To be fair, in the current climate, they are spending their efforts just trying to continue to exist. Their existence is an umbrella you do not even notice, and will not until it is gone.
Many people in right to work states take the option of not paying union dues, which does even more harm to them, as even though they have few resources, they still are required to represent everyone in negotiations.
Your union is probably doing everything it can for you and your job, it just doesn’t seem as much to you, because they have been so weakened that they can barely manage to keep employers legal these days, much less get you the good perks they used to.
Tell me, do yo make over MW? Do you have health insurance, a 401k? Do you get vacation?
If so, those are all things that your union has provided for you. If you like them, you should try being more supportive.
I dunno about “lost their way”. It isn’t a priority to the workers, so they shouldn’t spend too much time on it, but if it were simply an aside or a few minutes of a meeting, or a pamphlet or something, then I wouldn’t get all that worked up about it either.
Ye gods, that reads like right-wing porn. It’s trying to reassure the reader that having conversations about inclusiveness and representation are needless and destructive, and presents a straw version of intersectionality.
Luckily for the writer, our nation’s appetite for this trash appears to be bottomless.
Fighting climate change is about preserving habitable lifespaces on this planet which is kind of one of those key rights for workers (you know, the right not to have your atmosphere so destroyed). Hint, if you can’t breath, you can’t work.
I disagree entirely. When you’re taking the attitude that certain people should just shut up and agree with you because of their race, you’re being a racist. Having an issue with someone because of their race, and having a ‘conversation’ that is really just telling them to shut up and do what you say is, in fact, a bad thing on many levels, both from a moral stance and a practical stance. And the phrase “check your privilege” is antithetical to holding an actual conversation, what it amounts to is saying “I’m right because you’re [group I don’t like]”.
Taking the attitude that white people don’t get to have an opinion is exactly how to get those same white people to tune you out and ignore any legitimate points you’re trying to make in between the blatant racism. And it’s a great way to get those people you’re telling to shut up to decide that this is entirely about hurting them and getting some kind of revenge, not about correcting injustices.
It’s certainly possible to use the phrase in a dismissive way, but it’s also possible to use it constructively.
In this case, the original organizers were all white, and used the name “Million Women March”, which was the name of a march organized by black women in 1997. People reasonably objected, new chairs were added to make the event more inclusive, and the name was changed.
Does that sound like white people weren’t allowed an opinion? Does that sound like revenge-taking?
Or does it sound like legitimate points about inclusiveness?
Obviously, there are assholes out there. But let’s not pretend that any conversation about racial inclusiveness automatically includes the bullshit tactics you’re describing. That’s just nutpicking.
I am a white guy myself, and I do not feel as though it is telling me to shut up, I do not feel as though it is an attitude that they are right because of the group I am in.
I do feel however, that it does behoove all of us to take a look around, and see if we may be doing some harm without realizing it, and that is really all that they are asking for.
I will agree that the phrasing of “check your privilege” has become a bit rude, but as it is often times being used by those who are lower on the social totem pole towards those who are higher, I don’t know how you can get worked so worked up about it.
If a fifth generation multi-billionaire says, “I don’t understand why people have so much difficulty buying mansions.” that would be a time to tell them to check their privilege to be sure. Maybe not in those words, but I would hope that you would agree with the sentiment.
So, on the same token, but smaller scale, when a white guy says something like, “I don’t understand why those people have so much difficulty…” it may be that you do not understand, because you have lived a different life than they have, maybe even a privileged life, compared to their experiences.
In this scenario, you are not seeking to understand, but to dismiss their concerns.
I am a white people. I am of the opinion that white people, men in particular, have had a higher than “fair” control over the resources and direction of this nation for ever since the white men took it from the natives. I am of the opinion that we still do have a disproportionate amount of power.
The only reason that white guys like ourselves are told to shut up, is when we refuse to stop talking. When we refuse to acknowledge that there are other races, genders, religions, ethnicity, or sexual orientations, that are treated differently by society, then sometimes one of those demographics wants to get a word in while we are explaining to them that things are not as difficult for us, so we don’t understand why they are difficult to them.
When someone says “check your privilege” an appropriate response is to reply telling that person they should check *their *privilege. It may be that they do not understand what it represents to be told something like that, because they have lived a different life than the person they are addressing, having the privilege of being able to say check your privilege. The rabbit hole never ends!
Speaking only for myself, I’ve worked in many homeless shelters, at the Salvation Army and in food banks. I’ve met poor, homeless, or hungry people of all races. None have ever wanted to say a word to me about my privilege. And I’ve never been lectured about privilege by a cashier, a bus driver, a manual laborer or any other person who works a low-status job. All available evidence that I’ve been seen tells me that the poor are uninterested in the identity politics game.
