Does the Georgia lawmakers' response to Delta set up an analogous example of White Privilege?

There has certainly been debate about what “White Privilege” actually is, but I think that the Georgia lawmakers’ response to Delta’s cancelling of an NRA discount sets up an interesting parallel to it, as well as the typical response to losing it:
[li]NRA members enjoy unearned benefit (discount on airfare to annual NRA meeting : privilege)[/li][li]Members have the privilege removed due to business decision (policy change : affirmative action)[/li][li]Members complain that they are being discriminated against (claims of persecution : claims of reverse racism)[/li][/ul]
This concept might not be fully baked (on a Monday morning), but is the similarity of response completely unsurprising?

I don’t think the NRA members got the discount because they were white. Like you say, it was a business decision to offer the discount, and a more-or-less political/business decision to stop offering it.

People don’t like it when they lose something they have already. That’s not specific to white people, nor is their response when it happens. Minorities react the same way when they don’t get affirmative action. It doesn’t mean either side is unjustified (or justified) - it’s how people react.


I think your third bullet point is a bit off. Most NRA members were unaware that there was a Delta NRA discount, and I haven’t seen much complaining that they’re being discriminated against because of the revocation.

I think the point Aestivalis as making is that neither of these is a case of a group being placed at a disadvantage. They’re both cases of a group complaining about its loss because it received an advantage over other people in the past and is now being told it will be treated the same as everyone else.

We’ve had threads about it.

Then ISTM that Delta’s reaction to having its tax break removed is an example of the same thing and the same reaction. The NRA isn’t entitled to discounts; Delta isn’t entitled to a tax break on their jet fuel. Both organizations are merely having an advantage removed.


Were there any NRA members participating there? If so, how many?

Why not go in and ask them?

Delta now says they are looking into removing discounts for other “politically divisive” organizations, although they don’t mention which organizations those are. They don’t offer discounts to Planned Parenthood, contrary to what at least one GOP politician said, although I believe Delta does contribute money to PP.

Delta also says only 13 NRA members took the discount, so I guess the business decision was that the bad PR of the discount outweighed the good will it attracted among NRA members.


You use “affirmative action” to mean “will be treated the same as everyone else”?

Huh. Possibly I’ve been using the wrong phrase all this time? If a business sizes up two candidates, and says “you’re both qualified, and it’s very close, but Candidate A is black and Candidate B is white, and so we’re going with A” — and, if informed that A is actually the white one, and B is the black one, would respond, “Oh, gosh; well, then, we’re going with B, of course” — what phrase should I use for that?

Delta’s price break was no doubt a financial benefit they extracted from the state in return for providing jobs and other revenue. Nothing they were entitled to, and not uncommon. I saw something on CNN in the airport - Atlanta, in fact - saying NY and Virginia are telling Delta they’d be welcome there.

I’ve been involved with conferences who had deals with airlines offering similar discounts. None were nearly as good as you can get from any travel site. I investigated them, but never used one.
What’s really happening is the fear of the NRA and its lackeys that American businesses are seeing that the NRA has a minority position, and that being seen to back them is going be more costly to the businesses than opposing them. Similar to what happened in North Carolina with the bathroom law. That probably scares the shit out of them. Maybe in a few years the NRA will be as popular as Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein.

Your answering my question with a question is enough of a confirmation of my suspicions that I don’t feel the need to waste my time there.

Visibly exulting in one’s own ignorance is not normally admired here. So you know.

Meaning, for clarity, if you *really *want to know the affiliations of people posting in a thread, challenging someone else outside the thread is so ineffective an approach that it looks more like a deflection play, and not a good one either.

No, if you really wanted to know, you’d have simply asked. But you didn’t.

Complaining publicly is what peasants do. When you’re a powerful organization like the NRA (or Delta) you call up a politician you own and have him make threats on your behalf.

Let me clear it up for you.

We used to have a system where white people were given exclusive access to things like good job offers and college admissions. They received 100% of these things even though they weren’t 100% of the eligible population. That was white privilege.

Affirmative action changed this. It said you couldn’t give everything to white people. You had to give a fraction to people who weren’t white. White people would still get the largest share but they wouldn’t get everything.

Most people, black and white, see this as a generally workable and fair system. Some people, pretty much all white, think it’s unfair. They apparently prefer the old “white people get everything” system. They like the idea of white privilege and they want more of it.

The removal of an advantage is *not *the imposition of a disadvantage.

Let me clear this up for you, in turn: I think it’s unfair, but that doesn’t mean I prefer the old system. Because, well, I don’t. Oh, sure, if the Supreme Court ever strikes down affirmative action, I figure on celebrating so enthusiastically hereabouts that I’ll get banned because folks might think I’m insincerely trolling instead of sincerely rejoicing; but that doesn’t mean I’d prefer a “white people get everything” system; it can mean I’d prefer something else, is all.

What *would *you prefer, then? If it’s something other than fairness, why?

Actually we prefer a system where the best-qualified candidate gets the job or the college slot, not white privilege.