Your question contained an assumption. Namely that systemic racism exists. Your article assumes that everyone who disagrees with your initial premise is incorrect – and therefore you don’t have to consider that their views might have any form of validity. Generally it is assumed those people who disagree with the ‘enlightened’ view are racists or bigoted. Bigotry is more subtle than this, it is simply a description of someone who refuses to listen to the other side.

As it happens. I do agree with your view, but that isn’t a given – not virtue signalling as it comes with a few caveats. When you attempt to explain the concept of privilege through an identity politics lens, you shove nuance aside. So whilst it may be true that ‘black people’ are discriminated against – they are not a homogenous group. Nor are ‘white people’ – who do the discriminating.

There are plenty of BAME writers on this site who experience far more individual privilege than many white people. That might be around education, finance, job prospects. Can it really be argued that the black female lawyer is less privileged than the white homeless guy? Yes…. It can, under the mantle of identity politics – but it rapidly falls away under real world experience.

In short, insistence on identity politics isn’t doing anyone any favours. It skews the worldview towards perpetual victim hood and leaves a huge psychological discrepancy between ideology and lived experience. A gap any self respecting demagogue can drive a truck through. Trump did it in 2016, and I suspect if it continues to be the rhetorical weapon of choice by progressives then someone worse will do it again in 2024.

In short. The assumption provoked the response. That’s true of the 2016 election and it was true of your quora question. It takes a great deal of energy to look past your lived experience and most people don’t.