Association Member For Non-Profit Activities 150: Fill & Download for Free

My initial opinion is that there is nothing surprising. The redistribution of honorary military titles and royal patronages was, as we know, held off when Harry and Meghan made the decision to cease being ‘working royals’ and engage in their own activities in the same way as other members of the royal family such as Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, and thereby (i) reduce the public interest excuse for persistent tabloid intrusion, and (ii) allow them to pursue social change activities and interests that would otherwise be a conflict with the constitutional responsibilities of the sovereign if they remained official representatives.It is recognised that Harry had hoped he could achieve this by becoming a part-time working royal, i.e., not receiving any funds from the Queen but retaining some of the activities he was most interested in. Buckingham Palace were not in favour of a less clear-cut arrangement, given the constitutional difficulties it would create for a Queen and her ‘working royal’ representatives who must constitutionally be in agreement with her government.While it is not confirmed, it is understood that the military and charitable appointments Harry had taken on as a working royal were not re-distributed while the Sussexes took a year to confirm that their plans.The Duke and Duchess of Sussex at an event for the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust.Some public confusionBeyond this, my only other opinion is that there has been a fair bit of confusion over what ‘royal patronages’ means and why Harry is able to retain certain charitable interests (e.g., Invictus Games and Sentebale) but not others.This has come from the 19 February 2021 announcement from Buckingham Palace that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed they will not be returning to the roles of ‘working royals’ and that specific royal patronages (The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, The Rugby Football Union, The Rugby Football League, The Royal National Theatre, and the Association of Commonwealth Universities) will be redistributed by the Queen among working members of the royal family.It’s worth breaking down the difference to clarify the situation going forward for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.Being a patron of a charity in a private capacityLike most royal family members (whether working royals or not), Harry and Meghan are privately patrons of—or have connections of personal support with—charities. Among non-working royals, this is a private decision, and any costs to their activities with the charity are generally funded privately. The extent of support ranges from “lending one’s name” to donations to giving a speech at a charity dinner to actively serving on the charity’s board.For example, HRH Princess Beatrice, Mrs Mapelli Mozzi, is not a working royal. However, she is patron of several charities in a private capacity:The Forget Me Not Children's Hospice in West Yorkshire, since c. 2011The York Music Society, since 2012, alongside two other patrons (the Society is a choir of 150 members which puts on a handful of concerts each year and has a long history, having been formed in 1765).The Helen Arkell Dyslexia Centre since 2013. Beatrice received support as a child and young adult from the centre and was later invited to extend her private support for dyslexia with this ambassadorial role.Trustee on the board of the Outward Bound Trust since March 2019 (for which her father was patron until retiring in November 2019, and before him her grandfather Prince Philip).Having non-working members as patrons of charities and organisations benefits them because they are high-profile individuals who attract public interest. This includes the interest of newspapers (in promoting a charity), or benefactors (who may attend a charitable dinner to hear Princess Beatrice) and those making donations (who become aware of the charity through the Princess’ involvement).When a non-working royal family member becomes a patron of charity, they do not need the Queen’s permission or any discussion with staff at Buckingham Palace (although we can reasonably assume that they notify Buckingham Palace as a courtesy). This is because being private citizens, there is no potential conflict of interest for the Queen in her capacity as sovereign in which she must remain in agreement with her government. (That is, there is no conflict of interest for the Queen any more than if your sister supported a white supremacist while you were active in an anti-racist foundation).Several working royals are also patrons of charities in a private capacity while also holding royal patronages in which they represent the Queen more formally. For example, HRH Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex, is patron of various organisations in both a royal and private capacity:As a working royal, he represents his mother the Queen as patron of various organisations that have royal interest, such as the Royal Birmingham Conservatoire, the Royal Exchange Theatre Company, the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society, etc.In a more private capacity, the Earl of Wessex supports several charities and non-profit arts organisations such as the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, the London Mozart Players, Haddo House Choral and Operatic Society, etc.In the case of a working royal, there is a greater chance of conflict of interest (e.g., privately supporting a charity that is in direct or adversarial competition with a royal society), so participation tends to be more strictly controlled and ‘worked out’ with Buckingham Palace support staff.Having a working royal as a patron in a private capacity gives significantly higher prestige, as working royal’s movements are recorded by the Court Circular and published online , meaning that even when they are attending a private charitable event or meeting, the charity will be mentioned in a public capacity.Royal patronagesIt is common for newspapers to print the term “royal patronages” whenever a member of the royal family (working or not) serves as a patron, trustee, board member or otherwise for a non-profit organisation, regardless of whether that is on behalf of the sovereign or in a private capacity. However, it is not always quite correct.The royal patronages that are in the control of the sovereign are those which have what historically is referred to as royal favour—i.e., the personal interest of the sovereign. In many cases, that is because the organisation or charity has operated under either:a royal charter, which is a formal grant issued by the monarch (used to establish cities, universities, and a number of learned societies, etc., and which is today a government rather than a royal document). For a charity or organisation to receive or be incorporated under a royal charter, it must demonstrate “pre-eminence, stability and permanence” and in being incorporated it comes under public regulation. For example, the British Film Institute operates under a royal charity and works as a cultural charity, supporting filmmakers, preserving film archives and promoting British film. Its patron is the Prince of Wales. Likewise the Royal National Institute of Blind People in the UK received a royal charter in 1948, and its patron is the Queen herself.a royal warrant, which confers the right of the use of the title ‘royal’ in an organisation’s name. In the United Kingdom, this is protected under law and the right is governed by royal prerogative (which means more often a government minister rather than the Queen). It can also include the right to use what is called a protected royal device—a crown or coat of arms in the symbols and promotional images of an organisation.the personal patronage