Societal privilege isn't something measurable.....it's even more nebulous than a term like power.
You realize not everything can be measured, right, especially in regards to abstract concepts that don't have physical presence? This is social sciences, it's not nearly as precise as natural science, this should be almost common sense, the study of this is not going to be as simple, much as you'd like it to be
Why would I consider that kind if power to be more significant than other kinds of power....and how do you measure it? Clearly you believe that white people have more of this obscure undefined power....but how do you know that? How can you possibly measure such a thing?
I can observe it myself and in others, this isn't purely anecdotal, it's a consistent pattern where white people get the benefit of the doubt, they are treated as the norm, they aren't seen as dangerous or criminal, they're not profiled like non whites. Need I go on? Privilege and the power associated with it is going to vary even within the general population of white people, that doesn't mean the variability means the concept is nebulous if you actually look into it and consider that maybe this isn't going to work like an investigation of physical phenomena, since this is social interaction, not physics
I don't know what you mean by even ground. If you're talking about wealth....there's never been a system that gave everyone equal wealth. I can't even imagine how such a system would work.
It also appears that the characteristics that you have decided to divide people by are completely arbitrary.
If French Americans have 25% less wealth than Russian Americans....is that because Russian Americans have made a system that benefits them?
Does that sound like an extraordinarily dumb way of looking at things?
Never remotely suggested equal outcome, that's a dishonest strawman instead of having a charitable interpretation where it isn't just me demanding equality rather than equity (they're not the same)
If you reduce things to one statistic, you're going to look dumb regardless, that's not how a study works, you're ignoring a holistic method which applies even in the natural sciences, even moreso in social sciences
There's many nations where black people are in every position of power. In most cases, these are some of the worst places to live for black people.
If representation of skin color mattered....why do black people in nations with majority white populations do better than those in majority black populations?
That's whataboutism, we're not discussing global issues, this is primarily a white colonialist nation problem where Asians are treated like subhumans by white people, along with other non Asians
Never did I claim black people being better off relative to other nations reflected anything of superiority, that's more strawmanning of my position, which was not about global considerations of black people's status. Representation in a proportional fashion is the concern here, you're missing the point entirely by seemingly some very selective reading where I tried to make it clear that 1) this isn't a global issue necessarily and 2) that black people being better off in some nebulous (your word of choice) way doesn't mean they are remotely in an equitable position to white people, especially when systemic racism and biases are not addressed, because white fragility rears its ugly head so they don't want to confront their subconscious prejudices
There's no evidence of any real connection between implicit bias and behavior. The science disagrees with you.
Citation needed: just speaking with confidence doesn't end teh conversation. Seems to me you don't want to admit of any kind of subconscious prejudices or microaggressions because that'd be too uncomfortable. Well, that's too bad, because the world doesn't care about your feelings if they're so petty as to dismiss and downplay racism because you think things are "better"
Had it easy? At what point did being white mean you "had it easy"?
The whole time in America, because the other things that were used as prejudice weren't based on skin color, but nationality, ethnicity, religion, etc. Never were people being white used as a justification to segregate, to oppress, to other. It's like you haven't even remotely considered that race as a social construct has generally been distinct from other traits that you equivocate to being white (being Polish or being Catholic, neither of those are being white). You really think non white people were treated fairly and not othered by colonialists in pretty much every nation? Like they weren't inferior and needed to be "civilized" by white people?
This is part of the problem, acting like the racism of the past was somehow lesser because acknowledging those problems and how they may very well have persisted into biases and prejudices we have now would expose cognitive dissonance (or do you think the science isn't valid on that concept either?)