“Privilege operates on personal, interpersonal, cultural, and institutional levels and gives advantages, favors, and benefits to members of dominant groups at the expense of members of target groups,” the handout said. Privileged people in the United States include “White people,” “Heterosexuals,” “Christians,” “Men,” and “ English-speaking people.” The handout also criticizes the concept of a meritocracy.How hard is it for the diversity hustlers to take a more positive tack, say, getting people to recognize that any social organization is going to have insiders and outsiders, and that there might be evolutionary advantages for insiders receptive to good ideas from outsiders? Denigrating people for their benightedness only gets you so far.
Privileged people “often believe that they have earned the privileges that they enjoy or that everyone could have access to these privileges if only they worked to earn them,” the handout said. “In fact, privileges are unearned and they are granted to people in the dominant groups whether they want those privileges or not, and regardless of their stated intent.”
People in the “dominant groups” often do not even know or recognize their own privilege.
Because of this ignorance, according to the document, privileged people become “agents of oppression.”
The oppressors “knowingly or unknowingly exploit and reap unfair advantage over members of groups that are targets of oppression.” These oppressive groups “are also trapped by the system of institutionalized oppression that benefits them and are confined to roles and prescribed behaviors.”
20.9.21
PRIVILEGE IS CIVILIZATION.
That's a straightforward conclusion. Morale Conditioners at Iowa State can engage in all sorts of logic-chopping, and yet, they're conceding the point.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

2 comments:
Steve, this is a great point.
But we're trained as economists. What are the constraints that the diversity hustlers face that make them behave the way they do?
Dave, aren't the diversity hustlers getting away with their preachments because they don't face enough constraints? Perhaps it's on the economists to raise questions about competing hypotheses, and having the stones to stand fast whenever the hustlers act more like revival preachers than like scholars. But then my fourteenth great grandfather got tossed out of the Anglican Church for asking difficult questions, so I'm less afraid to push back than most.
Post a Comment