Today, white privilege is often described through the lens of Peggy McIntosh’s groundbreaking essay “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” Originally published in 1988, the essay helps readers recognize white privilege by making its effects personal and tangible. For many, white privilege was an invisible force that white people needed to recognize. It was being able to walk into a store and find that the main displays of shampoo and panty hose were catered toward your hair type and skin tone. It was being able to turn on the television and see people of your race widely represented. It was being able to move through life without being racially profiled or unfairly stereotyped. All true.
This idea of white privilege as unseen, unconscious advantages took hold. It became easy for people to interpret McIntosh’s version of white privilege—fairly or not—as mostly a matter of cosmetics and inconvenience.
Those interpretations overshadow the origins of white privilege, as well as its present-day ability to influence systemic decisions. They overshadow the fact that white privilege is both a legacy and a cause of racism. And they overshadow the words of many people of color, who for decades recognized white privilege as the result of conscious acts and refused to separate it from historic inequities.
In short, we’ve forgotten what white privilege really means—which is all of this, all at once. And if we stand behind the belief that recognizing white privilege is integral to the anti-bias work of white educators, we must offer a broader recognition.
A recognition that does not silence the voices of those most affected by white privilege; a recognition that does not ignore where it comes from and why it has staying power.
Racism vs. White Privilege
Having white privilege and recognizing it is not racist. But white privilege exists because of historic, enduring racism and biases. Therefore, defining white privilege also requires finding working definitions of racism and bias.
So, what is racism? One helpful definition comes from Matthew Clair and Jeffrey S. Denis’s “Sociology on Racism.” They define racism as “individual- and group-level processes and structures that are implicated in the reproduction of racial inequality.” Systemic racism happens when these structures or processes are carried out by groups with power, such as governments, businesses or schools. Racism differs from bias, which is a conscious or unconscious prejudice against an individual or group based on their identity.
Basically, racial bias is a belief. Racism is what happens when that belief translates into action. For example, a person might unconsciously or consciously believe that people of color are more likely to commit crime or be dangerous. That’s a bias. A person might become anxious if they perceive a Black person is angry. That stems from a bias. These biases can become racism through a number of actions ranging in severity, and ranging from individual- to group-level responses:
- A person crosses the street to avoid walking next to a group of young Black men.
- A person calls 911 to report the presence of a person of color who is otherwise behaving lawfully.
- A police officer shoots an unarmed person of color because he “feared for his life.”
- A jury finds a person of color guilty of a violent crime despite scant evidence.
- A federal intelligence agency prioritizes investigating Black and Latino activists rather than investigate white supremacist activity.
Both racism and bias rely on what sociologists call racialization. This is the grouping of people based on perceived physical differences, such as skin tone. This arbitrary grouping of people, historically, fueled biases and became a tool for justifying the cruel treatment and discrimination of non-white people. Colonialism, slavery and Jim Crow laws were all sold with junk science and propaganda that claimed people of a certain “race” were fundamentally different from those of another—and they should be treated accordingly. And while not all white people participated directly in this mistreatment, their learned biases and their safety from such treatment led many to commit one of those most powerful actions: silence.
And just like that, the trauma, displacement, cruel treatment and discrimination of people of color, inevitably, gave birth to white privilege.
So, What Is White Privilege?
White privilege is—perhaps most notably in this era of uncivil discourse—a concept that has fallen victim to its own connotations. The two-word term packs a double whammy that inspires pushback. 1) The word white creates discomfort among those who are not used to being defined or described by their race. And 2) the word privilege, especially for poor and rural white people, sounds like a word that doesn’t belong to them—like a word that suggests they have never struggled.
This defensiveness derails the conversation, which means, unfortunately, that defining white privilege must often begin with defining what it’s not. Otherwise, only the choir listens; the people you actually want to reach check out. White privilege is not the suggestion that white people have never struggled. Many white people do not enjoy the privileges that come with relative affluence, such as food security. Many do not experience the privileges that come with access, such as nearby hospitals.
