That particular BIPOC writer and I had a lengthy debate and reached a point of agreement that if she was ever in London we would meet up for coffee and chat more in person.
There are plenty of articles lecturing white people on white privilege. Is it working? I don't think so. You seem to be under the impression that all white people are inherently stupid and can't consider the issue of racism from an objective viewpoint. Most can. They have already factored in the views of writers like Marley K who explain to them very patiently exactly why they're the root of all evil. Does it work? Sure. Those people (like you) who are inclined to listen to that sort of story either took it on board, or went through the motion of virtue signalling their agreement. Did it turn off the moderates? I think it probably did.
Much of 2020 was dedicated to writing exactly this sort of story - those stories don't attempt to unpick any of the complexities of privilege. It's a simple narrative of white = bad, BIPOC = good. I think that's a flawed strategy in the long term and have explained many times why I believe that.
You are reading 'oppression is complicated' as 'oppression is a competition'. I have stated numerous times in all my work that the specific definition of 'white privilege' as understood by literate middle class people is not the same as is widely understood in the general working class population. I am very aware that there are certain privileges that ALL white people have over ALL black people regardless of any other factor. Articles like this one, are about how we can't consider privilege to be such a simple thing. You can make the argument (and you'd be correct) but in making such an argument you will move the demost to the right.
You can find it unconscionable if you like, but that's a moral judgment you've made. If BIPOC families are 10 times more likely to experience economic disadvantage than white people (which may be true) but there are 10 times as many disadvantaged white people as BIPOC (which may also be true) then you need to set your political sights on what is achievable. Given that most people vote in their own interests you need to consider how to move the poor working class to political left. A mixed message about intersectionality and privilege given in lecture format by (relatively) wealthy progressives isn't going to do that - it's far more likely to turn into a pissing contest, which is usually what happens between niche interest groups. In the UK for example, BLM was going great guns until it tweeted anti-semitic messages. That empowered the hard left (great work) but at the cost of losing moderate Jewish people. Then it went into an apology spiral.
There will always be pushback to social progress is correct - but where you and I fundamentally differ is on who is causing that pushback to social progress. I see a liberal democracy with a socialist stance as empowering people out of poverty. That financial empowerment (regardless of race) creates sustainable communities in which mixing can occur. Free health care, better nursey provision, upward mobility in jobs. I see exactly this as progress.... and I think it will reduce racism. Why do I think that? Because that's what happened in my country and particulary in London where I now live. Are we a racially harmonious society in the form of a Utopia? No. But I'd argue it's far better to be BIPOC over here than in the States. That's why we have to be careful about exporting and the 'copy and paste' mentality of American problems in the UK. They aren't the same.
For you, progress is a dialogue about social justice. That's great. But any pushback on any aspect of that discussion is met with outrage and a call of 'foul'. If you don't listen you must be oppressing. If you write anything that contradicts anyone, you're doing 'dog whistles' for racists. You're in a camp that sees any argument but your own as an attempt to undermine progress. This, ironically, is what stymies progress. Lefty activists fighting each other about increasingly batshit notions of what constitutes oppression is anathema to the voting moderate. It's a pyrrhic victory and it's encouraging people to see the world as an endless battlefield.
I think the lefties do still care about poor people. Genuine socialsim is raceblind. The bit you're missing from the story is that the UK has done a great job of raising poor BIPOC kids out of disadvantage. That's what the graph shows. It's working. But it's not a catch all system, because the problems being faced by white working class kids are different from those being faced by BIPOC working class. There are plenty of reasons for that - mostly geographic. BIPOC children gather in larger cities that have more economic resources. This article wasn't a dog whistle for white people - it's a thinking point for writers like yourself who insist that we must ONLY talk about race, because everything else is distasteful to your ears.
I will make the economic argument rather than identity one becuase it's what I think. Iw ill get accused of 'upholding white supremacy' - which is a linguistic backhand for 'racist'. A poor white child has far more white privilege than a black millionaire' is true.... but 'a poor white child has far more privilege than a black millionare is not' - the difference may not be important to you or suit your world view... but it's a view that is important to white poor people. In the case of your country, they make up about 60% of your voting population - and it may be worth considering how to move 20% of them across to your way of thinking. I say 'your' way of thinking, but it's actually 'our' way of thinking - becuase what you want to do is reduce racism. What I want to do is reduce racism. I think your confrontational approach entrenches people, you think my outspoken not toeing the line is dog whistling. We won't agree on how it works.
See my recent article about Jeanette Espinoza as an indication of how I'm inclined to tackle entrenched racism - and consider perhaps that you don't have a total monopoly on the 'right way' to do such a thing. Your confrontational 'listen to me becuase here's why you're a racist and an unbearable hypocrite' may not be the most effective way to enact change.
