Thank you, Nez. I feel similarly often, too: "privilege" as a 101 concept is really handy. But after a while it becomes "that opinion can only be steeped in privilege!" or "check your privilege!" used to silence people... and that isn't handy.

I don't know. I do feel torn. Because sometimes someone really is speaking from a complete lack of understanding that does, more than likely, stem from privilege-based blinders. But sometimes, as you say, a person really HAS thought seriously about something, and come back to an opinion that many might hold from ignorance.

(Like that opinion you discuss of Western individualism. I spent a long time as a baby feminist realizing that I'd been steeped in it from day one. That led to wondering if I valued it for the right reasons -- and to deciding I didn't. Then I spent a lot of time examining and thinking about alternate models that were community- and group-centered. I learned a LOT about myself, my culture, and my assumptions... as well as about the limitations of the "rugged individualist" model. But I also learned that I couldn't reject it completely, either, because doing that had some equally unsavory consequences. Like not allowing much room at all for "freaks", for unique and personal perspectives. So I eventually went back to something that I felt could account for the value of individuals without discounting group struggle. Maybe the pendulum swung too far back the other way -- I don't know. But that was my personal journey with these things.)

yes, i appreciate your thoughtful evaluation of zapatista type self-governance and individualist-centered ones. i am like you. i value soem room for those who naturally have skills in areas or deviances in areas that are part of the beautiful whole. i don't think valuing us all equally means we are all the same. we are not, we are talented in different areas, able in different areas, weak in different areas. that is just exactly why we need to value us all. at the same time, i loathe the star system, where paris hiltons can capture us all for no good reason, and all the adverse effects that are spurred from this.

as far as this:

Because sometimes someone really is speaking from a complete lack of understanding that does, more than likely, stem from privilege-based blinders. But sometimes, as you say, a person really HAS thought seriously about something, and come back to an opinion that many might hold from ignorance.

that makes sense, too. we probably have to feel it out as we do. we should watch out for what we are getting out of responding a certain way, tho. and i would add this: when you speak to the lowest part of someone, you increase your chances of that part responding. likewise the converse. when you find reason to address the finest parts of someone, that part may respond in kind. (poetry of behavior mod?)

we all have our approaches. sometimes we need to assume what we assume. and sometimes we hurt ourselves and our own growth by doing so. its up to me, its up to you. up to all of us. we'll figure it out. keep thinking out loud.

and i think you use a good example. i, too, had to question my notions of individualism after a few heady accomplishments. i did develop that idea, despite my family's philosophies, we certainly lived and made our way through the USA, which is steeped in it. and i see it almost as a sure thing, or at least an understandable outgrowth of pride in those people who have survived or accomplished in the face of tribulation. but there will always be struggle, and we should always value a person's spirit to overcome, as well as the spirit that makes one person at variance with another. we can't knock those human elements in and of themselves. so what goes wrong?

one thing is that our stories always play to the Lone Hero, the Savior, the Superman. But even when it feels like that in our own lives, it is hard to find places you didnt (i didnt) have help. so i think our personal stories get twisted to reflect the stories we are told all our lives. as a storyteller i think of this a lot. most USA fables are lone hero rescue type stuff that reinforces national exceptionalism, and thus, i often come back to the stories that are told to both adults and children. i see this is as an important lesson. but this is not told or questioned in school either, this framing ought to be changed for kids if we expxect them to be anything other than lone mighty "heroes" (or, of course, "failures") in the making. the frame ought to be changed, but kids also should be shown the frame, so they can learn to think critically, and not wait until college to get that lesson. but there is more hiding from them than the frame.

the big problem is that our First Story (as i never tire of pointing out) is a lie. The one that leads directly to the mighty lone hero myth that US citizens are raised on. The First United States Story fails to properly integrate the "help" the settlers needed to have such a land, to have such potential in their hands. Just as today our modern United States Story often fails to include the help it gets to be such a "Hyperpower." Our modern day discourse and storytelling on our nation too often leaves out the part of the equation that should be stressed. To our great harm. But incommplete truths and hypnotist's lessons are strains of the same melody what still haunts us in this nation. Part of what insures our stories to our selves, even, are tainted with it.

I spent seven years in graduate school full-time and I learned a lot of good stuff, needless to say, about argumentation and theory, etc., BUT I view my stint in "higher" education as helping me to become proficient with a set of tools, nothing more -- and some of which I arrived there with. At this stage of my personal, intellectual, and professional development, I have acquired a whole tool box full of such pertinent and valuable ideas, skills, processes, and so forth. I use the appropriate tool for the necessary job at hand. I don't have to use a shoe instead of hammer if I want to put a nail in the wall, but I can if I want to. And sometimes, I think it's to the point.

