Big Conversation gave us a valuable lesson in understanding privilege

It could have been a progressive analysis of the problems leading to a synthesis of solutions.

Instead, it got stuck in the problem phase and exploited the resulting emotional angst rather than engaging it toward healing.

One good outcome from the BC was our greater understanding of privilege — that which gives one person or group an advantage and others a disadvantage.

The most prevalent advantage systems are race and gender. But they are not the only ones.

Others are age advantage, ethnic advantage, physical ability (vs. disability), or advantages arising from nationality, religion or sexual orientation.

The BC got hung up in identifying white privilege — in tracing and retracing its history.

The benefits of centuries of white privilege are still with us and need examination. But if we deal only with race privilege (white or black, both exist), we miss the opportunity to highlight the experiences each one of us has in other flavours of privilege.

This is important because privilege is essentially blind to itself.

While it is easy to recognize one’s own disadvantage, it is very difficult, unless it is pointed out, to notice advantage.

In the same way most whites do not realize the advantages infused into their existence, most men do not acknowledge the advantages they have that women do not.

Being forced to look at our own privilege helps make our previously invisible privilege visible.

The BC could have focused on the broad sweep of privilege (race, gender, ethnic, able-bodied and so on) and how to eliminate it.

It could have moved to transform our privilege-bound society into a more equitable one.

The BC could have mobilised a broad spectrum of Bermudians in moves to dispel inequity.

But it focused on replacing white privilege with black privilege, replacing the privilege of one political class (UBP) with the privilege of another (PLP).

The BC was needed — it still is. But it needs to be a steered dialogue about the issues surrounding exploitation of any and all groups by another.

It needs to help us recognise privilege in all its forms and to expose and countermand privilege wherever it exists.

At the same time, it needs to help us recognize and resist creating new privileged classes who are just as blind to their advantage as their privileged predecessors were.

What is needed now is a dialogue with a direction and a plan for remediation.

That would be a Big Conversation worthy of the name.