Michael Mitchell: Archive

Doesn't the intellectual divide -- the fact both sides struggle to even understand each other, to be specific -- indicate a certain "privilege" on both sides? Let's call it: Information Privilege. Now how do we persuade both sides to share their game plans when they're competing for different goals? In other words, if "white privilege" exists, is it really unfair? Or is it just part of the game, so to speak, a natural feature of reality no one has the power to change? If you change the context to almost anything else, to other areas of life in which we compete for things, we all have certain advantages over others that no one is willing to concede and that no one has a problem with admitting are advantages because we all understand that when we compete for things some will win and some will lose. This is why I ultimately disagree with both sides. "White privilege" is obviously hypocritical nonsense, just a distraction from other privileges or a play to get more, but the fact that we're arguing about privilege at all is proof the "game" itself is rigged. When the government plays favorites and determines winners and losers on the free market or in our private lives, it's not merely unfair, it's a violation of the rights its proper primary function is to protect.