4 ms·

I think the word privilege should be reserved for those things which inherently everyone can't have. You can imagine a world where everyone has a flying car, bu

I think the word privilege should be reserved for those things which inherently everyone can't have. You can imagine a world where everyone has a flying car, but you can't imagine one where everyone has a personal servant (because then the servants would also have servants, who would have servants etc.) To be an elected representative, or a leader, is a privilege because if everyone was, no one would be. To be rich in absolute terms isn't a privilege, but to be richer than average is a privilege. Same with status, beauty, talent etc. Calling things privilege which aren't, conflates things which are zero-sum and things which aren't.

handoflixue 3y ago
> Calling things privilege which aren't, conflates things which are zero-sum and things which aren't. We already have "Zero Sum" to describe the thing you're talking about. Privilege is a different word, which refers to "a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed by a particular person or a restricted group of people" (Dictionary.com) You can try to fight to redefine the word, but recognize you're waging an uphill battle against how everyone else uses it
- vintermann 3y ago
  We need different words for rights, immunities or benefits that everyone can have and rights, immunities or benefits that you necessarily have at other's expense. I have to fight uphill either way, since these two are so often conflated by activists. But I'm not alone or the first to insist on making the distinction.