Every single time that I’ve heard a lecture about privilege, it’s come from someone who is richer and more powerful than I am. Celebrities, university professors and administrators, diversity officers, Manhattan journalists, kids at elite private schools, those are the ones who want to tell about who’s privileged, and they want to tell it to those lower down the socioeconomic ladder. And yes, it does generally come across with a finger-wagging tone.
Again, can’t speak for others, but that’s what I’ve seen. And if others have experienced the same thing, perhaps that can help explain why some people bristle a bit at the mention of “white privilege” and “male privilege” and all the other supposed privileges.
That is a great point and what I have experienced too. I work in a hard-core, blue-collar facility staffed with (legal) immigrants and people that come from poor, hardscrabble neighborhoods full of bad circumstances. They all speak openly and freely there and never once has someone implied that I have my job because I am a white male. They know it is because I know what I am doing and I am there to help both them and the company get their jobs done. However, I have had several people from hard backgrounds ask me in private if I would help them work their way up to a job like mine (Industrial IT manager). Of course I will and some of them even followed through on my help and advice and ended up much better off.
The only time I have ever heard something like “check your privilege” is from my ex-wife and her douche-bag friends that all grew up extremely wealthy in very segregated liberal enclaves in the most exclusive Boston suburbs. I grew up in a tiny poor town in the Deep South with a single mother that was an underpaid teacher.
I tend to be nice to everyone in person but limousine liberals and fundamentalist leftist preachers just rub me the wrong way especially when they are making unfounded accusations and unwarranted assumptions about me (sound familiar?). I have told several of them (quite truthfully) that I like black people, Mexicans, gays, poor people and almost everyone else but I do have one true prejudice. I don’t like condescending and pretentious white people AT ALL and I would appreciate it if they just stay as far away from me as possible. If someone happens to fall into that obnoxious group, it isn’t about minorities and never was. It is YOU personally that I will happily discriminate against every time because you are a needlessly confrontation hypocrite that doesn’t know what you are talking about.
I really don’t see why privilege is such a controversial concept. How can anyone deny that certain groups have it easier than others?
Like, every demographic has those who worry about poverty. But not all of them simultaneously have to ALSO worry about their parents being deported. Or their marriage being declared null and void. Or an employer making snap decisions about them based on their “weird” name (proportionally, anyway). Etc etc.
I mean, look at how the outgoing president of the United States and his family were treated by some circles. Yes, all Presidents have faced withering criticism, but how many in modern times had some of it concluding that they weren’t even American? JFK is the only one I can think of that comes even close.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here; it’s part of the people talking to each other that you said “having these sorts of issues and conversations is not a bad thing” about. It sounds like you’re backtracking rather dramatically from your initial position.
No, it’s a phrase that is only useful to dismiss someone’s opinion or attempt to silence them, it’s about as constructive as ‘fuck off and die’.
Let’s not pretend that I’m nutpicking when you praised praised a specific article by saying “having these sorts of issues and conversations is not a bad thing,” and I quoted two statements verbatim from the article you praised. Pretending that people are ‘nutpicking’ when they quote something you chose to say was good is not honest debate.
Because “groups” are irrelevant and largely made up. I thought getting away from that type of thinking was the goal. I could go through countless pages of examples but you are smarter than that and I am sure you can think of plenty of them on your if you can break the spell.
Is it possible that a white boy that grew up in a trailer park and is in remission for leukemia may have had it worse overall than the daughter of a black Harvard professor (or POTUS for that matter)? “Privilege” simply doesn’t work as a simple bubble chart.
No, what they are asking for is ‘shut up whitey/manly/hetty/cissy and accept that I’m right because I win the oppression olympics’. Which, incidentally, is pretty ableist, since they have no way of knowing if you have a mental disability or invisible physical disability, and so actually are lower on the privilege totem pole. And it also ignores the huge privilege that wealth brings, since it’s usually said by a richer person to a poorer person.
You’re joking, right? It’s a phrase primarily used either by rich ‘progressives’ or by campus ‘progressives’ who consider themselves higher on the social totem pole than the unenlightened.
Specifically, that they have it easier than others given everything else equal. It is at least an argument when you look at jobs and education. But given everything else equal, it would be better for everyone if there were no outright racism. It is not very productive to talk about privilege of not getting arrested or stopped for DWB because it doesn’t benefit anyone on the “other” side. Given everything else equal, if we had the choice, even if we were extremely selfish, we wouldn’t choose to institute racism because it wouldn’t benefit us.