Tal Fortgang, a freshman at Princeton University, has stirred up a controversial debate regarding so-called “white male privilege” since the publication of his column, “Why I’ll Never Apologize for my White Male Privilege,” in Time magazine.
Fortgang claims that all he and his family have achieved is due to their hard work, attributing little to their skin color.
The tone of the column is furious because people, who he called “detractors,” attributed his success to the fact that he is a white male.
“I do condemn them for diminishing everything I have personally accomplished, all the hard work I have done in my life, and for ascribing all the fruit I reap not to the seeds I sow, but to some invisible patron saint of white maleness who places it out for me before I even arrive,” Fortgang said.
He rebuked them by writing about his grandfather, who fled from his home in Poland when the Nazis invaded and was put into a displaced persons camp in Siberia, where he did years of hard labor.
In a world where the concept of political correctness dominates mainstream media, the courage to challenge it should be praised, regardless of whether Fortgang’s personal view is right.
As Judge Learned Hand said, “The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right.” The dominance of political correctness like this undermines the foundation of a free society. To speak out is to risk being kicked out of college.
Highly politicalized, the column polarized the media. Those on the right, such as New York Times columnist John Podhoretz and conservative pundit Shoshana Weissmann, praised Fortgang as a hero.
The left, of course, accused Fortgang again of a fundamental misunderstanding of the definition of privilege. Dunni Oduyemi and Parul Guliani, students at Columbia University, responded to Fortgang’s article, pointing out that he “completely misses the point and grossly misinterprets the meaning of privilege.”
What is in the center of the debate has less to do with political stances and more to do with the history and the wound that divided this nation: slavery. Connecting that period with politics without any respect to history is ignorant.
Jacqueline Battalora, a sociology professor at Saint Xavier University, said Fortgang doesn’t seem to understand this country’s history. In 1790, the first United States Congress determined that, to be a naturalized citizen of this country, one had to be white, a ruling that remained valid until 1952. The immigration laws at that time allowed Fortgang’s family to flourish in the U.S. But at the time the Founding Fathers made these laws, they didn’t even think black people were people at all. It makes little sense to consider what the forefathers would think of the U.S. today. Both left and right in the Congress agreed to exclude African Americans as naturalized citizens, paving the way for white American men.
Many still may not know that even white immigrants from Europe faced discrimination because of their religious beliefs. In the 19th century, for instance, the Irish flocked to the new world because of a devastating famine striking Ireland. Many Irish people were banned from accessing public service and electing officers in many states just because they were Catholics. White immigrants may have faced discrimination on some levels, but that doesn’t mean they have suffered any hardship to the same degree as African Americans, as they could at least reap the benefits of becoming naturalized citizens.
Yes, people of color and women of all ethnicities were once suppressed in this country supposedly meant for immigrants. But the 14th Amendment lays a legal framework for them to fight for their equal rights and privileges. The nonviolent resistance of Rosa Parks changed the landscape of the way that the South treated African Americans. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton led a movement that has ended up landing women the right to vote. Numerous heroic stories to show that it is better to fight and change what is unjust than to envy those who succeed through their hard work.