of the sovereign. Unlike other family members, the patronage of the sovereign does not quite occur in a private capacity due to her unique constitutional position. For those charities, trusts, not-for-profit organisations, etc., that have or have previously had her patronage (such as the Royal National Theatre and the Commonwealth Youth Trust), they have a particular standing, even if they are not incorporated under a royal charter. When a family members takes on roles (such as President and Vice President of the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust, as Harry and Megan did until February 2021, while the Queen remained patron) or becomes the organisation’s patron, they are doing so in their capacity as working royals, representing the Queen in a formal capacity.There are several thousand organisations that have royal patronage in this formal sense (some in the UK, some in Commonwealth countries and some transnational) and there are several hundred organisations that are incorporated under a royal charter.In almost all cases, participation in royal societies etc. by a working royal family member is considered part of their working duties on behalf of the Queen. While that may not necessarily make these organisations more important, it creates added complexity related to the Queen’s constitutional responsibilities and the requirement that she remain in agreement with her government—this requires some added ‘management’ of the politics of patronage, and is one of the activities undertaken by the sizeable team of staff (courtiers) working in Buckingham Palace.HM The Queen in 1984, granting a royal charter to The Industrial Society (formerly known as the Boys’ Welfare Association at its founding in 1918, and more recently becoming the Work Foundation in 2002.The use of the royal device (crown) on the Royal Society of Literature logo. The Duchess of Cornwall is patron.The charter of Charles II that established the Royal Society 1660, the oldest national scientific institute in the world. Since 1660, every monarch has served at the patron of The Royal Society.What of Harry and Meghan’s royal and private patronages?Leaving Harry’s honorary military roles aside, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’ decision to discontinue serving formally as ‘working royals’ (paid a stipend in exchange for full-time roles representing the sovereign in her official capacities) has meant having to give up roles as patrons of organisations operating under royal charter or otherwise part of the group that have specific royal patronage. This has meant the following:The Queen’s Commonwealth Trust. The Trust was founded in 2018 to promote the participation of young people in positive social change. Among their formal ‘working royal’ duties, Harry was appointed to serve the organisation as President, and Meghan as its vice president. As active roles in the organisation, holding these positions was not tenable from overseas.The Duchess of Sussex with former Australian Prime Minister at an International Women’s Day event hosted by the Queen’s Commonwealth Trust in 2019.The Royal National Theatre (usually known just as ‘the National Theatre’). The Queen was patron from 1974 until 2018, when this trust organisation became one of several that the Queen passed on to other family members to reduce her commitments after turning ninety. Meghan was patron of the National Theatre until February 2021.Meghan at the Royal National Theatre soon after taking over as patron from HM the QueenThe Rugby Football Union. Harry became vice patron of the RFU in 2010 and patron in 2016.The Rugby Football League. Harry became patron in 2017 and relinquished the role in February 2021.The Duke of Sussex at the 2015 Rugby World Cup final at Twickenham StadiumThe Association of Commonwealth Universities was founded in 1913 and promotes and supports higher education and research through networking. The Queen was its patron from 1986 to 2019 when it was the Duchess of Sussex took over as part of the group of patronages taken over by other family members to reduce the load on the Queen.Meghan at a meeting of the Association of Commonwealth Universities in December 2018A number of bloggers and people writing online have asked what Harry and Meghan’s non-working status means for their other patronages. There have been some which have been relinquished over the past year such as the London Marathon Charitable Trust, which is not a royal patronage and rotates its patron on a three-yearly basis.Others, which we are aware Harry will retain his role as patron are also not royal organisations. They include:- Invictus Games, which was founded by Harry and who have released a statement confirming that it is not a royal role and that Harry will remain its patron (“we are proud to have The Duke of Sussex as our Patron. The Invictus Games was founded by him, it has been built on his ideas and he remains fully committed to both the Games and to the Invictus Games Foundation.”)Sentebale, which was founded by Prince Harry in 2006 as a charity to help vulnerable children in Botswana and elsewhere’African Parks, which is a South African conservation organisation founded in 2000 and which manages national parks throughout South Africa and other African countries. Harry serves as its President since 2017.Dolen Cymru, which is a charity founded during the 1980s Ethiopian famine to promote links and support with Lesotho, Africa.Henry van Straubenzee Memorial Fund, which was established in honour of William and Harry’s schoolfriend Henry to help combat poverty in Uganda. Prince William and Prince Harry have been joint patrons since 2009.WellChild, which is a charity that supports seriously ill children in the United Kingdom. It was established in 1977 focused on children’s kidney disease, becoming the Children Nationwide Medical Research Foundation and then WellChild in 2003. Harry continues as its patron.Rhino Conservation Botswana is a charity that helps fund activities to increase and protect populations of black and white rhinoceroses in Botswana. Prince Harry became patron in December 2016.Prince Harry assisting in the translocation of a Rhinoceros in Malawi as part of his activities with African Parks.What does the change mean to Harry and Meghan’s role as royal family membersNo substantial change since early 2020 when Harry and Meghan made the decision to cease being working royals.Their role remains just like all other members of the royal family who are not on the payroll to represent the Queen in her official duties as sovereign, i.e., Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, Prince Andrew, Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, and all the many family members and cousins who are not styled an HRH.Most of the above have a connection with, support or are patrons of charities, but only working royals serve as patrons or perform other duties for the charities with royal charters, warrants or the Queen’s personal patronage as constitutional sovereign.Harry and Meghan have pledged to continue a life of public service, with a statement released the Buckingham Palace announcement: “As evidenced by their work over the past year, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role. We can all live a life of service. Service is universal."

