Uh, this is like a blatantly reverse-racist article.
I'm not american so I don't give a damn about racism, so I can say things which can't be said in public: black culture is inferior (muhaha... I trample on your cultural relativism) and has many toxic elements. It's stupid to blame race, but it's still fact that culture makes a hellof a lot of difference by itself, including more likely to have shitty neighborhoods and white aunts moving out of them.
So yes, you could call overly "reverse-racist" a point of view which willfully assigns to racism what can be explained otherwise.
I was at first attempted to call your statement hyperbole. But then I realized that's exactly the insidiousness of white privilege that I cut you some slack by thinking you're just being silly.
> And White people, every single one of you, are complicit in this racism because you benefit directly from it.
> every single one of you
> complicit in this racism
What else is this suppose to say besides, "all white people are racists"?
Why is that okay for a black person who identifies as "Black" not black as a descriptor of skin color but Black as a part of community, a culture, not an individual, to say that all, that's all as in every man, woman, and child as a White person, not an individual, but all White people as a part of the white community, are racists?
Why is this okay? What does this accomplish? What is the end goal of this conversation the author intends to have with his audience really about?
If a message is conveyed here to the White audience, what are white individuals, and White people collectively suppose to do about it? Is the article just about saying White people are racist and that's it, rant over, end of story?
What is the solution?
> [...] it’s getting harder and harder for me to think about the protection of White people’s feelings when White people don’t seem to care at all about the loss of so many Black lives
What? Are you serious?
Lets repeat that back:
> White people don’t seem to care at all about the loss of so many Black lives
Excuse me? Says who?
EDIT- I think it's interesting the parallel between this and womens issues where a man will discount a womans perspective by pointing out "not all men are like that"
The author's argument is that you have no say in this system of white privilege. It's neither opt in nor opt out, because that is the system. You get it whether you want it or not. He's not saying you're a racist because of this inheritance. He's saying it's a self-rewarding and pepetuating system that will not change until those who have the privilege a.) become aware of it and b.) decide to change it.
I don't speak for the author, but I'd say if you don't recognize or accept white privilege's existance, then you're oblivious. Exhibits A, B, C, D the're all around you and the author listed a number of examples of how it manifests.
The dilemma though, those of us who accept that white privilege exists and realize we benefit from it, and yet say and do nothing? We're certainly a little bit racist, because we're tacitly accepting the underlying premise: not my problem, I'm OK. That's definitely racist in the face of blatant inequality that we ourselves recognize. Through the recognition and acceptance white privilege exists, that I benefit from it, I've just ethically obligated myself through that awareness to change the discourse with the goal of changing the system. If I don't do that, complicity becomes racism.
Now if we want to play a little game of self-forgiveness, we can start singing the Avenue Q song, 'Everybody's a Little Bit Racist!"
However, I think it's hyperbole when the author writes, "Millions of Black lives are valued less than a single White person’s hurt feelings." I don't really know what that means. I'd say one black life probably is valued less (in terms of policy) than somewhere around a million white people's hurt feelings. That's pretty disgusting, but it's not just more plausible, it's likely.
Re: the complicit because we all benefit, I'm not sure that your argument holds. The author isn't calling all white people racist; he's saying that all white people benefit from racism. That is subtly different.
You may have a case to build around whether we all directly benefit from racism, or whether we simply don't suffer because of it. The latter position is surely close to axiomatic but the former requires more thought.