And white privilege is not the assumption that everything a white person has accomplished is unearned; most white people who have reached a high level of success worked extremely hard to get there. Instead, white privilege should be viewed as a built-in advantage, separate from one’s level of income or effort.
Francis E. Kendall, author of Diversity in the Classroom and Understanding White Privilege: Creating Pathways to Authentic Relationships Across Race, comes close to giving us an encompassing definition: “having greater access to power and resources than people of color [in the same situation] do.” But in order to grasp what this means, it’s also important to consider how the definition of white privilege has changed over time.
White Privilege Through the Years
In a thorough article, education researcher Jacob Bennett tracked the history of the term. Before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “white privilege” was less commonly used but generally referred to legal and systemic advantages given to white people by the United States, such as citizenship, the right to vote or the right to buy a house in the neighborhood of their choice.
It was only after discrimination persisted for years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that people like Peggy McIntosh began to view white privilege as being more psychological—a subconscious prejudice perpetuated by white people’s lack of awareness that they held this power. White privilege could be found in day-to-day transactions and in white people’s ability to move through the professional and personal worlds with relative ease.
But some people of color continued to insist that an element of white privilege included the aftereffects of conscious choices. For example, if white business leaders didn’t hire many people of color, white people had more economic opportunities. Having the ability to maintain that power dynamic, in itself, was a white privilege, and it endures. Legislative bodies, corporate leaders and educators are still disproportionately white and often make conscious choices (laws, hiring practices, discipline procedures) that keep this cycle on repeat.
The more complicated truth: White privilege is both unconsciously enjoyed and consciously perpetuated. It is both on the surface and deeply embedded into American life. It is a weightless knapsack—and a weapon.
It depends on who’s carrying it.
White Privilege as the “Power of Normal”
Sometimes the examples used to make white privilege visible to those who have it are also the examples least damaging to people who lack it. But that does not mean these examples do not matter or that they do no damage at all.
These subtle versions of white privilege are often used as a comfortable, easy entry point for people who might push back against the concept. That is why they remain so popular. These are simple, everyday things, conveniences white people aren’t forced to think about.
These often-used examples include:
- The first-aid kit having “flesh-colored” Band-Aids that only match the skin tone of white people.
- The products white people need for their hair being in the aisle labeled “hair care” rather than in a smaller, separate section of “ethnic hair products.”
- The grocery store stocking a variety of food options that reflect the cultural traditions of most white people.
But the root of these problems is often ignored. These types of examples can be dismissed by white people who might say, “My hair is curly and requires special product,” or “My family is from Poland, and it’s hard to find traditional Polish food at the grocery store.”
This may be true. But the reason even these simple white privileges need to be recognized is that the damage goes beyond the inconvenience of shopping for goods and services. These privileges are symbolic of what we might call “the power of normal.” If public spaces and goods seem catered to one race and segregate the needs of people of other races into special sections, that indicates something beneath the surface.
White people become more likely to move through the world with an expectation that their needs be readily met. People of color move through the world knowing their needs are on the margins. Recognizing this means recognizing where gaps exist.
White Privilege as the “Power of the Benefit of the Doubt”
The “power of normal” goes beyond the local CVS. White people are also more likely to see positive portrayals of people who look like them on the news, on TV shows and in movies. They are more likely to be treated as individuals, rather than as representatives of (or exceptions to) a stereotyped racial identity. In other words, they are more often humanized and granted the benefit of the doubt. They are more likely to receive compassion, to be granted individual potential, to survive mistakes.
This has negative effects for people of color, who, without this privilege, face the consequences of racial profiling, stereotypes and lack of compassion for their struggles.
In these scenarios, white privilege includes the facts that:
- White people are less likely to be followed, interrogated or searched by law enforcement because they look “suspicious.”
- White people’s skin tone will not be a reason people hesitate to trust their credit or financial responsibility.
- If white people are accused of a crime, they are less likely to be presumed guilty, less likely to be sentenced to death and more likely to be portrayed in a fair, nuanced manner by media outlets (see the #IfTheyGunnedMeDown campaign).
