On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:59:01 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:43:26 -0700, Darren New wrote:
>> 
>>> It's not a "privilege" to be treated fairly by the courts, or to be
>>> allowed to live without being hassled by your neighbors, or to avoid
>>> being beat up for no reason when you walk down the street.
>> 
>> Some might argue, though, that it is if your situation is such that you
>> are not.  There's the idea (which is what you describe), and then
>> there's the reality (which many in the US live in every day).  It
>> *shouldn't* be a privilege, I'd agree with that - it should be
>> something everyone has access to.
> 
> Unless you count "privilege" as opposite of "disadvantage", I don't see
> how you count "being treated the way the law says you should" as being
> "privileged."  I.e., you run into the excluded middle of "normal", where
> everyone who isn't ground down is unfairly uplifted.

That's a good way of explaining it, actually - privilege is the opposite 
of disadvantage for purposes of this discussion.  Being treated as the 
law you say you should be isn't a privilege, but if the only thing 
someone sees is people being treated better than they are, then the 
appearance *is* one of privilege.  It's a matter of the point of view, or 
the lens you look at the treatment through.

> Maybe this is a meaning of the word "privilege" I'm not aware of. Lots
> of people seem to use it to mean "better off than I am, through no fault
> of theirs or mine."

Well, again, it's a matter of the lens you look at it through.  From the 
perspective of someone who isn't treated fairly but sees people who are, 
the perception frequently is that of those being treated fairly 
("better") as being privileged.  From the perspective of someone being 
treated fairly, the point of view is different, and it's easy to look at 
it and say "it isn't privilege" because we're used to the fair 
treatment.  But if one's perspective is the one from not having that fair 
treatment, I can see how the fair treatment could be perceived as 
"privilege"  (sorry if I repeated myself, two sittings while writing one 
paragraph can do that <g>)

>>> The idea that you'd want to take these "privileges" away from someone
>>> in order to be "more fair" is absurd in my mind.
>> 
>> I agree with this.  For example, the way to fix "not everyone is
>> treated fairly by the courts" is not to make the situation so it reads
>> "everyone is treated unfairly by the courts".
> 
> That's the problem. You start getting people saying "let's take away the
> unfair privileges."  You know, like being born in a country where it's
> possible to get rich.

Also agreed.  The thing is, the opportunity is there, but is the 
opportunity equal for everyone?  That's a tough one to answer because 
there are so many factors.

Jim

Post a reply to this message