History is what it is. But, let's suppose that the history of the United States had never included slavery. Would this still mean that white privilege is a concern, or, would it mean that those who ended up here, through immigration or other migrations of choice, were subject to the same rights, obligations and privileges as every other resident, race, color and/or national origin, notwithstanding? Would it mean that a book about white privilege would have no traction, or that questions about equality would have to be framed differently? Your point about buzzwords is obvious: there are dozens of them. I am white (you knew that from reading this comment). And, I suppose, in the general view, that genetic fact renders me privileged. Sobeit. That fact, and, 99 cents gets me a cup of coffee at the corner Get Go convenience store. I'm going to have to move, though. Increases in property taxes; school tax levies and other living costs are rendering my retirement income null and void. So much for, uh, privilege. Yeah...

America is a violent nation, from Day One. That violence, so persistent, has melded with strident capitalism. These two define the State in deeds. The words are considerably less authentic, as they always are when measured against action.

In remains to be seen whether or not a nation conceived in violence and dedicated to the proposition that all men and women can achieve class exclusiveness through wealth will perish from the Earth sooner or later.

This discussion really missed the mark. Take the example of a Black person experiencing unwarranted violence or even murder at the hands of a police officer. You argued whether the differential treatment represents white people having a "privilege", or are just being treated like anybody deserves to be treated. Or from the other side, is the Black person lacking a privilege, or being denied their rights? I probably can agree with your answer, but the answer is irrelevant because it entirely misses the point. What you need to look at is all the other people - the ones not involved in that incident. All Black people are burdened with the knowledge that they are subject to such treatment. They can't live a single day without the threat of mistreatment affecting everything about their lives. Only Black parents have to have "the talk" with their kids, to explain how to best reduce the chances of being killed by a cop. White people have the privilege of never having to think about this. We can go through our days carelessly, in that regard. That changes everything. Of course the Black person who is targeted, has their rights violated. But the *expectations* that white people get to have, and that others, especially Black people, distinctly don't get to have, certainly seems like privilege to me. You made an analogy about country clubs granting privileges. And yes, it's very much like that. White people are very much in the club, and people of color, especially Black people, are very much not.

I have noticed a new phenomenon in the race war, and am wondering if anyone else has seen this.
Since Black Lives Matter, maybe even sometime before, there has been a shift. Where before there seemed to be solidarity among non-white groups, there is now an apparent widening rift. It was barely perceptible at first, but is now obvious. To me, anyway. I am wondering how/why this has transpired. Looking at the recent election, I stumbled upon a clue---I think. Vice President Harris is from a multi-ethnic background , if I recall correctly. So, besides being the first female VP, she had another barrier to overcome. Or several? More than once during the campaign, her racial origins were brought to the fore; affirmed and emphasized...as if to honor them equally; as if that were a mandatory act and less would have been disrespectful. This is interesting and perhaps demonstrative. Here we have a well-qualified and respected professional, who happens to be female and from a diverse family lineage. Her racial profile became almost as important as any of that. Hoping again that I am just flat wrong, I can visualize greater dissent among people of color. Unless
we get hold of this trend before it clamps on to us...

This last week reached a new low for the brotherhood of man. A sophomore at a state university has received death threats, because he missed a free throw in a basketball game. March madness, indeed. To the morons who authored these threats, i say: go find yourselves a hole in the ground, and crawl into it. I did not send anything about this to the local newspaper. They are unresponsive to such concerns. Well. Well. Well...

The latest things happening vis-a-vis race in America are deeply disturbing. Unarmed black men being shot, many killed, for raising their hands when confronted by law enforcement. Several have been holding smart phones, which, last I looked, do not resemble guns. Most all people who count themselves as conscious beings, are getting fed up with excuses, as the shootings continue. But, having noted all this, I'm seeing other worrisome things which seem to show disregard, or worse, push-back. Some are placing signs in their yards that either refute or parody the Black Lives Matter movement. One of those, near my present neighborhood, reads: Legends Never Rest. Now, that could mean something or, it could mean nothing. I at one point considered my own contribution: Rust Never Sleeps. Nor Does Gravity. But, the more I thought about community decay and unrest, the more I realized it would be unwise. You cannot make a harmless joke about tragedy. People just won't understand. Those who think you are in their camp will misunderstand. Some who think you are being coldly racist might decide to shoot up your house or neighborhood.

So, there will be no publicly displayed comments on my property. We are moving soon anyway..

