Majority Privilege, Not White Privilege!           Listen to this article here, https://youtu.be/3qOhtN1TzAw

11/7/2016

 

This comes and goes as a topic in various forms.  In the United States it’s been a fairly common topic among various chat rooms and internet forums in 2016 and 2015.  It is often fueled by racist concepts and a misunderstood history so many talking head on mainstream news outlets incorrectly invoke.  It is also a topic that is mixed with authority and power and wealth where those with the ability to make laws or spend money wildly to purchase loyalty seem to be the problem.  But it’s not as much about skin color as so many seem to confuse with it exclusively.  It’s about a failure to correctly identify context.











 

 

This idea of white privilege gets hyped up when a white law enforcers kills, harasses, or otherwise hurts a black or non-white individual they decide to interact with in the performance of their governmental duties.  I could share a list of sources showcasing how white law enforcers stop, harass, and otherwise hurt more whites, including killing them, than they do non-whites.  But what’s the point?  I could also explain how this translates into jury indictments and judges’ rulings.  Popular culture and social stigmas don’t react the same to a white man being interacted with as negatively it seems as they do with a black individual regardless of gender or other non-white individuals also regardless of gender; or even a white female.

 

I could share how more whites struggle to survive hardships economically in total numbers, are standing before a judge, and what their prosecution rates are counted, than blacks.  I’m not talking percentages.  But once more, what the point since media manipulation mixed with personal political goals spread divisive hate and labeling when a story is reported about a white man murdering a black man when the issue is about murder and the motive concerning self defense?!  Why bring up race when the issue is about one human killing another either in self defense or not?  Such is universally deemed wrong if not in self defense.

 

The focus should be on understanding the context of every possible stimulant that could affect the actions of individuals; and there are more stimuli than just racial discrimination.  And in the case of what is understood as White Privilege, it would be a failure to not understand historical context with visible popular culture and fads being anti-discrimination while the legal system is ripe with so many laws proclaimed to help; but they only focus on the racial aspect or socially divisive aspect of why a crime was committed.  Take for example hate crimes and killing people because they are black or homosexual.  The legality shouldn’t care why the individual killed the victim for any other reason than doing so in self defense and that context.

 

By going out and discussing trivial issues like racially motivated killing or hostilities instead of the quality of the character committing the act against the quality of the victim’s character, division is created among those not overly keen to improve their intellectual abilities.

 

The issue is not in skin color granting favoritism.  The issue is about control, critical thinking skills concerning individual survival and resource acquisition, and the most common connections with others.  If the tables were absolutely even in terms of ten white males and ten black males all equal in every aspect, including all twenty having moderate but not low or high intelligence, how much would they consider risking a group fight to the death because their skin colors are different?

 

Would they even consider the possibility of such future outcomes at all concerning peace in their lives because of generational grudges being handed down or would that be entirely what they would focus on?  Critical thinking skills and context of the situation is what the issue is about.  Why do people put others down when it is not to the immediate benefit of their self defense?  Absolutely money can play a role in this but it is often just a factor employed by opportunity and calculated tactics to intentionally divide people seeking to profit from them by using it to be a distraction.  Most often this is done politically by those keen on having power for their personal benefit.

 

But if the languages of these men were to be changed where all the black men spoke one language and all the white men spoke another language, what would the situation be then?  Fear of the unknown is the culprit here.  And if a bad idea not thought through all the way takes hold akin to ‘the best defense is a good offense’ then there is reason to fear one another because of misunderstood context of actions.  They would simply be at one another’s throats because they are trying to get rid of something they don’t understand which instills fear in them instead of realizing the potential of a greater set of future allies in the struggle of life to survive.  And that ‘in the now destructive thinking’ is the problem when chosen.

 

Skin color has very little to do with this issue overall.  In fact if skin color had any significant and deeply intellectual effect on white privilege and the proclaimed superiority then perhaps I wouldn’t have had the experiences I did in high school!  I wouldn’t have been faced with five, six, seven, eight, nine or more black male students asserting their numerical superiority and lack of respect of their futures over me in the back of a bus.  I was targeted because of my skin color due to their shallow intellectual reasons but also because of me being the minority in the area and other differences in comparison to them.  Control is what they exerted over me for the boosting of their own poorly invested self pride.

