> Society currently only thinks a limited set of things - parental wealth, social status, skin color, etc. - are forms of privilege and we should work to reduce

> Society currently only thinks a limited set of things - parental wealth, social status, skin color, etc. - are forms of privilege and we should work to reduce them. That is one way of looking at it. Another way of looking at it is that society reserves privileged status to specific groups and denies this status to others, and that things like parental wealth, social status, skin color, etc are _markers_ of this. In the United States, I believe the latter aligns with the facts we can observe. This is basically the argument of Isabel Wilkerson in "Caste"[0]. I'm not really up for trying to make the case for why I find this view convincing right now, in this comment I just wanted to highlight that it is a different argument than the one you made. If Wilkerson is correct, the actual markers of privilege are quite arbitrary, and phenomena such as racism arise from this rather than being themselves the root issue. The goal then is not so much ending discrimination as it is tearing down the caste system that fuels it. [0]https://www.isabelwilkerson.com/ https://www.isabelwilkerson.com/