Being in front of a college classroom for nearly twenty years has forced me to be able to come at ideas from multiple standpoints and using multiple examples -- at a moment's notice. Using the same frame (to use your term, Nezua) for everything makes about as much sense as using the same frame for every picture. It's not practical. And it may even be ugly.

well said. and with some weight, after the grad school stint and the teaching gig. gracias.

This post deserves to turn classic, be anthologized, etc., *great* critique of rigidly overapplied "theory."

Side note: there is such a thing as OD'ing on the "check your privilege" thing, & also I see it used on people who are not all that privileged more often than I do on those who are. Although perhaps I'm not looking in the right places.

All the great intellectual and technological advances were and are products of self teaching and learning by people who escaped the group mentalities {frames}, stood on the shoulders of those that went before, looked out far into the distance and pulled the future into the present. And so what if that was a product of privilege?
Is spending your time ordering and analyzing your profound thoughts and inspirations, arranging them tersely for all to understand, and letting them go into the {limited} universe of the internet blog realm something that is taking you away from watching soap operas or listening to talk radio {the things one must assume that the underprivileged apply themselves to}and thus placing you and your production in the apparently despicable class of the privileged?
The quoted text about privilege is really very pathetic pseudo intellectuality and more simply put, plain crap.
I think you should skip over this type of wordy and confused criticism, Nez, and not give it the respect you did in your very interesting post.
Just my ignorant dos centavos aqui.

i greatly appreciate tus centavos and the validation.

at the same time, i feel i get to illustrate ideas important to me by considering, albeit briefly, even what i see as "confused criticism." so the purpose is transformed, the goal is transformed, and in that service, they become very worthy of time. especially if we see separate blog posts written as part of an ongoing conversation that can evolve and affect many in unseen ways.

hey hey thanks Cero.

Nicely said, Nez. Like you, I'm a largely self-taught person who views schools with some suspicion. When I first read Magniloquence's post, I thought it was rhetorically flawed but I did find it useful; to me it essentially said this: she likes school. She values the camaraderie and structure you find there. Reading that post made me think a bit about knowledge and experiences that I had perhaps undervalued in my disdain for formal schooling. But the bottom line is that some folks dig school, some of us don't, for whatever reasons. I don't think it makes us better or worse, it's just a different style. I don't think privilege is much of a factor, nor fetishizing anything, nor any other meta-theory.

I should note that I don't see "privilege" as a bad thing inherently; like so many concepts involving power, it's really neutral until a human being wields it for good or ill. When I say to my colleague, "It's a privilege working with you," it's a good thing. When privilege is wielded to hurt others, however, then it becomes a problem. Wielding privilege to learn and improve oneself strikes me as entirely positive. Same with "theory"; I see it as neutral until it's wielded for good or ill in practice. To me, theories are like maps; I like maps, they can be very helpful for getting around, but if they're inaccurate or imprecise, you might end up lost. And no map is as good as having spent a lifetime physically learning the ins and outs of an area, which no map can capture.

Anyway thanks for sharing your thoughts, 'mano. Here's to the path of the renegade autodidact! And here's to those who prefer formal schooling! I think there's plenty of room for all of us in this wide open world.

Peace.

Reading this diary and comments after the day at work I had has given me some new insight into myself and why I appreciate your writing so much Nezua.

One of my weaknesses is that I get edgy and impatient when I hear people spouting "conventional wisdom" - especially of the superficial variety. For some reason it just drives me crazy. I just sat through a shit-load of that this afternoon and my skin was crawling. I find myself just wanting to scream and ask some really obnoxious question that gets the whole momentum off track.

I think I have that drive towards self-education you're talking about - and I just love how you affirm that in yourself. I do appreciate it in myself, but sometimes I get conflicted in knowing how to "be" in a roomful of people who seem so comfortable in platitudes.

Yeah, I agree with most of the folks here. I think she could have made her points, all of which are valid (if not the sole truth of the matter) without the comments about privilege, as if simply asserting something is a product of privilege is enough to invalidate it. I suppose that's too strong of a characterization of the rhetorical maneuver in question, but I still don't see what the point of the comment was. Sure, there are good things about institutionalized learning, but there are good things about educating oneself, too, and saying they're the result of privilege doesn't change that.