 

I certainly wouldn’t remember their greasy fingers on my face while the other black students ignored the situation of the only white individual on that bus ride most mornings.  I wouldn’t remember their horrid breath in my nostrils.  I wouldn’t remember their tightly clenched fists in my gut and my lower back.  I wouldn’t remember fighting to hold back my tears so they wouldn’t have any visible satisfaction in knowing they successfully intimidated me.  And I certainly wouldn’t remember the look of a middle aged short black female bus driver looking at me each day as I climbed onto the bus to test my resolve.  She was just as scared as the other students were, so I like to think in her defense.  They hid in their majority group of black skin color to not have to stand up to the minority group in their own majority group; because such conflict would put them at risk of being targeted by the seemingly powerful, aggressive, and combative minority group in their majority group of relatively peaceful black counterparts.

 

During those weeks I had little choice but to sit in the back of the bus.  There were seats available in the front, but my use of them was rejected by the other students.  Even though there were always empty seats with the black students in the front, I wasn’t allowed to sit with them.  This was not because of racial reasons.  My presence in the front of that bus was rejected because the trouble makers in the back of that bus would have made their way to the front to pick on me and whoever I sat near.  So they chose to protect themselves by letting me fend for myself and be the distraction from potential hostilities.  I was the individual they decided to sacrifice to the bear roaming around instead of grouping together and fighting the bear off.

 

That’s not privilege of being white.  It’s the unfortunate result of being a minority where critical thinking skills, moral philosophy, and compassion aren’t developed fully, if at all; where fear reigns supreme in the moment!  Some will call that children just being children or me just being a whiny little expletive.  But the truth of the matter is that such ridicule is simply misunderstood context or the rejection of greater clarity.  At least that was true for my experience concerning my junior year.  The following year I went to a much wealthier white majority populated school as my parents moved from the area.  The unfortunate experiences didn’t fade.  They simply changed criteria for why I was allowed to be bullied.

 

I drove a 1972 Oldsmobile or rode the bus as a senior the following year.  That was a horrendous for me as the parking lot was typically filled with BMWs, Mercedes Benz, and other rather expensive automobiles.  The problem wasn’t entirely that these people were horrid souls.  It was absolutely about confidence on my part in myself and confidence on their part in themselves as well as their understanding of authority and compassion in relation to mine; and where skin color was the issue in my previous school, blatant displays of wealth replaced that in my new school.











 

 

 

It wouldn’t be until years later that I would understand the context of the situation I was in when I read about how most minds do not fully develop critical thinking skills until their mid to late twenties.  I don’t know the science behind much of that.  It sounds as if it could hold some truth to it.  But for me, I know that I was not fully developed intellectually in terms of internal security until I was nearly thirty.  This is in large part due to the authoritarian nature of my father whom never realized the negative results his temper had on a three year old little boy and through his twenties.

 

Instead of trying to understand my situation as a junior I was ridiculed by him for not standing up for myself on that bus despite the fact that it was a death sentence to challenge half a dozen stronger students than I even with martial arts training.  And challenging them otherwise would have only escalated the situation in such a hostile environment where that are of Eastern Atlanta was more heavily black populated than other parts.  Then the following year I knew it was a mistake to discuss my troubles with my father about the other students because he had an air of superiority about him that I didn’t understand and he couldn’t explain which would have simply led to me be ridiculed as a wimp as he was prone to do jokingly and seriously with prior experiences.

 

Clarity of individual context is what the idea of privilege is all about.  And if the individuals are like minded or have other similar traits they will group together.  Pending their intellectual capabilities, their actions on how they interact with minorities will either be positive and peacefully inclusive or hostile and destructive.  Now consider my situation in high school where I was dealing with other emotionally and intellectually immature minds and voila!  It was easy for immature minds to improve their ego temporarily and dangerously at the expense of hurting another potentially causing blowback in the future for the aggressor.  Of course the moment that another got the best of the aggressor was the moment that his or her hollow pride would be destroyed and they end up on the receiving end of such fear they invoked in others but didn’t truly understand when they invoked such power for their gains.  And that is what all of this ‘white’ privilege is about.