So, this last weekend, I was up visiting my in-laws, and we got nailed with something they call a “bomb cyclone.”[1] It was a big two-day snowstorm that dropped about two feet of snow where I was and blew it all over hell. We’re talking 6–8 foot drifts.I have a Subaru Outback, which I was able to buy with a Good Son Discount from my parents and I’m very appreciative of that. It’s a very nice car, and it can go through just about anything with the excellent ground clearance and all-wheel drive. It’s very safe, and since I now have a kid, that’s why my folks were willing to sell it to me.My in-laws live well off the beaten path, off of a minimum maintenance road that doesn’t get plowed by the county. They hire a guy, but he often doesn’t come for days or sometimes even weeks. So, my father-in-law has a plow on his truck and has to plow out the road himself much of the time.We waited until Duluth was downgraded from “ABANDON HOPE ALL YE WHO ENTER HERE” to at least “snow covered roads; travel not advised,” and my father-in-law had plowed out the road to at least the main county road (about 8 miles away,) which had been plowed by the county, before we left.And we made it home. It was a little hairy at times, but we made it home, and because of that, I didn’t have to take an extra vacation day from work over it.My Subaru can and did make it through some pretty nasty stuff, but really, we made it home because of the snowplows clearing away enough that we could do the rest on our own.Without those plows, we would have gotten stuck. I have the utmost faith in the Subie (and my wife will tell you that I have probably too much faith in the Subie), but I wouldn’t have even attempted it without the plows.At least in the United States, yes, life is much easier if you’re a white person, because essentially, white people are driving behind a large social snowplow that non-white people often do not get to drive behind.I’m sure I’m about to get a giant pile of US white people who will comment about handouts and affirmative action and “well, I’m poor and I know a lot of white people who are and it sure as hell doesn’t feel easier to me!”And that’s true. All of that is true. That road might still be pretty shitty, and you might have done a lot of work to get where you are.Listen. I probably look like the model of the self-made man. I worked hard, got an education, and now I’m doing my best to make something of myself. I’ve worked plenty of hard, manual, “dirty” jobs, and I’ve worked my way up to where the health problems I have mostly stem from a profoundly flattened ass.I’m also a lily-white heterosexual Christian Midwestern dude from a moderately middle-class family who came over on the boat when land was ultra-cheap.My success in life is partly due to hard work, and partly due to the fact that I won the birthright jackpot.There are at least two things that are solely due to the melanin content of my skin and family history that have massively greased the skids for me compared to similarly situated people who are not white: generational accumulated opportunity, and structural privilege.These two things are like a snowplow. They cleared a path for me, and people like me, particularly people who look like me, to more easily succeed.Generational Accumulated OpportunityBuy land. They ain’t makin’ any more of the stuff. - Will RogersOver Thanksgiving, I got in a stupid political argument with a family member, as you do when you live where the air hurts your face and you’re sitting in a blizzard warning watching multiple feet of snow whipping around outside.While we were arguing about deregulation and unrestrained, unbridled capitalism, I pointed out that we had that at one point, and conditions were bad enough that it led to a number of constitutional amendments and the Progressive Era to correct for the Gilded Age and the robber barons. There were a lot of people who didn’t think it was as great a time to be alive as John D. Rockefeller did.He brought up something that I’m guessing Ben Shapiro must be saying lately because I’ve been seeing it pop up a lot in recent weeks: “Well, if the Gilded Age was so bad, why did so many people immigrate here at that point in history?”That answer is, in good part, cheap or even free land.When my folks came over from Germany during the Gilded Age, they got land in Wisconsin for less than a dollar an acre. Even adjusted for inflation, my family was able to buy upwards of a half a square mile of land for less than $5,000 in today’s money. (That same land is well over $5,000 an acre today.) At other points in history, you could get 40, 80, even 160 acres of land from the Federal government for the price of “pack a wagon, go there, and work it up.”[2] A lot of land was granted to timber companies and railroads, who in turn sold it cheaply to new immigrants for a profit to them.[3]Understand that land in Europe was virtually impossible to get your hands on. People didn’t own real property, for the most part. To own 40, 80, 160 acres would have been wealth beyond the dreams of most people.Understand the history of just English property law.[4] Basically, the king owned everything, and doled out tracts of that to the aristocracy, who in turn might dole out some of that to other aristocracy or gentry. Most people lived on someone else’s land and either paid rent or worked for the aristocracy or gentry. Other European nation-states were similar.Whatever the local law was, one thing was certain: Owning land meant income.Let me repeat that: owning land meant income.When you read those old English novels by Austen and Bronte, and it seems like nobody really had a job, that’s why: they were living on the income generated by the land they owned and the people living on it.Even when real property law in European/Western nation-states evolved and individuals really owned the land more than just the local monarch, there was the problem of a lack of frontier. There was a limited supply, and it was already owned by people. Nobody was making more of the stuff.Until some people trying to go find a better trade route bumped into a whole new chunk of it that they’d previously been unaware of.And since the folks who already owned and occupied that land weren’t white or European or Christian, the people who were white and European and Christian kind of looked the other way whilst other white, European Christians cleared the folks from that land and then those other white, European Christians all looked at each other and went, “Whaaaaaaat?! A whole continent that doesn’t have anyone on it?! SWEET!”It’s ours, boys! Ours for the taking! Manifest destiny! WOOOOO!Jon Stewart pointed this out very well, this problem that the United States has always had an entitlement mentality, in The Rumble in the Air Conditioned Auditorium back in 2012, a debate with Bill O’Reilly:We are an entitlement nation. We were born that way. We’re a country [of people] who came to another country with people already on it and went, “Yeah, I think we’ll have that. That’ll be nice.”But it wasn’t just that we wanted to come here, take resources, and leave. People wanted the land.It was well worth it to sell everything you owned, hop on a boat, and come here for that. The entry cost was essentially nothing. The requirements were (a) be alive when you get here, (b) don’t have any readily apparent communicable diseases, and at various times (c) don’t be Chinese or Asian-enough to be thought of as Chinese, a Japanese businessman or professional, black (whether free or slave - didn’t matter, you couldn’t vote, own property, etc.), Hispanic or Hispanic looking when we were at war with Spain or various Spanish-descended colonies or nations, or over the quotas for nations established in the 1920’s. This didn’t really change much until the 1950’s. For a solid 150 years of the nation’s history, this was pretty much how it was.The restrictions that did exist around immigration very much favored white people. And once you got here and got in, even if you weren’t white, it was easier for you to get that land if you were white. (I’ll get to that in a bit).What’s that? You there? What does that have to do with why it’s easier to be a white person today, you ask? Be patient. I’m getting there.Here’s the thing about land. Once you’ve got land, you’ve also got a lot of things that go with land.In the law, we talk about owning real property as having a “bundle of