dagNotes: on rights and privileges
The entire discourse about rights and privileges in the United States has never actually been a collective nor inclusive conversation about our rights. Quite the contrary, the conversation has always been contra the limitations, usurpations, or loss of a specific kind of privileges often referred to as rights and for specific people. This specificity begins with what the original colonizers constructed as basic human rights, which were the result of little more than so-called “enlightened” discourse about the privileges enjoyed by educated and Christian, white men who owned land and/or enjoyed a strong inheritance.
When we discuss our rights and privileges, we should be willing to admit we’re engaging a conversation that remains, as it is historically, white supremacist in both content and intent. When we discuss, as is popular, an ongoing restriction or prohibition of our rights and privileges, we are reconstructing a racist historical narrative and imposing it on individuals who aren’t white— who are nevertheless fellow citizens and/or immigrants—and who have had to bear the burden of white privilege, laws, and the construction of our rights throughout our short history.
(dedicated to libertarians-and-stoya.)