Social Justice

Liberals Who Learned About White Privilege Became Less Sympathetic to Poor Whites

But their attitudes toward poor blacks remained unchanged, according to a study.


Does educating people about white privilege—the idea that for white people, their race is a boon, but for black people, a drawback, at least in certain social situations—make them more empathetic? A fascinating new study suggests that the kind of racism awareness training taught in many university classrooms is not only useless but may actually be detrimental.

The study was published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General in April. Researchers provided participants with some academic literature explaining the concept of white privilege and then asked them to gauge their reactions to hearing a story about an unfortunate man. For some participants, the man was described as black, for others, he was described as white. Researchers also ran a separate experiment in which the participants were not told about white privilege before reacting to the story. They also queried both sets of participants about their political beliefs.

What they found was that conservatives who had learned about white privilege were no more sympathetic to the poor black man than conservatives who had not learned about white privilege. For liberals, the results were alarming: Liberals who read the educational materials about white privilege were similarly unsympathetic to the poor black man as the liberals in the second experiment, but they were even more unsympathetic to the poor white man.

"What we found startling was that white privilege lessons didn't increase liberals' sympathy for poor Black people," writes Erin Cooley, one of the study's authors and an assistant professor of psychology at Colgate University, in an explanatory post for Vice. "Instead, these lessons decreased liberals' sympathy for poor white people, which led them to blame white people more for their own poverty. They seemed to think that if a person is poor despite all the privileges of being white, there must really be something wrong with them."

In other words, learning about white privilege did not make conservatives more empathetic, and it made some liberals less empathetic, overall.

Reflecting on this finding for Quillette, Zaid Jilani proposes a possible explanation:

What accounts for this? One possibility is that social liberals are internalizing white-privilege lessons in a way that flattens the image of whites, portraying all of them as inherently privileged. So if a white person is poor, it must be his or her own fault. After all, they've had all sorts of advantages in life that others haven't.

This would mean that the sort of social justice training programs offered by numerous universities could be having an undesirable effect, give that most students who enroll in these classes are liberals. To take just one example, the University of Colorado at Denver offers a class called "Problematizing Whiteness: Educating for Racial Justice," in which students are required to look "beyond feel-good momentary White racial awareness" and realize that "whites are complicit." In researching my book, Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump, I found numerous similar examples of academic exercises that blurred the line between anti-racism and anti-whiteness, and between scholarship and activism. It would hardly be surprising if these classes, rather than changing liberal students' feelings toward disadvantaged black people, merely galvanized them against whites.

Reached for comment, Cooley told me that she thought such a course "could amplify the effects as you suggest," but "if the course tackled many different forms of hierarchy (class, ability, gender, sexual orientation), I would hope that students would leave with a more nuanced view of inequality and, thus, perhaps not show the effects we see in our study."

NEXT: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Is Wrong About a Lot of Things. But She’s Right About Fresh Juice in Cocktails.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. One possibility is that social liberals are internalizing white-privilege lessons in a way that flattens the image of whites…

    I think there’s an ugly word for that kind of thinking.

    1. “Equity”

    2. I wish you would call them what they are, leftists/progressives. There is nothing liberal about them at all.

    3. Salubrious?

  2. Well, maybe we shouldn’t sympathize with poor whites. As decades of exit polling show, poor white people are the Republican Party’s base. As such, they’re responsible for everything wrong with this country.


    1. And the Democrats seem determined to keep it that way forever.

    2. Its not just white privilege, its almost everything in the SJW repertoire. Their idea of “justice” isn’t to raise up the disadvantaged, but to tear down the advantaged (or those they perceive as being having an advantage)

      1. Yes, the ethics of preschool toddlers, who can’t build a bigger tower of blocks.

      2. Envy, jealousy is all it is! And the misconception that the proverbial pie is finite & if my neighbor does well & earns a large slice then mine must be smaller!!! Pure nonsense: The Pie is INFINITE!!!

      3. One of the things they refuse to accept is that most of the differences in outcomes have real and logical reasons behind them too… Most of which are known from studies… But which they deny to high heaven, because if they accept reality for what it is, then they have to accept that it is “fair” in the truest sense of the world.

    3. Adding hate kills any possibility of humor. Leave it out.

    4. Republicans like rich people, and want to make more of them. Democrats like poor people, and want to make more of them.