sticks.” [5] Those sticks are various rights associated with land ownership. There’s rights to alienate (sell), exploit (mineral rights, water rights, timber rights, crop rights, etc.), to improve, to occupy, and more. You can transfer those rights, in whole or in part, for a set length of time or forever.That makes it a huge asset to leverage. Land is great collateral. It’s (generally) never going down in price, it’s usually stable and not likely to go anywhere like personal property, and the chain of custody and title is usually pretty easily traceable. Who has what rights in real property is usually a matter of public record or well-recorded.It used to be that land was also essential for voting rights. If you didn’t own land, you didn’t have the right to vote. Even after that changed, land ownership still had a significant amount of voting power to it, and still does today. I laugh a little when I hear folks say that land doesn’t vote, people do, because that’s about half true. Because we have geographical representation, folks who own a lot of land also have a lot of influence in local politics, and as any congressional veteran will tell you: all politics are local.On top of that, land can be inherited. It can be passed down generationally. Even if it’s not income-generating land, it’s a huge expenditure that’s saved from occupying someone else’s land as a tenant. That means that income and wealth could be used to leverage other opportunities: education, the purchase of more land, and so forth.If your parents are more highly educated and wealthy, that vastly increases the chances that you will be highly educated and wealthy, because that status provides more networking with other people who can provide opportunity.Think about Sam Walton’s children, for example. Walton paved the way for them, not just with direct wealth transfer to them, but because they grew up knowing a lot of the right people. They could go to private schools, with the kids of other connected people. They made friendships. Later in life, they could leverage those friendships and connections for things like getting on the boards of profitable companies, which pay them a lot of money.Even if Walton put every penny he ever got from Wal-Mart into a charitable trust and his kids never saw a dime directly, it was the opportunities generated simply because that wealth existed that gave them their wealth.So, even if your parents were rich and never passed that wealth directly to you, there’s still a substantial amount of indirect benefit of just being associated with that wealth. A name might open doors that would otherwise be closed.You got a lot of opportunity.All of that snowballs through generations. And a lack of that opportunity also snowballs through generations.[6] (Credit to Feifei Wang for sharing this awesome explanation of privilege and how small differences in opportunity over time really stack up, and can then lead to thinking you never had or needed the snowplow in the first place.)So, if 150–250 years ago, your ancestors had land, it’s very likely that you are still indirectly benefiting from that today, even if there’s not a dollar in your bank account that can be directly traced to that land. You benefit in networking, opportunity, and the absence of sunk costs.So, if we back that all up to the original distribution of real property, policies that made it harder for non-whites to own land, or businesses, or have opportunities, or that actively dispossessed some non-whites of land, businesses, and opportunities that they already had, together massively disadvantaged non-whites.You were very much more likely to have ancestors that had that land, and the opportunities that came from the generational accumulation of opportunity, if you were white.You got to drive behind the snowplow.Fine, you say. What does that have to do with, say, a white person who immigrates today? We’ve ended most of those polices - there aren’t federal land grants, etc. anymore, right?And there’s some truth to that. If you’re a relatively recent newcomer to the U.S., this is probably less of a factor for you.But here’s the thing: you look like the people for whom that was a factor. You might have a name similar to theirs. You might speak English in a dialect that more closely matches theirs.All of that accumulated generational opportunity created something else, a snowplow of a different sort:Structural privilege“If I’d accidentally jostled the Baronet Pettur in the street while I was still barefoot and muddy, he could have horsewhipped me bloody, then called the constable to arrest me for being a public nuisance. The constable would have done it, too, with a smile and a nod.Let me try to say this more succinctly. In the Commonwealth, the gentry are people with power and money. In Vintas, the gentry have power and money and privilege. Many rules simply do not apply to them.” – Patrick Rothfuss, The Wise Man’s FearUnderstand first what privilege is. It’s not merely advantage. Privilege is the extent to which you are exempted from certain social rules.In the earlier days of the nation, there was a very overt structural privilege built on race. Literally. Under the Naturalization Act of 1790, non-whites were legally not allowed to own property, vote, or testify in court.[7] The notorious Dred Scott Supreme Court decision held that those of African descent could never become citizens, no matter what.[8]Those who argue against white privilege sometimes point to the fact that slavery was not a new institution. However, this generally fails to acknowledge that American slavery was particularly unique, and unique in its cruelty, in that it was built specifically on race and white supremacy.[9] Even the lowliest piece of white trash would always be systemically superior to blacks in this system.This was done purposefully because the people running that power structure were vastly outnumbered by the people they controlled. By creating a system where the people at the bottom of that power structure essentially policed themselves, the people at the top could avoid any unification and uprising against them. Whole fields of pseudo-science were created to try to prove the basis for this. Religion was corrupted to justify it.Even after the Civil War, institutional momentum tried to preserve this status quo, through black codes and Jim Crow,[10] through criminalization targeted at racial minorities,[11] and even through simple class warfare that disproportionately (and intentionally) impacted blacks more than whites.[12]All of this was designed for one simple purpose: to create a hidden system of social rules for non-whites that did not apply to whites, which preserved a social order of white supremacy.Today, we’ve made some strides in trying to at least legally abolish the overt structural racism. There’s various Civil Rights Acts, the Fair Housing Act, anti-poverty and affirmative action programs that are meant to balance out that generational accumulation of opportunity.Now, I didn’t actively participate in any of the creation and perpetuation of the systemic problems, for the most part. The vast majority of all this machinery was put into place long before I was ever born, and even the attempts to correct for it were started considerably before I came about.But it still exists. And I benefit from it.My life is easier because of both that generational accumulated opportunity and the systemic privilege.In terms of generational accumulated opportunity, I got to go to college. And law school. And I had a place to stay if needed, and parents who could backstop me if I had a sudden massive expense. I got a lot of these opportunities because I had parents who could afford to spend time with me as a kid, make sure that I did well in school, provided external opportunities to learn and grow, had a hobby farm where I could learn skills such as home construction, mechanical repair, woodworking, and much more.They got a lot of that opportunity to provide those opportunities for me because of the work of previous generations snowplowing the way for them.My family mostly covered my wedding, and we had numerous baby showers when my son was on his way. Just these two alone probably freed up nearly $20,000 for me. That all came from a bunch of people who all got to follow a snowplow of their own, and who could afford to put it together for us.Because of who my grandfathers and grandmothers and parents were, my name carries with it a certain reputation that opened doors. In my lifetime, there are over half a dozen employment opportunities that I got that I can directly trace to people who gave me a chance because of my family.Go back to the point where my family really started generationally accumulating that opportunity, just in the United States, and at least some of it is due to policies that advantaged them for being white.In terms of structural privilege, there are a whole host of social rules that do not apply to me because I am white.