It doesn't have to be white privilege. Privilege is just as insidious in any form, but because our country's class imbalance skews along color lines (predominantly, though, of course, there are exceptions), it often manifests as racial.
Read the whole thing because it's brilliant.
Read the whole thing because it's brilliant.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-18 08:13 pm (UTC)I'm not saying you don't have a point about the articles. But you just pointed out a very good reason to hire him that, again, had nothing to do with color. Yet you brought up the specter of color with the "black privilege" in the first place. I'm not attributing anything to racial privilege. I was saying there are probably plenty of reasons he got the job unrelated to race. You just proved my point: reverse racism is mostly not true.
However, white privilege is a demonstrative thing. You want to believe it's not true in McCain's case, fine, you cling to that. But to say it's not still in effect in the world today, America especially, is ignorance.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-18 08:21 pm (UTC)The point I'm trying to make isn't that Obama got the job due to "black privilege", but that it's as silly to say that a bunch of things in that article were due to "white privilege" as it is to say that Obama got his lawprof job due to "black privilege." Yeah, there's "white privilege" in America, but "Republicans don't hate Bristol Palin" has much more to do with her mom being a Republican than with her being white, as one example.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-18 08:24 pm (UTC)