Oh, I should add that I'm very grateful for your posts about educating yourself, about the necessity and desire to do so, about following your heart. Conformity and intellectual and spiritual laziness are constant temptations (ones to which I succumb much too often), and I find it very helpful to be reminded of that, in uncompromising language, on a regular basis.

With regard to the overlap you speak of, please see my recent brief note on the black insider.

yes, kai. interesting thoughts on the inherent nature of "Privilege." thanks for those.

--

NL, i aprpeciate that. sometimes its good to scream at those times. sometimes those talks need to be thrown off momentum. keep nurturing those ideas, impulses you have. the room will always be there. and much of it will always want to draw you back into platitude-ville. i think at a certain point we have to be ready to walk away from that room.

--

thanks jeffaclitus. i know what you mean. reminders are important.

--

will do, Jennifer. i always look forward to your notes.

Nez:

All sorts of "education" have the potential to increase knowledge. Only experiential learning increases wisdom, imo.

I read somewhere (might have been here) recently, that we need to be taught how to live in the world. I think that is probably true until we have developed our own moral compass. Then we can often know the truth of a situation by listening to our gut. I don't mean the nuts and bolts of how to handle a negotiation or navigate through a difficult situation. I'm talking about the difference between doing what's right and not doing what's right. My gut hasn't lied to me in many, many years. It has often been unsure, but it has never spoken other than truth to my heart.

C'mon Nez! Let's keep it simple. I was afraid you were going to be counting the number of angels that could be placed on the head of a pin before the mental gymnastics were done.

"I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain (or Nez's relativity to privilege or opportunity) than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." Stephen Jay Gould (corrupted by me)

But hey! Thanks for not writing it in Greek, but I need it dumbed down even more.

okay, peasant! i think i hear you. enough meta, you say. you just want to read my posts; not posts about posts about my posts. and maybe you are as tired of wading through passages about theory and "privilege" as i am.

i will try to keep it simple. but you know me. that's quite a request!

Nez:

I sometimes have a hard time figuring out what you're talking about, I have a hard time figuring out a lot of things.

Please be as dense as you like. "Simple" is what we have for a pretendsident. He not only doesn't do "nuance", he doesn't do "think".

democommie, i still am waiting for someone to push the right button so that the cymbals come out and littlebush starts clapping his clashy robot hands together.

thanks for the vote of confidence.

Kameelah at Black Looks posted this quote yesterday:

"In ‘The Soles of Black Folk: These Reeboks were Made for Runnin' (from the White Man),’ John Jackson, Jr. writes:

'[T]heories often serve to displace and subsume the subjects about which they comment and contend. The wonderfully complicated world in which we live is relegated to the calm, cool and calculated lines of sociological manuscripts that tie up loose ends of analysis such that “theory” ignores the ways in which lived lives exist beyond the hypothesis, outstretch it, outlive it…surely, to theorize is often a homicidal act, a killing of the heterogeneity of the world, a knife thrust into the very heart of life.' (Jackson 1997, 178)"

I am for the complicated posts. I am against the complicated posts wasted on analyses of other blogs that are not meritorious enough to deserve them. I love complication.

of course, "waste" is a term we will all continue to individually define!

I think the idea that privilege is bad is the companion of the idea that suffering and oppression is good (that is, that they ennoble the character of the sufferer and make them more authentic).

It's an incredibly powerful idea. I think many people believe in it even without wanting to, across different religions, or even if you don't belong to a religion. "Interrogating your privilege" can start off as self-analysis and turn into mystical self-flagellation, and back again.

As for the separate but related post about schools... I skimmed over the post, and I really empathize with magniloquence's argument because I think it's a reaction against a lot of very powerful right-wing libertarian talking points about education. It's very irritating as a teacher (I'm not a teacher now but I used to be) to try and engage someone who discounts everything you are trying to do and says the whole system should be torn down.... and you just know they have zero clue for the practical realities on how to build it up again. I knew a libertarian like this who was always talking about "burning down the public school system" because it was too corrupt to be saved. The glorious free market would take care of edumecation if we just destroyed the public school system first. Arrgh...

it is a powerful idea. and i am not disagreeing with it. but people suffer with privilege too. and even if an idea is born of "privilege," that doesn't mean it is not a fantastic idea...and it is nuanced truths like these that makes for boiling things down to such a simple formula frustrating to me.

i have big problems with the school system as i understand it. however, i dont think the free market will fix it. i love the idea of homeschooling, personally. or smaller groups of children taught by people closer to us, and more involved in our lives. i like the idea of more control and awareness of what our children are learning and not learning. we don't need to burn down anything to do that. just live differently.