[13]I am far less likely to be stopped by the police.[14]I am far less likely for those rare, but routine police encounters to turn violent.[15]I am far less likely to face incarceration.[16]I am far less likely to be suspected of petty crimes such as shoplifting or drugs.[17]Nobody ever asks me where I am really from. Nobody ever suggests to me that I should head back to Germany. Nobody ever looks at me and wonders if I’m a citizen or illegal immigrant purely based on the color of my skin.If I, a lily-white Midwesterner said, “It all goes down tonight. It’s going to be a huge blast. People will be talking about this for years,” what do you picture? Could be a party, right?Go back and say it with a Middle-Eastern accent.[18]I’m more likely to be rented an apartment, and pay less in rent when I do.[19] I’m more likely to achieve upper management positions in corporations.[20] I’m more likely to be paid higher than equally qualified candidates of non-white ethnicities.[21] I’m more likely to get called back for a second interview. I’m more likely to get an interview.[22]Nobody asks me to buy something or leave at Starbucks, and nobody would ever call the cops on me if I didn’t.[23]Nobody would call the police because I was sleeping in the student lounge of the dorm I lived in.[24]These rules exist for people who are not white, and the application of these rules and my exemptions from them are predicated on my race. The rules my life operates on are fundamentally different than if I were not white.Now, does this mean I haven’t earned a damned thing in my life? No.Does it mean I should feel guilty over my life having been easier? Absolutely not.It just means I should recognize the ways I am following the snowplow.I didn’t make the snowplow. I didn’t hire the snowplow driver. I didn’t send the snowplow out to clear that road for me. That snowplow didn’t clear that path with me in mind in particular and would have cleared that path whether I existed or not.But now I drive on that road.It would be wrong of me to think that I earned that plowed road, or that I deserve that plowed road, or that I would have totally gotten everything I have now without that snowplow clearing the way for me, or that the snowplow never existed.It doesn’t negate what I have done, what I have earned, or the validity of the road I have traveled to acknowledge that it was a hell of a lot easier than it is for others driving down a road that hasn’t been snowplowed, or worse, plowed in.So, what does it mean?In more civilized times, we called it noblesse oblige.[25]I was also lucky over this weekend, because one of my family members had a snowblower that hadn’t been used in years. He was going to throw it out. He’d barely ever used it because his neighbor has an ATV with a plow on it and just does his driveway for him. I asked if I could buy it from him, and he told me to just take it. If I could get it running, it was mine.I’ve been shoveling this whole time, and it’s wearing on me. I busted up my shoulder and my back playing rugby in college, and I’m getting old and fat and out of shape. And me being outside shoveling means my wife is in the house taking care of our kid, and she’s so exhausted, I try to take whatever shifts I can.I don’t have much spare income for a snowblower right now. I’d been dreaming about one, but it just wasn’t really in the cards at the moment. And our driveway is small enough that I couldn’t justify the hundreds of dollars, even for a used one.So, this was a godsend if it worked.All I ended up having to do was clean some leaves out of the tank and put some fresh gas in, which my father in law did for me while we were visiting. It started right up and runs perfectly.When I got home from that long trip, I still had to plow out our driveway. We didn’t get nearly as much as my in-laws, but still got about 5–6 inches. And, the town had gone through with the plow and dumped a big ridge in my driveway, enough that I didn’t want to pack it down before getting my wife and son in the house. I shoveled a quick path for them, and then set to work snowblowing the driveway with my new snowblower. It took me probably a third of the time it took to shovel and was so much easier. May God smile upon the inventor of the snowblower, for he is an unsung hero of the world.Now, I could have just stopped when I done with our driveway and put it away until the next time it snows.But our neighbor is going through a divorce, and she is essentially a single mom with four kids, one of whom has some serious health issues. She’s doing everything she can to stay afloat. She doesn’t have a garage with her house, so I let her have access to our garage to use our tools like the mower and shovel.She just needs a little landing pad for her minivan and a path to her door. She’d already borrowed our shovel and cleared some of it out, but she wasn’t able to do a lot. Not a knock against her; it was that wet, heavy heart-attack snow and she doesn’t have that much time for these things.I took the snowblower over and cleared that out some more for her. I cleaned up the piles next to the end of the driveway that she might have backed into on her way out. I dug it down to the concrete pathway so it wasn’t so slick. I ground down the packed ridge from the town plow. I widened out the spot where she was parked so her kids could get in and out a little easier without having to step through the snow to get in the car.Really, it took me maybe ten minutes and twenty cents’ worth of mixed gas.For her, it would have been another half-hour of labor, or hundreds of dollars for a snowblower of her own, which she would have had no place to store.It cost me virtually nothing, because of a snowplow that I got to drive behind. It would have cost her a lot more, because she doesn’t have that particular snowplow.That’s what acknowledging that life is easier is. Nothing more, nothing less.It’s realizing that not everyone got to drive behind the snowplow.It’s advocating for others who don’t get to drive behind the snowplow to have it at least a little easier.It’s not just trying to be nice to everyone, but being good to them.It’s actively working to grant others the same kind of life you enjoy for free.It’s using your place of privilege to make the world a little better.It’s being aware that you can make the world a little better.It’s using that privilege responsibly to help pay it forward. To help plow someone else out who needs it. To make their life at least a little bit closer to as easy as you’ve got it.To make the world just a little bit more fair.I didn’t deserve that snowblower.But I have it.I might as well do some good with it.I have other pictures here, but someone will comment that it was long and there wasn’t an animal at the