pull down to refresh
Why would you interpret "not a DEI group" as "white and male"?
Honest answer?
Because I watched the video.
I also look at this administration’s policies, from the federal government, to leveraging private institutions, to using contract law against race-conscious self-help programs, to challenging race-neutral admissions policies when they are intended to increase racial diversity.
That is far too broad to honestly reduce to:
“the federal government should not be setting racial quotas.”
The old system was broad and dismantling it is complicated. Because just like Jim Crow, the federal government has limited jurisdiction and ability to take down every stupid law that you put up. The new system, "ignore race and focus on producing market value" is very simple.
Race-conscious means there is no American people and we perpetuate a blood fued forever. It doesn't work for governing a multiracial society, much less one that was founded on a rejection of historical claims and grand narratives being used to collect taxes from individuals who don't share that history.
And your idea of race-conciousness is entirely based on superficial appearances. Gavin Newsom isn't just "white." He has English-Canadian ancestry. As an English-American I might as well be getting reparations from him for treason committed in 1776 if we want to play the ancestral vengeance game.
The persistent present effects of past racial injustice cannot be repaired by equal treatment alone. As the video I posted shows, that is not enough to repair what remains.
The persistent present effects of past racial injustice cannot be repaired by equal treatment alone.
That's based on your subjective feelings. What does "repair" mean? Why not just get rid of the race in question if you feel like the discrimination never ends?
That's based on your subjective feelings.
No. It's arithmetic. Equal treatment from unequal starting points does not erase the gap. Wealth compounds, advantages are inherited, and so are disadvantages.
Treating everyone equally today does not make yesterday's accumulated inequality disappear.
So at the very least, allow us to help ourselves without using contract law to stop those efforts.
It's arithmetic. Equal treatment from unequal starting points does not erase the gap. Wealth compounds, advantages are inherited, and so are disadvantages.
That's how it should be. On a national level you as an English speaker and US citizen are inheriting these kinds of advantages. But for you to say that's not good enough and demand an equal footing to white Americans puts all those other inequalities that you benefit from in jeopardy.
So at the very least, allow us to help ourselves without using contract law to stop those efforts.
That is what's happening. We're dismantling the federal government's ability to do anything about anything. If we separate economy from state then no racial discrimination is feasible.
That is what's happening. We're dismantling the federal government's ability to do anything about anything. If we separate economy from state then no racial discrimination is feasible.
That isn't what is happening. #1546689
Then you shouldn't have treaded. It's too late now. Vengeance was normalized and insisted on, you're still insisting on it, so now the other side wants their revenge too, and there's no moderates left to help you. How did you expect this to go?
You are better off from being born into a system where the answer is "tough luck"
Even though you couldn't come out and say it cleanly. I respect the fact that you tried.
Enough for me. At least you vaguely acknowledge that is what is being said.
The system was explicitly race-conscious when it created and administered inequality. Declaring the system race-blind afterward does not automatically erase the consequences of what that system produced.
The system was explicitly race-conscious when it created and administered inequality.
Okay, so we're punishing people for the sins of their ancestors? Got it.
Declaring the system race-blind afterward does not automatically erase the consequences of what that system produced.
We're not "declaring" it race blind. We're rewriting the law so that it is race-blind. The system is Bitcoin. It's not going to block you from a transaction because of your race.
It does put you at a disadvantage depending on the wealth accumulated by your parents. Do you want to abolish wealth inheritance? Do you want your children to have to start from zero or do you want them to have an advantage over the rest of the world by virtue of being American citizens?
Now we’re talking. You acknowledge there are
disadvantages depending on the wealth accumulated by your parents.
So the wealth gap created by racial inequality has to matter too, if we’re being honest.
If your answer is “tough luck,” I get it. But say it out loud. I can respect someone who owns that position.
If inherited advantage is real, inherited disadvantage is too.
No, my first answer is, "here's some money, now go away." But after three or four generations the answer changes to "go away" because it's become obvious that no amount of reparations are going to be enough for you to stop asking.
US citizenship is an inherited advantage from a global perspective. You are better off from being born into a system where the answer is "tough luck" because your society overall will get richer if we're not forced to waste time micromanaging everyone's wealth to satisfy your historical grievances.
Why would you interpret "not a DEI group" as "white and male"? As opposed to just, "people that don't support Marxists theories of racial justice"?
It is righteous policy and not racial. The policy being implemented on the books is race-blind meritocracy.
It is.
They are.
Trump didn't get elected by campaigning on racism to win 80% of the White vote. He won 57% of Whites, 46% of Latinos, 40% of Asians, and 55% of Other through an ideological argument that the federal government should not be setting racial quotas.