      1. Like humans rode horses to town in the old days, Democrats ride poor people to political power!

        1. I’m gonna take my peasant to the old town road
          I’m gonna ride ’til I can’t ride no more

    5. You have to be a satire-troll. HAVE to be. “they’re responsible for everything wrong with this country.”?!?!? It ain’t the poor whites voting Republican who destroyed the Black Family. The Poor Whites have nothing to do with the virulent (and extremely expensive) Urban Leftist fetish for Commuter Rail. So far as I can see NEITHER party had much to do with the spread of gawdawful Bauhaus Glass Box Architecture.

      “Everything wrong with this country” my tired behind.

      1. Pssssst, unlike Tony, Rev Kirkland, chemJeff, Mtrueman, OBL is a parody. Satire is exactly what
        his posts are. The others I named actually do believe the progressive drivel the shovel out.

        1. OBL is indeed a satirist; sometimes he makes me choke on my coffee.

          The others you named are just assholes.

        2. We really do need to develop a code of ethics here in which we do not name the satirists. Most of us can chuckle when OBL hooks another one, and some of us can maintain a sense of hope for the future when Tony et al emotes. Laying it all out there just sucks all the fun out of it. And concentrates the reality that Tony really does think the things he says are rational. I’m not convinced enough of the Rev’s grasp on rationality to make that call.

  3. I’ve often thought that the whole “white privilege” idea was more about knocking white people down a peg than actually improving things for anyone.
    The problem isn’t that white people get special privilege. The problem is that other groups have been dicked over historically and the SJWs are going to make sure we can never get past that.

    1. A paraphrase of how progressives feel about rich and poor: Progressives do not love the people they perceive as underprivileged, they hate the people they see as privileged.

      1. “The whole point of modern Liberalism is for Liberals to feel good about themselves!”
        -George Will, 2013

        Prog-Tards are sanctimonious & pious POS!!! & their SJW/Victimhood BS should rot in hell!

      2. Any progressive with an IQ above room temperature knows that the only reason poor people of any color will vote for them is “free stuff”. The working class and most of the unemployable hate every other part of the progressive agenda.

        So progressives seek votes from the poor, but never seek anything that would actually be effective to lift them out of poverty, because secretly progressives detest the poor.

    2. The point of outrage isn’t to fix things, it’s to be outraged.

      1. And to sell clicks and advertising

      2. So that’s why you’re constantly throwing tantrums.

      3. It worked for Fidel Castro & company!

    3. The problem is that, historically, brown people have indeed been dicked over….by the Progressive Left and the Democrat Party. And the SJWs are desperate to make sure that THAT issue never comes up.

    4. Well, they basically are into reverse discrimination. White people are now at a HUGE disadvantage in a TON of ways, basically being the only group that can legally be discriminated against with no repercussions.

      YES, white families tend to be wealthier on average and so on than other groups… But their kids are now systemically denied entry into colleges they rightfully should have gotten into, jobs they should have got, etc because of diversity quotas and the like.

      They can’t just let time take its course now that we have a level playing field. They also can’t accept that some groups are inherently less competitive in certain arenas, like women in many fields of work, etc. So reverse discrimination is their game.

  4. Teaching an inherently racist concept corrupts the thought processes of the people who are taught it, how surprising.

  5. You spelled “indoctrinate” and “brainwash” wrong, all over the article.

  6. MLK had it right when he tried to organize an inclusive war on poverty. What sort of university class teaches about privilege without a sturdy mirror? Structures of poverty may differ in cities and in rural areas, but that they exist in both settings independent of race should be acknowledged. Racism can play a role in reinforcing such structures, but any class of this sort should be critiquing socioeconomic mobility more broadly.

    1. My grandpa came over to this country as a teenage, looking for opportunity. He was going to be an engineer, and had enrolled in a college. Then the Great Depression hit, and he never got to attend. He spent his life driving a truck. He was white.

      Kids in a college classroom nodding their heads sagely at the idea of “white privilege” forget how much of a privilege it is to attend college on their parent’s or the taxpayer’s dime.

      1. Yes, anyone sitting in a college classroom is privileged, regardless of their color or sex.

      2. Kids in a college classroom nodding their heads sagely at the idea of “white privilege” forget how much of a privilege it is to attend college on their parent’s or the taxpayer’s dime.

        I don’t think they do. I think they, from their position of social privilege, honestly think that their privilege is synonymous with their whiteness and think that there are only two kinds of white people: privileged ones who are self-aware about their privilege and privileged ones who aren’t. They don’t know any poor white people to tell them otherwise.