It's very irritating as a teacher (I'm not a teacher now but I used to be) to try and engage someone who discounts everything you are trying to do and says the whole system should be torn down.... and you just know they have zero clue for the practical realities on how to build it up again.

Yes. That's where I am too.

"Okay, so if these students came to me after being unschooled... would they be incredibly wise and loving or would they have missed things that in order to understand my class and not struggle *terribly* they'd unfortunately need to have learned?"

I guess the thing for me is that... evading the system sounds easy when I think in some cases it is and in others it's not. And there's a slight tendency in all this that I see to blame teachers when... y'know, the fact that we do work within the system doesn't mean we're not *trying*.

so... yeah, discussions like this are hard for me. I want to believe I'm just unduly cynical about parents' ability to teach... but I myself had really subpar tutors when I was bedridden and...

...I could teach myself *some* of the material for my AP classes, but some I really could not. Yes, there's the question of how much I really do USE vector mathematics these days (I don't) but I still wish I'd a real chance to learn it from someone who knew how to teach it

rather than from some dude who was used to 8 year olds needing home tutoring due to illness and had no clue what to do with the bedridden student in AP Calculus.

well, please don't assume i value the AP as a goal or the current HS curriculum as worthy of being taught. firstly. are you defending the system and the state and the current body of propaganda and accreditation...or teaching in a "school" type setting? or both?

i can't find your quote? the "okay, so if these students came to me after being unschooled..." where is this from?

i agree that many people aren't capable of teaching their own children much. maybe that fact should be looked at, rather than them blindly foisting them into a system where they need know or do little that affects what their kids learn while in them.

i have bigger issues with the school system than how it teaches toward a standard. i have issues with the methods as well as the standard.

Is it Marxist (or simply too base) to observe that in the internets, theory is being wielded as a weapon rather than used as a teaching apparatus?

Re: education, I've spent most of my life in and around schools. My parents were educators and administrators and I was in school until my mid 20's. However, I've managed to turn things I taught myself out of interest and love into skills with which to make a living. Even when in jobs that used what I'd been taught in school, I used skills that I hadn't been educated in. Now, I don't know for sure, I might have picked up some of those skills while a student, however I can't say I wouldn't have learned them just living life.

If I learned those not-taught-in-a-formal-education setting skills because of having a privledged background, I don't find it problematic. Seems Mag was arguing against a point you weren't making, Nezua, and perhaps unintentionally included you in a group in which you have no membership. You noted that possibility, however.

Seems Mag was arguing against a point you weren't making, Nezua, and perhaps unintentionally included you in a group in which you have no membership. You noted that possibility, however.

I did say that. Both in the post itself ("I’m not disagreeing with the ‘meat’ of the post, or even of this paragraph. I’m disagreeing with the framework that these points are generally placed in.") and in my subsequent clarification in the comments ("I didn’t mean to imply that you personally got your independencce from privilege. As I said, some people do things that way because they have to… either because the system failed them, or because there is no system. But many of the people who wind up making these arguments do so with the same sort of fetsishizing tone as the Simplicity people I talked about in the other post. Those are the people I’m trying to criticize. I know it’s not clear in the post… I debated editing it to point that out… but it’s the pattern that bothers me, not anything specific to your particular argument or situation."). I don't know how much clearer I can make it that I wasn't talking about Nezua, or his particular situation... I was talking about the larger pattern of arguments that his post brought up for me.

I struggled for a really long time about whether to say anything, but I felt like I should try at least once more. I honestly wasn't trying to imply any particular privilege or insult on your part, and I'm sorry if it came off that way. As others have pointed out, that bigger pattern of arguments, particularly the hardline libertarian lines, can be very very frustrating, and my anger was and is directed there. Your words echoed theirs, even though I know that you are coming from a radically different perspective. Again, that is what I was arguing against - similar arguments used for different ends, and my own aversion to that process.

In a slightly different vein, though ... for those of you that do know me, and who suddeny have all of these criticisms to offer ... why didn't you tell me? Why didn't you try to engage me directly? I understand and appreciate Nez'z gesture asking the general audience not to hop into a place they don't know and start throwing around accusations. But some of you have talked to me in comments, welcomed me into your blogs, and even occasionally dropped by mine. If you had such a problem with what I wrote, why didn't you tell me?