end. Fine. Here. Enjoy this dog who apparently snowblows the driveway.Mostly Standard Addendum and Disclaimer: read this before you comment.Every time I write about this kind of stuff, it brings out a certain segment of the population.I welcome rational, reasoned debate on the merits with reliable, credible sources.But coming on here and calling me names, pissing and moaning about how biased I am, etcetera and so forth, will result in a swift one-way frogmarch out the airlock. Doing the same to others will result in the same treatment.Essentially, act like an adult and don’t be a dick about it.This kind of nonsense:will earn a special place in the annals of mockery while they howl at the void.I’m done with warnings. If you have to consider whether or not you’re over the line, the answer is most likely yes. I’ll just delete your comment and probably block you, and frankly, I won’t lose an ounce of sleep over it.Being a special kind of dick like the one above might earn you a place in the Hall of Shame, so I suppose if you plan to be a dick, you might as well go full out and make it worthwhile.Debate responsibly.Footnotes[1] Bomb cyclone: Even bigger storm slams Minnesota this weekend[2] History and Overview of the Land Grant College System[3] US Government Land Grants[4] The Social Distribution of Landed Property in England Since the Sixteenth Century[5] https://lawreview.vermontlaw.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/johnson2.pdf[6] The Pencilsword: On a plate[7] The Volatile History of U.S. Immigration[8] {{meta.pageTitle}}[9] The Invention of Race | Specials | WNYC[10] Black Codes and Pig Laws | Slavery By Another Name Bento | PBS[11] The New Jim Crow[12] Exclusive: Lee Atwater’s Infamous 1981 Interview on the Southern Strategy[13] Peter Kruger's answer to Do you believe in "white privilege"? Have you ever witnessed/experienced it?[14] The Stanford Open Policing Project[15] After Ferguson, black men still face the highest risk of being killed by police[16] A Mass Incarceration Mystery[17] https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6419&context=jclc[18] The Axis of Evil Comedy Tour (Video 2008) - IMDb[19] Analysis: African-Americans pay more for rent, especially in white neighborhoods[20] The Relationship of Race and Gender to Managers' Ratings of Promotion Potential[21] African Americans are paid less than whites at every education level[22] Employers' Replies to Racial Names[23] Wrongfully arrested at Philadelphia Starbucks, two black men seek to turn an injustice into good[24] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2018/05/10/a-black-yale-student-fell-asleep-in-her-dorms-common-room-a-white-student-called-police/[25] Definition of NOBLESSE OBLIGE

** This answer has been edited for clarity, and to include some additional information from those who have taken the time to share their comments.Also, our fellow Quoran Milt Rudy shared a fascinating video in his comment below. I encourage any member of the forum with interest in this topic to give it a look, as it contains some additional, and very helpful, advice from a law professor. It's 46 minutes long but, trust me, the knowledge you'll gain will prove extremely valuable when dealing with the police.New NMA membership fees have increased to $42, and gift memberships are now $25. My post has been corrected to include the updated rates. **__________________________I'm NOT a lawyer, but I'm going to pass along the advice I received from the late, great Howard Grimm, Esquire (Howard Grimm was, if not THE best, one of the best attorneys who ever practiced law).1). Never plead guilty to ANYTHING, not even a parking ticket.2). Force the prosecutor and police to do their jobs and PROVE you're guilty, and make it as expensive as possible for them to do so. File motions to continue, Change of Venue motions, writs demanding verification of sources or chains of custody for any evidence they claim to have against you, and pore through the Probable Cause Affidavit with a fine-tooth comb, challenging everything that's based on any police officer's “observations” or “beliefs” (i.e., “Officer Blowhard observed what he believed were green flecks of marijuana residue on the defendant's shirt …”).3). *(NOTE: This may no longer work in every state, due to updated legislation.) *At your arraignment, claim indigence; let the court appoint a public defender for you. Give him or her all the information pertaining only to the P.C. affidavit. Once a trial date has been set on a docket, you'll know the name of the judge. Fire your public defender and hire the best attorney in your area. Now that you have a trial date, most of the expensive stuff is already done, so except for the odd deposition or annoyance motion, you'll just be paying your new attorney's hourly rate.4). MAKE SURE YOU PAY YOUR LAWYER ON THE DAY OR DATE AGREED UPON. Don't make up excuses; mortgage your home, put off your other bills for a month or two, borrow from friends and family if you must, but make sure your lawyer is paid ON TIME. This is just cheap insurance; if you ever need a good lawyer in the future, he or she is more likely to take your case because he or she knows you'll pay your bill when it’s due. There are other benefits to this, too. Years ago, when I was a young man, I was pulled over for an expired inspection sticker (Indiana no longer requires annual vehicle inspections). The cop was being a real smartass, asking me if I was mentally retarded or just stupid, asking my then-girlfriend if she was my sister, just trying to make me angry to escalate the situation. I just smiled and chuckled a little. “You think this is funny?” he asked, and I nodded. “Okay, then; I'm also going to write you up for no brake lights and driving an unsafe vehicle. We'll see how funny you think it is when you pay the fine and court costs.” My brake lights worked just fine, and my inspection was scheduled for the following day at Campbell's Garage. “I'm sure my attorney will handle it,” I told him. “Oh yeah? And who's your lawyer?” he asked. “John Grimm,” I replied (Howard's son, an excellent attorney in his own right, who had a reputation for destroying police officers' testimony while on the witness stand. He even had a few charged with perjury although, to my knowledge, none were ever convicted or even went to trial). The cop tore the half-written ticket from his book, wadded it up and shoved it into his pocket. “Son of a … Forget it! Have a nice day,” he huffed. He got back into his car and sprayed gravel everywhere as he drove off. Incidentally, John really was my lawyer. He negotiated a very nice settlement for me in a landlord-tenant dispute, handled a Workman's Comp claim for me and had two frivolous speeding tickets dismissed (both were for less than five mph over). He charged me $75 for each of the tickets, but I figure I saved more than that in insurance rate hikes.5). NEVER go to trial with a P.D. (Public Defender). They make the same $240 per case whether you're convicted or not, so they have no vested interest in your exhoneration. Also, they'll try desperately to convince you to sign whatever plea deal the prosecutor puts on the table. Being tapped by the prosecutor is any P.D.’s ticket out of the public defender's office and their overwhelming caseloads; those who play ball are more likely to be hired as deputy prosecutors, which means regular hours, an actual paycheck and expense account, state-funded health insurance and prosecutorial immunity.6). If you're called to testify, answer the question that was asked, and then STOP ANSWERING THE QUESTION. Don't expound or volunteer additional details unless you're specifically asked to do so via another question. If you're asked a yes-or-no question, pause for a few seconds in case your attorney might make an objection, and then answer, “Yes,” or “No.” Force the prosecutor