Welcome back, my adventurous friends. I’m going to try to go ahead and wrap this series up. We’ll be looking at the final 10 items on the presenter’s privilege list and have a bit of a closing discussion. So, without further ado:
25. If you have ever felt like there was NOT adequate or accurate representation of your racial group, sexual orientation group, gender group, and/or disability group in the media, take one step back.
Note this is about how you feel; you do not have to present any objective evidence that your group is in point of face insufficiently or inaccurately portrayed in media. It’s all about how you feel, so everybody can step back. Except, of course, if everybody can see you’re a heterosexual White man, and you step back, there’s going to be grumbling and snide remarks, and most likely the presenter is going to call you out on it. Notice that sexual orientation comes up again; notice also that same sex attraction is not specified. I wonder if Susie the pedophile is getting a free pass for a reason. What is that + about, anyway?
26. If you confident that your parents would be able to financially help/support you if you were going through a financial hardship, take one step forward.
Once again, an attack on intact, coherent family structure and support. I know I keep saying it, but you have to remember that in this paradigm privilege is evil, hence the saying “check your privilege” as the new “shut up.”
27. If you have ever been bullied or made fun of based on something that you can’t change, take one step back.
You mean like right now, in this conference today? Three steps back for me!
28. If there were more than 50 books in your house growing up, take one step forward.
Okay, great, so in middle/high school you get bullied for being a book worm, now it turns out that was privilege all along. Also, if you have more than 50 books in your house right now you’re giving your kids privilege, which is to the detriment of people without books, so stop it. So now we’ve got literacy privilege; also a bad thing.
29. If you studied the culture or the history of your ancestors in elementary school not including the month of February) take one step forward.
This is so egregiously racist, bigoted and stupid I have a hard time believing it. First, we set aside AN ENTIRE MONTH for BLACK HISTORY ONLY!!!!!, then if you studied about your culture any other time you’re the one who’s privileged, not the kid who got an entire month all about himself. Also goes to show that as a peace-maker Black history is a no-go.
30. If your parents or guardians attended college, take one step forward.
If they ended up saddled with a gagillion dollars in student loan debt, can you take a step back? Seriously, though, college educated Whites are the only people who take this list seriously. So of course this one had to make it to the list.
31. If you ever gone (sic) on a family vacation, take one step forward.
Yes, except for the (sic) that is exactly how it appears on the form. I rather think it speaks for itself.
32. If you can buy new clothes or go out to dinner when you want to, take one step forward.
Hello class warfare. Really, more envy. If you step forward on this one you know you’ll be getting the evil eye from everyone behind you. This is a paradigm created by losers to give value to their own failed lives, and they can only imagine doing that by tearing down those more successful than themselves. Welcome to the struggle session, comrade!
33. If you were ever offered a job because of your association with a friend, family member or organization, take one step forward.
Okay, so all the vets who got offered a job based on their honorable discharge papers are “privileged.” How about we try asking if you were ever offered a job because of your skin color, but now white. If they can leave out February I can do that. How about if we just straight up say, if you have ever gotten a job because of affirmative action, take one step forward. Why can’t we put that on the list? You’ve put our private medical information, our families, our sexual orientation, etc. all on the list, why can’t I put affirmative action on the list? Seems like a pretty big privilege to me.
34. If one of your parents was ever laid off or unemployed not by choice, (sic) take one step back.
Once again, the grammar is as it appears in the original. I remember friends’ dads getting laid off in the 70s. It sucked. The same people making this list are the ones writing the policies that are making sure everyone gets laid off again. If you can’t build everyone up, then tear everyone down, just so long as we’re all equal.
35. If you were ever uncomfortable about a joke or statement you overheard related to your race, ethnicity, gender, appearance, or sexual orientation but felt unsafe to confront the situation, take one step back.
You mean like this entire conference? Seriously, how tone deaf can you be. And notice, please, the alphabet people are listed once again. When did homosexuality become the same as Black? Do Black people really want to be lumped in with the alphabet people?
Okay, so the point of this entire Privilege paradigm is to create conflict, a conflict which, by its nature, cannot be resolved if one accepts the paradigm. It elevates the bases and least moral to a position of noble victimhood, it casts aspersions on the family, the home, Christianity, literacy, a strong work ethic and everything else that creates a stable society.
