Privilege?

[Einkarl]

I'm going to try to make this quick and I don't mean to start a shit storm so hopefully we can stay polite :)

Whenever around "revolutionaries" here on the internet it isn't at all uncommon to hear words thrown around as "cracker" or "privilege", as in "hetero privilege".
Words that naturally don't have a positive connotation.

It is really hard to tell non-revolutionary proletarians that they are exploited and taken advantage of by the very privileged bourgeois and then turn around and say that they themselves are "privileged" relative to other people.

Because it is one thing to tell a white man that black men face adversities placed on by society and it is a very different thing to tell a white man that he is privileged because of society e.i. that these societal inequalities benefit him. This is an issue and it legitimately turns people away from the cause.

The privilege line of thinking from what some "adherents" have told me (and I could be dead wrong so I apologize) is based on the idea that bourgeois structures or conditions that hurt one group of people necessarily benefit another rather than merely just hurting one group. I do not believe that a Hetero Woman benefits from the societal stigma of a lesbian woman.

Language is extremely important in forming a movement and being called privileged does not sound like label of a discontent and exploited group of workers be it of any race, gender, or sexuality should have.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

Thank you very much for this post.

Admittedly, I tend to ignore these discussions because they are rarely fruitful, however I will do my best to intervene here since I think it is an important topic.


I'm going to try to make this quick and I don't mean to start a shit storm so hopefully we can stay polite :)


Naturally, this is appreciated.


Whenever around "revolutionaries" here on the internet it isn't at all uncommon to hear words thrown around as "cracker" or "privilege", as in "hetero privilege".
Words that naturally don't have a positive connotation.

This is indeed true, but only half true. If we are to put this within the context of dialectical materialism, we can see that the idea of positive/negative connotations is a unity of opposites based on class struggle. By this I mean that for something to have a negative connotation, a positive connotation must exist in order for the negative connotation to be possible, and the dialectical tension that this unity is based in is class. For example, if I were to advocate the armed overthrow of capitalist order, then I am sure the bourgeois would tell me how rude I am being while the working people of the world might listen to me with interest. Likewise, I can imagine telling a white proletarian that his privilege exists due to his settler-colonialist relationship with the African American population, and he would be offended. But of course, the idea of white privilege did not come out of the sky and has a social basis, and that basis was that of radical Black Communist movements of the 60's.


It is really hard to tell non-revolutionary proletarians that they are exploited and taken advantage of by the very privileged bourgeois and then turn around and say that they themselves are "privileged" relative to other people.


This raises a good point. Indeed, we would never disrespect a labor aristocrat who is interested in Communist organizing that he is a net exploiter and reject his interest in radical leftism. Instead we would regonize that his interest might collide with the interests of other sections of the working class, and that in these inner class conflicts we side with the most oppressed section of the proletariat against the faction that is oppressing it, even if it comes from the working class.


Because it is one thing to tell a white man that black men face adversities placed on by society and it is a very different thing to tell a white man that he is privileged because of society e.i. that these societal inequalities benefit him. This is an issue and it legitimately turns people away from the cause.


I have already addressed the other point, but the very concept of the "American Dream", that is, social mobility, is based on white supremacy. After all, why do you think all of those success stories of white males were able to happen from the 50's till the late 80's? Because people of color, queers, and woman did not have access to these opportunities. Additionally, although there is a myth of de-industrialization that is supposed to bring the US fame and wealth, the US still produces about 18% of the world's industrial product. How is this possible with all of the decaying factories? Many factors of course, but one of them is that much of labor takes place in prison, where prisoners are paid far below minume wage and are worked like slaves. And we all know that blacks make up one of the largest populations of people in prisons due to discrimination. So in essence, the logic of slavery has indeed gone through a quantitative shift, but not a qualitative one, and does indeed still operate.


The privilege line of thinking from what some "adherents" have told me (and I could be dead wrong so I apologize) is based on the idea that bourgeois structures or conditions that hurt one group of people necessarily benefit another rather than merely just hurting one group. I do not believe that a Hetero Woman benefits from the societal stigma of a lesbian woman.

Well this is where I would say that it is right here to critique identity politics. It is true that hetero privilege exists, but it is a relative privilege that can only be convieved as saying that heteros have it better than queers do, which is true. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I do not see how heterosexual woman oppress transgender woman, but I would see how white men oppress black men, and how males in general oppress men, but this is based on actual oppression and not a relatively lower standard of living.

