The accusatory attitude towards privledge seems to me like the crabs in a bucket mentality, jealousy, or other similar ressentiment towards towards the more powerful. I think this is what matters, as it gives you us a model for understanding the position. If we merely listen to the position explaining itself, we'll find that it breaks down completely under scrutiny. I could rip the entire concept apart with clever arguments (let me know if anyone wants to read that), but at this point it feels like we're just pointing out the obvious and agreeing with one another as a way of venting.
A better question is, will anyone here defend the idea of privilege being used like this? As you point out, it's used as a way to bring down the successful rather than as a way to help those who are unsuccessful. If you look more closely, this is a common psychological theme of losers (underprivileged, needy, use any synonym). They hate the rich but do not love the poor. They want to see evil people punished, but they don't check what happened to the victims. Psychologically speaking, hatred of X is distinct from the love of (opposite of X).
Of course the disadvantaged aren't without power. They're actually the most powerful when you consider the strength in numbers. By definition, being disadvantaged has become an advantageous position, meaning that the powerless are powerful. Think about it - if white men are being harassed, how are they privledged? There's no force more difficult to oppose than public opinion.
The so-called fight for the good (especially of a class or category of people) is just a fight for power. Femininsm is a fight for power. Communism is a fight for power. Maybe this comment too is just an attempt to elevate myself. I'd argue that it's not, though, since my will to power is lacking. Anyway, psychology is not rocket science, our social norms just prevents a clear understanding of human nature from becoming common knowledge.
p
The accusatory attitude towards privledge seems to me like the crabs in a bucket mentality, jealousy, or other similar ressentiment towards towards the more powerful. I think this is what matters, as it gives you us a model for understanding the position. If we merely listen to the position explaining itself, we'll find that it breaks down completely under scrutiny. I could rip the entire concept apart with clever arguments (let me know if anyone wants to read that), but at this point it feels like we're just pointing out the obvious and agreeing with one another as a way of venting.
A better question is, will anyone here defend the idea of privilege being used like this? As you point out, it's used as a way to bring down the successful rather than as a way to help those who are unsuccessful. If you look more closely, this is a common psychological theme of losers (underprivileged, needy, use any synonym). They hate the rich but do not love the poor. They want to see evil people punished, but they don't check what happened to the victims. Psychologically speaking, hatred of X is distinct from the love of (opposite of X).
Of course the disadvantaged aren't without power. They're actually the most powerful when you consider the strength in numbers. By definition, being disadvantaged has become an advantageous position, meaning that the powerless are powerful. Think about it - if white men are being harassed, how are they privledged? There's no force more difficult to oppose than public opinion.
The so-called fight for the good (especially of a class or category of people) is just a fight for power. Femininsm is a fight for power. Communism is a fight for power. Maybe this comment too is just an attempt to elevate myself. I'd argue that it's not, though, since my will to power is lacking. Anyway, psychology is not rocket science, our social norms just prevents a clear understanding of human nature from becoming common knowledge.
More options
Context Copy link