Okay, I'm really confused. Just where do I fit in?

Let's see, I'm definitely caucasian, so I guess that makes me "white." (although I'm really very tan right now)

I certainly work, currently about 65-70 hours most weeks. But apparently only certain kinds of work count as part of the "working" class. On the one hand, I do manual labor. But conversely I also have employees who work for me so I do spend a good bit of time in the office doing payroll, invoicing jobs, and looking for new work too.

So where do I fit in? Am I part of the oppressed white working class? Or am I one of the privileged oppressors?

" Pretty much privileged oppressor, I think." - janna

This is a common mis-conception of the the oppressor/oppressed and the privileged/under-privileged dichotomies. Each of these terms are descriptions of relationships, not of people, or of groups of people. They only have any meaning at all when used to describe a specific relationship, or when comparing specific entities within a limited scope or axis. For example:

- Inner-city children are oppressed by adult drug dealers, or, adult drug dealers are privileged in inner-cities relative children are not.

At the same time: those same children have a privileged relationship to the state relative to adult drug dealers; the adult drug dealers are oppressed by a lack of opportunity in relation to larger society; and all of them, as Americans, have an oppressive relationship with various countries around the world.

Of course, you can argue over the nature of any of these relationships, but none of these participants are inherently or solely "oppressive", "oppressed", "privileged", or "under-privileged". It would be like calling someone "left-standing" because they're standing on the left hand side of someone, conveniently ignoring the universe of things on their right.

[At the same time: those same children have a privileged relationship to the state relative to adult drug dealers; the adult drug dealers are oppressed by a lack of opportunity in relation to larger society; and all of them, as Americans, have an oppressive relationship with various countries around the world.]

Oh come now. How precisely am I oppressing drug dealers or people in other countries?

I'm not arguing that the example is factual, only that the example is a proper use of the terms. More importantly, you can't oppress anyone. Only institutions can be oppressive. Individuals can't be oppressors. When people lay that accusation, feel free to laugh at them. They don't know what they're talking about.

Personally, I think this form of rhetoric represents a failure in political science, but that's just my opinion. If nothing else, it often leads to the ridiculous conclusion that employing someone is a form of oppression.