        1. For some of them that last bit is certainly the case.

          But lots of people who grew up middle middle class, not upper middle class, tended to get a view of things across the board.

          The bottom line is privilege is privilege, black, white, or otherwise. Asian Americans are more likely to be wealthy than white Americans, so why isn’t everybody bitching about Asian privilege?

          1. Most of this “privilege” BS originates on college campuses, and while some campuses have large numbers of Asian foreign students, the number of American-born Asian students is limited by (informal but effective) quotas, so they aren’t so visible.

      1. Somebody horning in on my act?

  7. I keep telling the homeless guy living under the bridge that his white privilege prevents me from helping him. I don’t help the black guy in the next tent over either, but if I was going to help somebody it definitely wouldn’t be whitey.

    To think that assigning collective negative traits to people based solely on the color of their skin would have have negative consequences.

    1. Once upon a time, in a decade not all that long ago, liberals would actually help the poor. I knew one that would help out at a soup kitchen every weekend. It wasn’t much in the grand scheme of things, but she actually got out there and helped people. And she wasn’t alone.

      Nowadays liberals got replaced by progressives. A totally different mindset. Big government wasn’t a tool towards an end, it was the end itself. Progressive never bother helping the poor directly. They don’t volunteer at soup kitchens. They’re too busy being intersectionalist scolds to bother.

      1. Some Lefties would help poor people in some ways. In other ways, they hurt them…actively. There is no such thing as a Liberal.

        If I was poor, I would rather have Lefties leave me alone than serve me soup. They give me soup while they tax the shit out of me, impose massive rules on me, and lock me up if I smoke some weed.

        Lefties are just selfish pricks who want to Virtue Signal that they think that they are not actually the pricks that they are.

      2. Nowadays liberals got replaced by progressives. A totally different mindset.

        ^ This. Progressives want to sleep peacefully at night knowing Government is handling Charity so they don’t have to.

    2. I hope that these college progs refuse to give change to a white beggar and tell him “Fucking white privilege!”

  8. Hmm, anything that gets liberals to blame individuals for their own situations can’t be all bad.

    1. The problem is that they blame poor “whites” for their failures but don’t credit anyone with their success.

      1. ^ This, even though I’ve been told in no uncertain terms that it’s a microaggression to imply that someone’s success is solely due to the color of their skin.

      2. How is it that poor whites are 100% responsible for their own failings… Yet poor blacks have 0% responsibility for their own failings?

        Don’t see how even real racism could quite swing things that far in either direction!

  9. … not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character

    1. Content of their wallet.

  10. I have a friend who is a university professor, very libertarian, and has even contributed to Reason. Yet he believes in WhitPriv. I was discussing this with him, that even though Blacks clearly have a disadvantage, Whites do not have any special privileges in modern society. No legal privileges, no social privileges, no certificates of privilege on file, nothing.

    The response was that the lack of a disadvantage is itself a advantage. It’s a strange response. As if it’s all relative. Privilege is not a legal right conferred by law of society, but merely a direction on a spectrum. And that privilege will always exist until everyone is absolutely equal.

    Of course he’s a university professor. He’s been indoctrinated in this stuff since age 6, with never a glimpse of the real world outside the academic unreality zone. He has been taught since a wee tot that equality means pulling everyone down to the lowest level. Removing disadvantages and raising Blacks up just isn’t in his vocabulary. Sigh.

    p.s. Granted, he much much better on other issues. This one issue however, marks him as that elusive and rare Left Libertarian heard so much about in myth and legend.

    1. I would ask (1) What are these supposed actual disadvantages of non-Whites, (2) can these “disadvantages” ever be removed, and (3) can equality of everyone ever realistically be achieved?

      1. I have well-off middle-class black friends who get followed around boutiques in a way that never happens to me. They get asked to park cars when waiting to pick up their valeted cars at restaurants. Again, I’m white and that never happens to me or any of my white friends. I agree that this should not be called ‘privilege’. It’s not privilege for others to default to treating you as not a thief and not a servant. It’s not white privilege as much as it’s inherent racism and it does still exist in 2019.

        1. So, you live in a racist, blue city. Got it.

          1. >>>followed around boutiques … asked to park cars

            also it’s not 1993 anymore

            1. Really need to update those rote talking points

        2. Hmmm? I have yet to see a black valet. Sorta doubt a casual racist would turn his car keys to a black stranger.

        3. Honestly, I’m sure some shit like that does happen more to some minority groups… But in all fairness, I think it is more that this stuff sticks into their heads more too.

