First, let's note that you didn't have anything specific to say about my claim re the Sambo poster. You attacked the concept of white privilege in general because you can't stand anything that makes "your" people look bad.
As I've said before, it's amazing how defensive you are about being white. You're not dumb enough to try to defend genocide, boarding schools, or mascots in this blog, but you deny or excuse most other charges of racism against whites. Especially charges against the Irish, Scots-Irish, or whoever it is you consider your ancestors.
Some specific problems with your response:
Whites are privileged now
If you disagree, show us some evidence to the contrary. For instance, evidence that minorities dominate significant institutions in our society. Hint: Sports and music don't count unless minorities are the owners, not merely the players.
But whatever you do, spare us your inability to deal with generalizations and start making an actual case. In other words, put up or shut up. If you can't support your case with facts and evidence, give up and admit you've lost another debate.
Whites have always been privileged
In large part we're talking about white Anglo-Saxons. You know, the whites who have dominated many institutions throughout America's history? The whites who have made up a majority of America's whites?
In recent years, other white people--Irish, Italian, Greek, Polish, Jewish, Armenian, et al.--have joined WASPs among the privileged. But blacks, Latinos, and other minorities are still on the outside looking in. To simplify it for you, white skins have power, brown skins don't.
But so what if the makeup of the white elite has changed somewhat over the years? What hasn't changed is that the elite are still white. Hence the phrase "white privilege" rather than "Anglo-Saxon privilege"...duh.
The concept dates to 1935, at least
More important, who cares who came up with the phrase? If you read the Wikipedia entry, you'd know the concept goes back at least to W. E. B. Du Bois and his 1935 book Black Reconstruction in America. It wouldn't surprise me if intellectuals have discussed and debated the concept since the Reconstruction Era.
In short, your third point is wrong and irrelevant to boot. No one cares where the term comes from if it accurately describes a problem. Which it does.
I don't get your point here. If I had to guess, I'd say you're going to tell us how your poor white relatives are losing jobs to people who don't deserve them. In other words, a typical racist rant that blames the "problems" of whites on minorities.
Did I guess right? If not, please fill us in. Clarify your unclear point so we know what you're talking about.
I trust you have better arguments than these about the so-called "cliche" or "myth" of white privilege. So far your arguments look pretty shallow to me. If you think you can do better, try disputing the 281,000 hits you get when you Google "white privilege." Good luck...you'll need it.
Finally, that you've criticized me for putting my name in the title of blog postings is a joke. Here's why your criticism is stupid:
First, it's my blog, so why would I need to put my name in the title to get attention? I get attention from every posting whether my name is in it or not.
Second, I've done it a couple dozen times, so it's nothing new. When you pick on any one posting, you're only revealing your ignorance of this blog's history.
Third, I'll put anyone's name in the title if it reflects what the posting is about. This posting is about how you bitch and moan every time I generalize about whites--even if my statements are generally true.
For more on the subject, see my posting on systemic racism.
Below: An example of white privilege in action. (Hint: This is a mock picture that depicts a valid point. See if you can figure it out so I don't have to spell it out for you.)