I'd say being impoverished, being imprisoned, and being executed are not 'hardships' worth glossing over in favor of looking at the bigger picture. At that point, the difference in hardship between centuries ago and today become very difficult to discern. They're fucking travesties; cataclysmic events that reflect very poorly upon this country. You cannot experience these things and look at your country in the same way as those who have the privilege to glamorize our state of affairs based on long-term goals and lofty ideals, without ever having to worry about what they're going to eat or if they will live to see the next day.
Firstly, let's assume I'm a minority. Can we proceed now, because mine is not a position exclusive to white privilege as you're insinuating. What would your approach and argument be if I were black? Do you think it's impossible for a minority to be proud of America? Genuinely curious.
Secondly, would you take the position it wasn't worth people like Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi to "
gloss over" hardships for their cause? Neither of them did so, I'm not either, I'm only arguing hardships are subservient to the greater ideal that fights to rectify them. Both the above understood that the benefit the ideal would grant was far more of paramount importance than the hardship to the individual in the moment.
Finally, people were literal property centuries ago. Subjugated, sold, whipped, raped, tortured, murdered....incomprehensibly horrific treatment on a daily basis for years and years on end. As I've said numerous times now, there's still much room to improve, but I in no way believe today's America is even
remotely the same as it was back then in terms of civil liberties for minorities. It's not difficult to discern in the slightest, unless you'd be content with living in America centuries ago as opposed to today? I'm highly doubtful you would.