          I have caught store clerks giving me the eye a number of times in my life when I was dressed scrubby. I had some dumb Indian guy throw me out of his convenience store when I was trying to buy stuff because he thought I was trying to steal lotto tickets or some crap.

          I’m white. The thing is I don’t whine about this shit, and I don’t make a big stink about it. I think every single time this has happened to 99% of black folks it gets written in stone in their memory as an unforgettable event, when I probably can’t remember 80% of the times this has happened to me, and probably didn’t notice the other dozens of times some store clerk was doing this to me and I didn’t even pick up on it.

          My personal way of dealing with this shit is if I’m walking around downtown, and I see some sketchy looking black guy… I’m going to pay special attention to WTF they’re up to. If I see a black guy in a nice ass suit, I won’t give 2 shits, because they’re likely not a problem. I ALSO pay attention to sketchy white folks. I think this type of thinking is pretty common… If there is any difference on the margins it is perhaps that people might be slightly more inclined to ignore a sketch looking white guy whereas they notice 100% of sketch looking blacks, but I’d bet it’s a small difference either way.

    2. This trend also exposes the utter fallacy of White privilege.

      If you say that America is the best nation on Earth then Europe is disadvantaged. Asia is disadvantaged (yeah, Japan is “disadvantaged”). Africa is disadvantaged. South America is disadvantaged.

      Canada is disadvantaged.

      1. There is a modicum of merit to the theory – the same modestly dressed white man and black man walk into a store, the effort man has a slightly better chance of getting treated better. But a well dressed black man will be treated better than a cracker in a wife-beater. The theory is far better expressed as class/wealth divide.

        1. Yup. Nobody I know of ever treats a well dressed person like they’re sketch. If there is a difference it is on the margins when both a black and a white guy look scrubby.

    3. The response was that the lack of a disadvantage is itself a advantage. It’s a strange response. As if it’s all relative. Privilege is not a legal right conferred by law of society, but merely a direction on a spectrum.

      But that’s right. That is my understanding of the term. “White privilege” doesn’t necessarily refer to formal privileges granted by law or the state, it mainly refers to informal privileges people receive without even asking for them.

      For example, suppose you and I are exactly equivalent runners about to run a footrace, except that I am wearing ankle weights but you are not. You clearly have an advantage in this race even though you never had to request to not have ankle weights. Your “privilege” in this case is “not wearing ankle weights”.

      And that privilege will always exist until everyone is absolutely equal.

      Well sure. Maybe some radical egalitarians favor that. But I think a lot of people would want instead that these privileges are reduced to a point where having a particular *unearned* privilege doesn’t make any meaningful difference in the trajectory of one’s life. For example, tall people have advantages over short people in that tall people can reach for items on high shelves without needing a step ladder. But even though that is a type of “height privilege”, it doesn’t really matter in the big picture of things.

      1. “White privilege” doesn’t necessarily refer to formal privileges granted by law or the state

        Which is why the term is incorrect.

      2. The big picture of things? So your heightism comes thru after all!

      3. “Height privilege” has HUGE effects on ones life outcomes, Jeff.

        Both in terms of the quality of the mate you can attract, and indeed in your average earnings! This is an issue that MUST be addressed for the sake of fairness!


        If honkies have it so good Jeff, why can they be discriminated against legally when being admitted to colleges, for the sake of diversity? AKA letting in less qualified students. Same thing for hiring at big businesses.

        Seems to me non whites DO have legal privileges, and whites don’t. The only thing whites have going for them is fewer dysfunctional family units, they go into industries that tend to pay themselves better THROUGH THEIR OWN EFFORTS, and that’s about it. In short white people do better because white people make better decisions on average.

        Asians in fact have more “white privilege” than whites do in America. Asians prove that doing the right things, even if there is some magical hidden bias, is enough to more than overcome evil white racists.

        So this whole BS argument can fuck right off.

    4. Of course it’s all relative. What did you think the word “advantage” meant? It has meaning only in comparison to something else.

    5. On your points, whites are legally disadvantaged in a ton of ways today, and slanted against in cultural ways as well. Diversity goals being the driving force behind most of this nonsense. Not being allowed to speak their mind on a myriad of subjects because we’re evil and white etc.