- The personal faults or missteps of white people will likely not be used to later deny opportunities or compassion to people who share their racial identity.
This privilege is invisible to many white people because it seems reasonable that a person should be extended compassion as they move through the world. It seems logical that a person should have the chance to prove themselves individually before they are judged. It’s supposedly an American ideal.
But it’s a privilege often not granted to people of color—with dire consequences.
For example, programs like New York City’s now-abandoned “Stop and Frisk” policy target a disproportionate number of Black and Latinx people. People of color are more likely to be arrested for drug offenses despite using at a similar rate to white people. Some people do not survive these stereotypes. In 2017, people of color who were unarmed and not attacking anyone were more likely to be killed by police.
Those who survive instances of racial profiling—be they subtle or violent—do not escape unaffected. They often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, and this trauma in turn affects their friends, families and immediate communities, who are exposed to their own vulnerability as a result.
A study conducted in Australia (which has its own hard history of subjugating Black and Indigenous people) perfectly illustrates how white privilege can manifest in day-to-day interactions—daily reminders that one is not worthy of the same benefit of the doubt given to another. In the experiment, people of different racial and ethnic identities tried to board public buses, telling the driver they didn’t have enough money to pay for the ride. Researchers documented more than 1,500 attempts. The results: 72 percent of white people were allowed to stay on the bus. Only 36 percent of Black people were extended the same kindness.
Just as people of color did nothing to deserve this unequal treatment, white people did not “earn” disproportionate access to compassion and fairness. They receive it as the byproduct of systemic racism and bias.
And even if they are not aware of it in their daily lives as they walk along the streets, this privilege is the result of conscious choices made long ago and choices still being made today.
White Privilege as the “Power of Accumulated Power”
Perhaps the most important lesson about white privilege is the one that’s taught the least.
The “power of normal” and the “power of the benefit of the doubt” are not just subconscious byproducts of past discrimination. They are the purposeful results of racism—an ouroboros of sorts—that allow for the constant re-creation of inequality.
These powers would not exist if systemic racism hadn’t come first. And systemic racism cannot endure unless those powers still hold sway.
You can imagine it as something of a whiteness water cycle, wherein racism is the rain. That rain populates the earth, giving some areas more access to life and resources than others. The evaporation is white privilege—an invisible phenomenon that is both a result of the rain and the reason it keeps going.
McIntosh asked herself an important question that inspired her famous essay, “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”: “On a daily basis, what do I have that I didn’t earn?” Our work should include asking the two looming follow-up questions: Who built that system? Who keeps it going?
The answers to those questions could fill several books. But they produce examples of white privilege that you won’t find in many broad explainer pieces.
For example, the ability to accumulate wealth has long been a white privilege—a privilege created by overt, systemic racism in both the public and private sectors. In 2014, the Pew Research Center released a report that revealed the median net worth of a white household was $141,900; for Black and Hispanic households, that dropped to $11,000 and $13,700, respectively. The gap is huge, and the great “equalizers” don’t narrow it. Research from Brandeis University and Demos found that the racial wealth gap is not closed when people of color attend college (the median white person who went to college has 7.2 times more wealth than the median Black person who went to college, and 3.9 times more than the median Latino person who went to college). Nor do they close the gap when they work full time, or when they spend less and save more.
The gap, instead, relies largely on inheritance—wealth passed from one generation to the next. And that wealth often comes in the form of inherited homes with value. When white families are able to accumulate wealth because of their earning power or home value, they are more likely to support their children into early adulthood, helping with expenses such as college education, first cars and first homes. The cycle continues.
This is a privilege denied to many families of color, a denial that started with the work of public leaders and property managers. After World War II, when the G.I. Bill provided white veterans with “a magic carpet to the middle class,” racist zoning laws segregated towns and cities with sizable populations of people of color—from Baltimore to Birmingham, from New York to St. Louis, from Louisville to Oklahoma City, to Chicago, to Austin, and in cities beyond and in between.
