-
@antipodean said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
Proposition 16 aimed..
“to end and correct the effects of a specific form of discrimination" through "good-faith efforts ... to identify, select, and train potentially qualified minorities and women".[6] In the context of higher education admissions, these efforts may not include overt quotas as the Supreme Court has ruled them unconstitutional “Such good faith efforts that reduces the ability to get into Harvard to increase African American and Hispanic representation which resulted in Asians being judged lower in subjective criteria, namely certain personality traits. A difference the appeals judge admitted was statistically significant, i.e. not as a result of chance.
I agree that it was these flaws that saw the proposal rejected. I'm not advocating the proposal here, just debating over whether a supporter of the proposal can be described as racist.
Also discussing whether the concept of the proposal is out of line with general western thinking. -
Much the same argument exists in Australia and more specifically it's enshrined in our Constitution. It's the power the Federal Government relied upon to conduct its intervention in the NT.
Specifically subsection 26 of section 51 - 'the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws'. More worrisome is we still have section 25 - 'Provision as to races disqualified from voting'.
-
@Tim said in US Politics:
Biden pick to head DOJ Civil Rights Division wrote Blacks had 'superior physical and mental abilities'
That plus this:
Doesn't fill me with confidence that he is not beholden to the radicals of the party
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@MajorRage said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@NTA said in US Politics:
In an email obtained by BuzzFeed News, an AWS Trust and Safety team told Parler Chief Policy Officer Amy Peikoff that the calls for violence propagating across the social network violated its terms of service. Amazon said it was unconvinced that the service’s plan to use volunteers to moderate calls for violence and hate speech would be effective.
That's pretty laughable from AWS who've successfully argued against being held liable for content on their platforms. It's either cartel behaviour to shut down a new market entrant, some pretty amazing double standards or sucking up to the new administration. Probably all three.
So let the Ayatollah go nuts. He's not getting the kind of coverage / trouble that 88M followers gets you.
Unregulated, unaccountable, inconsistent censorship based on follower numbers and market share? What could possibly go wrong?
Well, if they want to suck up to Biden, best to sack all white men. He's made it perfectly clear that he's priorities are non-whites and woman.
And the US now has a Vice President who actively campaigns for discrimination against people on the basis of skin colour to be made legal
I think you mean from next week.
The current VP has a history of discrimination of a different kind:
Absolutely nothing in that article to show he favours discrimination at all - unlike Harris. Just that he once wrote a letter opposing gay marriage and one or two Democrats saying, well, he's not a Democrat.
But the sheer ignorance of the author on Bush's hugely-successful African AIDS program (PEPFAR) is breath-taking. Abstinence was included in that program as some African countries, many being deeply & almost fundamentally Christian, demanded it. Bush rightly thought it more important to actually get HIV drugs to Africans rather than virtual signal. Pence was right to support it and should be applauded for it.
Not going to be sidetracked. Pence's views on homosexuality is not a secret.
-
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
@Tim said in US Politics:
Biden pick to head DOJ Civil Rights Division wrote Blacks had 'superior physical and mental abilities'
That plus this:
Doesn't fill me with confidence that he is not beholden to the radicals of the party
Not the only ones going after ethnic votes:
-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
@Tim said in US Politics:
Biden pick to head DOJ Civil Rights Division wrote Blacks had 'superior physical and mental abilities'
That plus this:
Doesn't fill me with confidence that he is not beholden to the radicals of the party
Not the only ones going after ethnic votes:
Did you not argue that those with power in the Dems are moderate? I'd argue that playing identity politics like that, which is something Trump did as well, makes them pretty far from 'moderate'.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew you don't think there is any place for "righting" past wrongs? giving a leg up to those that may be starting from a less fortunate position because of the wrong done to previous generations of their family?
You mean like the Jews? 🤔
Oh, sorry, doesn't fit the flimsy "historical principle" or are they just not fashionable in 2021? Wrong skin colour probably.
-
@Kiwiwomble no race of people has suffered more throughout history than the Jews. Just making sure they're included in the new adjustment measures alongside the blacks. Righting past wrongs was the criteria wasn't it?
