I can't even make much sense out of this incoherent diatribe; all I get from it is more complaining and moaning about some imaginary ''White privilege.'' And P.S., Ms Savali, if the word 'Black' merits a capital letter, then so does the word 'White.' Why is it that Whites are ''privileged'' then we don't merit having our name capitalized?
If Whites are 'privileged' then why is it that any White who attempts to defend himself or his folk in matters racial, is assailed with the invented word ''racist" or 'supremacist' instead of being thought a worthy defender of his people, as blacks who defend their people are considered? I suppose it is a sign of our ''privilege'' that the left, the White left, whose mindless support blacks disdain, invented a word, ''racism'', that can only be applied to White people and no other? That's a 'privilege' I can do without, having a term of abuse, a special category of thought-crime, coined just for me and mine.
Talk about privilege: blacks and other minorities are always sinned against and never sinning. Criticizing blacks or other ''victim'' groups is punished by job loss, career destruction, social ostracism (by the left and the politically correct ''right"), and even prosecution, in some countries. Blacks, however, can and do insult Whites and other races for that matter without any negative consequence whatever. That's privilege for somebody, but it ain't for Whites.
Blacks, too, are given carte blanche to riot, while if Whites protest, as in London when some White citizens went out to try to protect their neighborhoods in London during the riots of a few years ago, those Whites were pushed back by police while blacks and other minorities were allowed to burn and loot ad libitum.
Blacks have the privilege of being coddled by not having to meet standards -- affirmative action, for example -- and they have the privilege of having excuses made for every bit of misbehavior, up to and including murder. After all, -- racism! Poverty! The legacy of slavery! White privilege! Blacks are not accountable or responsible for anything, and to expect them and other minorities to abide by standards is 'racist', because those standards were set up by Whitey, and Whitey is privileged and racist and bigoted and hateful. And if any of us protest, we are castigated.
Even writing a post like this on the Internet no doubt places the writer on a list, but when are blacks warned about 'hate speech' as they condemn and curse and bear false witness against us? I've never seen blacks accused of bigotry or 'racism.' And why is that, exactly? Because the word 'racism' was invented expressly to be used as a word-weapon against Whites, to silence us, to discredit any criticism or murmur of protest on our part. We are always in the wrong, automatically. By definition. Yes, the definition of 'racism' has been crafted so as to exclude blacks and other minorities from being guilty of it. ''Racism equals bigotry plus power.'' How clever. How fortuitous.
So I can be a ''racist'' by that definition but a black person can say something like this:
Leonard Jeffries (chairman of the African-American studies department of the City College of New York, interviewed in the May, 1995 issue of Rutherford magazine):
Q: But the black man is no longer a slave.
A: The slave should be waking up, thinking of ways to slit the slavemaster's throat. . . .
Q: What kind of world do you want to leave to your children?
A: A world in which there aren't any white people. . . ."
Countless examples of this kind can be cited, enough to fill a book. And yet the mildest of criticisms, or even a carelessly-chosen word or phrase ("niggardly", or "Black hole", "picnic", "nitty-gritty") can be labeled 'racist' and censored, and the speaker fired, shamed, or driven out of polite society.
Who calls blacks and other minorities to account for their 'hate speech'? Nobody, at least in the controlled media. Hmm. Exemption from responsibility for one's actions? Sounds like privilege to me.
What's worst is that in 'White-privileged' America, White Americans can be slaughtered in horrible, indescribable ways (the Knoxville atrocities, in which two young people were tortured and killed, or the Wichita Massacre, in which four White people, who were minding their own business, were slain) and their deaths downplayed, and their killers given light punishments. That is privilege, to be able to commit crimes of that magnitude and to have them minimized by a pro-black media and justice system.
And then we are 'privileged' -- what an insane world this has come to be, in my lifetime.
Unless 'privileged' means being silenced and bullied by the media, by accusatory minorities and their left-wing White enablers and apologists -- and I am sure it does not -- then the privilege is not with us. The very fact that no article in the mainstream (so-called) media can express the point of view that I am expressing here is proof that we are not privileged to speak our minds, to voice our very justified grievances. Only minorities, with their unending complaints and accusations are allowed to have their point of view heard. Whites are not allowed to have pride in our folk, our ancestors, our considerable heritage, and not allowed to say we want to guarantee a future for our children. Our children are even accused of 'racism', even as babies. Remember the Newsweek magazine cover -- or was it Time? -- asking 'Is your baby racist?' The question was rhetorical, of course, since the media in general have decreed Whites, even White babies, guilty. Guilty of 'racism', from birth. Even those guilt-crazed leftists who march in solidarity with blacks (and who, like one misguided White man, was attacked at a protest by the black beneficiaries of his sympathy) are racist because they are White. White=racist! Nobody with White skin escapes condemnation, politics notwithstanding.