      There are still some trailing legacy issues from past shit, I wouldn’t say otherwise… But for the most part the failings of minority groups in the US are their own doing at this point. Why is it that illegal immigrants with 7th grade educations can come to America, not speak English, and STILL make more money on average than native born blacks? It’s because they have a better culture than blacks from America. Foreign born blacks do better than native born ones as well.

      So I call bullshit on the whole thing at this point.

    1. Wait, wat? A transgendered son means he was born female. And females don’t typically need to shave their beards.

      1. That’s not what she’s shaving…

      2. This one mentioned transitioning. I’m guessing this one’s process includes exogenous hormones to grow a beard. And then shave it off.

        Wasn’t it just a year ago that Gilette was advertising for men to not be men? Boys won’t be boys. But girls will be boys.

        1. Yes, that’s how it works. Masculinity is wonderful as long as you’re a woman trying to be male. Just like dressing up and making up like Tammy Faye Baker is great as long as you were born with a dick.

    2. Jesus Christ. How ridiculous.

      These big companies are so fucking stupid. Don’t they realize if they just keep their head down and don’t take controversial positions they’ll be fine? If they take a position, like this insanity, it’s only got downside… It will piss people off. These idiots should have read their Sun Tzu.

      1. To be fair, Gillette’s customer base seems to consist entirely of women, who reflexively buy whatever’s available on the store shelf, and trainees at various American boot camps, where Mach 20000s are the only brand available to shave with during that time.

        A lot more guys seem to be gravitating towards double-blade safety razors, when they aren’t just growing out their beards. You can basically buy a year’s worth of blades for about half of what it costs to buy Gillette’s overpriced cartridges.

  11. These classes ARE activism.

    History classes were a great way to cover historical topics like slavery, plight of the Jews, and achievements of all races and creeds. The problem with history classes for Lefties is that historical facts are discusses and not explained away.

    The Democrat Party being the Party of slavery for example. Africans selling Black slaves to White merchants for example. Ghengis Khan murdered so many men and children, that DNA evidently shows that 8% of men in 16 Asian populations and .05% of populations worldwide are direct descendants of Ghengis Khan.

    1. My favorite is to ask people who the last group to own slaves in America were… When I tell them it was Native Americans in the western states, they don’t tend to like that… Or when you tell them that blacks in Africa were the last people to own African slaves… Hell, there are still millions of de facto slaves in Africa.

      Yeah, facts don’t play nicely with their BS.

      1. The immigration policies of European countries that draw hordes of sub-Saharan Africans northwards have actually resulted in a surge of slavery in Africa. Many of those trying to reach Europe end up enslaved in North Africa.

  12. “Liberals Who Learned About White Privilege Became Less Sympathetic to Poor Whites”

    The privilege that poor whites have is that not enough right-thinking people hate them. So in that sense, the lessons worked.

  13. Not only does the poor white Appalachian coal miner have white privilege, but he’s racist because when he comes out of the coal mine after working hard all day, he has black all over his face from the coal dust.

    1. What a Nazi bastard! I’m sure that kind of thing would REALLY piss off an oppressed black lawyer who makes $500K a year in NYC too, knowing that those privileged whites get away with that kind of thing at the end of every work day!

  14. It seems reasonable to me that anyone who is amenable to “white privilege training” probably already looked down upon poor whites. Because Democrats have been looking down on poor whites my entire adult life.

  15. I hope all the people who ran this study were black, because if any white people were involved it doesn’t have the intersectionality to properly understand the effects of white privilege.

  16. I think I missed out on white privilege. I’m an OFWG and I’ve gotten a free newspaper or coffee.

  17. White privilege is the belief that the kids of poor coal miners in KY have a better shot at a successful life than Obama’s kids.

  18. Anti-racist is code for anti-white. Remember when everyone thought that was just a dogwhistle?

  19. To play Devil’s Advocate, this sounds more like an issue with branding than what they’re actually attempting to demonstrate. Maybe instead of calling it “white privilege”, they should have called it “the minority penalty” or something.

    Similar to how when feminists throw their fake numbers around, they say that women make 73* cents per $1.00 that a man makes instead of saying that men make $1.37 for every dollar that women make. This framing makes the public more sympathetic if you pressure employers to pay women more rather than just paying men less. Seems like same principle should be applied to inter-racial injustice.

    * — the actual number is probably closer to 90 to 95 cents per dollar once you take all the side variables into account, which is still an injustice we should be fight against. By no means should we be dismissing actual discrimination that women and minorities experience, just that making up fake statistics is not the way to do it.