I have another view on the problem of racism. Perhaps someone else has noted this---I have not seen it expressed before. It comes back to social and cultural roots. And generational attitudes. People get too accustomed to 'always doing what they have always done'. Even when, in some recess in their mind, they know it is wrong. One generation passes along its' prejudices to the next. The snowball effect, so to speak. When attitudes become pervasive, behaviors follow suit. Such is the case with the racial divide in these United States. The recent political divisiveness here has only aggravated and amplified the problem. My assertion is that the battlelines , as now drawn, leave little room for constructive change. Some sensible people, race notwithstanding, either recognize or intuit the intractability of this massive snowball. But there are not enough of them actively working to solve the problem.

Always (and in all ways) doing what you've always done, good and bad, gets you what you've always gotten. And, there will forever be those who would not have it any other way. I hate to be a pessimist.
But see no way around it. Attitudes and behaviors are stoked by generational flames.

Another view, Part Two:
Around about the time the new world was already infected with white on black racism,(slavery),circa the 1700s, there were rumblings of something called manifest destiny. This had to do with the 'Indian Problem'. There was no perceivable Indian Problem in the 1600s. There were few white people here then and the Thanksgiving myth was born. Later, into the nineteenth century, the 'Indian Problem' emerged. No-one was concerned with the subjugation of blacks. Not much. Not yet. Roughly, manifest destiny proposed that the country would expand; prosper; and anything or anyone standing in the way of that would be exterminated. And so, there arose a systematic effort to displace and/or erase indigenous peoples. The only good (Native American) was a dead one. This was more ruthless than enslaving Blacks, but no less unjust. My family, I think, goes on here. The genes are still out there. Native American genes. I hope ,and trust my point is clear. For, if it is not, I do not know where we go now.

III.
For milennials and any others who may not know;were not taught much about World War II, this final installment concerns another dark chapter of US history, vis-a-vis treatment of minority people, lawfully residing in the USA. These were Asians,Japanese and possibly others who were shipped to internment camps during that war. There was fear that they would somehow undermine the American war effort, perhaps through espionage or some other nefarious fashion. It was not known, nor ever proven, as far as I know, that this fear had any sort of reality. The recipients of this dose of injustice were guilty by association only. 'We just couldn't trust 'em'. It was, after all, wartime. In this case, and under the circumstances, the presumption of equal treatment under the law, was dismissed, out-of-hand.

I was not born until after that war. But these cold facts were never, in my school years, any part of American history curriculum. I seriously doubt, as previously implied, that they are given so much as a footnote since. It is easy to employ Occam's Broom when wishing to dispose of embarrassing history. And to always do what you have always done, when you want to get what you have always got. Exceptionalism, you see.

Current Events:
Folks in our little town are creative. Someone bogarted the Black Lives Matter banner often seen in yards throughout the land. The first line became the name of the high school; the second, class of 2021; the third, congratulations! Now, some people might take offense to this. There were only a few black kids in the graduating class. Was this only poor taste? Microaggression? Mere ignorance? I thought about approaching the home and asking about the creativity. Thought better of that, however. These are,as I have mentioned, turbulent times.

The comment from my June 10,2021 message here came up in a program I was watching yesterday. The remarks were brief but the context similar. I don't know exactly what the speaker's point was but found it interesting he would choose an analogy I had remarked on about a month ago. Maybe he is or has been a contributor of some sort. Perhaps, a PT follower? Or just a thinker who found the comparison cogent. In any case: interesting, don't cha think?

Here is a novel approach. Maybe. If there has always been 'white prvilege', how does that square with subjugation. Slavery. And so on. I have asserted that the founding fathers learned from Enlightenment views. But, wait a minute. Did the enlightenment rubber stamp slavery? Not in anything I have read. Was slavery an unspoken privilege for white people in Europe? Indentured servitude appears to have been a practice. I suppose .that equates with slavery, in some sense. But, is it not true that when a debt was repaid, the indentured servant was, uh, free? That did not apply for enslaved blacks who were abducted from their homelands and treated like oxen.
So, all this considered, it would appear the founding fathers manipulated things: to suit themselves and their personal agendas. Desire, expectation, belief, etc., are propositional attitudes, as Davidson asserted. They do not equal truth, unless someone thinks so. We have always done what is advantageous. And cheap. Slavery was cheap. Way back then...