 

However, the peer pressure of high school doesn’t end at graduation.  Collective conformity continues on outside of high school.  It can take the shape of many different forms.  In the case of law enforcement, if the head of the department is aggressive and not confronted to be taught otherwise successfully it may attract other aggressive personalities.  Or the way the various laws end up working together may craft training programs which subtly encourage aggression towards those whom are more dissimilar than they are.

 

The problem is not race to be sure.  The problem is how people identify and acquire information in order to piece the puzzle of context together in each interaction.  And that is what is most important.











 

 

We can look at this and see how it works around the world and in history.  The truth is that we need to be able to assess threats.  And if someone looks more like we do then they are seemingly more likely to get a pass or cause less initial distress.  If they do not look like us but speak the same language we may be more likely to interact and get to know them better than those whom do not speak the same language as we do.  It’s all about understanding context of available avenues to remove those fears in the moment but not at the expense of the most productive potential future outcomes.

 

We fear what we do not understand or agree with.  This is true even for those boys who caused me so much terror in my last half of high school.  They felt the fear and pressure of their home lives and or social aspects because being seen as weak by not asserting one’s self is not a very desirable trait in the social circles of younger still developing minds and hearts pending their parents’ or guardians’ teachings.  Fortunately there are much easier means to understanding this fear than to incite or escalate hostilities.  We are all human beings and want to be heard.  We all have stories that we want to have listened to because it is a form of vindication for us.  It tells us that we are important enough to be heard and that we are not alone.

 

This doesn’t mean that there isn’t racism in the world.  I am only arguing that racism is not what fuels this white privilege that seems to portray white law enforcement brutality being heavier handed against blacks than whites.  I’m sure there are many reasons, starting with the way laws are crafted, that promote such seemingly stupidity and ignorance on behalf law enforcement.  I also have no qualms about saying a large part of this proclaimed ‘white’ privilege is founded in the ability to employ violent aggression against others by law enforcement because that is what law enforcement is all about; initiating aggression.

 

Law enforcement believes they have a socially granted right by the majority to initiate aggression to protect themselves against those they believe are a threat to them or the society they are taught they are to protect, even if it is from a tail light being out.  This is true, even if they do not understand it because they often follow orders without recognizing the unintended consequences of their actions and it is socially unacceptable to pull a gun on a law enforcer even justly because the following headline will be akin to, ‘So & So murdered Family man Officer Jon Doe in your town!  Are you safe from this cop killer?  More at 11!’  Of course since blacks in the United States are still a minority in comparison to whites nationwide, it will be more collectively acceptable to act aggressively towards them than other whites despite a lot of the contradictory nature of popular anti-discrimination sentiment.

 

This is true in part because the overruling majority sentiment is not that racism and discrimination is bad, but that government is a necessary evil.  Because government in action dictates that everyone must pay or lose in order to gain and be safe collectively, it is okay to hurt others if it is for some kind of greater good.  Therefore, all law enforcement gets a greater pass at such things.  This is what the Black Live Matter movements should be speaking out against, government intervention and promotion of hostilities; not being angry at white people and stopping traffic which financially hurts innocent people likely no more intelligent than they are without regard for race, gender, or anything else other than being a motorist at the wrong time of day.

 

Yet being a majority is absolutely with its consequences pending the critical thinking skills, desire to self reflect and improve, as well as define a moral philosophy which is mindful of both present and future actions equally to preserve life and property; not encourage greater risks through blowback and retaliation requiring further hostilities and a lower chance of peace between reason capable minds in the future!

 

Similar to before, we can take a group of five black men and a group of five white men with three in one group speaking one language and the others in each group speaking another and the common tongues will congregate sooner with each other than non-common tongues.  These people will identify more similarities with one another because they can alleviate their fears of ‘what if’ concerning them through peaceful communication.  The main issue will be language.  And that language barrier will hold up for much longer until one or more of them begin to learn the alternate languages.