These exclusionary zoning practices evolved from city ordinances to redlining by the Federal Housing Administration (which wouldn’t back loans to Black people or those who lived close to Black people), to more insidious techniques written into building codes. The result: People of color weren’t allowed to raise their children and invest their money in neighborhoods with “high home values.” The cycle continues today. Before the 2008 crash, people of color were disproportionately targeted for subprime mortgages. And neighborhood diversity continues to correlate with low property values across the United States. According to the Century Foundation, one-fourth of Black Americans living in poverty live in high-poverty neighborhoods; only 1 in 13 impoverished white Americans lives in a high-poverty neighborhood.
The inequities compound. To this day, more than 80 percent of poor Black students attend a high-poverty school, where suspension rates are often higher and resources often more limited. Once out of school, obstacles remain. Economic forgiveness and trust still has racial divides. In a University of Wisconsin study, 17 percent of white job applicants with a criminal history got a call back from an employer; only five percent of Black applicants with a criminal history got call backs. And according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, Black Americans are 105 percent more likely than white people to receive a high-cost mortgage, with Latino Americans 78 percent more likely. This is after controlling for variables such as credit score and debt-to-income ratios.
Why mention these issues in an article defining white privilege? Because the past and present context of wealth inequality serves as a perfect example of white privilege.
If privilege, from the Latin roots of the term, refers to laws that have an impact on individuals, then what is more effective than a history of laws that explicitly targeted racial minorities to keep them out of neighborhoods and deny them access to wealth and services?
If white privilege is “having greater access to power and resources than people of color [in the same situation] do,” then what is more exemplary than the access to wealth, the access to neighborhoods and the access to the power to segregate cities, deny loans and perpetuate these systems?
This example of white privilege also illustrates how systemic inequities trickle down to less harmful versions of white privilege. Wealth inequity contributes to the “power of the benefit of the doubt” every time a white person is given a lower mortgage rate than a person of color with the same credit credentials. Wealth inequity reinforces the “power of normal” every time businesses assume their most profitable consumer base is the white base and adjust their products accordingly.
And this example of white privilege serves an important purpose: It re-centers the power of conscious choices in the conversation about what white privilege is.
People can be ignorant about these inequities, of course. According to the Pew Research Center, only 46 percent of white people say that they benefit “a great deal” or “a fair amount” from advantages that society does not offer to Black people. But conscious choices were and are made to uphold these privileges. And this goes beyond loan officers and lawmakers. Multiple surveys have shown that many white people support the idea of racial equality but are less supportive of policies that could make it more possible, such as reparations, affirmative action or law enforcement reform.
In that way, white privilege is not just the power to find what you need in a convenience store or to move through the world without your race defining your interactions. It’s not just the subconscious comfort of seeing a world that serves you as normal. It’s also the power to remain silent in the face of racial inequity. It’s the power to weigh the need for protest or confrontation against the discomfort or inconvenience of speaking up. It’s getting to choose when and where you want to take a stand. It’s knowing that you and your humanity are safe.
And what a privilege that is.
Collins is the senior writer for Teaching Tolerance.