Is there some conclusion to be drawn here? It depends. Conclusions are frowned upon, in some quasi-legal forums. Facts are what they are., not what alternative factualists claim them to be. Prejudice and discrimination, lawful or no, are engrained. Based on historical fact, our current corner is the one to which we are consigned...having run out of paint. Subjugation is not new. It is not solely black/white.. Look around the world. You will figure it out. I already have. You have too, if you were paying attention. If not, your bad.

is not new. Power is not new. Nor is greed. There are simple matters. Unless of course one wishes

A final note:
The phrase, systemic discrimination, has been around for years. Most of what I have written here was leading to this. Systemic discrimination has origins preceding white privilege. Subjugation of groups/classes of people began with power struggles, aristocracy, theocracy and host of subdivisions of these dramas. The black/white schism is only one example, and, perhaps the one most currently visible. People are accustomed to doing what they have previously done...always getting what they have gotten, and, being pretty content with all of that. We are not discussing a two hundred or three hundred year-old problem. The disease is far older that that. Anyone who cannot connect the dots is wrapped up in the current moment. We do not seem to learn much from our mistakes.

Now, we have critical race theory. I will search that, just to suss out meaning. The scene changes. A lot.

Alright. I looked it up. Not so different from my own notions of why racism endures. Opponents of the theory seem to deny social and cultural issues I have advanced with my ideas about a totality of. circumstances: the interrelatedness of many things. Inasmuch as we cannot legislate attitudes; can only retribute bad behavior, critical race theory seems just one more way of intellectualizing the problem. Intellectualization does nothing towards resolutions. Critical race theory will not do much either. So long as these matters earn no more than a nod and wink there will be no peace. Systemic discrimination will endure. Any questions? I have several. But, critical race theory is ill-fitted to answer them so far.

There are few in my small circle who give a flg about philosophy. My brother and our friend in Ecuador are about it. When critical race theory emerged,Brother and I were exchanging ideas/thoughts on metaphysics. He opined that, far as he could ascertain, metaphysics' main contribution was allowance for 'wild-ass guesses' about certain philosophical enigmas and conundrums. I noted this was sorta like what I had been thinking, only better parsed. On mulling over the explication of CRT, found by my web browser, I began to see a connexion. Metaphysically speaking, wild-ass guesses have value. They are, as in Dennett, a kind of intuition pump: not often right; not always wrong. I have commented previously on cultural, historical and traditional aspects of prejudice and discrimination ( in both its' lawful and unlawful guises). In reading the proffered description of CRT, i found a similar (to me) characterization, offering a social basis.

Now, whether CRT consists in wild-ass guessing, is not abundantly clear. Nor is it clear that it offers much towards resolutions of the ongoing, seeming intractable problem of race in,America or anywhere else. It is well, I suppose, to get people talking. That is a crucial step to solving problems.
But, there have been countless efforts towards talking over the race problem, since long before most of us were born. If CRT is just another flavor; just a wild-ass guess, all the talk about it is only more paint around the corner in which we reside. Intellectualizing problems is little more than forming wild-ass guesses about them, metaphysics notwithsranding.

Notions come and go and may come back again. Philosophy is replete with them.

These remarks might have been better placed. But, I don't think so. There is a new show, due to hit the airways. It is called THE WONDER YEARS. If you are old enough, you may recall the original series. Featuring white kids. Growing up, more or less normal, in a more or less normal world. The protagonists were charming. Charmingly vulnerable. So, all these years later, there is a new version of the show. It focuses on coming of age issues. For black kids
I did not pay much attention to the original show. Television was not, for me, very important. There may have been black actors in the series. Probably not many, though. Surely not above the percentage of blacks in the population at the time. So, now, we will have the premise, from a black perspective. Thing is, perspectives are flexible. They are, as it has been said, propositional attitudes.
I don't mind progress. It is inevitable. I would hope the new series is a fair portrayal of how things are.
But, things being equal, I'll not bet on that. Cancel culture and historical revisionism play insideous roles now. As does critical race theory...in my humble opinion.

There was a post on affirmative action. Cannot find it now. It appeared to talk about LBJ. And the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Johnson was a shrewd opportunist, not an activist for civil rights. Being as he was, looking forward, with a long view, there was no loss to appearing pro-civil rights. This may have been the early vestige of political correctness as we now know it. What his longview motives may have been is hard to divine. Maybe he only wanted a legacy. If so, he got that. Didn't even have to be assassinated.. Yes. Pretty shrewd. LBJ in no way fit the notions of civil rights. But, motives may be clouded. Especially when long views are at stake.