This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
I think "white privelege" is a term coined by activists.
And that term holds a polarising dimension to it, which kinda materialises itself every time the term is spoken out. And then the people that use the term [i](those are less radical then the activists that use it in a pretty radical way)[/i], need to write down several chapters to explain to people what the term means for them and that it's not really what people think about it when they hear it the first time.
And so the entire "white privelege" conversation often turns up as a huge dumpster fire of people sticking up middle fingers to eachother. Team against team, human against human... who all feel adressed because of "identity". I don't think this "white privelege" idea helps the conversation to move forward, and because of it's polarising characteristics it denies critical evaluation of cultural tendencies that are deeply rooted in society [i](mostly in uconcious ways)[/i] and cause measurable consequences that aren't favorable to the social fabric as a whole.
And that term holds a polarising dimension to it, which kinda materialises itself every time the term is spoken out. And then the people that use the term [i](those are less radical then the activists that use it in a pretty radical way)[/i], need to write down several chapters to explain to people what the term means for them and that it's not really what people think about it when they hear it the first time.
And so the entire "white privelege" conversation often turns up as a huge dumpster fire of people sticking up middle fingers to eachother. Team against team, human against human... who all feel adressed because of "identity". I don't think this "white privelege" idea helps the conversation to move forward, and because of it's polarising characteristics it denies critical evaluation of cultural tendencies that are deeply rooted in society [i](mostly in uconcious ways)[/i] and cause measurable consequences that aren't favorable to the social fabric as a whole.
Ryannnnnn · 31-35, M
@Kwek00 I certainly think it could be worded better, it just sounds insulting to most people who don't know what it means. Then after feeling insulted if the person criticises that percieved insult, they're called ignorant and guilted, which just alienates them further and leaves them none the wiser.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@Ryannnnnn A "privelege" used to be something that was granted by some higher authority. And it was pretty clear cut, when you were indeed "priveleged" in society.
The term "privelege" holds a meaning for a lot of people. And if you use it like this and connect it to an "identity", and it's a lot less clear cut as the term used to be. You enter this fuzzy area of people belonging to that identitarian group (in this case white people) that are supposed to be "priveleged" but a lot of members of that group don't see it that way. It also works in a frustrating way of people belonging to that group. You should check the suicide numbers of white young males, that are perceived to "priveleged" by certain members of society (specially activists that internalised this entire idea in a radical way) and who can't find a job because they lack "experience" and who are just failures even after getting a degree which (in certain countries) made them incredible debters. Then they need to get a house on the housing markets which in a lot of developed nations is maintained by a certain category of old people that made "good investments" that are no paying off on the back of those that can't find an affordable place to put their beds. And while being confronted (just like everyone else) with the hardships of reality they are still called "priveleged" which doesn't really contribute to their emotional state.
I'm also pretty disgusted by those that preach "equality" and that want to solve certain problems in society by "quotas", which in activists circles is a thing at the moment. Because those people from the so called "priveleged" group, that also have a hard time getting a job, now are even more set back because of some urge towards equality of outcome. That frustration has to channel itself somewhere in the political framework, and ussually it's radical-conservative parties that exploit these emotions because certain left wing parties seem to like this sort of rhetoric.
The term "privelege" holds a meaning for a lot of people. And if you use it like this and connect it to an "identity", and it's a lot less clear cut as the term used to be. You enter this fuzzy area of people belonging to that identitarian group (in this case white people) that are supposed to be "priveleged" but a lot of members of that group don't see it that way. It also works in a frustrating way of people belonging to that group. You should check the suicide numbers of white young males, that are perceived to "priveleged" by certain members of society (specially activists that internalised this entire idea in a radical way) and who can't find a job because they lack "experience" and who are just failures even after getting a degree which (in certain countries) made them incredible debters. Then they need to get a house on the housing markets which in a lot of developed nations is maintained by a certain category of old people that made "good investments" that are no paying off on the back of those that can't find an affordable place to put their beds. And while being confronted (just like everyone else) with the hardships of reality they are still called "priveleged" which doesn't really contribute to their emotional state.
