‘White Privilege’ and Reverse Racism

The events that took place on 12th August in Charlottesville were sadly reminiscent of a certain nadir in Western history. In what seems to have been an inevitable development in the polarisation of ideologies across the US, the ‘Unite the Right rally’ that brought together white supremacists, white nationalists, neo-Confederates, neo-Nazis, and militia movements has provoked a response of outrage — and rightly so. The ideology of white supremacy can not be justified on any rational grounds.
That being said, while a forceful rejection of white supremacy is undoubtedly the correct course of action, in the aftermath of the rally, as social commentators mobilised to condemn the rally participants, the frenzy of anger has manifested a pernicious perception of society. This perception adopted by social justice activists and much of the mainstream media not only perpetuates racism but is potentially undoing generations of race relations in the West.
As a means of countering this surge of white supremacy, which is being propagated by a relatively small group of people, the onus of blame has fallen on all people with white skin. Consequently, Allure (an international women’s magazine with a readership of 1.1 million individuals) has published an article titled ‘White Women, Stop Pretending We Don’t Benefit From White Supremacy’. Similarly, Teen Vogue (an international magazine with a readership of over 1 million individuals) has published an article titled ‘How “Nice White People” Benefit from Charlottesville and White Supremacy’; and Brittany Picket, an activist and public figure announced over Twitter that ‘… White supremacy benefits all white people. Including the ones with no torches. That’s why it survives’.
It shouldn’t be necessary to overstate the dangerous implications of this perception that needs to be addressed, but let me first make one thing clear: my intention with this essay is not to diminish the seriousness or magnitude of racism in the West, nor is it to disparage well-intended individuals who have adopted the language of ‘white privilege’ as part of their vocabulary; what I will show is that the concept of white privilege perpetuates racism and is detrimental to society.
What is ‘White Privilege’?
When addressing issues of race I’m very aware that I’m treading on dangerous ground, so I recognise it’s important to first provide a universal definition of the issue in hand, especially in the current social climate that has created more ambiguity regarding what ‘racism’ is due to the concept’s gratuitous and largely erroneous use:
Racism
Oxford Dictionary: Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.Merriam-Webster: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
Essentially, ‘white privilege’ is a concept of privilege theory that builds on the framework of identity politics which claims that Western societies are intrinsically advantageous to white skinned people. This privilege influences all social and economic aspects of white skinned peoples’ lives, professional and personally, and simultaneously oppresses people of other races.
While there are different schools of thought regarding the degree to which people with white skin actually experience privilege, the concept of ‘white privilege’ has been integrated as part of the liberal left’s caricature of how the world really is.
The popularisation of the concept ‘White privilege’ in contemporary society can be credited with the Black Lives Matter movement, which, after having received much media attention in 2014, promulgated the idea of white people having privilege unavailable to other races. Prior to that, it’s initial introduction in the West can traced back to the late 80s.
One of the most influential cases for white privilege was put forward in 1989 by a prominent feminist, Peggy McIntosh, who authored an essay titled White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack. In her essay, McIntosh describes the concept of how people with white skin in Western societies enjoy advantages that non-whites do not experience as ‘an invisible package of unearned assets’. These assets, she explains, are like ‘an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools, and blank checks’. This alleged fact of life is inferred from the somewhat dubious precursor that men are trained to be oblivious of their privilege, and due to the nature of ‘interlocking hierarchies’ in society, it follows that white people are also trained to be oblivious to their white privilege. To illustrate this point, McIntosh helpfully provides a list of 50 examples of white privilege in daily life that cover a range of scenarios including the ease of being able to surround one’s self with one’s own race and being able find the music of one’s own race represented in a local music store.
How the Concept of ‘White Privilege’ Perpetuates Racism
Putting aside the fact that many of the examples provided by McIntosh fail to hold true in today in 2017, the flaws in the concept of white privilege are manifold. Worse yet, if we examine the implications the rhetoric in use we find a subtle malignant effect.
We should first recognise that the narrative of white privilege isn’t about equality, nor is it about addressing racial discrimination. It is used primarily as an effective rhetorical device to undermine individuals on the basis of race and also to justify certain behaviour using the guise of victimhood. The status of victimhood is achieved on the grounds that the domination of white people in all aspects of society is unconsciously and unavoidably preserved by all white people.
Now, it shouldn’t be difficult to explain how pertaining privilege to race is detrimental to society, but let me illustrate the social implications of viewing the world through a lens where white people are inherently privilege over other races. The result is quite concerning:
Person A has white skin. This person enjoyed a pleasant upbringing, went to a good university and now has a high ranking job and lives in relative comfort.
Person B has also experienced an equally pleasant upbringing, received a good education and has a high-ranking job that provides comfortable living conditions. Person B has black skin.
The general concept of white privilege holds that person A’s success was achieved through a system that conveniently ‘works for him/her’, while person B was able to achieve these things despite have to function in a system that is unfavourable.
Therefore, person B is superior to person A because he/she achieved the same degree of success while ‘playing with a handicap’.
Of course, this is only one scenario that exemplifies how the concept of ‘white privilege’ breeds racism, but even if we change the variables we still see that the nuances affirm white inferiority because of a supposed beneficial social condition white-skinned people live in. For example, an unsuccessful white person must face a larger burden of failure because he or she has managed to fail despite the privilege of favourable conditions.
