One of the biggest scams liberalism pulled on us is to convince us that we exist in societies where we actually have "rights" and "freedoms."
In reality, we exist in a society that is hierarchically based on privilege.
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
9 points (100.0% liked)
Flippanarchy
886 readers
482 users here now
Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to [email protected]
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
Hearing it like that makes it even sadder, because it shows in an easy way that people discriminate against each other without even being good off themselves.
https://www.wordnik.com/words/privilege
I agree with what the poster is trying to say, but you can't just change the meaning of words to fit your argument
This is a motte-and-bailey argument, in which one term has two definitions. You have the definition in the OP which gets brought out whenever someone argues against the idea of "privilege". It's designed to be hard to disagree with and so it just states the obvious. However, it's not the definition that people who talk about privilege actually use in any other context. Otherwise why would they talk about dismantling privilege? Or refuse to talk about the privilege of of anyone except straight/white/cis people (usually men)?
I don't like it when people make a controversial claim and then pretend that they aren't doing that if anyone challenges them, rather than defending the claim.
This is really the only definition I’m aware of. What do you imagine these other people mean then?
I think that in other contexts, they present privilege as a property of groups rather than of individuals. So, for example, white people as a whole have white privilege and so any particular white person has it because of his race, not because of anything he personally has or has not experienced.
They also present it as something that the privileged groups have unfairly, at the expense of other groups. "When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression." If privilege is simply the state of not having your life made worse, why would it feel different from equality? Why would anyone want to dismantle it?
I don’t really understand how these ideas are in conflict with the meme here. You could be living a perfect life in a material sense but still be miserable if you are clinically depressed.
Privilege takes many forms. Some are just not being subject to oppression or violence that these other groups face, but some can also be benefiting from the oppression of those groups.
For example, having class privilege can mean benefiting from cheap labor to fulfill your desires. If a billionaire was deprived of all or most of the labor of the people who support their lavish lifestyle, I have to imagine this could cause them considerable distress, at least temporarily. In that case, I think it’s fairly easy to see how equality could feel like oppression.
Another example is that some people just like having a higher social status in society. It feels natural and empowering for them to be “above” other people in some sense. When this is upended, it feels bad.
But again, none of this implies that these people are living good lives in the current system. It just means they either benefit from it or aren’t harmed by it in some way, small or large. For most people, I think the benefits are small and may even be outweighed by other benefits they would receive in a more equal society. But there are those who would lose more, and they tend to be the loudest opponents of equality. They also tend to be wealthy and influential in the media and they influence many other people to adopt their viewpoints, even when those viewpoints aren’t in those people’s best interests.
All that said, this seems to be a common and recurring issue, so it may be that the concept of privilege needs reframing to avoid triggering people who don’t understand what it means. I am open to suggestions but we also need to be careful not to minimize or erase the struggles of oppressed people in our language.
I'm not sure "privilage" is the right term in this scenario. For me, the term "privilage" would be more fitting to describe rich people.
I know you have good intent, but if we go around calling straight white cisgender men "privilaged", that's just fueling the "culture war" when we really should be focusing on the class war.
Social privilege is 100% a thing. You can bet that the fact that a white person doesn't receive subconsciously ingrained doubt and xenophobia from literally everyone else pretty much ensures that a white person will be subconsciously favoured. (edit:) this doesn't mean that they will necessarily receive a cornucopia of riches, but it pretty much guarantees that they'll be first pick for the football team, so to speak.
Same goes for Maleness™ and Cis-ness (?), they are perceived as defaults, as standards. It also applies in the neurotypical-neurodivergent face-off.
In short, as long as there is any kind of "other" and one is not perceived as part of it, one is intrinsically privileged.
(edit 2:) And the only thing which trumps social privilege is money.
The question is whether privilege is the right word for this.
Privilege kinda describes something above what's deserved or something unearned.
You're describing basic human decency I think which everyone deserves
I have been arguing this for years now and all I get is the "bUt tHeY're BEtTeR oFf sO ThEy arE prIviLeGeD"
OK, and look at all the people you're calling "privileged" who don't agree with you because of your characterization of them. If changing the word gets them on your side isn't that worth it?
Well, it's an unearned advantage, isn't it? What else would you call such an advantage other than a privilege?
Basic human decency, including not having who you are used against you, isn't something people should have to earn.
I agree with all of the ideas in this meme, but I've never been a fan of this wording. "Privilege" in particular. To flip the wording, I'd rather it be "the minority handicap" or something. It almost seems like it's calling out straight white men as the enemy of these ideas. If straight white men are the problem, then seems like that's the group you'd be trying to convince. Yet this wording seems to alienate them more.
That was my thought. If my race isn't making it worse it seems like that should be the standard. It's more like a non-white disadvantage, which I admit doesn't roll of the tongue as well.
And none of that holds a candle to privalige of being rich.
I mean, you've got the OJ paradox.
Did he get away with murder by throwing money at an army of top lawyers? Absolutely.
Did he get singled out by the LAPD and dragged through what was supposed to be a kangaroo court run by literal Hitler worshipping fascists? Also Absolutely.
Wealth doesn't completely immunize you against bigotry, particularly from the vile views of other richer people.