In the context of obvious white supremacy, the privileges and immunities associated with whiteness are undeniable. For example, no rational agent would dispute the claim that whites, by virtue of their whiteness, enjoyed various positions of power granted to them by the American system of slavery. However, as the existence of white supremacy becomes less self-evident, so does the existence of white privilege. With the morphing face of white supremacy—i.e. the move from abject, violent, racist oppression to more subtle thought and action—it has become less clear to some that certain privileges are granted to whites truly on the basis of the color of their skin. Therefore, today, the claim that white privilege exists is a contested one. A defense is required.
The discussion that follows falls short of such a defense, but it seeks to establish the beginnings of an epistemic account of white privilege, namely by considering the question, “How does one know that white privilege exists?” My central claim is that it is difficult for those with white privilege to even know that they have it. The very nature of privilege encourages the ignorance of its existence. It follows from this premise that certain knowledge is available to the oppressed group that is, in some ways, not available to the dominant group.
Let us consider the following thought experiment. Imagine a two-story house. On the top floor, a group of people are seated and are waiting to be served dinner. On the bottom floor, another group of people are cooking the meal that is to be served to the first group. This second group cooks the meal, serves it to the people upstairs, and washes the dishes afterwards. What responses could we anticipate if we asked one member of each group to describe the conditions of the lives of the other group? It is clear that the group sitting upstairs would be unable to say anything interesting or important about the experiences of the second group. The downstairs group, however, by virtue of its ability to move in and out of the physical space of both groups, occupies a superior epistemic standpoint from which to observe and make judgments on the experiences of both groups. In this way, a member of the second group is positioned to know certain propositions in a manner that is inaccessible to the dominant group.
Social epistemologists refer to this positioning as the subjectivity of the “situated knower.” For example, feminist epistemologists in particular seek to know how our knowledge of the world is gendered and how a gendered subject produces knowledge. We should ask similar questions along the lines of race. How do race-related subjects produce knowledge, and how does the knowledge we have influenced by our particular experiences and positions fit within a context of white supremacy? I believe the existence of white privilege is one such claim that can be considered in this light.
Now, it should be understood that “white privilege exists” is a propositional belief, as is “white privilege does not exist.” What qualifies a belief as knowledge is contested and differs from philosopher to philosopher—yet let us say that for a belief to be knowledge it must have a causal correspondence to the facts. The interesting question is how does one discern the “facts?” And how do we evaluate competing claims to what the facts are? My point is that our discernment of the facts, and ultimately our judgment as to whether white privilege exists, is contingent on one’s positioning within the structure of white supremacy.
The reader may wonder if it is ever possible for the dominant group to acknowledge its privilege. The answer is of course, but it requires the help of the oppressed group. With the case of white privilege, one strategy is to listen (i.e. really listen) to the concerns of people of color who attempt to call individual whites out for their allegiance to white supremacy. Don’t feel attacked. Instead think of the ways in which your behavior, unbeknownst to you, serves to reinforce power in socially destructive ways. Perhaps there is solace in the realization that you’re not an evil person for having white privilege. Rather, it is something you were born with and have the power to resist.
I wrote this column because I think it should be the precursor to any discussion of white privilege. It is the column I should have written before my column from last spring, “Finding the Strength to Voice Rage.” I hope that I have shown that the evidence for the propositional claim “white privilege exists” is contingent upon the subjective knower and the position from which they know within a particular structure of power relations. Through dialogue, we are able to negotiate these divergent positions to arrive closer to truth and the acknowledgement of our ultimate reality and the obligations that follow from it.
Anthony Kelley is a Columbia College senior majoring in women’s and gender studies. Strength to Love runs alternate Tuesdays. Opinion@columbiaspectator.com