Entitlement and Privilege

[Cain]

As I'm sure you can imagine, I spend a lot of my days having to deal with the relationship between 1. and 2. in the OP.

Obviously, based on what you've said in the past, although I might add that the two are not separate things, for the most part.  Privilege is what one HAS, and entitlement is how they perceive what they have with respect to their place in the pecking order.

Indeed.  All of my students are privileged, but not all of them are entitled as a result.

In fact, my students provide a pretty useful case study.  In a situation of generally high levels of economic privilege, what matters most is not race, or gender, or religion or even sexual orientation between the students in determining the pecking order...it's the exact magnitude of economic privilege they have in comparison to other students.

I notice you put class as the top consideration in your second post on this thread, so I like to think of this as a level of confirmation and supporting evidence.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I also think that there are certain factors, like age, which work differently depending on your economic class. A rich old person has more power (slightly distinct from privilege) than a rich young person, but a poor old person has less power than a poor young person, especially if they are also female.

I covered that in part 2, but I was speaking from Arizona, where things are slightly different on a cultural level.

I do agree that culture affects the entitlements of aging quite a lot.

Yeah, here it's the White retired crowd that carries the most punch, both economically and at the voting booth.

Right... my point was that age works differently at different economic levels. You're white and wealthy, age gets you more clout. You're poor and brown and age gets you even more fucked over because people aren't even afraid of you anymore. You're an old White man, people will probably listen to you. You're an old Hispanic lady, they might let you clean their toilets.

Sure.  That's why I put age at the very bottom of the catagories.  The catagories are, as demonstrated, cumulative.  A poor old female has far less clout than a poor young female.  Likewise, a rich Hispanic person has more clout than a poor White person.

I'm not trying to quibble about something that is actually not terribly important, but the distinction that I'm trying to make is that age works the opposite for poor colored people than it does for rich white people, in that rather than having the least power when you're young, you have the least power when you're old. So the most disempowered people, even in Arizona, are the ones who are poor, brown, trans, female, 65+, rather than poor, brown, trans, female, ~18.

If that makes sense.

Anyway, it's a minor distinction and I don't mean to detract from the thread, but rather to enhance it.

I'd actually argue that.  Here, an old poor Hispanic is seen as irrelevant and invisible.  A poor young Hispanic is automatically assumed to be a criminal until proven otherwise.  This isn't hyperbole, it's a matter of public record and legislation.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

As I'm sure you can imagine, I spend a lot of my days having to deal with the relationship between 1. and 2. in the OP.

Obviously, based on what you've said in the past, although I might add that the two are not separate things, for the most part.  Privilege is what one HAS, and entitlement is how they perceive what they have with respect to their place in the pecking order.

Indeed.  All of my students are privileged, but not all of them are entitled as a result.

In fact, my students provide a pretty useful case study.  In a situation of generally high levels of economic privilege, what matters most is not race, or gender, or religion or even sexual orientation between the students in determining the pecking order...it's the exact magnitude of economic privilege they have in comparison to other students.

I notice you put class as the top consideration in your second post on this thread, so I like to think of this as a level of confirmation and supporting evidence.

Sure.

Although "entitlement" is automatic.  What some of your more civilized students may have is a perception of their privilege as being luck of birth, etc.  This would imply a high level of privilege, with a low level of entitlement.  I am unsure that it is possible to have NO sense of entitlement, though it IS possible to have a "negative" sense of entitlement...IE, the person on the bottom who knows he or she is on the bottom, and perceives no chance whatsoever of remedying that.  Which may very well be accurate.

[Cain]

Yeah, that's true.

I'm being sloppy with my thoughts today.  Lack of sleep and all.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Part 4
Arizona, an Illustration

In Phoenix, there is what I call The Terrified White People Party.  It is composed mostly - but not entirely - of conservatives.   The agenda for this party is simple:  White people must remain on top of the heap, and any means to do so are acceptable.

This explains why a crooked old Nazi like Sheriff Joe Arpiao gets elected over and over again.  He is a tool by which the White population of Maricopa County keeps the Hispanics and Blacks in line.  He and Russel Pearson pushed SB1072, for example, which was basically a means by which to criminalize the act of having brown skin.

Never mind that Sheriff Joe is a strutting hack whose eyes roll back into his head when anyone mentions "Truth", "Justice", or even "Who profits from the jail concessions?"...The fact is, he does what he was hired to do, which is to bring a 1950s Birmingham, Alabama police force into being for the purpose of maintaining White privilege.

The reason this has become so popular recently is simple:  The growth rate of the Hispanic sector of the population is twice that of the White sector.  10 years ago, Arizona was one of the reddest of the red states, and now it is sort of a light pink, as more and more Hispanics arrive at the polling stations.  Hispanics are just as smart and observant as anyone else; they can see the abuses and misuse of power directed against them, and they won't be voting tea party any time soon.

