An analogy or two.
Of course, it's not surprising that someone surnamed "Rosenberg" has an anti-White man bias. You wouldn't know it from listening to the HBD filth, but a certain group has historically been motivated by a genocidal, vicious animus against European Man ("Whites").
We need to put this moronic concept of "White Privilege" to rest. I'm not sure how a group that is officially discriminated against by law, is subject to genocidal race replacement migration the world over, and is also subject to myriad examples of de facto bigotry, is in any way "privileged." Nor is it "privilege" to simply enjoy the fruits of your own labor.
An analogy would be thus. Imagine you come up with a brilliant business idea and start your own company. You make enormous sacrifices to make your business successful. Naturally, you are the CEO of your own company and own most of the stock. Does your status within your own company mean you are "privileged" compared to others outside your company? And what if envious others, led by fast-talking levantines, attempt a hostile takeover of your company, the business you've built up with your own genius and your own "sweat equity?" Who's right? And it these others are increasingly successful in stealing what you've created, aren't they they ones who are truly unfairly privileged?
This could be looked at another way. Let's say we compare two individuals. Joe has 10 units of wealth and Tim has 5 units. Well, is Joe "privileged?" That's the output. What about the input of work? What if Joe has contributed 20 units of work for those 10 units of wealth, while Tim has contributed 0 units of work - no, say Tim has actually been destructive and is at a -5 work units (negative "contribution") - for his 5 units of wealth. Who's privileged? Tim, not Joe.