I'm also pretty disgusted by those that preach "equality" and that want to solve certain problems in society by "quotas", which in activists circles is a thing at the moment. Because those people from the so called "priveleged" group, that also have a hard time getting a job, now are even more set back because of some urge towards equality of outcome. That frustration has to channel itself somewhere in the political framework, and ussually it's radical-conservative parties that exploit these emotions because certain left wing parties seem to like this sort of rhetoric.
Ryannnnnn · 31-35, M
@Kwek00 You make very good points and explain it very well.
I've also been very critical of the idea of equality of outcome. If you take it to it's end point it encourages and enforces discrimination based on race and gender, in order to stop percieved discrimination based on race and gender..
Well i can say I was almost a part of that statistic myself unfortunately, due to various health issues and struggle finding work while temporarily being homeless. So I got very frustrated when I'd hear people talking about 'people like me' being 'privileged' by people who were in universities with rather comfortable lives (which I am now also thankfully).
I've also noticed a shift in politics due to the alienation of many moderate or centre people being put off by these radical ideas. I would have considered myself very left a few years ago, but by todays standards i'm in the centre, so i find myself politically homeless atm. Having certain conservative values but believing in liberalism, it's gotten very polarising.
I've also been very critical of the idea of equality of outcome. If you take it to it's end point it encourages and enforces discrimination based on race and gender, in order to stop percieved discrimination based on race and gender..
Well i can say I was almost a part of that statistic myself unfortunately, due to various health issues and struggle finding work while temporarily being homeless. So I got very frustrated when I'd hear people talking about 'people like me' being 'privileged' by people who were in universities with rather comfortable lives (which I am now also thankfully).
I've also noticed a shift in politics due to the alienation of many moderate or centre people being put off by these radical ideas. I would have considered myself very left a few years ago, but by todays standards i'm in the centre, so i find myself politically homeless atm. Having certain conservative values but believing in liberalism, it's gotten very polarising.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@Ryannnnnn Well, I still consider myself on the left... but I'm not a team player. The left is just as diverse as the right. Not everyone agrees, people have diffrent ideas about things. I don't ally myself with a group as much, neither do I uncriticaly take over their ideas. 🤷♂️ And there are fucked up people, ideas and radicals on both sides. 🤷♂️ It's this caricaturization of an entire side of the political spectrum, that's creating these polarisations. A bunch of people just think that "left" and "right" consists as a charicature of the meme culture. They are quite literally living the meme, fighting against windmills of their own creation. It's fascinating and sickening at the same time from my perspective, and it doesnt allow a lot of quality conversations to take place. Just a bunch of tribes giving the other the finger because of what they perceive the other tribe to be.
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
@Ryannnnnn It's more then that... it's not "either" ideology. This "either" thing is a pretty anglosaxon way of doing things, because most of the time, people have a 2-party system going on in their country. Two-parties that absorb all branches and ideologies from either the left and right side... and both sides absorbing the center. This is a consequence on how the voting system works.
If you live in other parts of the world with a more proportional voting systems and where in every district seats are devided amongst all parties according to their political weight in votes. You'll see the diffrences of right and left wing parties. These 2 blobs that you see in the UK and America contain all the same people that belong to such ideologies... but they have less chance of expressing themselves. In those two blobs there is also a lot of inn-fighting because certain strains of progressives or conservatives aren't that complementary with eachother. The political landscape ain't binairy.
If you live in other parts of the world with a more proportional voting systems and where in every district seats are devided amongst all parties according to their political weight in votes. You'll see the diffrences of right and left wing parties. These 2 blobs that you see in the UK and America contain all the same people that belong to such ideologies... but they have less chance of expressing themselves. In those two blobs there is also a lot of inn-fighting because certain strains of progressives or conservatives aren't that complementary with eachother. The political landscape ain't binairy.