And isn't that what Whites were told was 'bigoted', to judge people as a group, to condemn all for what only 'some' did? We are convicted and punished for our 'sins' of thought, word, deed, and even a look that is judged to be 'hostile', but we don't have a right to offer a defense. There is no legitimate defense, in our accusers' eyes. We are perpetually guilty. We are guilty because of what our ancestors were alleged to have done, or what they didn't do. Yet our society traditionally rejects generational guilt, of people being held to blame for what their ancestors -- even our parents, much less remote ancestors -- are alleged to have done.
I suppose that's privilege?
Oh, there is privilege in this supposed 'free and equal' country, but it is not on our side. Privileged people are able to speak their minds, to defend themselves, their way of life, and their children's futures. In fact, one doesn't require privilege to be able to speak and think freely; isn't that supposed to be automatically part of being an American, of living in a ''free country"? Forget privilege; free Americans are theoretically able to choose their companions rather being unable to associate freely, or to abstain from associating.
Truly "privileged" people set the standards and define the terms; they are not forced to kowtow to others, to grovel and speak deferentially to everyone who claims 'victimhood.' They are not forced to kneel and apologize to others as 'leaders' like Bill Clinton and so many other Whites have done to blacks. Truckling and apologizing, begging forgiveness for imagined slights, or wrongs done centuries ago -- this is not what 'privileged' people do.
Who are 'privileged' people? Maybe people who live in a country created by someone else, where they can benefit from the accomplishments and know-how of others -- people who 'reap where they have not sown' -- those are privileged people. People who accuse and intimidate those unlike them, and who, though not willing to respect others, demand and get (unearned) respect or deference -- those are privileged people. Such people feel no need to respect others, or to abide by laws and customs based on reciprocity toward one's neighbors. That kind of one-sided 'respect' sounds like the kind of privilege traditionally accorded to nobility or royalty, not 'equals' in a republic.
Today's privileged people can command sympathy and special treatment based on dubious claims of having been 'persecuted' or mistreated. Enter the idea of "hate crimes". Because this kind of claim is profitable to putative victims, there's obviously a great incentive to allege wrongs by 'hateful racists' or bigots. How many 'hate crime' claims have been found to have been hoaxes and lies? Too many to count, but just off the top of my head, what about Tawana Brawley, the girl who claimed to have been gang-raped by Whites? The girl who launched Al Sharpton's dubious 'career'? For a more recent example, how about Crystal Gail Mangum, the false accuser in the Duke 'rape' hoax? How many lives did she ruin? And did the media ever admit that they supported the lies, and refused to hear evidence to the contrary? Hate crime hoaxsters should be shamed, but the dishonest, media enables these lies, and gives them credence automatically. And they are not harmless lies. These lies have ruined innocent people, and should be prosecuted in criminal court. But the lying media are a party to these falsehoods, and should be discredited. Left-wing Internet propaganda should also be discredited and shamed. But "White privilege" is not strong enough to stop all the false witness that is spread against White people.
Thus I contend that White privilege is laughably weak, if not totally imaginary. Since it doesn't even get us better PR, does not protect us against the myriad lies that are told every day in the mendacious media, since it does not exempt us from being prosecuted for exercising our First Amendment rights, since our point of view is still banished form the public square, since we are not allowed to freely associate or not associate with those we choose -- I contend that there is no evidence of White privilege. If a court of law had to decide whether this 'White privilege' exists, based on real evidence, any honest court would dismiss the case for lack of evidence.
That, of course, would be in a sane world, which our world today is surely not.
The privilege in this world goes to those who concoct some tale of 'oppression' or of being 'offended' by someone else's words, or by their very presence. Most 'victims' complain that the world (usually meaning Whitey, and The Rich, which also means 'Whitey') has denied them Equal Opportunity, and Kept Them Down. Professional victims think that their lack of some desired good proves that somebody is cheating them, oppressing and persecuting them. And minorities, being told all their lives that 'racists' are thwarting them at every turn, that 'racists' are plotting to deny them their "rights", believe they are the perpetual victims of scheming Whites. And they feel that this entitles them to compensation, benefits, even large sums of money for 'reparations' because of slavery suffered by their distant (five or more generations ago) ancestors. Shame on all those who promote this attitude, and who have created this insoluble problem of the aggrieved 'victims' who can never be satisfied.
The 'Victim', real or imagined, is King (or Queen) in this topsy-turvy world, the world in which the competent and the capable are somehow guilty for their accomplishments or personal abilities, while the have-nots, who fancy themselves as suffering from social injustices on a cosmic scale, are catered to, fawned over, appeased, even idolized and put on a pedestal.
This is where privilege lies, and it has created this absurd situation where supposed 'suffering' or oppression creates a class of bogus 'nobility' based on victimhood, who then feel that they are 'owed', big-time, and who become more demanding the more they are coddled.
Privilege is the word.