91–100 of 906 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there are any historical examples of racial discrimination justified by invoking evolution. This argument is hilarious but this is not a turn I expected it to take.
I trust you do understand the distinction between the nature of this use vs past.
The important thing is establishing that one group has too many resources which rightfully belong to some other group. The rest is implementation detail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's more like requiring everyone submitting papers to the ACM to explain how their research will result in a more equitable society. That'd exclude a ton of research topics: how is a faster rendering technique going to result in anti-racist outcomes? I guess you cant submit that paper.
Faster renders favour people in socioeconomically deprived areas who lack higher-end resources and thus face a barrier to entry in the field. Boom. Submit.
Back then, it was advisable to stuff quotes by Marx or Lenin into everything, even an article discussing milk production.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh, okay, so, to clarify my understanding, because of the quotas, assuming a fixed amount of available spots, less Asians get in than they would without the quotas. But a) wouldn't that apply to other demographics too? and b) All Asians? Are Hmong, for example, over-represented in college enrollments? I'm just trying to understand why it's specifically anti-Asian.
It isn't specifically "anti-Asian". A bunch of pro-diversity people see white people do well and get successful. They see the same in Asians. They see the opposite for black and latino. They conclude "we must give black and latino preferential treatment to catch up". It is a bit more elaborate, but not much more than that. >All Asians? Yes. Despite their fronts, diversity initiatives don't look much further beyond se…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe GP is referencing American university admissions, where DEI-flavored racial quotas tend to disadvantage Asians when compared to a race-blind system based purely on standardized tests.
Elaborating on this, there is a passage quoted in the article from the most common text on "anti-racism" : "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." The consequences of this are easy to illustrate in orchestras. Orchestras have always been heavily dominat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to be suggesting that the only way to right past wrongs is to commit further wrongs. Is there really no positive way forward?
As a society we view “further wrongs” differently. Taking money from someone who stole from you (with the help of the legal system) isn’t considered a further wrong. Criminals rarely utilize the “let’s do no further wrong defense” at sentencing. But maybe they should, as there seems to be a huge appetite for this sort of thing.
Yes, and that includes letting bygones be bygones when we all have terrible injustices in our collective past. This is what a generalized amnesty is all about. The only alternative is a destructive war of all against all, as indeed is often seen in "honor-bound" societies where "the duty of righting wrongs" is taken as an absolute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's anti-asian and also anti- any race that isn't on the list of beneficiaries. The original argument could have been conveyed better by framing it more broadly, but it isn't wrong.
Aah, that makes sense, if I'm understanding it correctly, they specified Asians because they're another minority, but disadvantaged by policies that seek to help other minorities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's more like requiring everyone submitting papers to the ACM to explain how their research will result in a more equitable society. That'd exclude a ton of research topics: how is a faster rendering technique going to result in anti-racist outcomes? I guess you cant submit that paper.
Faster renders favour people in socioeconomically deprived areas who lack higher-end resources and thus face a barrier to entry in the field. Boom. Submit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elaborating on this, there is a passage quoted in the article from the most common text on "anti-racism" : "The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination." The consequences of this are easy to illustrate in orchestras. Orchestras have always been heavily dominat…
Jews were also persecuted because of their overperformance. Too many rich Jews in a city = a reliable recipe for pogrom.
Then yeah, when someone fired up some anti-Semitic hyperbole, well, great way to get out of that debt you owed, right?
IIRC Edward I of England expelled the Jews primarily to confiscate their property after years of taxing them superhard, but it also gave the Crown ownership of debts owed to the Jews, so he was playing the populist hand, and getting funds at the same time.
Quoted post unavailable.
If you are not simultaneously against bezos-funded propaganda or zuck-funded propaganda (he still funds fwd.us whose main goal is to lower tech salaries by increasing immigration), you are a hypocrite.