We may talk about male privilege, white privilege, or Christian privilege in isolation, but in practice one form of privilege is consistently used to buttress the others. One cannot be eliminated without at least weakening the others, and one cannot be challenged without implicitly challenging the others. This means that anyone promoting one is implicitly promoting the other; sometimes, though, all get promoted together and explicitly and it appears that John McCain believe in them. Do Republicans want a president who believes in America having a white, male, Christian power structure?
Bill O’Reilly: But do you understand what the New York Times wants, and the far-left want? They want to break down the white, Christian, male power structure, which you’re a part, and so am I, and they want to bring in millions of foreign nationals to basically break down the structure that we have. In that regard, Pat Buchanan is right. So I say you’ve got to cap it with a number.
John McCain: In America today we’ve got a very strong economy and low unemployment, so we need addition farm workers, including by the way agriculture, but there may come a time where we have an economic downturn, and we don’t need so many.
Source: Carpetbagger Report
Of course it has to be made absolutely clear that it was Bill O'Reilly who described America as having a "white, Christian, male power structure" which is being broken down by excessive immigration, not John McCain. It must also be made clear that John McCain is actually at odds with most of the rest of the Repulican party when it comes to immigration - in the above interview, McCain disagrees with Bill O'Reilly about putting caps on immigration.
What should also be clear, though, is that John McCain doesn't dispute Bill O'Reilly's characterization of America as being run controlled by a white, male, Christian power structure, he doesn't dispute being part of that power structure, and he doesn't criticize O'Reilly for using that phrase. This leaves open the very strong likelihood that he agrees with and accepts it, at least on some level.
Let's think carefully about what Bill O'Reilly said here. Pay close attention, for example, to the fact that O'Reilly isn't making any arguments based on economics, national security, or the other common excuses used by those in power who are trying to promote political agendas which just happen to subordinate minorities. The rhetoric here is focused on race and ethnicity: immigrants aren't bad because they take away jobs or pose a security risk, but rather because they aren't white enough, male enough, or Christian enough. It's curious that someone like O'Reilly would be so candid about such racist, misogynistic beliefs. Maybe some white, male Christians are becoming so confident in their power that they don't fear public censure like they once did.
I've written frequently about how religious privilege - and Christian privilege in particular - is one of the last forms of unjust social privilege which continue to hold a strong, unquestioned position in American society. Other forms of privilege (white, male, heterosexual, etc.) haven't disappeared, but they have been weakened and they are no longer beyond being questioned and challenged in polite company. What I may not have always made as clear as I should is just how strongly interconnected all of these forms of privilege really are.
This means that when atheists challenge Christian privilege they are also implicitly challenging white privilege and male privilege. It means that atheists can implicitly challenge Christian privilege by challenging white privilege and male privilege. The same relationships go in the other direction, too: anyone who openly promotes Christian privilege is also implicitly promoting white privilege and male privilege. There was a time when those latter two privileges were defended openly, but such direct sexism and racism aren't as acceptable as they once were.
In the long run, though, atheists should invest more time in trying to bring down this "white, male, Christian power structure" rather than trying to "pass" for one of the privileged classes. It's precisely the attitude of white male Christians like Bill O'Reilly that they should be privileged and be the ones in power that causes so many problems today. Obviously eliminating all such privileges won't lead to any sort of paradise - all of our problems stem from our own human nature - but they are a necessary step in the creation of a genuinely just and fair society.
