Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 2 of 5


Among schoolgoys, there is a rather vindictive prank one can do to a classmate who has left his backpack or bookbag unattended, known as skinning. The bag is emptied of its contents, turned inside out, and then zipped back up with all of its contents inside.

In 1988, Peggy McIntosh published one of the seminal works in the far-left dominated academic field which has come to be called “Whiteness Studies” in a number of circles. “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack,” is an excerpt taken from a working paper produced by the women’s studies department of Wellesley College, and lists 50 “daily effects of white privilege” in the first-person perspective of the author from her experiences. Though McIntosh tried to cover herself by claiming her examples shouldn’t be generalized, her work is obviously not read that way in the identity politics dominated Obama years. If even some of these privileges existed in the 1980s, you would be hard pressed to find them now. A sacred text of the anti-white/third worldist/regressive left, Invisible Knapsack could use a good skinning. Here is a critical assessment of privileges 11-20.

  1. I can be casual about whether or not to listen to another person’s voice in a group in which s/he is the only member of his/her race.

I can do this to anyone. Anyone can do this to anyone. Tuning out people you don’t want to hear from is a pretty universal thing. If I were in a panel discussion with McIntosh, I’d ignore her too even though both of us are White. Because she is espousing an ideology which is hostile to me and I do not have to accord her respect.

  1. I can go into a music shop and count on finding the music of my race represented, into a supermarket and find the staple foods which fit with my cultural traditions, into a hairdresser’s shop and find someone who can cut my hair.

This is a peculiar complaint given the explosive growth of hip-hop and rap in the 1980s, which was contemporary to McIntosh. Certainly it is not true today that non-whites can’t be found in music sales, as non-white performers make up a large amount of the music industry. As for finding the staple foods of one’s culture, why would those automatically be there for you if you are in a foreign country (assuming she is referring to non-black minorities)? I guess from this perspective, it’s an exercise of White privilege to buy a loaf of bread instead of a bag of rice (which any supermarket sells by the way). The hair complaint is also strikingly odd, since the trope of the black barbershop is so well known. Furthermore, there exists a sizable black haircare industry that goes back decades. If memory serves correct, the first black millionaire made their fortune selling black haircare products.

  1. Whether I use checks, credit cards or cash, I can count on my skin color not to work against the appearance of financial reliability.

McIntosh may actually be onto something here, as financial institutions need to be able to reliably assess risk in order to operate at a profit —or operate, period—and given that the average black income is much lower than the average White income, a White person is less risky to extend credit to. That Whites collectively have a good credit score, for lack of a better way to explain this “privilege,” owes to our collective efforts at managing time preference and budgeting our money. If enough of us stopped doing that, creditors would no longer be able to make this positive assumption about us as being good people to lend to. The Great Recession was in part due to a Bush-era program of making risky loans to encourage non-white home ownership, you know.

  1. I can arrange to protect my children most of the time from people who might not like them.

I mean, if I have the money to, sure why not? I can put them in private schools where they will be a majority and they are less likely to be bullied for their race. If I have my own car, I can drive them where they need to go so they don’t have to take mass transit. I can do all kinds of expensive things to reduce their exposure to risk, if I have the money. It’s a real privilege to be literally driven out of our own cities.

  1. I do not have to educate my children to be aware of systemic racism for their own daily physical protection.

I would have to educate them about race realism and to avoid certain places at certain times; they would never be taught this by anyone considered a professional educator in their lives. Were I not to educate them about reality, they would be taught a fantasy and their safety would be put at risk.

  1. I can be pretty sure that my children’s teachers and employers will tolerate them if they fit school and workplace norms; my chief worries about them do not concern others’ attitudes toward their race.

See 14 and 15. This is a combination of money and using it to avoid the risks of living in a diverse, low-trust, and high-conflict environment. Also how hard is it really to behave at school and work? I have done both now for almost 20 years. I think I’ve only ever been reprimanded a handful of times, mostly as a small child. And I would certainly be concerned, were I a parent, if my children were being taught a hateful anti-white curriculum, like the third-worldism that blacklivesmatter wants taught in every public school.

