A Brooklyn-based journalist has calculated the exact financial benefits she has received due to racism and white privilege, totaling a staggering $371,000.
McMillan derived this figure by tracing the money she has received from her family over the years, which she argues her family was able to save up over generations because of their whiteness.
A significant portion of this sum includes educational loans totaling $52,784.33 that she received from her grandfather, which she contends he was able to provide due to the wealth he accumulated as a result of his whiteness.
McMillan, a graduate of NYU where she studied political science, argues that her grandfather’s wealth was rooted in the benefits he accrued from the GI Bill, a post-World War II legislation that she claims “heavily favored whites” and therefore benefited him at the expense of non-whites.
Additionally, McMillan received $40,384.72 as an inheritance from her grandfather, which she also attributes to the advantages he gained due to his whiteness.
The writer also received $15,086.74 from her parents, which she vaguely referred to as a “gift” without elaborating on how it was attributable to their whiteness.
McMillan also cites “avoiding foster care” as a consequence of her whiteness, which she values at $15,771.37, a claim that suggests non-whites are automatically in foster care.
The writer also contends that her rent-stabilized apartment has saved her $1,319.86 in costs due to the discrimination she never faced as a white person.
Furthermore, McMillan claims she received $26,858.04 more than non-white tutors in her job as a tutor with Maggie, and she has been spared $37,488.11 in credit discrimination when accessing credit.
Explaining her calculations to CNN, McMillan said, “I calculate $146,000 from my family that probably they had because of racism. I calculate $225,000 of money that I have had access to or equity I’ve gained probably because I was white. That’s almost $400,000.”
When announcing the tour for her new book on X.com, formerly Twitter, some commenters criticized the book’s premise, arguing that the benefits she cites are more reflective of upper-class privilege rather than solely white privilege.
One commenter suggested that McMillan should “re-label white privilege to ‘white, upper middle class’ privilege” since many poor white people did not enjoy the same “bonuses” she did.
Another commenter questioned whether McMillan would be donating the profits from the book to black causes, while a critic observed that the money from inheritance, parental support, and grandparental loans is not a “white bonus” but rather an “upper-class bonus.”