UNDERSTANDING TRANSFORMATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND THE FUTURE OF DEFI
The Curious Death of Sandra Bland w/Malcolm Gladwell | Joe Rogan
09:42communication and he is this attitude09:45that he’s a cop and that you have to09:48listen to the cops because he’s them and09:50you’re you yeah and that that’s like09:53when he’s telling her to put the09:55cigarette out and she’s saying I don’t09:57have to do that and he’s saying get out09:58of your vehicle and she’s saying I don’t10:00have to do that and then he’s screaming10:02at her I mean that’s that’s all right10:04there yeah so it seems like to me he10:05wants compliance he won’t sir to listen10:07he does yeah he does what he gets it’s10:10funny the what’s remarkable about that10:14tape which I must have seen 50 times and10:18which has been viewed on YouTube you10:20know even a couple million times is how10:22quickly it escalates you know the whole10:24thing is it’s insanely short yeah you10:28you would think if I was telling you the10:30story of this you would think oh this10:32unfolds over 10 minutes and it doesn’t10:35it unfolds over a minute and a half and10:39that what I remember years ago I wrote10:41my second book blink and I have in that10:44book a chapter about a very famous10:47infamous police shooting in New York10:49case of amadou diallo I remember that I10:51remember that was shot like 40 times by10:53cops yeah and one of the big things I10:55was interested in talking about in that10:59case was how long does it take how long11:02did it take for that whole terrible11:05sequence to go11:06down so from the moment the police11:08develop it suspicions about amadou11:12diallo to the moment that amadou diallo11:14is lying dead on his front porch how11:17long how much time elapsed and the11:19answer is like two seconds11:21it’s boo boo boo it’s like and I had a11:24conversation with them actually here in11:26the valley with Gavin de Becker11:30has he ever been on your show no11:32fascinating guy was a security expert on11:35a security expert incredibly interesting11:37guy’s friends with Sam Harris I know11:39that yes yeah yeah and he was talking11:43about this question of time that when11:46you’re a security guard guarding someone11:48you know famous a lot of what you’re11:50trying to do is to inject time into the11:53scenario instead of you don’t want11:56something to unfold in a second and a11:58half where you have almost no time to12:00react properly and what you want to do12:01is to uh knit to unfold in five seconds12:03if you can an align this up I can’t12:06remember his exact term but basically12:07what your job is is to add seconds into12:10the the encounter so that you have a12:13chance to intelligently respond to12:16what’s going on and so he was hit this12:18great riff about um how good Israeli12:23secrets of Secret Service guys are and12:26one of the things they do is they’re12:28they’re they’re either not armed or they12:31don’t they’re trained not to go for12:33their weapons in these situations12:35because this point is so say you’re12:37guarding the president you’re a body man12:40for the president you walk into a crowd12:42somebody comes up to you like pulls a12:45gun wants to shoot the president12:46his point is if you’re the secret12:48security guy and your first instinct in12:51response to someone pulling a gun is to12:53go for your own gun you’ve lost a second12:55and a half right your hands got to go12:58down to here your whole focus is on13:00getting to your own gun and in the13:01meantime the other guy whose guns13:04already out has already shot you’ve lost13:06you need to be someone who forgets about13:08your own gun and just focuses on the on13:12the man in front of you right and13:13protected the president but he was all13:15in the context of time is this really13:18crucial13:20variable in these kind of encounters and13:22everything as a police officer you13:24should be doing is slowing it down wait13:28I you know13:30analyze what’s happening and that’s what13:33he doesn’t do the cop in this instance13:35speeds it up right he goes to DEFCON you13:39know she likes a cigarette and within13:40seconds he’s screaming at her this is13:43like you know a parent shouldn’t do that13:45I mean let a little police officer by13:47the side of the highway Brett but the13:48difference is he knows she’s not a13:50criminal13:50I mean he must know it’s [ __ ]13:54he’s pulling her over because he’s13:56trying to write a ticket and the way13:58he’s communicating with her when she13:59lights a cigarette14:00it’s like she’s inferior like he this is14:04not someone who’s scared he’s not scared14:07of a perpetrator he’s not scared that14:09there’s a criminal in the car about to14:10shoot him he’s not scared of that at all14:12he wants uh Terr total complete14:15compliance