to drag every single tidbit of information out of you; this practice will eventually rattle most prosecutors, and when he's frustrated, he's more likely to overlook something or to make a mistake your attorney can exploit to your advantage. Even under direct questioning by your own attorney, you should pause for a few seconds before you answer; it makes you appear thoughtful.7). Be CONFIDENT, but not arrogant. Wear a jacket and tie to court; DON'T wear an Armani suit. Look the judge or jurors in the eye, and speak directly to them while testifying. Make eye contact with every juror on the panel. If you're asked to explain something, be sincere, and imagine you're telling your story to your best friend over a cup of coffee. It's okay to laugh or to chuckle during those times when it's appropriate while relating your account; it puts the judge or jury at ease, and makes your version of events more believable. Cops are always very clincal when testifying, using words like “vehicle” instead of “car,” “I observed” rather than “I saw,” “my assigned commission” in place of “the squad car” and “deadly weapon” instead of “sandwich,” “cell phone” or “toothbrush.” Jurors don't speak that way, and you shouldn't either, because they really aren't impressed when cops try to talk down to them. I once heard a police officer testify, “I placed the suspect in restraints for his own safety because, at that point in time, I couldn't be certain of the circumstance which had currently perspired.” [sic] What he meant was, “I handcuffed the suspect because I didn't know what had happened (transpired).” Don't try to talk like a cop; you'll only alienate yourself from the jury. Just be sincere and tell the court what happened in plain language.8). If a police officer lies on the witness stand, don't be afraid to point that out. When my brother was arrested for DUI, the cop said he failed his field sobriety test, and added “He blew a point one-two on the portable field breath test.” In fact, my brother and I each had ONE glass of wine with our steak dinner at Logan's Steakhouse so, when I was called to testify, I told the judge, “This guy missed his true calling, Your Honor. He should have been a writer, because that's some of the best fiction I've ever heard.” The judge actually laughed and asked me, “Was your brother drunk?” I replied, “Not even close. I spent thirteen years in the Navy, Your Honor, and a lot of my off-duty time was spent in various E-clubs. My little brother can drink me under the table, so I'm certain he was not impaired in any way by having one glass of wine with dinner. I had a glass of the same wine, so why did the officer ask me to drive Mike's car home without even smelling my breath?” After our server testified, my brother was found Not Guilty, because he KNEW the cop was lying through his teeth.9). NEVER consent to a warrantless search, neither of your vehicle nor of your home or property. If a police officer shows up at your door and wants to talk to you, speak to him through the locked screen door, if you have one. If not, speak to him (or her - sorry), through your locked door. If he or she says they can't hear you, just say, “Go around to the side of the house and I'll open the window a crack.” If you're questioned about anything, say, “I'll be happy to answer any questions you care to ask, but only in the presence of my attorney. I don't know why you're here, and I don't want to be misquoted. If you're going to ask me anything, I want my lawyer to witness my answers. Leave your card in my mailbox, and I'll call you with my attorney's address when I have an appointment.” If they approach you on the street and ask anything besides your name, don't answer. Instead, ask, “Am I under arrest?” If they say no, then tell them, “This conversation just came to an end. If you want to question me, you'll either have to arrest me now, or meet me at my attorney's office at his (or her) convenience.”Just as a quick sidebar, I should mention that I have six video cameras in my truck. Some are in plain sight; I have a dash cam in the windshield and one in the back window, and a pinhole camera in each of the back corners (which record to a hard drive, locked securely beneath the floorboard under the back seat). I also have two more in covert locations, just in case the others are confiscated and “accidentally” or “inadvertently” lost, damaged or erased. Two of those cameras stream live video to a web site on a dedicated server whenever I'm in the truck, even when the ignition is turned off. The cops might find all of my cameras if my truck is ever impounded, but they won't get the evidence. All have microphones, too (except the two pinhole cameras), and display the date and time on the recorded video. I have a camera in my sunglasses, and I carry a pen-camera in my shirt pocket, which is activated with a simple push of a button. I'm not a drug dealer or a criminal; I have a very good reason for this level of concern, which I might reveal in a future post.And finally …10). NEVER, and I mean NEVER, EVER, lie to your lawyer. Tell him or her EVERY LITTLE DETAIL, no matter how embarrassing it might be. It's his or her job to decide what to pursue and what to omit. Omitting any part of the factual details will likely come back to haunt you at the least convenient moment, and your credibility will be destroyed beyond repair. Your attorney doesn't like those types of surprises, because it makes you both look foolish. If your lie or omission is revealed in court, the jury (or judge) will have already convicted you before they even begin to deliberate your fate; if you lied about that, you're probably lying about something (or everything) else. They will prefer to err on the side of caution and find you guilty every time. Your lawyer isn't going to gossip about you (that's why the “lawyer/ client privelidge” is held inviolate), so come clean and spill your guts during your second meeting. The first, the initial consultation, should be a “broad-stroke” explanation of your case. Once he or she has accepted your case and you've signed the agreement, you should say, “I'd like the first available appointment so I can give you all the details.” In the meantime, gather up all your paperwork, write down the names and contact information of any witnesses you believe could help, and take pictures of the scene, any nearby landmarks and of anything else that might be considered material evidence (such as skid marks, tire tracks, damage to your car, visible footprints or whatever might help to reinforce your version of events). Print those pictures, write the details in block letters on the back of each image and give them all to your attorney. Again, let him or her decide which ones will be used in court. If he or she doesn't use some, or even any, of them, that's okay; it's better to have them and not need them, than to need them and not have them.Howard taught me a few other secrets, which I'll keep to myself for the time being (I don't want to give away the farm, so to speak).I guess I should add this disclaimer:The above is not intended to be, nor should it be taken as, legal advice. I've simply shared some of the things I learned from a man who knew his way around around a courtroom. Howard Grimm never tried to sugar-coat American jurisprudence, and he had three sons who were also very aggressive in matters of law. Police officers do not exist to protect us from harm. American courts all over the nation have long held that a police officer has no duty or obligation to put himself in harm's way to protect a citizen. In my opinion … I'll repeat that more loudly for those who are already upset from reading this post … IN MY OPINION, the police in the United States comprise the best-equipped, best-organized and largest criminal gang our nation has ever produced, and they only exist to protect each