I'm sorry. I said I wouldn't get into this. I just needed to try at least once more.

You noted that possibility, however.

—gandalf mantooth

i think, mag, he meant me. but so did you note that. so...cool.

As others have pointed out, that bigger pattern of arguments, particularly the hardline libertarian lines, can be very very frustrating, and my anger was and is directed there. Your words echoed theirs, even though I know that you are coming from a radically different perspective. Again, that is what I was arguing against - similar arguments used for different ends, and my own aversion to that process.

—magniloquence

yes, i guess it is a bit confusing, as you are quoting me, and you lead in with a reference to my post. but i stand behind my arguments even if they "echo" someone else's. i can't answer for their arguments, though, i don't think. unless theirs are the same as mine. in which case it's my argument, not theirs. ;)

and i see no big deal "getting into this," we're all friends here, i think. you addressed points not like mine, but that resembled mine...and i addressed a point you made fleetingly that didn't apply to me but that i see happening left and right. so the bottom line is we're all discussing ideas here, not each other.

Is it Marxist (or simply too base) to observe that in the internets, theory is being wielded as a weapon rather than used as a teaching apparatus?

jeje...interesante.

I'm sorry. I said I wouldn't get into this. I just needed to try at least once more. [...]

I struggled for a really long time about whether to say anything, but I felt like I should try at least once more.

i'm not sure i understand the "try once more" thing. but i think we're cool.

As I said, some people do things that way because they have to… either because the system failed them, or because there is no system. But many of the people who wind up making these arguments do so with the same sort of fetsishizing tone as the Simplicity people I talked about in the other post. Those are the people I’m trying to criticize. I know it’s not clear in the post… I debated editing it to point that out… but it’s the pattern that bothers me, not anything specific to your particular argument or situation.

maybe it's the quote and direct link to me that confuses this.

In a slightly different vein, though ... for those of you that do know me, and who suddeny have all of these criticisms to offer ... why didn't you tell me? Why didn't you try to engage me directly?

well, to be fair, maybe they didn't see it that way until they read my framing of it.

oh mag, if you mean as opposed to commenting here, then nevermind.

Nez: but what does defending "the system" mean? what does it mean to be outside the system? what does it mean to be teaching outside the system? i don't even know what these things mean, practically. i mean i get the idea that the system has flaws, but i sometimes think... people overestimate other people's ability to get out of it.

thats what i asked. what was being defended.

On the topic of privilege: I think it is a valuable tool, personally, both in of itself and as a marker of when one might be harming others with one's behavior. It's a way to point at the damage it's difficult to see. When I accepted that people in stores treat me differently because of my skin color, it brought with it both a desire to rectify that in my own behavior AND an ability to see it systemically and attempt to counter it there. Labeling the different treatment I receive a privilege is, in a way, shorthand.

I was privileged to not see how people who didn't look like me were excluded from fiction while aspects of their culture were freely used and recoded as "white". That I don't have those blinders on now hurts, and so does the desire in me I have to squash to put those blinders back on because it made life more pleasant. Having that labeled as a privilege in my mind, though, really helps. It's a privilege. I don't deserve it. It was given to me due to an accident of birth, not due to either merit on my part or the actual reality of the world. Now that I see that part of the world which was blinded to me before, I can cease inadvertently hurting others by ignoring or minimizing their pain, which is where I see "check your privilege" is truly useful.

Re: school. Ideally, schools should serve as a frame giver, not a frame indoctrinator. The current public system is organized to strip both curiosity and critical thinking from the students unless they are lucky enough to hit one of the few non-burned-out teachers. Since "No Child Left Behind", it has become infinitely worse in such a manner that I personally believe it's deliberate.

I love school. I've been working my ass off for months trying to get into a graduate program and get back into school.

Take that as you will. ;)

great comments, Deoridhe.

and i hope it is clear that i am not denying privilege exists, nor that it is valuable to be aware of it. my thesis in this essay is that theory overused reduces thought and human complexity to very limited and uninteresting and counter-productive formulas.

school is fun, college is fun. there's no doubt that it isn't. i thought it was. i am more concerned with the schooling that goes on for young minds. adults are free to entertain themselves in myriad ways. children form their entire worldviews, sometimes, from how and what they are taught. and then they play that out on the rest of their world, it even informs what later they will think of as harmful, as inessential, or as fun.