    1. There is no gap, it’s fully explained by career and lifestyle choices

    2. You accurately address the intellectual side of their argument. But there’s a reason they rejected that in favor of WP. They found focusing on the penalty didn’t silence their critics except when some reasonable penalty could be inferred. Since their goal is not satisfied by noting some discrimination exists they rejected that philosophy in favor of a more racist framework.

    3. The problem with that theory is that it really doesn’t hold water.

      As I said above illegal immigrants from Mexico move here with lower levels of education, not speaking the language… And still do better than native born blacks. Foreign born blacks do better than them too.

      AND to finish off the argument once in for all, since all those groups still do far less well than whites… Asians. Asians make more money and are better by every friggin’ metric than whites. SO even if there IS some sort of hidden racist bias in the system, it’s not enough to hold back a group that makes all the right choices.

      Or, one can simply look at the reality of the situation: All of the results track perfectly with average IQ within ethnic groups. You can argue whether or not the IQ gaps are genetic or environmental, but they explain 100% of the differences observed.

  20. Headline should read “indoctrinated”. You can’t learn about something that doesn’t exist.

    1. The only use white liberals have for poor whites is as cushion between them and poor blacks.

  21. Reached for comment, Cooley told me that she thought such a course “could amplify the effects as you suggest,” but “if the course tackled many different forms of hierarchy (class, ability, gender, sexual orientation), I would hope that students would leave with a more nuanced view of inequality and, thus, perhaps not show the effects we see in our study.”

    So their response is “I reject your reality, and substitute my own”?

  22. It’s funny they needed a study to realize this. Talk to any sufficiently progressive / racist liberal and it’s obvious that other white people are shit in their eyes and have it coming.

    The appeal to more intersectionality may actually work. At some point we’ll have some many categories for identity that we’ll come full circle and treat people like individuals.

  23. This would mean that the sort of social justice training programs offered by numerous universities could be having an undesirable effect,

    I’m not clear on what basis we can call this undesirable. They designed a class to teach everyone to hate white people for taking their opportunities. This seems to be successful. From their perspective what is undesirable?

    1. The fact that not all white people (or non whites for that matter) are stupid enough to fall for this bullshit, and it’s pissing them off? The blowback on this shit is building.

  24. I started working when I was 13. By the time I was 18 I was loading and unloading tractor trailers, freezing weather and 120 degree heat. My days started at 5:00 a.m. For six years, in the evenings I went to school and earned a college degree. For long periods of time I ate ramen noodles and peanut butter on rice cakes. IF I had been a minority grants and scholarships would have been available to me. Now tell me about white privilege since I happen to be both male and white.

    1. THIS. Whites, especially males, are the ones most disadvantaged in official capacities anymore. It is reverse racism.

  25. I already said all this above but: Illegals who don’t even speak English do better than blacks… Foreign blacks do better than native born blacks… And Asians do even better than white people.

    It ain’t white privilege, it’s life choices.

    PS And average IQs within different ethnic groups. You can argue all day long whether it’s environmental or genetic, but observed IQ differences account for basically 100% of the differences in outcomes observed.

  26. This is extremely true and very obvious in how the majority of “woke” liberals act towards poor white people and their economic and social concerns every day. They actually perceive great virtue in their disdain for lower-class white people and their moral elevation of people of color above them. This condescending, violent hypocrisy is probably the primary reason why I despise the left. Because even though I’m not white, I have a lot more empathy for poor whites (perhaps as a result of having grown up in Tennessee) than I do for middle and upper class brown and black people who try to claim victimhood status when they are materially much better off than many others.

    That being said, I can’t help but acknowledge the existence of white privilege, particularly due to my own experiences, though I deny that it’s anywhere near as pervasive and impactful upon social outcomes as a typical leftist would. In any society, or in fact in any large group of any kind, the majority or plurality group is going to have certain advantages over minority groups, being seen as the “default” identity for people in that group, and inevitably otherizing other members of that group who don’t conform to the norm. We should all be conscious of stereotypes, prejudices, and implicit, but we shouldn’t allow that to evolve into outright hatred and even genocidal rhetoric like I often see coming from the extreme “progressive” SJW crowd.

  27. […] Liberals Who Learned About White Privilege Became Less Sympathetic to Poor Whites Robby Soave, Reason […]

  28. […] writhing worthless eaters. But the new answer “because they have white privilege”, does.A new study found that “white privilege lessons didn’t increase liberals’ […]

  29. strike

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.