[Einkarl]

I have already addressed the other point, but the very concept of the "American Dream", that is, social mobility, is based on white supremacy. After all, why do you think all of those success stories of white males were able to happen from the 50's till the late 80's? Because people of color, queers, and woman did not have access to these opportunities. Additionally, although there is a myth of de-industrialization that is supposed to bring the US fame and wealth, the US still produces about 18% of the world's industrial product. How is this possible with all of the decaying factories? Many factors of course, but one of them is that much of labor takes place in prison, where prisoners are paid far below minume wage and are worked like slaves. And we all know that blacks make up one of the largest populations of people in prisons due to discrimination. So in essence, the logic of slavery has indeed gone through a quantitative shift, but not a qualitative one, and does indeed still operate.




Well this is where I would say that it is right here to critique identity politics. It is true that hetero privilege exists, but it is a relative privilege that can only be convieved as saying that heteros have it better than queers do, which is true. Feel free to prove me wrong, but I do not see how heterosexual woman oppress transgender woman, but I would see how white men oppress black men, and how males in general oppress men, but this is based on actual oppression and not a relatively lower standard of living.

I'm not denying that these oppressions do exist, I just don't believe that a white worker (non-reactionary) benefits from the oppression of black workers.
The relationships I'm speaking of are purely within our class so in the prison example
I don't see how the white proletariat benefit. I can definitely see how the white bourgeois does however

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

First, I think the relationship is more complex than what you're suggesting. It's not that there's a causal link where "hurts homos = great for heteros", to run with your example. If the people you're talking to see it as a causal link, their grasp is pretty tenuous. Rather, it's that the same systems (for example, juridical frameworks) that define the particularities of certain oppressions also define the (relative) privileges granted to maintain certain useful (for capital) divisions. That is to say, the same system of law that defines and prosecutes rape in such a way that men largely have carte blanche to rape women within certain limits on one hand, also criminalizes fighting back on the other. This isn't just theoretical - if you look at the stats for women in prison for defending themselves from intimate partner violence, they're truly horrifying.

As to problems of communicating this to proletarians, this says more, in my opinion, about academic "radical" snobbery than it does about the concept of privilege. For starters, I'd say that it reflects a tendency for self-righteous students to internalize and repeat words without internalizing knowledge or being able to explain things.

Fuck tumblr.

[d3crypt]

Just because someone is "white" (if that really exists) doesn't mean they should be blamed for exploitation of "black" people. Honestly all this does is acknowledge reactionary concepts of race. What we should acknowledge is that there is inequality in these socially constructed groups. However i think this is more the fault of the exploitation of capitalist society. Capitalism always needs a minority group to stereotype and treat like shit. At one point it was blacks. Now it is hispanics. There are racists of every ethnicity, it doesn't mean that every one of that ethnicity should be blamed for the maltreatment of minorities.

[SamEmm]

Whiteness is a biological myth, but it is a social fact. Here is a small recent example of the psychological wages is whiteness: www.timwise.org/tag/levar-burton/

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta

[slum]

while there are people who use the term 'privileged' to mean 'benefits from the exploitation of [insert relevant oppressed group]', i see it used more often to mean 'is exempt from certain hardships that members of [oppressed group] are subject to'. i think the latter is more useful. the former makes assumptions about racism, sexism, and homophobia that ignore their origin and function in class society.

[#FF0000]

Just because someone is "white" (if that really exists) doesn't mean they should be blamed for exploitation of "black" people.

I don't think anyone ever says "white individuals are directly and personally responsible for the oppression of other groups". That is almost always a mis-characterization of what people who talk about racism in society are actually saying.


At one point it was blacks. Now it is hispanics. There are racists of every ethnicity, it doesn't mean that every one of that ethnicity should be blamed for the maltreatment of minorities.

Nah, it's every group that isn't white, all at once. And it isn't because of individual prejudice -- the racism we talk about is structural and practically built into our institutions and culture.

[d3crypt]

I don't think anyone ever says "white individuals are directly and personally responsible for the oppression of other groups". That is almost always a mis-characterization of what people who talk about racism in society are actually saying.



Nah, it's every group that isn't white, all at once. And it isn't because of individual prejudice -- the racism we talk about is structural and practically built into our institutions and culture.

Good point. However i was mainly commenting on people who hate "white" people because of privilege. I have met a lot of people like this.

