Jordan Peterson Debunks Intersectionality and White Privilege
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 01. 2020
- Jordan Peterson is a professor of psychology at the university of toronto. In this clip, he debunks the myth of white privilege and intersectionality and explains their relation to Marxism and Postmodernism.
#peterson #debunks #intersectionality
Check out his full talk "Identity politics and the Marxist lie of white privilege" here: • Lecture: Identity poli...
---
If you like the content, subscribe!
As a working class white dude here I'm still searching for the white privilege I've been told I had. It's gotta be here somewhere.
Have you found it yet
If you do find it could you let me know so I might be able to get some idea as to where to find mine?
One of the first people to write about a concept that would come to be called "intersectionality" - said, that "Although most individuals have little difficulty identifying their own victimization within some major system of oppression-whether it be by race, social class, religion, physical ability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age or gender-they typically fail to see how their thoughts and actions uphold someone else’s subordination." And one of her examples include, "African-Americans who possess eloquent analyses of racism often persist in viewing poor White men as symbols of White power." What she's saying here is that class is also structured within degrees of privilege and penalty - so, seeing any poor person as a symbol of oppression (white power in this case) is problematic and doesn't account for the "intersectionality" of our identities.
All this said, I am a Black, transgender man, who grew up working class - so on race, class background, and gender identity - I face disadvsantages. But, I am also able-bodied, have USA citizenship status, I have an appearance that fits most people's expectations for my gender (I look like a man), I have college education, I make an income in the top 25% of income earners. So, I have income/class privilege, education degree privilege, I have gender privilege, I have able body privilege. And in recognizing this, I do my best to use each of those areas of privilege in ways that benefit or help people without that privilege.
And this is all intersectionality and antiracism thought is about. It's not saying that ALL white people have ALL the privilege. It's saying that we have to look at the multiple areas of one's life and put that together to get a more complete picture of privilege and oppression. Under this theory - I would be considered overall more privileged than you if you are a white dude, in poverty, no higher education, with a disability, and undocumented - and I would be compelled to do what I could to use my privilege to protect you from oppression and disadvantage. That's all these theories are saying.
Darwin knew.
I think you’re missing the point of intersectionality. It’s not just about skin colour. It’s about class, gender, disability, sexuality. There are plenty of white men living on the streets homeless. They wouldn’t have the same privileges as a white man who is well off with a home. But if there is a white man who is homeless who is physically able, then he is more privileged than a homeless woman of colour who has a disability. It’s about compounded experiences of marginalisation. No one is denying that living in poverty is hard, but it’s the compounded marginalisation that’s what intersectionality is about
“The individual is the ultimate minority.” Well said Dr Peterson, well said.
When there is no personal accountability, blaming will always be directed on external factors.
And it isn't bad, it is just human nature to survive. Not constraining it is bad.
Privilege is not dependent on skin color. It is dependent on power. I have worked in China and Japan and when working and living in these cultures it is clear my skin color does not give me privilege. My power is dependent on my culture which is dependent on group association. Outside my group I lose power (privilege) This is why inter-sectionality is simply a power grab by one group from another. It is taking something through coercion. Because the desire for power is a universal human instinct there will always be those without power trying to acquire power. If men have more power than women than women as a group will seek to acquire the power that men have " Through group association" (feminism). Not having power creates the desire to associate with others to acquire power.
Nonsense. They have job ads specifically asking for whites. Asians worship wites, actually.
@@JohnSmith-hs1hn Asian culture is quite eager to assimilate Western culture, and parading around Westerners in front-facing positions gives an Asian company a "modern" appeal. Also, white tourists have long created a stereotype that white people are all wealthy, something that the Chinese people revere over almost everything else. This isn't about "Asians worshiping whites". Rather, it is about Asians wanting to be wealthy & appear wealthy.
In this case they already have a slot of power and are breaking their backs for more, that is ominous in my mind, it suggests someone/something has put all their chips on the table and is all in so to speak.
Western women lose their female privilege in Asia. For many western men it's the opposite.
Your account is very interesting indeed. Would you be so kind as to expand on that topic, please?
When you get down to it logically categorizing fractionates all the way down to the individual. Accordingly, we, as our selves, are responsible for our own actions and successes or failures. I firmly believe that the reason the US has lasted so long is because it recognizes and safeguards the sanctity of the individual against the dangers of humans (groups or individuals) and governments to stomp on the individual.