 

But if all of them spoke the same language, then race, gender, age, intelligence and other aspects will play a more pivotal role in how they interact.  Legalities only encourage division because it’s always a poor versus rich problem, a group versus group problem, in politics with no politician ever truly offering the solution to simply talk to those we fear.  Now introduce divisive laws and inaccurate historical context where some of the whites’ ancestors owned some of the blacks’ ancestors with at least half of the blacks feeling they are owed something and the situation changes even if they speak the same languages.  There is division there, but why?

 

None of what happened was directed at the present groups.  None in the present groups are responsible for the actions of their forefathers.  But why does it matter with the current aspect of affairs concerning the idea of white privilege?  Because those invoking this concept don’t understand or haven’t realized that it is merely a divisive idea that creates hostilities between those whom are more emotionally controlled, can and do see quality of character first, and recognize the aspect of future affairs and those who see something in the moment to profit from because of emotional outrage.  Yes, this likely can be correlates with intelligence or the ability to control instinct and emotion for greater gains later on.

 

For those non-whites invoking the idea that whites have privilege, they seem to often feel like they can immediately gain from the situation in terms of ideas such a government mandated reparations for crimes committed against their ancestors and themselves because of the way history has seemingly been stacked against them.  For those invoking white privilege but are white it is because they may feel guilty out of fear, similar to why those students and bus driver didn’t help me out, and or they don’t have enough information to fully see the context of the situation.  But no matter which side this is promoted from, it is a divisive issue that is only a distraction from one thing.

 

Creating hostility where it doesn’t have any legitimate business existing is the focal point.  That is what people are distracted from recognizing when invoking these shallow ideas of racial privilege without exploring the ideas deeper to understand other potential stimuli for the issues at hand.  One generic experience apparently tells all because what it matches is what triggers emotional outrage in the moment for the loudest proponents of ‘white’ privilege today!

 

There is no racial privilege.  It merely seems like there is because of how the populace is mixed, or isn’t mixed, and I believe is directly proportional to the intellectual and emotional maturity of the majority and minorities in question.  If the label were changed to Catholic then the majority being Catholic would favor other Catholics pending their maturity levels.  If the label were changed to Irish then the majority being Irish would favor other Irish; again pending their maturity levels.  And the same holds true for my situations in high school; and just like I was able to figure it out, so too would the minorities being persecuted by Catholics, Irish, and others in the scenarios just mentioned.  Interestingly enough this is a common theme many Native America historical accounts when there realized they were losing their way of life through attrition.

 

While the technological achievements of war played a significant role in the destruction of the Native Americans’ way of life, it was the farming techniques and technology which enabled larger populations of white individuals to survive and eventually outgrow the previous natives.  With this advantage portions of the white population that never had contact with these previous natives put pressure on those with contact to move them out of the way.  And then ultimately demanded the federal and state governments to perform such tasks because the people in the more populated cities demanded recourses they were far removed from.  The nescience and outright ignorance of these people to understand the unintended consequences of their actions sowed destruction and hostility.

 

In the case of the recent Standing Rock protests, U.S. police and or military have been deployed to supposedly do horrible things to the Native American protestors in the name of people far removed from the situation and nescient if not intentionally ignorant of what is going on.  I state ‘supposedly’ after having done little research on the current aspect of this particular affair; However, my studies into U.S. history showcase the consistent reneging of contractual obligations by the federal government and state governments concerning ancestral lands and the like.  The history between the federal and state governments and each respective Indian tribe, particularly in the North East, Midwest, and Northwest which haven’t been particularly great!  In Dixie they are only slightly better but it’s not noticeable to those whom haven’t studied the mid 1800 history of Indian tribes in the South.  But no matter those trifle differences, since the majority rules concept changes everything making the issues at Standing Rock, in the Dakotas, something of importance right now!  The land disputes in question need further clarity by the general public and law enforcement alike if a peaceful solution is to be made.

