A significant question facing progressives today is whether the use of the term "white privilege" helps or hurts building the kind of solidarity needed to promote racial justice and reverse runaway inequality.
Here is one vision that has rainbows in it:
Rev. Barber and Molly Ivins would certainly agree on one thing: " the political and economic fight today in America is not between the left and the right, it’s between the ups and the downs ".
And, Rev. Barber’s fight for voting rights and more ballot access is one strong remedy to combat white privilege, as well. Though, looking at places like Wisconsin, you see what rich white privilege has been able to accomplish with 1%er $$$ buying our federal judiciary. With a big assist from Fundamentalist White Nationalst Christians, of couse. And, that’s spreading into the New Heartless Land. Ohio and Indiana were once KKK strongholds and Pence Republicans would certainly like to retain and keep them that way. The whole thing of privileges will eventually die off. Unless, of course, some idiots push the panic button.
Good post! God, I miss Molly Ivins! I would love to hear her take on Trump and Congress.
This article reeks of white fragility. White privilege is about no one personally and it should not be taken that way. I am the descendant of privileged enslavers from Maryland. I did not personally cause this situation. I should not feel guilty about it just responsible to work to end white supremacy. That is all.
Thanks. Molly would call Trump a carnival barker in a third-rate traveling road show. He’s also a looney but has one socially redeeming American quality: he’ll do absolutely anything for $$$. And, that’s why about 25% of Americans respect and admire him. Whatever there is really there, is for sale. Right down to the very core of our country’s foundations. He’s our first POTUS as #1 Pimp.
Molly had a keen nose for bullshit, as well as a sharp tongue with which she never failed to call out the purveyors of it. And she was the best at making fun of these self-important stuffed shirts. She was a treasure!
Everything in one’s background can be a factor in how they see the world and there is no reason not to consider it in political discussions. I can suggest, for example, that one’s class background is a factor in how they view the benefits of capitalism. I can suggest their view may be too optimistic.
However, it any factor is used to completely discount someone’s opinions, to say they should have no voice, it is very destructive to democracy.
For example, if someone said that Jews cannot discuss Israeli society objectively and their opinions are therefore invalid, I don’t think that most people would accept that argument.
So consider everything as an influence that can be criticized but don’t use it to exclude and silence people.