-
@Siam so unless you help everyone at the same time you shouldn’t help anyone? This is the “silver bullet” attitude i was talking about
It’s a BS argument to avoid doing anything because someone will always find a “yeah but how about this”
Saying one group of people deserves something doesn’t mean another doesn’t also
Using the specific theme of this thread, do we think the Jewish people have been treated as poorly as people of colour in America? We’re talking about actions the US government could/have taken aren’t we so we should limit it to the US
-
@Kiwiwomble agreed. So how about we treat everybody as individuals and assess each as individuals and provide resources and opportunities from there, completely irrespective of immutable characteristics? e.g. race, sex, orientation, history etc. No groups, just individual people.
-
@Siam I have already conceded that is obviously the “best” way to do it
The comment you’ve picked out is that start of a convo
But people are just playing dumb if they can’t see that the best way to fix things is infinitely harder than a much more flawed “group” approach, and easy to talk about waiting and doing it “right” when we we might not be the ones needing the help
-
@Kiwiwomble Hasn't the US been helping the Jewish nation since 1947, in backing it up against it's Arab neighbours?
-
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@canefan that might have been meant for siam
I was just interjecting to say something. This is the way (of the Fern).
-
@Kiwiwomble said in US Politics:
@Siam I have already conceded that is obviously the “best” way to do it
The comment you’ve picked out is that start of a convo
But people are just playing dumb if they can’t see that the best way to fix things is infinitely harder than a much more flawed “group” approach, and easy to talk about waiting and doing it “right” when we we might not be the ones needing the help
I can appreciate the desire and need to do something useful and helpful to address the obvious inequalities staring us in the face seemingly everyday.
I'd rather sway away from a solution with subjective assessment of an individual by the arbitrary group he's in, as it's core principle.
We must have better definitions for those we wish to help. The solution must be applied on today's circumstances and universally cater for all who need it. It can't be skin colour because we'll just be racist to poor white people instead of poor black people.
If anything the solutions should be based around income and wealth differences, not skin colour ones.
The goal is to provide all with lives of equal opportunities, a high standard of outcomes, all at the expense of no one in particular, right?
The social engineering like proposition 16 are doomed to fail (designed to fail actually), because they never have definitions. Every single moving part comes down to someone's interpretation. No variables are fixed with group identity politics - every decision needs an arbiter. The whole system needs people in charge of it's application. That's enticing to bad faith actors.
E.g. proposition 16. Who does this apply to?
How black? Skin colour? Genetic percentage? Who gets left out of the opportunity?
Historical oppression? Just American slaves? Kurds allowed? How many years back? All ancestors of slaves?I'm saying don't even ever give the grouping of people in 2021 by race or skin colour any oxygen as a means to assess government help for it's citizens.
Never group by characteristics you were born with. Something no one can control. That's not how public policy should be drafted.
Assess by opportunities and income, then be fair dinkum about fixing them.
I agree it's clear where the problem areas are, and a genuine reluctance for those with the financial resources to mend things has also been stark. Yes something needs to be done but the foundations for deciding who needs help must be rational.
In 2021 skin colour is the least interesting and revealing thing about a person. Don't continue to make it the difference between a good life and a shit life, again.
-
When somebody says their priority is this, it means that if they strike two things in the same situation but only have resource to help one, they will help this one.
Thus if your small business is struggling and it's white man owned, it won't get as much help due to racial and sex profiling. Which is what we've spent the last 100 years hearing is a very bad thing.
I certainly don't agree with what happened on Capitol Hill & Trumps' comments around it, but if you look at the above, it does add some context to what they were trying to achieve, doesn't it?
-
@Siam said in US Politics:
@MajorRage How great would it have been if Biden made a point of "every suffering American" instead of deliberately including and thus omitting particular arbitrary groups?
(sigh...)Buying votes at a time when he doesn't need to buy votes as the election is already done?
Either that or he will genuinely avenue public funds away from white people.
US Politics