I've never understood why postmodernism ever embraced intersectionality in the 1980's. The whole thing seems like a meta-narative.
Privilege is irrelevant. Privilege comes in the form of being better looking, taller, smarter, richer, more talented, etc. The real question, and the only question is did you attain your privilege because of malfeasance or inequity. If so, people are justified to complain. If not, it's simply a matter of good fortune that nobody can be faulted for. It is not a privilege to live in the country your people built. It is a privilege to be treated equally in a country built by others.
Who built America? Asking out of curiosity?
I would not consider nepotism to mean that someone is smarter, richer, more talented et cetera. Nepotists did not earn their success.
@@FootballerXPAmericans
He asked why did they choose those particular attributes over others; because they were the largest groups they could access and hope to influence
Agree
Post Modernist thought process amounts to conjecture. You can't approach a self involved person of conjecture and make a difference.
There are two factors to ones success, luck and hard work. Some people are born lucky. They might be physically gifted with looks, strength or other attributes. They might be mentally gifted with drive, intelligence, or other factors. They might be circumstantially lucky with status, location, or wealth. Yet...being born lucky does not guarantee success. Hard work will increase one's chances of success, but not guarantee it. The only thing you can control though, is how hard you work. So, increase your luck. Work hard.
White privileged does exist. The question is how much of it exist. This also applies to black privilege. We live in a complex world.
I agree
Whites are privileged to have inherited a great civilization and historical achievements, yes, but that doesn't mean we should just give everything to brown and black people. It's weak behaviour to leech from another people like this. Blacks should just go back to Africa and achieve their own things amongst their own people just like every other noteworthy civilization had to.
Anyone who denies it really has no right to breathe.
0:23 *Post-modernism*
2:57 *Intersectionality*
Jordan Peterson's the Man!
Interesting hearing a white man speak about debunking white privilege, remember this people’s subjectives are based on their experiences and their material state. Jordon Peterson doesn’t speak for everyone
Funny how he called it a game, but let him dress as a black person see if he gets shot
“I’m gonna go on for 5 more minutes.”
10 minutes later 😂
I just came across this video of (now) 4 years old, and I noticed the word Intersectionality in the title. I haven't seen that word in a while. It used to be all over the place. Wha happened to it? Has it gone out of fashion? Has it been replaced? It hasn't been around for long...
Anyway, it shows that these concepts are highly volatile. It's almost as if they have no real meaning.
"I'm gonna go for 5 more minutes..."
*VIDEO LASTS 10 MINUTES*
Yeah, that's Jordan for ya
Perhaps not coincidentally, he's pretty good for the first 5 minutes.
Imagine all this in George Carlin or any famous stand up comic's voice and it really drives home how insane intersectionality and white privilege are. I wish more comedians would tackle this issue. I hope Dave Chappelle does another special on these issues.
Absolutely ridiculous
@3:44 Except for the fact that white Americans, were historically unimpeded in their pursuit of success, benefiting from a country whose structures and legislation, like the New Deal, enhanced its "whiteness". All rights and moral standards in America are traditionally anchored in "whiteness," the recent emphasis on "individualism" raises concerns, especially after achieving a "white" majority. So it's quite convenient how "individualism" has become so appealing after all this time, inquiring minds want to know, why now?
I'm not understanding your criticism. It seems that you didn't offer a coherent refutation of the claim at all. He said that the rational conclusion to intersectionality, referring to the ways in people have a multiplicity of identities and some of which overlaps while others don't and those identities impact them, is individualism. With a multiplicity of identities, group identities, and experiences, the logical end to the idea that people's identities and experiences affect them, is that the best way to treat all people is as individuals, not as iterations of whatever group you care to point out in that moment. Why? Because whatever you decide to categorize them as insufficiently captures the reality of the person.
Saying that "white people haven't been impeded in their success (a laughably ignorant and overgeneralized statement) so it seems suspicious that they're the ones purporting individualism" is a question of motivation. Whether or not white people have been impeded, or have acted in whatever evil way you want to ask, it wouldn't change the outcome of the claim that individualism is the conclusion to intersectionality. Logically, it's completely irrelevant. Like arguing from authority, It's a logical fallacy.
How about you make a criticism of the idea itself instead of the motivation of the people saying it? That way, you'll actually have a chance of figuring out the truth.