and he’s talking to her like14:18like he’s a drill sergeant but can’t you14:21can’t both those things be true how so14:25well in this so in the deposition he14:27gives which I get to the end of the book14:29and I got the tape of the deposition14:30it’s bad it’s totally fascinating14:32it’s like he’s sitting down with the14:34investigating officer in looking into14:37the death of Sandra bland and he’s got I14:39don’t know how long it is two hours now14:41he’s walking them through what he was14:43thinking that day and he makes the case14:46that he was terrified that he was14:49convinced he says he goes back to his14:52squad car comes up and there’s submit14:55there’s some evidence to support this so14:57he pulls her over and he goes to the14:59passenger side window and leans and says15:02ma’am you realize why I pulled you over15:04blah blah and is are you okay because he15:06she doesn’t seem right to him she gives15:09him her license he goes back to his15:10squad car and he says while he’s in the15:12squad car he looks ahead and he sees her15:15making what he calls furtive movements15:17so he’s like furtive movements also he15:20thinks she’s being all kind of jumpy and15:23you know isn’t he just says I saw her15:25moving around in ways it didn’t make me15:27happy and then when he returns to the15:29car he returns driver’s side which is15:32crucial because if15:33you’re a cop you go driver’s side only15:35if you think that you might be in danger15:36right he doesn’t if you go driver’s side15:39you’re exposing yourself to the road15:40when you reason you do that is it when15:42your driver’s side you can see the it’s15:45very very difficult if someone has a gun15:47to shoot the police officer who’s pulled15:50them over if the police officer is on15:51the driver’s side right you have an15:53angle if they’re on the passenger side15:55so why does he go but if he thinks she’s15:57harmless there’s no reason to go back15:58driver’s side I think this guy I think16:01these two things are linked I actually16:02believe him he constructs this16:04ridiculous fantasy about how she’s16:08dangerous but I think that’s just what16:10he was trained to do he’s a paranoid cop16:12and then why is he’s so insistent that16:16she be compliant for the same reason16:19because he’s terrified he’s like do16:21exactly what I say cuz I don’t know what16:23the what’s gonna happen here right and16:24she’s I you know I I don’t know I I16:28don’t think those two those two strains16:32of of interpretation are mutually16:34exclusive mmm that’s interesting it16:37didn’t sound like he was scared at all16:40it sounds like he was pissed that she16:42wasn’t listening to him yeah I didn’t I16:44didn’t think he sounded even remotely16:45scared I felt like he had I mean we’re16:49reading into it right right I have no16:51idea but from my interpretation was he16:54had decided that she wasn’t listening to16:57him and he was gonna make her listen him16:59yeah that’s what I got out of it I17:01didn’t get any fear and I thought that17:03version of it that he described just17:05sounds like horseshit it sounds like17:07what you would say after the fact to17:09strengthen your case well they so17:12there’s another element in here that I17:13get into which is I got his record as a17:17police officer he’d been on the on the17:19force for I forgot nine ten months and17:22we have a record of every traffic stop17:24he ever made and when you look at his17:26list of traffic stops you reason you17:28realized that what happened that day17:30with Sandra bland was not an anomaly17:33that he’s one of those guys who pulls17:35over everyone for [ __ ] reasons mmm17:38all day long so I think I’ve forgotten17:40exact number but in the hour before he17:43pulled over Sandra bland he pulled over17:45for people for other people for equally17:48ridiculous reasons he’s that cop no and17:51he’s that cop because he’s been trained17:53that way right that’s a kind of quotas17:55strange strain of modern policing which17:57says go beyond the ticket pull someone17:59over if you if anything looks a little18:01bit weird because you might find18:02something else now if you look at his18:04history as a cop he almost never found18:06anything else his history is a cop in18:09fact I went through this I forget how18:11many hundreds of traffic stops he had in18:13nine months if you go through them18:15he has like once he found some marijuana18:17on a kid and by the way the town in18:19which he was working as a college town18:21so I mean how hard is that I think he18:24found a gun once misdemeanor gun but18:28everything else was like pulling over18:30people for you know the the light above18:33their license plate was out got that’s18:37the level of stuff he was using he did18:39this all day long every day18:43so he’s like