Huh? What does hate have to do with anything? Use it to recognize the privileges you have, and then use those privileges to help others share those privileges.
It's not easy, of course. "Sharing the privilege" of being part of the dominant Christian culture in the US doesn't means helping others become Christian. But neither doesn't mean hating oneself for being Christian.
I apologize. It was a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to the parent comment, and I tend to get offended by statements that imply all white people are privileged racists. Maybe that's not how it was meant to be understood.
White people are privileged. Being privileged doesn’t imply anything about a person’s actions or beliefs. As a straight white man, I’m privileged because when I walk down the street, I don’t need to worry about men whistling at me or trying to grope me. I don’t need to worry about being detained by cops for looking “threatening” just by virtue of my skin color. I can cross the border without anyone suspecting me of forging immigration documents. I can easily get married to my partner almost anywhere in the world. I don‘t need to worry (in the workplace, or in political discourse, or just talking to strangers in the street) about being seen as an outsider, and I’m treated as an individual rather than continually judged against a stereotype.
Being privileged doesn’t have anything to do specifically with my actions, and if a gay man, or a woman, or a Latino points out that I am privileged, they are not making any claim about my beliefs, and it’s nothing personal. (And they are absolutely correct, I am privileged.)
You should not be offended when people call you privileged, unless you are sure that they are making a statement about your individual beliefs, rather than just neutral statements about the prevailing structure in the society (and then you should still try to avoid responding with anger; it’s almost never really personal). Instead of taking offense, you should try to talk to these people and understand where they’re coming from and why they’re frustrated. If you listen carefully and empathetically, you may find yourself just as outraged at the injustices in our society.
Thanks for the well-worded response. The idea of white privilege isn't what offends me, and I don't argue with the fact that being who I am opens a lot of doors. What offended me was the implication of racism a general characteristic. I strive to treat everyone equally, and when someone assumes I'm racist because I'm white, that is seen to me as an injustice (hence the overly-sarcastic response I wrote and then deleted). That's the danger with generalizations. There may be prevailing problem within a people group, but making generalized statements is really disheartening to those who are trying to be different. Additionally, it doesn't encourage the perpetrators to change; it just gives them an identity and makes them feel that they have a whole race just like them.
There is a narrative that those who object to the status quo do so from hate. Women who point out sexism do so because they hate men, and men who agree must surely hate themselves. Black people who point out racism do so because they hate white people, and those white people who agree must surely hate themselves. Those who point out severe economic inequality in the US are communists or socialists who hate America. Those who want a secular government which doesn't favor one specific religion do so because they hate Jesus. And so on.
It's very easy language to use. It implies the opposition is based in unthinking emotions so can be ignored. It's also true that some may actually be driven by hatred or self-hatred; and for that matter be based in very logical reasoning. But the hate narrative assumes that what's true perhaps for one (possibly imaginary) person who opposes a given status quo is also true for the entire opposition.
Yes, the g'g'parent post used a stereotype that white people have a specific stereotypes of black people. Your deleted response, which used language often used to keep the status quo, also implied a stereotype, and as you said, generalizations don't help.
What about a response like: "While that is a stereotype some white people believe, it's far from universal. I'm one counter-example. That said, I agree that the dying racist belief has had a real and horrible effect on how we deal with child poverty."?
I think that defends your views of yourself without derailing the conversation, while also discouraging the perpetrators of racism and supporting the main point of the original poster. (Remember, this is a post on education, not your views of race privilege or how to address racists.)
I'm all for a Finnish-style education system, backed by a strong social safety net with an emphasis on children. That includes, as maxerickson pointed out, a sufficiently supported school meal program. Racist views have helped shape our current system, and I think economic greed, including cutting taxes and the commercialization of education, are growing factors.
You know who else is privileged? Smart people, tall people, good looking people, people born in America, people born who are not physically disabled, people without health issues.
I find the "privileged" commentary really unhelpful because it's a drastic oversimplification of life. A black child born into a well educated and wealthy family is far more privileged than a white child born to a poor, uneducated and abusive family.
Being tall is a mixed privilege. It helps basketball players, but not jockeys. Both the very tall and very short have difficulties getting clothing, and some of the very tall are that way because of medical problems.
Most things are a mixed privilege. An ex-neighbor of mine, who was a good looking fitness instructor who rode a motorcycle, would also be harassed when she was on her bike, solely for being herself. Friends of mine who are moderately rich say they have difficulties because a lot of people associate with them in the hopes of getting access to that money. (Take a look at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8809183 to see the number of people ready to jump on $7 million.)
While there are many ways to use the language of privilege, and it can even be used as a weapon to undermine other viewpoints, it seems that your last paragraph falls strongly in the standard privilege viewpoint. That is, I suspect that most people who talk about privilege will agree that "A black child born into a well educated and wealthy family is far more privileged than a white child born to a poor, uneducated and abusive family" is something which falls into the privilege framework, even if some may disagree with its validity or object to a real-world usefulness of a partial ordering which combines multiple privileges.
I'm therefore confused about how that's an example of how privilege commentary is 'really unhelpful'.
It's not easy, of course. "Sharing the privilege" of being part of the dominant Christian culture in the US doesn't means helping others become Christian. But neither doesn't mean hating oneself for being Christian.