Also remember, this paradigm was created by the Weather Underground, and was and is intended to be used in Maoist-style “struggle sessions.” What was the ultimate goal? Well, from Wikipedia:
To try to turn their members into hardened revolutionaries and to promote solidarity and cohesion, members of collectives engaged in intensive criticism sessions which attempted to reconcile their prior and current activities to Weathermen doctrine. These “criticism self-criticism” sessions (also called “CSC” or “Weatherfries”) were the most distressing part of life in the collective. Derived from Maoist techniques, it was intended to root out racist, individualist and chauvinist tendencies within group members. At its most intense, members would be berated for up to a dozen or more hours non-stop about their flaws. It was intended to make group members believe that they were, deep down, white supremacists by subjecting them to constant criticism to break them down. The sessions were used to ridicule and bully those who didn’t agree with the party line and force them into acceptance. However, the sessions were also almost entirely successful at purging potential informants from the Weathermen’s ranks, making them crucial to the Weathermen’s survival as an underground organization. The Weathermen were also determined to destroy “bourgeois individualism” amongst members that would potentially interfere with their commitment to both the Weathermen and the goal of revolution. Personal property was either renounced or given to the collective, with income being used to purchase the needs of the group and members enduring Spartan living conditions. Conventional comforts were forbidden and the leadership was exalted, giving them immense power over their subordinates (in some collectives the leadership could even dictate personal decisions such as where one went). Martial arts were practiced and occasional direct actions were engaged in. Critical of monogamy, they launched a “smash monogamy” campaign, in which couples (whose affection was deemed unacceptably possessive, counterrevolutionary or even selfish) were to be split apart; collectives underwent forced rotation of sex partners (including allegations that some male leaders rotated women between collectives in order to sleep with them) and in some cases engaged in sexual orgies. This formation continued during 1969 and 1970 until the group went underground and a more relaxed lifestyle was adopted as the group blended into the counterculture.
This paradigm is being taught in schools at every level, often on a mandatory basis, and is the underlying philosophy behind Critical Race Theory. In addition to schools, it is also being pushed on the military, most Federal and many state government bodies, and the majority of major corporations in the U.S. today. As a system it is completely antithetical to both Biblical morality and the founding principles of the United States. It is a corrosive moral acid intended to undermine the church, the family and the republic. It’s well past time we started treating it as what it really is.
Throwing off Biblical morality has gotten us to this point: https://theothermccain.com/2022/08/07/zulock-william-zachary-gay-couple-child-pornography-adopted/#disqus_thread
Yes, there is metaphysical truth: https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2022/08/08/young-men-metaphysical-certitude/
Metaphysical truth of skeletons: https://whoresandale.wordpress.com/2022/08/05/maybe-the-real-skeletons-were-inside-us-all-along/
The metaphysical truth that Google is evil: https://sylg1.wordpress.com/2022/08/07/google-has-canceled-feedburner/
A white guy who understands having an ego as a good thing: https://sigmaframe.wordpress.com/2022/08/05/dying-to-self-is-not-ego-ablation/
Pelosi privilege is a thing: https://gunnerq2.com/a-theory-about-the-pelosi-trip/
Not becoming extinct on schedule privilege: https://www.scifiwright.com/2022/08/paul-ehrlichs-cloud-of-blue-steam/#more-30967
9 responses to “In Defense of Privilege, Part 5”
I was taught American history because I was American. Were these people not American?
Some yes, some no, some you just can’t tell. Some who know, some who don’t, some it’s just as well.
So basically CRT is just “making a bunch of shit up and calling it Truth”
Yes. But it has to be bad stuff about Christians, Whites, men, etc.
Steve Kirsch doesn’t know with metaphysical certitude what killed those doctors, so it follows what he says, in the past said, or will ever say, is bunk.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is good enough for me, especially on the clot shot.
The above I response to this
Fourteen young Canadian docs die after getting the shot. Normally would be ~0 over 30 years.
This is a list of just the docs my doctor friend in Canada heard about passively. In the past 30 years, he’s never heard of a single death like this. Not one. Now there are 14.
They’re kicking off at one a day. How many doctors does Canada have?
Pingback: FMJRA 2.0: Alberich : The Other McCain