to him it’s second nature18:46yeah pull her over like who knows what’s18:49going on she’s out of state she’s young18:51black woman was this comparable to the18:53way the rest of the cops on the force18:54and his division did it well I looked at18:57I didn’t look at the rest of the cops on18:59his voice what I looked at were state19:02numbers to the wherever they’re several19:05American states give us like North19:07Carolina for example will give us19:10precise complete statistics on the19:16number of traffic stops done by their19:18police officers and the reasons for19:20those stops so when you look at that so19:22I have the I look at the North Carolina19:24numbers for example in the North19:25Carolina Highway Patrol it’s the same19:27thing they’re pulling over unbelievable19:29numbers of people and finding nothing19:31like night you know one percent less19:34than one percent hit rates in some cases19:36of being hit rate being finding19:38something of interest19:39so like they’re pulling over ninety nine19:41people for no reason in order to find19:43one person who’s got you know a bag of19:46dope or something in the car19:48you cannot conduct policing in in a19:53civil society like that and expect to19:55have decent relationships between law19:57enforcement19:58in the civilian population yeah no20:00question but doesn’t that sort of20:02support the idea that he’s full of [ __ ]20:03that he was really concerned that she20:05had something he’d never encountered20:07anything well or or this was the one the20:11fantasy in his head is so what so the20:13questions why does he keep doing it if20:14this is a guy who day in day out pulls20:16over people for no reason and finds20:18nothing and continues to do it20:20now there’s two explanations one is he’s20:22totally cynical and thinks this is the20:24way to be an effective police officer X20:26mission number two is this is a guy who20:28has a powerful fantasy in his head that20:30one day I’m gonna hit the jackpot and20:33I’m gonna open the trunk and is going to20:34be 15 pounds of heroin and I’m gonna be20:37the biggest star who ever lived I think20:39there’s also a rush of just being able20:41to get people to pull over this the the20:44compliance thing which is another reason20:46why he was so furious that what she20:47wasn’t listening to him yeah and she20:48kept a cigarette lit yeah or she was20:51listening but not complying yes yeah um20:53what are the laws I mean are you allowed20:56to smoke a cigarette in your car when a20:57cop pulls you over how does it work like21:00that21:00yeah I mean of course yeah they can’t21:03stop you from engaging they can’t tell21:05you to put out your cigarette there’s no21:07law no he could have said I mean no21:10there’s no law I mean the car though two21:13things the courts historically give21:16enormous leeway to the police officers21:19in a traffic stop as opposed to a21:21person-to-person stop but uh but no I I21:24mean right this is about what he should21:26have said is he could have said ma’am do21:31you mind I would prefer if you put out21:35the cigarette while we’re talking or I’m21:37allergic to smoke or whatever I mean21:39he’s a million ways to him to do it21:40nicely21:40yeah but he’s he’s a jackass about yeah21:42but I mean he’s basically doing the job21:46like a jackass he’s doing a jackass21:48version of being a cop well so this is21:50so this is one of a really really21:53crucial point in the argument of the21:54book which is I think the real lesson of21:58that case is not that he’s a bad cop22:00he’s in fact doing precisely as he is22:02was in trained and instructed to do he’s22:05a he’s the ideal cop and the problem is22:10with the particular philosophy of22:12law enforcement that has emerged over22:14the last ten years in this country which22:16has incentivized and encouraged police22:20officers to engage in these incredibly22:23low reward activities like pulling over22:26a hundred people or defying one person22:28who’s done something wrong that has22:29become enshrined in the strategy of many22:32police forces around the country they22:34tell them to do this I have a whole22:37section of book right go through in22:38detail one of the most important police22:41training manuals which is you know22:45required reading for somebody coming up22:47and which they just walk you through22:48this like it is your job to pull over22:51lots and lots and lots and lots of22:53people even if you only find something22:55in a small percentage of cases why22:57that’s what being a proactive police22:58officer is all about right so they are23:01trained that that phrase go beyond the23:03ticket is a is a term of art in police23:07training like you got to be thinking you23:09sure you pulled him over for having a23:11taillight that’s out23:12but you’re look you’re