@@mikefamm5712 First, the assertion that intersectionality logically leads to individualism overlooks the historical evidence that I alluded to above, as well as the core purpose of the framework itself. Intersectionality, as conceived by Kimberlé Crenshaw, is not just about recognizing multiple identities but understanding how these intersecting identities can lead to unique forms of oppression or privilege. While it does highlight individual experiences within these intersections, it doesn't negate the impact of group identities (which white Americans created to maintain socioeconomic control) in societal structures. Treating people as individuals is valuable, however when looking at the historical context, “individualism” doesn't address the overwhelming systemic issues that have persisted due to enforcing group-based identities for centuries. This new push for “individualism”, is being used to maintain the ill gotten wealth and power of WS which was created by racism. This is yet another scheme to avoid rectifying the damage that caused all of these racial disparities using “color blindness” and “individualism”, which is opportunistic morality. As LBJ & Patrick Moynihan stated “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, you are free to compete with all the others, and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.”
@@mikefamm5712 Second, regarding the historical and empirical evidence (white people haven’t been impeded), the construction of race as a pseudoscientific hierarchy with white Americans at the top has profound historical implications (why is this fact laughable?). This racial categorization has been used to justify and perpetuate systemic inequalities. Policies like the New Deal and the GI Bill, which greatly benefited many white Americans, often systematically excluded Black Americans and other minorities, contributing to significant disparities in wealth and opportunity. This is not just a historical “footnote” but a key element in understanding contemporary racial inequalities. Your claim about the “motivation” of those who advocate for individualism as a response to intersectionality is also a logical fallacy that completely misses the point I was making. Understanding the historical and sociopolitical context in which these arguments arise is crucial. It’s not merely about “motives”, but as I previously stated, recognizing the broader context and implications of racism and WS.
@@mikefamm5712 Last, but definitely not least, there is the lingering issue of "nuanced communication in politics" and the exploitation of the loophole in the 13A which is essential in understanding the gamesmanship that continues today (aka New JC). Policies such as "stop & frisk" and others have disproportionately targeted Black Americans, contributing to a systemic bias in the criminal justice system. The higher interaction and exoneration rates among Black Americans highlight this systemic bias and the reality of racial disparities in legal outcomes. In nearly all aspects of society black Americans are overrepresented in negative statistics and under in positive ones. To say “race” is no longer an issue after centuries of unilateral legislation and benefits (failure wasn’t an option) is outright disrespectful to all those who’ve suffered up until now. Especially when the damage and effects are still present today. While the idea of treating everyone as an “individual” is indeed honorable, it quickly becomes immoral when there is consistent failure to address the systemic and historical factors that shaped group identities and experiences. The argument that intersectionality leads to individualism oversimplifies a complex framework completely disregarding nuances of intersecting identities and their impact on experiences of oppression and privilege. There is no ambiguity, denying these facts only aims to maintain the status quo which is indeed WS.
You ramble on without actually giving sound argument in my opinion.
If Whiteness is enhaced, how come that americans with asian migration background are the most affluent and I think also least criminal racial group in america, if I'm informed correctly ? Is the law and institutions made to enhance "asianness" ?
HuWhite 🎻
I’m confused, he said it’s majority privilege like if I lived in China, I’d be under privileged. I’d be a minority race, so it would be Chinese privilege? I dong get it
It might be more about skin color as opposed to nationality. Darker skin people seem to be lower caste wherever their from
4:15 Here is a link to the paper: www.collegeart.org/pdf/diversity/white-privilege-and-male-privilege.pdf
Life’s not fair there are infinite privileges and always will be
Lol. No further comment.
gosh this is so stupid that I am getting second hand embarrassment as an academic ..... who gave him a mike .... who are these audiences .... are they for real ?
What is an academic?
Oh God, I LOVE THIS GENIUS!!!!!
Depends what country you are from. In USA, early settlers took land from Natives and Mexicans. This possession is great power because banks and real estate go hand in hand. When this power in “settlers” hands, they have all the power. And so this land has been passed down to its own generations. This is a huge head start to wealth and prosperity opposed to the Natives and Mexican from which the land was taken from. They have to work and come up with money to buy back the land that was taken from them.
Cry harder
@@blameyourmamma nobody is crying, just facts. I would bet you are single, broke and you have to pay for street crawlers to get lucky. You were just born into a sad life.