What inevitably follows from the logic of ‘white privilege’ is an assertion of superiority derived from race, and that is by definition racist. This is inescapable — in what ever way the concept the is used the outcome is ultimately undesirable because it suggests a racial inferiority even though that is what the concept is trying to rival. The irony here is that the concept of white privilege is an attempt to mitigate racial discrimination by using racism — it’s counter-productive. Creating more inequality doesn’t solve an inequality problem. For that reasons alone, it’s not too bold a statement to say that the use of ‘white privilege’ isn’t so much about equality but rather about evening the score.
Another point worth addressing is how the effective rhetoric of white privilege has lead to white people calling out one another on their own privilege.
When a person adopts the mindset of being inherently offensive and oppressive to all other races, to the point where he/she feels a sense of guilt or self-repudiation in relation to his/her skin colour, this is an example of successful racism. Though, it should be noted, that privilege theory isn’t the only contributing factor to this practice. Another now-common social ill can also be held partly responsible for the spread of white-on-white racism, namely, ‘virtue signalling’.
Why Well-Intended People Who Call Out ‘Privilege’ Ultimately Fail
Let’s for a moment consider the possibility that all people who use the concept ‘white privilege’ are doing so out of good intention; that they’re pointing out instances of racial inequality to the end of establishing equality. Even if this is the case, the concept is still based on a generalisation. It might be true that a certain race of people has a higher or lower probability of experiencing/doing certain things, but it’s simply unreasonable to assume that it’s universally true.
For example, statistics show that Asians in America achieve higher SAT scores than other races. Would it be fair to dismiss an Asian person’s achievement as a result of some inherent quality — ‘Asian privilege’ — and use it to discredit them? Of course not, though the same behaviour is seemingly justified when practiced against white people.
This perversion of what privilege is can of course be reversed. Consider for a moment the concept of ‘black privilege’. While I don’t condone the exercise of responding in turn, it is possible to collect poor generalisations and compile a list of ‘black privilege’ in daily life. Such examples could include being able to talk about race without being stigmatised; not having to worry that your success is perceived as the result of a ‘system that works for you’; not having to worry that disagreeing with someone of a different race equates to you being racist; and so on… (I will avoid exhausting this list for obvious reasons.) This just goes to show that the theory of white privilege is a classic example of ‘stacking the deck’ to justify a particular opinion.
Another reason why ‘exposing’ white privilege with good intentions fails is because issues of racism and racial inequality consist of multiple factors. There is no universal solution, however the logic of white privilege, at least from an optimistic perspective, attempts to address manifold problems that are in some way related (though not exclusively) with a single solution rather than addressing them individually. Proponents of privilege theory will argue that ‘recognising privilege is the first step toward countering racism’, however that is begging the question. It comes back to the question of how categorising races into victims and oppressors and designating a moral disability to a particular race can translate into a meaningful dialogue toward countering racism — it simply doesn’t
Instances of racism obviously need to be addressed, but the espousal of a blanket generalisation serves only to increase hostility between races. The increasing usage of ‘white privilege’ exacerbates racism in a broader sense since much of racism is rooted in poor generalisations.
Finding a Better Dialogue on Racial Inequality
In view of the Charlottesville rally and similar events, finding an effective approach to counter the ideology of white supremacy before it gains further popularity is of great necessity. It’s for this reason that this essay shouldn’t be confused with an attempt to thwart the efforts of those who oppose racism — it’s quite the contrary. The use of divisive language present in the current political discourse and much of the mainstream media in the West only fuels hostility and aids the cause of white supremacy. Moreover, homogenising what is a myriad of factors contributing to inequality under the band of race is simply irresponsible. That is why the careless rhetoric of ‘white privilege’ must be disposed of.
In the increasing antagonism of modern society, where to be moderate is to be considered weak, and as the gulf of the political divide grows ever wider, we must remember that while privilege and inequality do indeed exist, these concepts are not inherent or exclusive to any particular race of people. Believing so is a perversion of reality that is socially disastrous; it is a false perception that can only create conflict.
Post-Script: Anticipating the Response of ‘White Fragility’
I recognise that there are a few obvious responses to this blog that I need to anticipate and respond to, namely the criticisms that stem from the idea that this essay is product of ‘white fragility’:
(1) You’re refuting white privilege merely to protect your own interests’
Yes, I may have white skin but to discredit what I have written based on the colour of my skin is, again, an act of racial discrimination. It’s also a common fallacy, namely the ad hominem argument, i.e. attacking me personally rather than my argument. Actually, contrary to the Western consensus, a person’s identity has no rational impact on the weight of an argument.
(2) ‘If you’re not with us then you’re part of the problem’
We often have a tendency to go through the rash procedure of compartmentalising people into allies and enemies, which isn’t productive if we wish to generate meaningful dialogues on race. This distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’ will, again, create hostility since many such distinctions are based on assumptions or misinterpretations of peoples’ behavior. I wouldn’t want to associate myself with any sort of camp, but that certainly doesn’t equate to me as being ‘part of the problem’. If anything, this essay is an effort to try to counter racism in the broader sense.
(3) White privilege isn’t a critic of white people, it’s a critic of the system.
This is essentially a red herring to attempt to hide what is palpably a racist concept that uniquely affects white people. This imaginary system is a rhetorical device used to trivialise the success of certain white people and taunt those who are struggling.
(4) If you don’t think white privilege exist then, congratulations, you’re enjoying the benefits of it.
An argument of this kind is a rather elementary way to avoid providing a valid premise and it’s also a sort of circular reasoning. It’s an argument that suggests the target is ignorant, but somehow doesn’t provide any evidence for it. How the lack of proof for something can be used to prove its existence simply nonsense.
