No it is not. You cannot point to poor treatment of one group as evidence of the "privilege" of another group. There are more than two colors of people.
No it is not. You cannot point to poor treatment of one group as evidence of the "privilege" of another group. There are more than two colors of people.
There are degrees of privilege, too. I'm not white - I'm multiracial white/Asian, though I look basically Asian. I'm also not a Stanford grad, and my parents weren't millionaires. However, I grew up middle-class in a reasonably affluent suburb, my parents stayed married, they were highly educated, and I'm not black or Hispanic. These are all privileges; they are unearned advantages that I obtained through circumstances before my birth. That I'm not white and can't call up a VC to get them to fund my company doesn't make me unprivileged; it makes me less privileged than certain 1-in-a-million individuals.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4099803,00.html
(Ynetnews is an Israeli paper, by the way)
"Since the mass immigration some 100 years ago, Jews have become richest religious group in American society. They make up only 2% of US population, but 25% of 400 wealthiest Americans. How did it happen, and how crucial is their aid to Israel?"
Hmmm...
Perhaps Jews do so well because Judaism teaches critical thinking and education as a philosophy, whereas Christianity teaches obedience and the power of wishful thinking. Only one of these schools of thoughts helps you in the real world.
Better is just to see it as a positive attribute, rather than a normative one. It is a fact that white men have some advantages in most tech workplaces, simply because they don't stick out. That doesn't make white men bad people, or obligate them to do things to genuflect to non-white non-men. It's just a useful thing to know, is all.