When Alexander, who is white, drives his car over the speed limit, a police officer lets him off with a warning. When Christopher, who is Hispanic, drives his car at the same speed as Alexander on the same road, the officer gives him a ticket, even though his record is clean. This is an example of:

White Privilege.

Explanation:

White privilege is a privilege or advantage that white people have over their fellow citizens just because of their skin color. This societal prejudice over the non-whites by the whites is also a form of racism, though it may not seem as serious as the black racism.

Considering the given example, the 'white' Alexander isn't fined and let off with just a simple warning. But the case was different for 'non-white' Hispanic Christopher who did the same offence but ended with a ticket and not a warning like Alexander. This is a clear case of white privilege that the policeman was practicing, giving advantage to the whites and acting otherwise with non-whites. Even though everyone have the same rights and political, social and economical circumstances, the whites are prioritized over the non-whites just because of their fair skins.

faulty parallelism is a construction in which two or more parts of a sentence are equivalent in meaning but not grammatically similar in form.

the correct version of this faulty parallelism in the sentence is:

the hikers knew that the hike was six miles, that it usually required the entire day, and it would not be wise to start after 10: 00 a.m.

the problem is the last sentence, the first two have a basic subject+verb+object structure.

so, to give a proper balance to the structure, or better said, to give a parallel structure, we must write a basic s+v+o structure in all three sentences:

the hikers knew that the hike was six miles, that it usually required the entire day, and it would not be wise to start after 10: 00 a.m.