Mexicans "took power" from Aztecs who in turn had conquered previous "Natives" just as Apaches wiped out the Anasazi etc etc.
Love listening to J.P. The whole 'white privilege' circles back to today's 'victimology' think.
I thought this would be a reflection and exploration of intersectionality theory from an intellectual and emotionally neutral perspective. But, it just seems like an angry, series of put-downs and attacks, rather than any respectful, nuanced, dialectal discourse based on reasoned counter thought.
Arrest him for being funny while academing!
Safe space for racists
Jordon Peterson is Canada's answer to Donald Trump.
I'm not sure your aware of it, but you're an idiot.
Being followed around a shop by security isn’t because you lack majority privilege…
It is when stereotypes are associated with your race. Black people are stereotyped as thieves and criminals. Which is why they are more likely to get followed around in assumption of stealing than a white person.
Yeah, just look at South Africa during Apartheid. 80% of the population was oppressed due to their race
All he just did was made me as a black wish us blacks can take back control of Africa the richest resourced continent on the planet and we would be able to be overall 1st class citizens on the planter wonder why it feels like their is an agenda to keep us from doing so. I like Peterson but strongly disagree
Not a big fan of his; AND, this is one of his best. Right in the Zone condensing unquestioned cows (sic) and their forests of academic papers...and cow farts.
this man doesn't know what majority tyranny is.
Chinese are the most affluent group in Malaysia, although they are a minority and discriminated against by affirmative action.
Majority tyranny doesn't keep them from becoming rich and educated there.
This analysis is so bad, it should not even be on CZcams.
Please get to the point before 5 minutes
He literally just admitted that it exists lol, only that it hurts his little white feelings.
Are you one of the dense not very bright people he mentioned ? Are you using the CZcams comment section to score some stupid points on the hierarchy?
the term white privilege is simply and update to the Bolshevik term the bourgeoisie .
The necessary vilification and dehumanisation that precedes the slaughter of millions of people.
P Lewin Indeed , that is the historical pattern .
Yes. So white people are privileged since they are the majority. He quite literally agrees lol
Peterson said it exists, though. Privilege isn't contingent on laws; it is practiced and enforced by the broader society. There is no law madatng people to walk on the right side of the sidewalk-yet we all do it. It's social.
Africa is 10000 times more diverse than eurooe, btw. So is Israel, unironically. All the other stuff you said is just white tears and strawman lol.
So Mr. Peterson has finally lost his mind..
Could you explain why or is my question just your proof i am too stupid to understand?
There is ample generalization that just makes it all absurd. Critizing Marxism for this, the marginalizing is generalized, but he is doing the same thing. For one..
Another, he criticizes the 'opinion' without 'empirical' evidence.
This is the definition of philosophy. And part of what thinkers do practice. Including Jung.
@@geraldineobrienbolivia I have the feeling you lost your mind.
@@geraldineobrienbolivia Even if he showed imperical evidence as you state, you would just move the goal posts again.
He is not wise at all IMHO, typical “sounding smart to dumb people” type intellectual ....everything he said isn’t wrong just tremendously myopic & limited. Nevertheless, I respect his time and take.
He has an earned doctorate degree and has taught at Harvard University... which you have not done.
Aren't the neomarxist disciples the dumb ones fooled by complex but wrong scholars, because they just can't explain what is wrong?
Or you are likely too stupid to grasp him
What he is saying is not rocket science. You just heard "white privilege" amd turned off your brain because you disagree. If I with a learning disabiliy can understand him perfectly, what does that say about you.
@@StreetsOfVancouverChannel do you know how systemic racism and oppression works? All kinds of people have degrees, and all kinds of people don't. If you think having one means something conclusive about your credibility or intelligence, then you are an agent of oppression.
can't believe i used to absorb every word this man said
This is one of the most damning cases against Postmodernism ever, and setting aside whatever reservations you have against him -- which I'd probably agree with vehemently -- I don't see how you could deny how excellent he is when discussing politics, particularly on this topic.
@@BiackopsspokcaiBlmao if you don't have an issue with his politics what on earth would you have an issue with him for
As a white male I would just like to know if today I can take my white privilege all around the world with me. Say in places like China, India, Saudi Arabia, etc.
Yes. Anyone who has traveled knows that you hold massive White privilege in those very countries you mentioned. Because you are White, you can get away with all sorts of things that native people of those countries would never get away with.
You can