  1. I can talk with my mouth full and not have people put this down to my color.

Wow, this is really challenging my worldview. How about you stop being a slob?

  1. I can swear, or dress in second hand clothes, or not answer letters, without having people attribute these choices to the bad morals, the poverty or the illiteracy of my race.

Yeah because there is no vitriol directed towards coarsely spoken and badly dressed White people. I can’t think of a despised group of Americans who live in the interior of this country and are endlessly mocked and denigrated for their speech, mannerisms, and appearance at all. There is no term that originates as a racial slur for this group and then gets applied to any member of my race who doesn’t meet liberal urbanite standards. Nope.

  1. I can speak in public to a powerful male group without putting my race on trial.

I mean, it would probably be perceived as ironic at best or racist at worst, but I could go around imitating what members of other groups do and announce my race/gender/orientation as part of whatever public-speaking I am doing. Reality would seem to suggest it isn’t these “powerful male groups” who are inserting race into interactions, but the speakers.

  1. I can do well in a challenging situation without being called a credit to my race.

Depends on the situation. If I cuck really hard I might be considered a “good White person,” or a “White ally.” I mean, the alternative is being a bad one, right? Does that count?

The next time you see someone spouting anti-white nonsense about privilege, combine rhetoric with hatefacts and shut it down.

See also: PART 1

This entry was posted in Ideology and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 2 of 5

  1. On point #13, RCA has a characteristically good post on the subject:
    Additionally, a For Those Who Can See post on the question of reparations deals with the same issues:

    This is hardly a wholly original observation, but I think the whole “white privilege” thing (which is of course effectively skewered in OP) is quite interesting in how it shows American society’s values have seemingly inverted over time. It seems like it used to be the case that, if one group was on average more law-abiding, intelligent and productive than another, it was seen as being better in some sense. (As for example, the lauded by progressives book “the Condemnation of Blackness” ironically shows.) But the language of today reverses that: rather than “crime rates” we talk about “incarceration rates”, rather than “IQ scores” we talk about “standardized test scores” and so on, in a way that implicitly or explicitly ascribes any differences between whites and NAMs to white racism. And thus, the less intelligent, law-abiding and productive a (non-white) group is on average, the more virtuous and sympathetic it becomes by the alleged prima facie fact of being a victim of a correspondingly greater amount of systemic racism. So it seems like the leftist “people of color” favorability hierarchy in America is apparently blacks>mestizos>Asians, whereas by the standards of an earlier era it would be Asians>mestizos>blacks.

    Also, it’s interesting how this is distinctly “white” as opposed to “white and Asian” privilege, given that by many of the quantitative metrics that allegedly demonstrate white privilege, like incarceration rates and educational attainment, Asians equal or outperform whites on average. But obviously, this would destroy the propaganda narrative of particularly “white”, as opposed to intelligent and well-behaved, privilege. (Random relevant data:


    • Language is a powerful meme. Control the memes, control the normies.

      Asians also have the highest median income according to the Census. But don’t expect to hear about why they need to gaslighted into self-flagellation.


  2. transcendentalpoliticsblog says:

    And goes who also went to Wellesley College? One Hillary Rodham!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Steel T Post says:

    If “white privilege”—privilege meaning “set apart, peculiar, advantage granted”—actually means “superior genotype,” then I’ve got it. I guess that makes me a gene supremacist. Which is scientifically validated; yields 1580 total results for “superior genotype” (quotes used in the search) and 93 results just this year.

    So I was born this way, privileged in genotype (and thereby phenotype) by none other than GNON. If one cannot pray away the gay as they say, then certainly one cannot pray away the white privilege either. Wellesley College will just have to tolerate me, and with academics being the denizens of tolerance, I’m sure they can handle it, if they only hire another diversity officer who can actually understand the scientific literature about superior genotypes.

    Theological question: What is the relationship between GNON and KEK?


  4. Pingback: Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 3 of 5 | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  5. Pingback: Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 4 of 5 | ATLANTIC CENTURION

  6. Pingback: Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 4 of 5

  7. Pingback: Skinning the Invisible Knapsack, Part 5 of 5 | ATLANTIC CENTURION

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s