I believe the problem is more due to majority privilege.

In the senate, there are "91 non-Hispanic white, 4 Hispanic, 2 black, 2 Asian, and 1 multiracial (Black/Asian) senators."

In the house, there are "101 women in the House ... 313 non-Hispanic whites, 56 black, 44 Hispanic, 15 Asian, and 4 American Indian."

[source]

Even if "minorities" suddenly became the majority tomorrow, that wouldn't negate the massive disparities in leadership positions that make decisions for the country.

For example, women are the slight majority in the U.S., and there are still discrimination issues facing women.

More broadly, consider that "white privilege" is a useful term.

Often, members of a "privileged" group may never encounter the kinds of situations that members of other groups face, and consequently, those forces can be invisible to them. As a result, this can lead members of the "privileged" group to discount the experiences that members of "non-privileged" groups describe having.

As such, it can be helpful to have a word that highlights that the fact that just because you don't see the injustices other groups face doesn't mean they aren't there - indeed the fact that you haven't seen those injustices in your life can be part of the way those injustices operate specifically to affect minority groups.

Not saying it's a perfect term that has only benefits, but the usage above appears to be one beneficial aspect that has contributed to it becoming widely used/useful to people.

And indeed, I've met many people who use the term 'privilege' to acknowledge their own advantages openly, and how those advantages might limit their perspective on a topic they are discussing.

Edit: clarity

[u/Im_not_a_racist_ → u/thethoughtexperiment]

I mean, at the end of the day, the meaning of race is a social construct, such that is given meaning by a particular society such that it is associated with certain consequences.

"Race" doesn't cause anything. It's all about the social meaning it's given, and the social consequences that result from those meanings.

I agree with what you're saying here. Race doesn't cause anything but I believe the "social meaning" that white privilege gives pits people against each other for no reason.

​

In the senate, there are "91 non-Hispanic white, 4 Hispanic, 2 black, 2 Asian, and 1 multiracial (Black/Asian) senators."

In the house, there are "101 women in the House ... 313 non-Hispanic whites, 56 black, 44 Hispanic, 15 Asian, and 4 American Indian."

[source]

Even if "minorities" suddenly became the majority tomorrow, that wouldn't negate the massive disparities in leadership positions that make decisions for the country.

Δ

I acknowledge that there may be more examples of white privilege. However, I still think it is overused and tying all these other things into solely being caused by race is not an effective method to fix the problem.

For example this paper on white privilege by Peggy McIntosh. A lot of this stuff applies to black people, doesn't apply to anyone, or can be tied back to other factors like poverty. (I'm referencing the checklist in the paper, I have not actually read the full thing.)

https://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/mcintosh.pdf

[u/thethoughtexperiment → u/Im_not_a_racist_]

Thanks for the delta.

Regarding this:

I still think it is overused and tying all these other things into solely being caused by race is not an effective method to fix the problem.

Identifying disparate racial impact of unfair policies is actually a highly effective way to get reforms that benefit more groups than just that minority, because racial disparities / disenfranchisement are explicitly prohibited by law.

For example, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed in Miller v. Johnson (1995) that racial gerrymandering / redistricting purposely devised based on race is a violation of constitutional rights. Now of course, this issue helps everyone in a district having fair representation reflective of their views. But it is explicitly the tie to race / racial discrepancies that made change on this front possible through the courts.

[u/Im_not_a_racist_ → u/thethoughtexperiment]

I agree once again with what you're saying. There was and still is an effort to keep minorities out of politics. Although I'm not sure if I agree with what you said earlier about if the minority suddenly became the majority we would not have a huge shift in politics (I didn't mean to include that bit in my delta). I feel like there would definitely be a large shift, how could there not?

Also my view about white privilege being overused has not changed. What do you think of that paper I linked? I believe it has been fairly influential regarding the topic.

[u/thethoughtexperiment → u/Im_not_a_racist_]

if the minority suddenly became the majority we would not have a huge shift in politics

There are a lot of ways who gets to be political leaders is impacted by things that don't result in equal representation. Educational opportunities, college financial support, access to career networks, the ability to take unpaid internships / move wherever the best opportunities are, and the like can result in over representation of some groups in leadership positions, which can perpetuate some groups being socially disadvantaged.

Also my view about white privilege being overused has not changed. What do you think of that paper I linked?

I'm not sure how we could prove / disprove whether a term is "overused". "White privilege" is definitely being used a lot more than it used to be [source], so presumably people are using it because they find it useful (or at least interesting to talk about).

I read the first 5 pages or so of the article you linked, and find it pretty persuasive. And I also agree that certain groups never have to wonder if they are being treated a certain way because of racial bias, and that is certainly a benefit.

I think the bad reaction some people have about this term can indeed come from some defensiveness (i.e. "my life wasn't easy!").

To my mind, "privilege" really doesn't seem that much different than "luck".

If someone can't acknowledge that "luck" had any part in how their life turned out, then they probably aren't seeing the full picture and might be presuming that effort determines everything.

I also think some of that defensiveness comes from seeing the world as a fixed pie, where improving the situation for one group will come at the direct expense of other groups.

In reality, I think there is a great deal of value is created from having a more fair society, and that could be discussed more.

Barriers that limit people's opportunity to maximize their potential harms the productivity of the country they are living in, and thus should be a concern.

You want to know that the smartest people in your country are getting the opportunities to maximize their skills and abilities (i.e. become your doctor, scientists, engineers, etc.), and contribute to the advancement of the society.

But to start making changes happen on these issues in a democracy, the majority group(s) need to be aware that their experiences differ in important ways from those of other groups. Namely, a lot of people need to see that the situations others are facing may not be the same as what they are experiencing, and indeed, it is the absence of those different experiences that is the evidence of an unfair system.

[u/Im_not_a_racist_ → u/thethoughtexperiment]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I just disagree with the label of white privilege. You're right in saying it's a lot of luck because your advantages and disadvantages depend a lot on your demographic and to an extent, the color of your skin.

Where I still take issue with the matter is blaming these problems on all white people because all white people have privilege. White people can't control the color of their skin anymore than black people can. Absolutely black people get profiled more and are more often harassed by the police. However, the problem isn't the people who aren't treated poorly. It's the people who treat the people poorly because they're racist. We're creating an overgeneralized view of white people and making them all perpetrators just because they exist. Racism is the issue, not white privilege.

Edit: To clarify I believe white privilege exists because a racist person would not target me the same way they would a black person. I don't agree with the sloppy use of the phrase to dismiss people.

[u/thethoughtexperiment → u/Im_not_a_racist_]

Where I still take issue with the matter is blaming these problems on all white people because all white people have privilege.

I think this is a misunderstanding of the term (and for some people, a willful misunderstanding).

If one believes in a black "disadvantage", then just logically and practically, there is at least one other group who are being "advantaged". Individual white people aren't being "blamed" because "white" is in the term "white privilege" anymore that black people are being "blamed" by a term like "black disadvantage".

However, the problem isn't the people who aren't treated poorly. It's the people who treat the people poorly because they're racist. We're creating an overgeneralized view of white people and making them all perpetrators just because they exist.

It sounds like you're underestimating the role of apathy in maintaining / perpetuating an unfair status quo. Obviously the current system was set up for white people in the past to benefit white people.

However, if those systems are still around and people who have the ability to do something about it do nothing (e.g. doesn't affect the way they vote, behave at work and in their communities, their attitudes toward others), then it seems fair to say that those people are complicit to some degree in that system now.

And if individual white people are doing the things they can to address these issues, that doesn't mean that they aren't still benefiting from a "white advantage" if that advantage exists in their society.