thinking beyond23:14that is there something else in the car23:16that’s problematic that’s to try to find23:18so there he was being a dutiful police23:22officer and the the answer is to23:24re-examine our philosophies of law23:27enforcement not know I mean you can’t23:30dismiss this thing by saying oh that’s23:32just a particularly bad cop not great23:34but I don’t know if he’s any worse than23:36you know he’s just doing what he was23:38trained to do that’s the issue23:40he should be trained to do something23:41different right that is the issue right23:42the issue is there this is standard23:45practice a treat citizens that are doing23:48nothing wrong as if they’re criminals23:50yeah and pull them over and give them23:52extreme paranoia and freak them out yeah23:55I hope you find something I was home I’m23:58Canadian and I was home in Canada24:00small-town Canada couple weeks ago and I24:04saw in the pack you know how these cars24:06always have there’s often that our24:08slogan on the side of the car the back24:09of the commune so in my little hometown24:11in southwestern Ontario sleepy you know24:14farm country the slogan on the back of24:17the police cars is people helping people24:20so Canadian like the X know understand24:25this24:26country with very low levels of gun24:29ownership which means that a police24:30officer does not enter into an encounter24:32with a civilian with the same degree of24:34fear or paranoia that the civilian has a24:37handgun right which is a big part of24:39this regardless of how one feels about24:42gun laws in this country the fact that24:44there are lots of guns mean makes the24:46job of a police officer a lot harder and24:48every police officer will tell you that24:49in Canada they don’t have that fear but24:51it’s also Canada and its small town24:53Canada and so when you encounter a24:55police officer in my little town he’s24:57like he’s people helping people he’s24:59like he’s like driving like a Camry and25:02he’s you know he’s like this genial25:04person who was a really camera amis I25:06forgotten exactly what the driver was25:08not like they’re not driving scars yeah25:11explorers painted black with like big25:14bull bars at the front right and then25:17you go you know I was you go I mean even25:20in LA I hate you know I like that25:22cars are painted black and white so they25:25look ferocious I mean the whole thing25:27that was it is still look ferocious do I25:30just look they identify as police to25:32connait to a Canadian looks to me it25:35looks a little why do they have to paint25:37them black forgets nothing Oakland25:39Raiders I mean it’s like what do you25:41think they should paint them something25:43mild and like bright yellow something25:45lovely something lovely like a nice can25:48you imagine a like a teal or a25:50lime-green well that would be yeah25:52because there’s a lot of black cars a25:54lot of white cars a lot of teal cars25:55it’s good so it would yeah it would25:57stand out like oh it’s cop this paint26:00car but you know this kind of symbolism26:03right matters right right you wanna see26:06an image sheriff joe arpaio who makes26:08all those prisoners wear pink yeah yeah26:11that’s kind of thing but I mean to26:14against his point though how many women26:16shoot cops26:18isn’t that an insanely low number yeah I26:21mean insanely low I mean what are the26:24numbers I mean it’s probably almost26:26non-existent26:27yeah well guys pull over women I don’t26:29think they’re worried about being shot I26:30really don’t I think it’s horseshit I26:33think it’s all after the fact yeah he26:35was trying to concoct some sort of an26:36excuse I was gonna excuse for26:38is he still in the force I know he was26:41either he’s kicked off for I forgotten26:46the precise language they used but for26:48basically being impolite to a civilian26:52but um yeah I don’t think there’s a lot26:54of but I don’t know whether I mean I I26:57still think we’re saying the same thing26:59which is the thing that’s driving him27:02his motivation is not rational right and27:05if you were a rational actor you would27:07never engage in an activity where 99.9%27:10of your police stops resulted in nothing27:13right27:14yeah he’s he is off in some weird kind27:17of fantasy land for a reason which is27:20that’s what in certain jurisdictions in27:23this country that’s what law enforcement27:24has come to look at Brooke like yeah27:26that’s that’s problematic it’s a huge27:28problem27:34[Applause]
Why Investors Are Piling Into Bitcoin Despite the Risks | WSJ
The price of bitcoin is skyrocketing, driving a rally of momentum trading that’s pushed its value higher than it’s ever been before. WSJ explains how bitcoin trading works, and why the volatile digital currency is reaching all-time highs. Illustration: Jacob Reynolds/WSJ