This is a direct threat to the power base of the White sector, particularly the retired sector, most of whom are "transplants" from areas with fewer minorities...And most of whom view Hispanics and Blacks as congenitally criminal folks who can't be trusted.  On top of that, the idea that minorities might outnumber Whites means the most terrifying thing of all:  The Whites might not be "first in line" anymore, and may actually have to wait until an Hispanic's needs are met before theirs are addressed.

This is the fear reaction that drives the insane legislation we have down here.  In fact, I'd hazard a guess that a good chunk of the legislation aimed at reducing reproductive rights in women is an attempt to bolster birth numbers among Whites (while having the added advantage of telling women what for).  But not all of it...those pieces of legislation are also aimed at an even more general idea, that of returning to a mythical golden age 1950s in which women stayed at home, dad went off to work, and Those People stayed on their own end of town, to get into the sort of trouble that White people don't get into if they don't allow mixing.

Needless to say, that era never actually happened.  The 1950s were, once you strip the nostalgia away, the most conformist years in our history, but also had the highest levels of teenage pregnancy, juvenile delinquency, and drug abuse (pharmaceutical as well as illegal) since we started tracking that sort of thing.

The Terrified White People Party doesn't care.  They want that conformity, they want their privileges enshrined in actual law, but most of all, they want to tell those liberals a thing or two...So they pass insane laws that are designed to piss liberals off, without considering any other consequences of those laws (liberals being defined as "people who think privilege can be a bad thing, sometimes").  It's legislation via AM radio, and it's led to the state going both bankrupt and fundamentally insane.

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

I am liking this a ton. Privilege is something that obviously got talked about a lot when I was dealing with Occupy people, and it's an uncomfortable thing to stare in the face of. When discussion opens up a bit, I'd love to get into how entitlement and privilege play into guilt and shame, but I don't want to derail.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I am liking this a ton. Privilege is something that obviously got talked about a lot when I was dealing with Occupy people, and it's an uncomfortable thing to stare in the face of. When discussion opens up a bit, I'd love to get into how entitlement and privilege play into guilt and shame, but I don't want to derail.

My experience with the Occupy folks is that "privilege" was defined as "behavior we don't like", and was used as a mallet to smash square pegs into round holes.

And go ahead.  The topic is Entitlement and Privilege, and the floor is open (but please, please, stay on topic, folks!  See OP Notes for details).

[Q. G. Pennyworth]

I am liking this a ton. Privilege is something that obviously got talked about a lot when I was dealing with Occupy people, and it's an uncomfortable thing to stare in the face of. When discussion opens up a bit, I'd love to get into how entitlement and privilege play into guilt and shame, but I don't want to derail.

My experience with the Occupy folks is that "privilege" was defined as "behavior we don't like", and was used as a mallet to smash square pegs into round holes.

And go ahead.  The topic is Entitlement and Privilege, and the floor is open (but please, please, stay on topic, folks!  See OP Notes for details).

Gotta go pick up the munchkins, I'll get my thoughts in order on the walk.

[Junkenstein]

Rodger, Parts 1-4 are most excellent. Thanks.

Cain, I am a grown man and fear the idea of you giving me "The talk". Are they ever the same?

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

Thanks for this. A big light that should have already been on came on here:

In fact, I'd hazard a guess that a good chunk of the legislation aimed at reducing reproductive rights in women is an attempt to bolster birth numbers among Whites

[Pergamos]

This is great stuff, thank you.  I keep thinking I have something to add, but it is always off topic enough not to be worth adding so simply, thank you.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This is great stuff, thank you.  I keep thinking I have something to add, but it is always off topic enough not to be worth adding so simply, thank you.

Well, considering I wrote it for Von DEC14, and he didn't even bother with it, I'm glad someone got something out of it.

[Pergamos]

This is great stuff, thank you.  I keep thinking I have something to add, but it is always off topic enough not to be worth adding so simply, thank you.

Well, considering I wrote it for Von DEC14, and he didn't even bother with it, I'm glad someone got something out of it.

I'm pretty clearly not the only one.  It's nice when trolls inspire good stuff.  Sort of the opposite of the intended mission I think.

[von]

This is great stuff, thank you.  I keep thinking I have something to add, but it is always off topic enough not to be worth adding so simply, thank you.

Well, considering I wrote it for Von DEC14, and he didn't even bother with it, I'm glad someone got something out of it.

reading it now...I feel like a bad, whiny child...

[The Good Reverend Roger]

This is great stuff, thank you.  I keep thinking I have something to add, but it is always off topic enough not to be worth adding so simply, thank you.

Well, considering I wrote it for Von DEC14, and he didn't even bother with it, I'm glad someone got something out of it.

reading it now...I feel like a bad, whiny child...

Nice try.  You shot your wad.  You'll need to start over with a new account or something if you want any more mileage out this business.