 

All of the little tidbits of interaction and history gathered leading up to this create the clarity needed in understanding the ‘who,’ ‘what,’ when,’ ‘where,’ ‘how,’ and ‘why’ of the present situation that is seen as a racially motivated act of hostility by the white people involved on the side of the oil pipeline and a defense of their racially motivated attacks on the other.  And that makes it eerily similar to the way blacks are treated in the United States today in terms of common language, interests and culture.  The more the similarities there are the lower the chances of employing unwarranted aggression and the idea of ‘a strong offense is a good defense tactic’.  Yet when Native Americans and Blacks alike do things that are more in line and similar with what the majority white population wants, they are often very successful.  Take for example the casinos run by some Native Americans or charter schools they’ve created.  And look at the successful black businessmen in the world like Herman Cain, a former chain pizza shop owner and Neil deGrasse Tyson an amazing astrophysicist!  I’m sure the local governments find ways to profit off these men very nicely!  It’s also less likely they will be targeted by some stupidity because of their contributions to the majority’s preferred norms.  It can still happen, but their language, intelligence, and skill sets make them valuable to points that even lower IQ members of the majority will easily be able to recognize as important.

 

There is no white privilege, or racially based privilege until the issue of understanding majority privilege has been recognized and understood.  This means that understanding historical context will illuminate the problems allowing us to make the corrections when necessary to avoid destructive hostilities and promote creative connections.  This is bettering future relations between all reason capable individuals able to communicate on relatively similar levels.

 

Then when the majority concept is recognized, it would be fair to say that this version of majority privilege happens to be white in the United States.  In Mexican towns it would be Hispanic privilege.  In Beijing, China it would be Chinese privilege.  In the heart of the African Continent it would be black privilege.  But the issue is majority privilege with some subcategories.

 

In this case it would be similar to understanding the differences between patriotism and nationalism.  In this the evolution of the use of the word of patriotism means ‘to support’ where nationalism is a specific kind of support for a country that is governed.  Prior to nationalism, patriotism was about devotion to country too.  Now it is still associated with it but akin to the way anarchy means chaos and also means ‘without centralized rulers.’  But that is a topic to be discussed at another time.

 

Suffice it to say, the issue is a critical thinking problem rooted precisely in intellectual and emotional maturity.  We identify with what we are most familiar with because of how we are taught or learn.  This doesn’t answer the questions of every law enforcement brutality encounter between different races.  It does however put a large gaping hole in the idea that some with particular skin pigmentation, or lack thereof in the United States, somehow have magically intentional agreements between others akin to them in racial appearances that just let them off the hook with absolute intent to avoid the most dastardly form of hostilities by other whites in positions of power over them.











 

 

It’s just not that simple.  The truth is often far stranger and more complex than fiction, yet comprehension of complex ideas requires more intellectual development and maturity and work to recognize.  And that is why I believe the fundamental problem lay in how we identify first with others and how that connects to our intelligence as individuals and groups.  This is of course going to be taken the wrong way by so many people as if I am calling certain groups stupid or smarter than the rest with intent to demean.

 

The truth is that it is about individual context and full comprehension of that context.  And what is that context?  In a nutshell, it’s that we all want to live peaceful lives free of destructive conflict.  That is a very real possibility if we learn to control the only thing we can, ourselves as individuals, for the purpose of recognizing how our hasty and ill thought through actions often hinder greater possibilities in the future.

 

-JLD

~~~

 

Find out more about my works here:
I base all of my posts on previous content I've created in two books  and multiple audio programs.

Download and read for free Liberty Defined and Morality Defined here,

https://www.smashwords.com/books/byseries/20333 or http://www.jimlimberdavis.com/books-cnec

 

Listen to my Liberty & Morality Defined presents Youtube audio series here, http://bit.ly/2eT3ZxN

 

If you're a Star Wars fan and would like to start the journey into a realm of fantasy following a journey of struggle against two separate empires and a galaxy of souls lost in a conflict still raging on after 10 million years, download and read for free book one of my Hunter's Gambit series, Revelations here, http://bit.ly/2b1QoBh

 

And visit me on FB at FB.com/LibertyDefined
FB.com/JLimberDavis

Twitter @JimLimberDavis
Steemit @JimLimberDavis

 

If you enjoy the work I create, please encourage more of it with one time or reoccurring donations here,

http://www.jimlimberdavis.com/#!donation-support/c22og

Download a free PDF  of Liberty Defined here!

Want to advertise here?

This site is a Google ads free site.  Ad blockers do not work here.  All advertisements are custom made and never blocked! 

Prices start @ $15 / 28 days!  Click here to learn more!