AmeriKKKa

[Seabass]

It's not a privilege when your working conditions improve because of unionization, and as the author notes these efforts were supported across races. --efforts that have seemingly been eroded to nothing in part by your insistence on "white privilege"...

When white people benefit from social reforms and black people don't, what do you want people to call it?

Also black workers did benefit as noted above.

Black people have been excluded from countless social reforms in this country.

[Sean Hayden]

So, failing to address the point you what --throw out the most appalling example of racism you can find?

Shall I post examples of the many whites who fought for equality?

What an absurd way to imagine making progress...

[Sean Hayden]

It's not a privilege when your working conditions improve because of unionization, and as the author notes these efforts were supported across races. --efforts that have seemingly been eroded to nothing in part by your insistence on "white privilege"...

When white people benefit from social reforms and black people don't, what do you want people to call it?

Also black workers did benefit as noted above.

Black people have been excluded from countless social reforms in this country.

This misses the point, doesn't it? Nobody has argued otherwise after all. The argument is about calling earning better conditions "privilege" and lumping whites together as the creators of the disparity.

[Sean Hayden]

And if you're a Marxist: maybe capitalism which is apparently necessarily racist(?)

I'm not a Marxist nor do I believe that capitalism is necessarily racist.

Well that may be the problem right there, for me too. I didn't know the bastids made so much sense...

[Seabass]

So, failing to address the point you what --throw out the most appalling example of racism you can find?

Shall I post examples of the many whites who fought for equality?

What an absurd way to imagine making progress...

Read the next post.

My point with the lynching is that not all racism is the same. You have genocide at one end of the spectrum, and unconscious bias at the other. "White privilege" describes a specific societal effect that is the result of biases that the dominant ethnic group has. Not everyone who has white privilege is racist.

[Sean Hayden]

It's not a privilege to have better conditions as a result of fighting for reform. Whites don't as a matter of fact just enjoy better conditions because of their skin color.

So, how do you intend to address the lack of "white privilege" in the south when compared to the unionized north? Is she just lying?

[Seabass]

It's not a privilege when your working conditions improve because of unionization, and as the author notes these efforts were supported across races. --efforts that have seemingly been eroded to nothing in part by your insistence on "white privilege"...

When white people benefit from social reforms and black people don't, what do you want people to call it?

Also black workers did benefit as noted above.

Black people have been excluded from countless social reforms in this country.

This misses the point, doesn't it? Nobody has argued otherwise after all. The argument is about calling earning better conditions "privilege" and lumping whites together as the creators of the disparity.

Who does that though? The author is addressing a problem that doesn't exist. When I see people talking about white privilege, it's usually regarding white people displaying a lack of understanding about the racist crap that this country puts black and brown people through.

[Seabass]

It's not a privilege to have better conditions as a result of fighting for reform. Whites don't as a matter of fact just enjoy better conditions because of their skin color.

This is a conflation of two separate issues. What do better conditions as a result of social reforms do have to do with some ethnic groups being treated better or worse than others?

So, how do you intend to address the lack of "white privilege" in the south when compared to the unionized north? Is she just lying?

Why would I address that? In the US, white people in general have privilege relative to black people in general, all other things being equal.

[JimC]

And if you're a Marxist: maybe capitalism which is apparently necessarily racist(?)

I'm not a Marxist nor do I believe that capitalism is necessarily racist.

I don't think that racism is an automatic corollary of capitalism, but capitalism is perfectly happy to use it as a way to divide workers, if allowed to by a government in its pocket.

[Sean Hayden]

It's not a privilege to have better conditions as a result of fighting for reform. Whites don't as a matter of fact just enjoy better conditions because of their skin color.

This is a conflation of two separate issues. What do better conditions as a result of social reforms do have to do with some ethnic groups being treated better or worse than others?

So, how do you intend to address the lack of "white privilege" in the south when compared to the unionized north? Is she just lying?

Why would I address that? In the US, white people in general have privilege relative to black people in general, all other things being equal.

Because the article is addressing causality. "White privilege" is cited as a cause for disparity, when in reality it may be better to blame capitalism. If being white alone confers advantage why should the more racist south have less privileged whites than the north? --that's the jist anyway

[JimC]

It's not a privilege to have better conditions as a result of fighting for reform. Whites don't as a matter of fact just enjoy better conditions because of their skin color.

This is a conflation of two separate issues. What do better conditions as a result of social reforms do have to do with some ethnic groups being treated better or worse than others?

So, how do you intend to address the lack of "white privilege" in the south when compared to the unionized north? Is she just lying?

Why would I address that? In the US, white people in general have privilege relative to black people in general, all other things being equal.

Because the article is addressing causality. "White privilege" is cited as a cause for disparity, when in reality it may be better to blame capitalism. If being white alone confers advantage why should the more racist south have less privileged whites than the north? --that's the jist anyway

It's a complicated world, but I think that "being white alone confers advantage" is somewhat of a straw man. There are many factors which lead to disadvantage, which is always a comparative phenomenon. In a particular geographic area (such as the US south), and for a given range of occupations (loosely, blue collar) if it is consistently true that white workers are economically advantaged in comparison to black workers, then at least it is part of systemic racism, whatever its source. I'm not a huge fan of the term "privilege", it is divisive and misleading. Better to stick to a more neutral "comparative disadvantage" and find pragmatic solutions to reduce it.

[Sean Hayden]

You don't think "White Privilege" and "being white alone confers advantage" are close enough to avoid a charge of strawmanning?

--//--

Systemic racism is real. I don't see it as equivalent to "White Privilege".

[Seabass]

Furthermore, the privilege theory of causation – Black workers get less because white workers get more, and its corollary – flies in the face of American reality. Historically, wages, benefits and working conditions have always been significantly lower for working-class whites in the non-unionised South than for Black (and white) workers in unionised areas of the North. The higher union standard of living results not from racial privilege, but from the unity and solidarity of both Black and white workers in class struggle.

This is weird cherry picking. Why is she not comparing the conditions of black workers in the south to white workers in the south, and black workers in the north to white workers in the north? She may as well compare white workers in Siberia to black workers in Manhattan to demonstrate that white privilege doesn't exist.

And she conveniently omits the fact that unionization is far more difficult in the south BECAUSE of white anti-black racism.

[Seabass]

It's not a privilege to have better conditions as a result of fighting for reform. Whites don't as a matter of fact just enjoy better conditions because of their skin color.

This is a conflation of two separate issues. What do better conditions as a result of social reforms do have to do with some ethnic groups being treated better or worse than others?

So, how do you intend to address the lack of "white privilege" in the south when compared to the unionized north? Is she just lying?

Why would I address that? In the US, white people in general have privilege relative to black people in general, all other things being equal.

Because the article is addressing causality. "White privilege" is cited as a cause for disparity, when in reality it may be better to blame capitalism. If being white alone confers advantage why should the more racist south have less privileged whites than the north? --that's the jist anyway

Racism is the cause, and white privilege and disparity are the result. Whites in the south are worse off than whites in the north because the racism in the south results in less unionization. White, anti-black racism harms white people too. But white people in the south still have it better than black people in the south. That's white privilege.

[Sean Hayden]

If that is all that is meant by white privilege then there is nothing to argue really. Only the ignorant and or malicious would deny that it is easier to be white in the US than just about anything else in most places. --it is considerably less so --on account of skin color alone-- than it has been in the most recent past though.

But I think much more is intended by the term than that.

--//--

As an aside, I want to point out that in my opinion discussions like these and the thinking involved is never truly resolved, or finished. I hold no lasting convictions about my correctness.