Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
“Privilege” and the rhetoric of austerity by Adam Kotsko
http://itself.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/privilege-and-the-rhetoric-of-austerity/In an individualistic culture, it can be difficult to get people to recognize structural inequality without making them feel as though they are being accused of personal wrongdoing. Privilege discourse is one of the most widespread methods for bridging that gap. It does this by pointing out the ways that certain peoples everyday experience is not natural, but is undergirded by a social structure that benefits some and hurts others. These goals are laudable, if limited, because making people aware of a problem is of course only the first step. Its also been pointed out that certain privileged people view privilege discourse as a new form of political correctness, a way of policing their speech so that they respond to this attempt to break out of the cycle of personal accusation as though it were a personal accusation.
For me, though, the biggest problem is that little word privilege. Why should precisely that be the key term? A privilege is something extra and from a very young age, I knew that when something was referred to as a privilege, I was in danger of losing it. How does that make sense, for instance, with something like being free from fear of police harrassment? Undoubtedly, that is part of my privilege as a white, straight, cis, well-dressed man. But when it is called a privilege, my initial thought is that it is something unjustified that should be taken away i.e., we should all have to be stopped and frisked. Something similar came up in my post about how I had some degree of autonomy and dignity in my work do we really want to say that thats a privilege? In both cases, arent we dealing with something more like a right thats been denied to a great many people?
There are admittedly some cases where those implications of the term privilege very precisely describe the phenomenon in question. No one should be able to assume that their experience is the norm for everyone. No one should be taken more seriously simply because they belong to a particular demographic group. Yet there is no way to limit the term to those cases, and even here, perhaps a meme along the lines of yet another oblivious white dude would be more helpful.
More alarming to me, though, is the way that the term privilege plays into the rhetoric of austerity. Weve all seen the dynamic at work, for instance when people talk about how teachers have summers off and a good retirement plan, etc. The response is always to say, Thats unfair, that should be taken away never my job should be like that too! Deprivation is taken as the baseline assumption, and anything above that is an unfair imposition. Theres no hope that my situation will get better, and my only source of satisfaction is to tear others down. The language of privilege resonates a bit too closely with this embittered hopelessness, fits in a little too neatly with the ideology of permanent austerity...
SEE ALSO THOUGHTFUL COMMENTS AT LINK, SUCH AS:
Larry Garfield Says:
Saturday, August 10, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Thank you! The term privilege pisses me off, too, although I didnt quite get why until your post. You have X and I dont, so give it up is going to make a lot more enemies and a lot fewer allies than You have X and I dont, I should have X too.
And that leads directly to ripping out public employee pensions, rather than restoring and properly funding private employee pensions. Exactly the sort of austerity politics youre talking about.
He who must tear another down in order to lift himself up is the lowest of men.
Saturday, August 10, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Thank you! The term privilege pisses me off, too, although I didnt quite get why until your post. You have X and I dont, so give it up is going to make a lot more enemies and a lot fewer allies than You have X and I dont, I should have X too.
And that leads directly to ripping out public employee pensions, rather than restoring and properly funding private employee pensions. Exactly the sort of austerity politics youre talking about.
He who must tear another down in order to lift himself up is the lowest of men.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1227 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
“Privilege” and the rhetoric of austerity by Adam Kotsko (Original Post)
Demeter
Aug 2013
OP
The Magistrate
(95,241 posts)1. An Excellent Analysis, Ma'am
"Deprivation is taken as the baseline assumption, and anything above that is an unfair imposition. Theres no hope that my situation will get better, and my only source of satisfaction is to tear others down.
Demeter
(85,373 posts)2. Not my analysis, but thank you all the same, Sir, for your attention!