Thoughts on White Privilege

Over the past few days I have listened with a bemused attitude as a parade of white men have bemoaned the losing of their privilege. Most of this pity parade was in response to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States. In a case of mass projection, a plethora of white men have challenged Sotomayor as racist, primarily because there seems to be a fear among them that she will not automatically rule in favor of the white man.

Many of their challenges have been absurd. Tom Tancredo compared La Raza to the Ku Klux Klan, Rush Lim-baa (as in sheep), compared her to David Duke, a charge that even the former Klansman reputed. Karl Rove, the dropout who doesn't respect the educational process, questioned her intelligence. Throwing everything against the wall and hoping something sticks, we've got the usual absurdities from the likes of Glenn Beck and Toad Gingrich.

Sadly, NBC commentator Pat Buchanan appears to be the most blatant of the lot, openly decrying the declining power of the white male. Buchanan, for his part, at least seems genuine, although I'm not sure if that's in his favor or not.

The position that these white men have all staked out is that leveling the playing field is racist. That taking away the automatic advantage that white males have expected for centuries is somehow wrong. Buchanan stated on Monday that if a job were given to a minority it was taken from a white male. His underlying bias is that a white man must be the best for every job. Suppose that giving a job to one minority took the job from another minority (e.g. female vs. Latino). Where would Buchanan stand? On the side of the white man that finished third.

You see, what those who are crying racism at present are really upset about is the loss of their own privilege. It is presented that giving a fair opportunity is somehow unjust, while the old status quo that held down everyone but the white man was somehow fair. Arguments against affirmative action in colleges never seem to suggest that the legacy admissions (children of alumni) are an unfair advantage even though these allow underqualified students admission to many top schools (e.g. Bush 43). Let's not bring up that the dumb children of the rich can guarantee decent SAT's because of a prep school education, while a brilliant child of poverty stricken parents may not be able to afford to take the test.

Advantages and disadvantages do matter. White males have had everything their way for so long that any attempt to even things out is seen as an attack. The bigoted are now accusing everyone of racism because they fear their days of dominating the power structure are over.