[#FF0000]

Good point. However i was mainly commenting on people who hate "white" people because of privilege. I have met a lot of people like this.

Yo I spend a lot of time talking about these kinds of politics and I also spend an embarrassing amount of time on the internet and I've only ever seen like a handful of people who hold those sorts of opinions, most of whom were almost certainly trolls.

There's def. people who like to play "OPPRESSION OLYMPICS", though, and I think that might be a problem inherent to the concept of 'privilege' as people use it.

But I am waaaay too sleepy to be elaborate on that so I'm gonna post a link to a thing that has some good criticisms of 'privilege'. (https://blackorchidcollective.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/guest-post-privilege-politics/)

[helot]

while there are people who use the term 'privileged' to mean 'benefits from the exploitation of [insert relevant oppressed group]', i see it used more often to mean 'is exempt from certain hardships that members of [oppressed group] are subject to'. i think the latter is more useful. the former makes assumptions about racism, sexism, and homophobia that ignore their origin and function in class society.

I think this is the best way to discuss this with ordinary workers anyway. It is only once the existence of oppressions and how this person is exempt because they're male/white/straight is understood that we should even start discussing how we unknowingly reproduce these oppressions due to our socialisation especially if part of a privileged group and how best to minimise the reproduction we engage in while trying to build a movement capable of destroying present society.

[Devrim]

Whenever around "revolutionaries" here on the internet it isn't at all uncommon to hear words thrown around as "cracker" or "privilege", as in "hetero privilege".

I have been involved in revolutionary politics since the 1980s. I have never actually heard people saying that people have privilege though I have heard the term used when discussing this concept.

I have just checked what it meant but until that I thought a 'cracker' was something you put cheese on.

Devrim

[CyM]

Privilege theory is a dead end we need to get beyond. White workers are not privileged, they are exploited. Black workers just happen to be doubly exploited. It is not a privilege to be half as fucked. This is the problem with all of these ideas which find their root in the postmodernist cesspool that is academia. They all reduce themselves to blaming the workers and youth for the continuation of capitalism and oppression. If only you all felt guilty enough and recognized your guilt, the world would be a better place! What garbage.

[Red Flag Rising]

When my friends encourage whites to "check your white privilege" what do they mean? How do I do that? Does it mean that I am to humbly slink away from any debates on race? Does it mean I should let non-whites cut in front of me in line?

[Quail]

When my friends encourage whites to "check your white privilege" what do they mean? How do I do that? Does it mean that I am to humbly slink away from any debates on race? Does it mean I should let non-whites cut in front of me in line?
It means you should consider what you just said/did and put yourself in the shoes of someone who isn't white, and think about how you would feel in that situation. We've all grown up in a racist, sexist, etc., society so there will be times when subconsciously we do things that perpetuate those power structures (e.g. by making people who aren't white feel uncomfortable and unable to speak up and get their voices heard in say an anarchist group). "Checking your privilege" basically means making sure you aren't doing stuff like that, and if you are then making all efforts not to do it again.

[Anti-White]

When my friends encourage whites to "check your white privilege" what do they mean? How do I do that? Does it mean that I am to humbly slink away from any debates on race? Does it mean I should let non-whites cut in front of me in line?

Yes, that's exactly what it means, but more, much, much more.

[Decolonize The Left]

Privilege theory is a dead end we need to get beyond. White workers are not privileged, they are exploited. Black workers just happen to be doubly exploited. It is not a privilege to be half as fucked. This is the problem with all of these ideas which find their root in the postmodernist cesspool that is academia. They all reduce themselves to blaming the workers and youth for the continuation of capitalism and oppression. If only you all felt guilty enough and recognized your guilt, the world would be a better place! What garbage.

From an absolutist point of view this would be correct. But from any point of view which looks at things more coherently, it's remarkably short sighted.

Take women, for example. They are oppressed under capitalism but I maintain an enormous amount of social privilege over my girlfriend in the house, on the street, in the workplace, everywhere. To tell my girlfriend that she should shut the fuck up about being treated as a second class citizen because capitalism is more important blah blah is silly, disrespectful, unhelpful, and strategically moronic.

Simply reducing everything to capitalism is the dead end. Capitalism is far too smart for your black and white perspective; it has already evolved far past generic communist economic critique. In fact, it has already incorporated this critique into the market and hence neutralized it effectively.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Yes, that's exactly what it means, but more, much, much more.

White Guilt =/= Checking Privilege