The Problem With Privilege

Privilege is a word that is used to describe a lot of different things in an attempt to convey one core concept, unfortunately that message is often lost in the conversations that follow as they tend to lead to conflict and so the concept itself never actually communicated.  The result is that rather than getting people to recognise the concept, instead those conversations feed conflict rather than providing any opportunity for it to be resolved.

There are protests taking place around the world right now promoting the Black Lives Matter movement; these protests were sparked by the murder of George Floyd.  However these protests are about much more than the death of one man, and those that fail to see this are also predominantly those who take issue with the concept of privilege.  I think one of the reasons behind this failure is the breakdown of communication.  Jane Elliott is an educator who has devoted her life to combating racism, for over 50 years she has conducted experiments, given lectures, and demonstrations that attempt to make people see the root causes and the impact of racism amongst other social conflicts by communicating the core concepts.  One particular video that has gone viral once again is that where she asks a room full of white people to stand up if they would be happy to be treated the way black people are treated - not surprisingly, no-one stands up.

This idea of getting people to see something from another person's point of view is compelling but it also makes people realise the true context of their own position, it makes people realise their privilege.  Again however there are still those who take issue with that word and what it implies to them, so in an effort to combat this ideology I want to take a moment and try to explain the concept with a different word.

Using the word 'privilege' is useful in some settings, but not all; there are situations where using it is inflammatory not because of what it actually represents but because of the false assumptions that are made by the people that it is directed at.  To give an example, when you tell a poor, white, unemployed person, that they are privileged, that is a hard pill for them to swallow because they can't comprehend how they could possibly be privileged when they don't feel privileged - they therefore take it as an attack on them personally and an attempt to label them as something they feel they are not.  From their perspective they take what matters most to them, usually wealth, and they look at how much they have, and they will look to people they in their mind deem to be privileged by wealth, i.e. a billionaire, and then reject that label.  This is not what is intended by the people who use that word, and thus conflict inevitably ensues.

However if you change the word you use and instead of saying privilege, say instead "advantage" you get a different response, by saying "White advantage" or "Male advantage", "Straight advantage" etc, you get people to see a different perspective.  The word "advantage" more accurately communicates what is intended by the original argument, that you have an advantage based on the fact that you fit that demographic.  If you are white you have an advantage over someone who is not, if you are male you have an advantage over someone who is not, and if you are straight you have an advantage over someone who is not.  To have an advantage does not guarantee success and even in failure you still retain that advantage because a poor white person and a poor black person are not on an equal footing, whether that is in the way society treats them or the opportunities they get when they attempt to build their wealth. 

"Privilege" is a word that implies success, not only potential success but success already achieved, therein lies the problem, when it is directed at someone who does not feel successful, they reject the label.  The word was intended to imply advantage but it was never received with that implication by those who did not perceive themselves as a success.  Those who did not feel successful failed to recognise the advantage they still held even in a place of failure, because of their perception that privilege is about your about your current state as opposed to their potential and their future path.

Right now our focus is on America because that is where George Floyd died and where the epicentre of the problem of police brutality and disproportionate targeting of Black and Ethnic Minorities through prejudice and discrimination is most visible but this is a problem that goes beyond America.  Black Lives Matter is a movement and protests in support of it are being held across the world not just in protest at what is happening in America but also in protest of the same problems within those countries that are protesting, as much as the political leaders of those countries are happy to try and direct the focus of those protests at America, the anger that is being expressed is domestic too, and the recoil of those same leaders can be seen when racism within their own countries is challenged and they flip and attack the protests trying to label them as something they are not.

I grew up in Northern Ireland where race was never really discussed until I was about 14 years old, partly because where I lived was almost exclusively white but also in part because Northern Ireland was and still is living with the legacy of its own Civil Rights Movement one that was defined by religion as opposed to race.  Racism is a problem in Northern Ireland as much as anywhere else, I won't pretend it is not, that would be a disservice.  I would contend however that there is a more intimate understanding within its society of the effect of segregation, prejudice, and discrimination because these were things that most people within its society had experienced first hand or descended from people who had.  More than this, in High School as part of the National Curriculum in NI at the time we read a book called 'Roll Of Thunder Hear My Cry' by Mildred D. Taylor, an African American author from Jackson, Mississippi.  The book tells the story of Cassie Logan, a young black girl growing up in the deep south and her experience of enforced racial segregation under the Jim Crow laws.  The novel gets quite graphic in parts, but the one thing that always stood by me since we read it together was the fact that in a class of 30 or so white kids, the anger at the way Cassie was treated was palpable.  We studied the book with context and understood the historical accuracy of the content which made it hit home so much.

I am privileged in many ways, most notably I have white privilege and I have male privilege, I recognise the advantages these give me.  I also have disadvantages due to health, disability, and sexuality, I recognise these too and how they are used against me by others.  I can understand why someone would not feel as if they were privileged in the sense of the word that campaigners want people to recognise, but I also recognise why that is the case, and why that reaction isn't justified because it's based on the false assumption of its meaning and not what is intended by the use of the word.  I think the reason why I can see this is because of the environment I grew up in, and the education I received.  I think more people can be reached through better communication but the real issue is finding a way to communicate those concepts.

This post was not written to make people recognise their privilege, if you are reading this post then you probably know your privileges.  This post was written to make you think about whether there's a more effective way to get your message across.  To call back to Jane Elliott, the videos that went viral demonstrating her approach were effective in communicating what is meant and what is intended through deconstruction of the concept and demonstration not through language alone.  She made people understand the context of what she was communicating rather than relying on them interpreting the words she used with the assumption they would draw the same meaning from those words - or to put it another way, she made people "see" the dress itself, rather than assuming they saw the same way she did, as blue and black or white and gold.