What Jordan Peterson Gets Wrong and right about white privilege

http://thefederalist.com ^ | January 31, 2018 | David Marcus

[Paladin2]

..... "Towards the end of a recent lecture, Peterson tackled the issue of white privilege. The 10-minute segment went viral, praised by many as refutation of the idea that white privilege even exists. Frankly, it was not his best work. It’s a bit sloppy on the concept itself, and utterly failed to take into account the broad context of racial issues that led to the idea in the first place."

"Furthermore, he rightfully criticizes the lack of serious scholarship surrounding privilege theory. It is a concept almost always backed up anecdotally and rarely subjected to serious empirical investigation. When it is, the evidence of bias is often sketchy at best. But once we admit, as Peterson does, that white people do accrue unearned advantages, either by science or storytelling we have a responsibility to examine this and try to make sure that people are not subject to denigrating treatment based on their skin color."

[KC_Lion]

Ping for your interest.

[Paladin2]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA

[Architect of Avalon]

Please send the alleged unearned advantages to me.

[Bob]

Oh, c’mon — Don’t you get the least bit embarrassed. Here you are just walking down the street, minding your own business. Some random stranger walks by, hands you a $100 Bill and says “Thanks for being white.” I still haven’t been able to get used to it.

[gspurlock]

Exactly how are science and storytelling generating unearned advantages? High ability is not privilege. Whites who do not have those abilities do not benefit from the products of others. . .go to Appalachia or eastern Europe and then re-think this thought.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

At the very end Marcus criticizes Peterson's online discussion with Molyneux, i.e. Guilt by Association.

This is the same sort of tactic used by the SJW's.

Molyneux may say controversial things (and a lot of very very stupid things) but he is not a neo-Nazi or skinhead (although he is mostly bald).

Peterson should meet and discuss with whomever he wants. He should get his message out as much as possible.

This whole guilt by association act is just a way to marginalize entire swaths of conservatives and moderate liberals and prevent them from engaging in meaningful debate.

[tbw2]

Dr. Jordan Peterson was on Glenn Beck this morning discussing his book.
He had a video with PragerU this week.
Glad to see his book has actually sold out at number one on Amazon.

[aquila48]

Here is a great video by Jared Taylor on White Privilege and its history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qk9R3u0r00

[JMS]

Marcus’ immediately does the same thing that SJWs always do, accept a dumb premise and run from there. Peterson does not accept the very premise of “White Privilege” and so Marcus is setting up a straw man argument to point out errors where none exists. He would do well to actually listen to what Peterson has to say rather than putting his interpretation of what Peterson says in the article.

[Little Ray]

Privilege?
If you got it, embrace it!
And pass it on to your kids!

[aquila48]

Strange, I haven’t heard any asians complain of white privilege...

And if white privilege exists, it sure hasn’t stopped them from outperforming whites.

[rollo tomasi]

David Marcus does not realize black's (Although small percentage), owned slaves in America and many were educated before the 14th Amendment. Jim Crow was a "Southern thing" as well and a testament to government totalitarianism in the United States.

Marcus also does not realize that highly trained white stonemasons "literally built the White House". The soil was rich in the South, but the climate was unbearable. To put it plainly, whites generally stayed up North because air conditioning was a century or two away. This created an ongoing demand for cheap labor (I said cheap not free, there was a monetary cost associated with each slave).

Marcus does not realize the state of Sub-Saharan Africa was a primitive hell-hole before the white people started that "evil" thing called imperialism where white Europeans built an infrastructure for that ungrateful region. Technological progress was basically stalled in that region until "the white man" and Arabs, finally created medical advancements to stay in that region due to disease that foreigners were not immune to at the time.

I could go on and on, but the main thing I take in all of that article is that 'The Federalists' is turning into an awful publication judging by the lack of intellect found in this article.

[Rurudyne]

The only “white privilege” is not having people you care about expect you to subscribe to the myths of black liabilities that causes men to imagine both that some suffer vicariously or that guilt is hereditary.

[poinq]

I don’t believe in white privilege. But I do believe in stereo types that are given the benefit of the doubt. A clean cut man in a nice suit will be given the benefit of the doubt as far as honesty and intelligence. In a suit, I can walk into many businesses that I would normally be required to sign into. But its not really white privilege.

I have known several poorly kempt people who are white, normally male, who would always be questioned. One guy who had long unkempt hair and beard, dressed in old jeans and an old sweat shirt and stood about 6 foot 4, complained to me that girls often walked across the street at night rather than to walk passed him.

I also, knew a guy who was black, often wore business attire, and he got all the same perks as I did. The color of his skin was not a hindrance. In fact black people sometimes said he was not black even though his skin was dark, he had typical black hair, and in all ways had the physical appearance of a black man. But dressed and spoke “white”.

So the real issue is appearance and how you comport yourself. At least thats true with white people. There is no doubt that black people do give white people a few stereo types as well. They often think white people are smart and mean. Or at least until they get to know them.

[sauropod]

.

[Rurudyne]

The stories are a vehicle whereby people imagine they suffer vicariously.

In real life every person’s suffering is uniquely their own. People do not suffer vicariously, empathy has limits for mortal Mankind.

What this is really about is “entities”, not Persons. An entity, in this case a race, is said to suffer (though entities cannot suffer) and because entities do not die their claimed suffering is eternal. The injuries of a thousand years ago are as fresh as those of yesterday in some far off city. The story makes it so. Thus those who are part of an entity claim the suffering of the entity.

Everything that happens to individuals that reinforces the myth of communal suffering is embraced, usually without question, as proof of the communal suffering. Anything that is good that might happen to an individual is despite the communal suffering.

Every aspect of the whole idea of entities suffering is the worst sort of intellectual tripe.

It becomes a prison in the heart and mind to anyone who embraces it.

[gspurlock]

“It becomes a prison in the heart and mind to anyone who embraces it.”

Very astute and perhaps why a lot of conservative blacks call the Democrat party the “plantation”.

[Paladin2]

I forgot to hit excerpt and had no idea if the whole article could be posted or not. (I live in fear of the Admin Monitors...).

“Marcus criticizes Peterson’s online discussion with Molyneux..” -— Yep, that’s on my list of videos to watch.

I’m currently going through the one with Camile Pagellia. So far, it’s very interesting wrt Academia in the 60’s and 70s.

[JGT]

Excellent response. I would have liked to see JP answer the question along those lines, as well as delve into the personality characteristics of the type of person who is more likely to place primacy of categorization over that of individuality.

He provides an interesting description of the personality dimensions of a “typical” SJW here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_fBYROA7Hk