European style Fascism and Nazism endemic, to the second
quarter of the 20th Century, are being brought back to vigorous life
in modern America. On the one hand, a
loosely organized, but powerful, group of activists speaking to a concept
generally termed “White Privilege” are pushing their agenda, with little media
attention, to the forefront of discussion about important social and economic
issues confronting the new America of the 21st Century. On the other hand, the resurgence of a cancer
that’s attempted to insinuate its way into American society since World War II,
generally termed the “White Supremacy” movement, is dominating headlines in
2017 America. While inaccurate, “White
Privilege” is generally seen as a passion of the “left” while “White Supremacy”
is generally seen as the passion of the “right.” In
truth, just as Fascism and Nazism were, in many ways, two sides of the same
coin and, thus, natural allies, White Privilege activists and White
Supremacists are fused into a single coin by the alloy of racism central to the
philosophical approach of each group.
 |
| The Bloody Battle Of Gettysburg |
Because there is little ideological difference distinguishable between
the race based positions adopted by the White Privilege movement and those of
the White Supremacists, Americans truly interested in effectively addressing
social and economic challenges facing the nation today are faced with a
Hobson’s choice; a take it or leave it proposition with little public
discussion about non-racially oriented alternatives to those challenges either
wanted, or, often as not, allowed.
White
Privilege as a concept is defined well by Wikipedia, “White privilege (or white skin privilege) is a term for societal privileges that
benefit people identified as white in Western countries, beyond what is
commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social,
political, or economic circumstances.”
Does White Privilege actually exist in America?
Of course White Privilege exists, in the United States and
elsewhere. In any society many groups enjoy
“societal privileges” others are not privy to.
A 2016 Pew study of social and economic differences between whites and
blacks in the U.S. demonstrated whites do better than blacks in America in many
of the social and economic metrics examined.
Data presented in the study also demonstrates those identified as Asians
do considerably better in terms of economics than either whites or blacks. Does that mean “Asian Privilege” should be of
more interest to those engaged in the privilege discussion than “White
Privilege?”
The potential list of “Privileged” groups is endless. A 2016 story about Treasury Department data
in the Seattle Times was headlined, “Married gay couples beat straight couples in
income.” So now we should worry
about “Gay Privilege?” Pew’s 2016
Religious Landscape Study shows Jews, Hindus, Episcopalians, and Presbyterians
all do considerably better in terms of income than either agnostics or
atheists, each of whom do better than all of America’s other religious
denominations. Should we now attack
“Jew, Hindu, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian Privilege,” and take government
mandated steps to improve the lot of Jehovah’s Witnesses; the most deprived religious
group economically?
The point is, making the case for “White Privilege” requires defining groups and individuals by race; didn’t we
decide years ago the Nazis went outside the bounds of civilized behavior
because of their attitudes regarding race?
Don’t most of us agree White Supremacists offer America almost nothing
save hate and violence? So why do “White
Privilege” advocates want to follow the lead of those two hate groups?
“White Privilege”
advocates most often use the term “people of color,” in defining people by
race. So, who are these people of
color? How does a person come to be
defined as an oppressed “person of color” rather than as a privileged “white?”
My mother-in-law and
father-in-law both came from Mexico.
Were they people of color? “White
Privilege” advocates, apparently taking onto themselves the moral authority to
decide, would generally say, “Yes.”
If my in-laws were
people of color then my wife is a person of color. I am generally considered to be “white.” Only being half “Mexican,” are our children
“white” or are they oppressed “people of color?”
My children are married
to people generally considered to be “white.”
Being only one-quarter “people of color” how will my grandchildren be
defined; or my great-grandchildren who may be only one-eighth “people of color?”
Who gets to decide
what a person of color is? Are Jews
people of color? How about Hindus, many
of whom claim descent from Aryan forbearers?
How about the descendants of Asian families? When does a child become “branded” as “white”
when born to a family previously defined as a “family of color?”
Did we learn nothing
from the Fascists; from the Nazis; from our own oppression in past times of
American citizens identified as being “Japanese?”
Defining people by
race and then applying race based “fixes” to perceived problems based on race is un-Christian and, from the little I know about several other religions,
un-Jewish/Hindi/Muslim/etc., not to mention un-American.
A better approach,
one that does not defy common decency, is to adopt and then expand on a universal
concept found in nearly all religions: “Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you.”
“White Privilege”
advocates and “White Supremacists” truly represent two faces of the same coin
just as the Fascists and the Nazis, both of which espoused versions of
Socialism as part of their racist philosophies, were significantly similar. “White Privilege” advocates and “White
Supremacists” want to take the rest of us sliding down the same slippery slope
that led to the horrific genocides of the past.
“Never again,” must really mean “Never again” or we will certainly see the
horrors of the past repeated again; this time in America. Is that really
a risk we want to take?
