This is a topic I've been thinking a lot about recently. There are some topics where people have inherent disagreements that aren't likely to be bridged due to genuine differing beliefs on fundamental realities. However, sometimes, it seems like people are literally arguing different points where it's almost two entirely different topics/issues they're discussing. I propose that this is one of them.
In any discussion I've seen on the topic of white privilege or privilege in general, the side that believes in privilege, if they're trying to genuinely convince people, present basic examples where they see it as indisputable. These tend to be things such as, police pull over black people more than white people, are more likely to shoot/hurt black people than white people. People with (for lack of a better phrase) "non-standard" names get less call backs for jobs. Minorities have to worry about their actions being generalized to their whole race, etc. These are all very important and real points.
On the other hand, people that are against the concept of privilege tend to rely on their own personal anecdotes. White people arguing against privilege comment that they weren't privileged. They weren't born with wealth. They had to pay their way through college. They may have been the first person in their family who went to college or who got a post-graduate degree. They may have lived with just one parent and had to work even in high school to pay for at least luxuries they got like a car to drive or maybe even necessities. Their feedback is, they didn't experience privilege because they had to work for what they got.
Let me first say, I'm not arguing against the concept of white privilege or that it doesn't exist or even that it should be renamed (I know people have given me crap in the past about focusing on the names of things instead of the problem itself). I've put a lot of thought into these different perspectives because I know many people who argue the second point, and to be frank, it's hard to completely disagree with them. If you look at the word privilege (honestly, my only foray here into definitions of a word), you get definitions like "A peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor; a right or immunity not enjoyed by others or by all." Yes, the fact that you're statistically going to get treated better by the police if you're white is an advantage, but it's only an advantage in a world where some things are crap. Privilege, to many people, should have a baseline of neutral. Again, it's hard to disagree with this completely. I'm privileged if I have the athleticism so far above the average person that I can play professional football and make millions. Of course that's privilege, I'm way above what any rational person would say the norm is. The fact people don't look at my actions and judge all white people is really an indictment on a false norm for how minorities are treated. It's a horrendous thing and should be remedied for sure, but it's actually the horrendous nature of the problem that makes privilege seem to not make sense. How am I privileged when I'm not treated like dirt? Especially when I worked through other obstacles where I was actually less than the norm (economically, family situation wise, etc.).
OK, so why is this important? Well, I'm someone who is willing to change his opinion on things (and someone who has changed his opinion on issues, his vote in the most recent election, etc.) in light of seeing and understanding differences. This has mostly been due to people actually communicating with me about the issues. Communication is important. Also, making sure that you're talking about the same issue is really important, because people can be convinced of some things if you don't lump everything in the same bucket, when it really isn't the same. This is a great example, in my mind. On the one hand, you have people arguing for the existence of privilege. They often use the examples I used above where being neutral is actually a privilege because many people are in a situation that's worse than neutral (neutral meaning for a brief statement, you are treated fairly for who you are and the actions you do without external baggage). I agree that the issues where this isn't true need to be combated and see it as a pretty clear cut case in this. People are being treated unfairly. That's a straight up problem that needs to be addressed.
However, the other side of the coin is more where privilege actually comes in. Some people are born with socioeconomic privilege where they are truly given advantages beyond many others. Maybe their college is paid for and they have the backing of parents so they can start their own business knowing if they fail there will be no long term repercussions because they'll never have to worry about things because they were born into the family they were born into. In the current state of things, even a stable home life could be viewed as privilege considering the norm may not be that. The topic tackles issues like inheritance taxes, social programs to give help to somewhat level the playing field, etc. This is an important issue, as well, but in my mind, it's a separate issue. It's also one that I don't quite support remedying in the same way as I support remedying the first one. I definitely think there is rational discussion that can be had and fixes that can be put in place from an overall societal and governmental standpoint to help address this. However, this issue has extended (at least in the comments of some progressive writers and pundits) to mean, for example, don't give your own children all the advantages you can because it could take away from other children. That's just privilege. I'm not getting behind that, sorry. It may seem like that's a side issue, but I guess that's part of my point (it's a very different issue than systemic racism).
So what does this mean in practical terms? Well, it affects how you address things and what you address. I'm willing to support and will try to support in my personal life, the eradication of privilege in terms of treating people like crap. I'm also not against overall, systemic addresses of what I think of as true privilege issues, but I'm not sacrificing my family's interests to do so on a personal level. And, when I'm talking with someone who genuinely wants to listen about white privilege and they say they're not privileged because they barely had enough money for food and clothes growing up and had the work to get everything they had, I might just agree with them but also say even if you're not privileged, that doesn't mean other people aren't getting screwed and that we shouldn't do something about it. Who knows, it may get through to them like similar discussions have helped me.
Thoughts?