other from civilian redress when we're victimized by them. To be fair, this is a general, albeit personal, observation; I'm sure there are a few out there who believe themselves to be “good cops.” However, I believe that if any police officer has been on the force for more than a week, then he has either committed a violation of statutory or constitutional law or, if he hasn't done so personally, he knows of someone on the same force or within the same precinct who has committed such violations.Again, I'll point out that my opinions aren't borne out of something I heard Rush or Hannity say on the radio; these are my own beliefs, borne from my own bitter and disheartening experience with law enforcement officers, so don't waste your time or mine writing comments telling me how wrong I am or how tough your job is. Such comments will be deleted immediately. Want to change my mind? Give me my $80,000 back and I'll consider it. Short of that, I have no interest in reading any defense you might offer here on the forum, so you may direct your comments to my attorney of record. Your job is tough because you (or your colleagues) have made it that way, and now, with the advent of smart phones that ensure most citizens have a means to record what you're really up to, the blue curtain you've hidden behind for decades is finally being lifted.TL;DR:Bottom line? Don't trust police officers, prosecutors or elected officials. If any of the aforementioned tell you, “I just want to help you,” they're most likely lying to you, because it's perfectly legal for any of them to do that. If you lie to them, though, it's a criminal offense. That alone should illustrate the one-sided “us vs. them” environment they've created in this country.I'll wrap this up with one final recommendation for my fellow Quorans: Join the National Motorists Association (just Google motorists.org). It's $42 a year ($25 for a gift membership), they're non-profit and they REALLY look out for their members. If you get a speeding ticket, they have tons of reference materials they'll loan you for free that will help you prepare and win your case (or you can buy them if you want to keep them on hand). If you take a speeding ticket to court and lose, the NMA will reimburse you up to $150 in cash (one ticket per year). Don't take my word for it; just check out their web site - it's all there in writing. Another thing I like about the NMA is that they answer their own phones! When you call them, you won't get a call center rep who routes your call back to someone who will pass along your message; you'll be speaking with someone who is actually sitting in the NMA office, and prepared to answer your concerns or to help you decide how to handle that traffic infraction. I've been a member for nearly twenty years, and I donate to them whenever I can.Sorry for the long-winded diatribe; this is the longest answer I've ever posted on Quora, so thanks for letting me vent, and good luck to all.*EDIT:Okay, first of all, I just got off the phone with Kelly at the NMA. Membership fees have increased to $42, and gift memberships are now $25. I often give away gift memberships (10 in 2017), and the NMA extends my membership by a few months for every gift I make to someone. When I first joined many years ago, it was twenty bucks a year, but I guess everything is more expensive now than it was back then. I apologize for this oversight, and I've made the necessary correction in my post above (although it might still be incorrect in some of my responses to a few commenters).Moving on …While most of the comments I've received from those who have read this post have been positive, I'm catching some flak from a few others who have correctly pointed out that some of the above recommendations won't work out for everyone in every state. For example:If you live in one of the Commonwealth states (Kentucky, Virginia, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania), some of these strategies may not be available to you. Claiming indigence, for example, apparently doesn't work in Virginia, according to one commenter.Also, I want to emphasize that I am not an attorney, and this post is intended only to outline various tactics I've employed in my personal legal proceedings, both civil and criminal, which were related to me by a very successful attorney.I don't have a criminal record, although I was arrested for two felony counts in 2006 (I was acquitted of all charges at trial, and I have since had the arrest expunged).As one commenter (a practicing attorney) pointed out, there ARE times when a defendant should consider accepting a plea bargain. For example:I worked at a liquor store here in Fort Wayne when I was young. One night after closing, a burglar chopped a hole in the roof and became wedged in a ventilation duct. I heard him calling for help the next morning when I opened the store, called the fire department to have him extracted, and then called the owner of the store and apprised him of the situation. The owner arrived with the police in tow, and the would-be burglar was arrested the moment his feet touched solid ground.Under similar or comparable circumstances, of course, it should be obvious that any offer the prosecutor might make would be in the defendant's best interest.However, if you're ever arrested for a crime for which you KNOW you're innocent, I remain adamant that you should NOT accept a plea bargain. While it's possible you might be convicted at trial, even when you're innocent, it's just as likely that you will be acquitted.When a defendant's trial begins, his chances of conviction or acquittal are exactly 50/50. As the trial progresses, the pendulum will swing both ways during witness testimony. There are two major factors which will ultimately decide your fate:1). The eveidence against you (including witness testimony), whether it's bona fide or manufactured and,2). Which attorney's argument the judge or jury finds more convincing or credible.Before the attorneys here tear me a new one, I will state that there ARE other factors which come into play, but those two are the major ones.Most members here, I hope, will never face a criminal trial. Even so, most of you will receive the occasional parking ticket or traffic citation (speeding, dim license plate light, headlight/ brake light out, no seat belt or similar nonsense).Lawyers will tell me I'm full of it but, personally speaking, I NEVER just whip out my checkbook and pay the fine without forcing the prosecutor to relinquish a significant amount of his annual budget to prove I'm guilty; I'll waste as much of the state's money as I can. Since 2006, the police have mostly left me alone, because they know I’M GOING TO FIGHT BACK. The few times I have been stopped, they immediately dropped their adversarial attitude the moment I pointed out the video system I've installed in my truck which, incidentally, I keep in excellent repair.I have successfully utilized EVERY SINGLE ONE of the tactics I've outlined above at different times in my life, and I STILL recommend them. However, please use your God-given common sense to realize the laws may be different where you live, so some of them might still work for you, while others may not apply.If you get a traffic citation, do yourself a favor and call the National Motorists Association at (608) 849–6000. You'll be required to join for a year, but that'll be the best forty bucks you'll ever invest. The NMA will do everything in their considerable power to help you fight that ticket yourself and WIN, without having to hire an attorney.Also, I hope you'll read the input from other Quorans who have taken the time to comment on this post, as you'll find some very valuable information there. I'm not ashamed to admit I've learned a few things from them, and I'm grateful to all of you who have shared your knowledge and experience.Fred