A discussion about privilege.

What a funny word it is, “privilege”, bandied around by the fawners and detractors of those with a certain background, or who have a certain viewpoint. The word remains split between its old meaning and its reverse-snobbish, sneering, derisory counterpart, which is exactly why it remains such an interesting word to use. The heir to the Duchy of some far-flung county, complete with a medieval manor and a townhouse in Mayfair, may be considered “privileged”.  People may get special “privileges” as part of a responsibility or a title, both of which to be either admired or respected. Those who believe in radical views whilst not taking into account the complexities of society may have a “privilege”, one that ought to be ridiculed. Indeed, it begs the question, how privileged are we?

The root of the word explains the development of its meaning. I may be demonstrating my privilege of knowledge in Latin by saying that “privilege” comes from the word privilegium, from the words privus meaning “private” and lex/legis, meaning “law”, via Middle French. It was a legal term meaning that certain people, whether by birth or by favour, were granted certain legal immunity often for a limited period of time, and was opposed to a right which was granted from birth and lasted for a lifetime. In practice, a privilege was often granted to prestigious institutions or individuals, often by being high up on the social ladder.

It is easy to see where the definition of “privilege” being one of high social status comes from. Indeed, the idea of prestige limited to the few is seen as a sign of “privilege”. Someone who attended Eton and then Oxford like his forefathers, before becoming a director of an investment bank before the age of 40 would be described as someone from a “privileged” background, as would the majority of the characters from Made in Chelsea, many of them heirs to significant fortunes. In more recent years, what with the rise in reverse snobbery – not that they themselves haven’t moved up the class scale – the term has become derogatory. “Privilege” in a meritocracy, in the modern, positive sense of the word, has no place. People should earn their positions and work hard. Paradoxically, in a godless country, suffering is seen as honourable.

 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
                                                                                                                                                                    Matthew 5:10

Thus, when someone from high says that poor are poor because they do not work hard enough, because they are lazy and feckless, we call out in anger about how his “privilege” has distorted his view. Indeed, people who have a view on a certain aspect on society but who meet criticism from the subjects of such discussion, they too criticise his “privilege”. "Privilege" is now attached to being out of touch and condescending. 

But how far do you go in this modern usage? It would be accurate to say that we, inhabitants of the Northern Hemisphere, where all power bases have been situated, from Ancient Greece and Rome, the Mongol Empire and the Chinese dynasties, to the heydays of European empire, to the American sphere of influence. The wealth taken up by those in this half of the world is huge so that we can live in nice houses and have access to very cheap food. We are the beneficiaries of a “privilegium”, which stretches across North America and Western Europe, from the struggle to feed oneself.  And yet, we in this hemisphere enjoy lecturing and perhaps patronising our poorer cousins in the southern half. We intervene in their struggles; we excavate large amounts of their resources and sell them in London, New York and Tokyo, leaving pittance to the natives. We have no understanding of local customs and acceptable living standards, of a life that once suited someone well, yet we force on them western values which may have little resonance, western values which have produced some awful tyrants such as Idi Amin, who went to Sandhurst; Robert Mugabe, an almnus of University College London; Pol Pot, who discovered Marxism in Paris as a student, only to enforce it to run his country into the ground. And as some people fly out, with all good intentions, to alien places to meet people who see us as alien to their culture, it is questionable to see how our “privilege” is better than the “privilege” of the former European nobility and of the upper middle-class, which evolves into rights to become head of some sort of demagoguery among those lower down.

I do not know exactly why I have written this little blog post, but through writing this, the use of “privilege” has demonstrated three things.

1.       The evolution of an unbridled language such as English.

2.       The complexity of human thought and rationality.

3.       That we’re not equal but privileged, but some are more privileged than others, therefore clarifying George Orwell’s famous quote from Animal Farm.

Perhaps I have failed at all three, but after all, when you speak from on high, your privilege becomes like genitalia; appearing from out of your trouser zip, enlarging when passionate.