Systemic Racism Question

[scruffy]

Is that English? If not, what language do I put in the translate app?

Sorry, my libberish isn't what it used to be.

(I used to be able to say diversity without choking)

 

[IM2]

It seems pretty obvious that systemic racism is just a made up term to promote Marxism. To dem politicians, people who can support themselves are white or Asian, and they have an unfair advantage because they are not on welfare or in single parent homes. Therefore society must be torn down so the government forces equal outcomes, fairness. With the recent SC Rulings, the dems are howling that society isn't fair enough for people to be legally treated the same. It is much like the idiots on the view telling senator Scott that minorities can't succeed because life is unfair. It seems white democrats and their allies have their boots firmly on the necks of minorities by telling them they can't be successful because of how they look. The only answer dems give is that society isn't ready yet, it isn't fair. That simply means that there isn't government forced outcomes. To the dems, in today's age, do you really think that someone who is good at a job and shows up to work everyday will be exclude because of how they look?

Since Asians were not discriminated against, what SCOTUS did was the result of activist judges. And what AA did was ensure equal treatment.

Now let me get to the inane comment made by whites, who have been exclusively helped by government policy for 188 out of the 247 years America has been a country, about blacks being told they can't make it. That's retarded given what has been done for whites. This idiot talks about government forced outcomes when what whites have is the sole result of government forced outcomes. It's time white amnesia got a cure.. Now for his last sentence, I will once again repost a statement from a member of this forum.

“I can say for sure that happens because I did it. Before retirement, I was an Engineer. For the last 20 years of my career, I was a Manager and Director and I hired hundreds of people. I reviewed well over a thousand resumes for all kinds of positions. Everything from Secretaries to Engineering Managers. Both Salary and Hourly. I always culled out the resumes with Black Ethnic names. Never shortlisted anybody with a Black Ethnic name. Never hired them.

Since the Fortune 50 company I worked for had a stupid “affirmative action” hiring policies I never mentioned it to anybody and I always got away with it. A couple of times I was instructed to improve my departmental “diversity” demographics but I always ignored it and never got into any trouble. My stereotype is that anybody with a stupid ghetto Black ethnic name is probably worthless. I could have been wrong a couple of times but I was also probably right 99% of the time.

Glad I did it. I would do it again.”

This statement was made 3 years ago. And he's not by himself. There are all kinds of people in this forum doing the same thing. And the republican argument against AA boils down to this: that the way somebody looks means they have to be unqualified. Only whites can be qualified.

The OP's argument is hogwash.

 

[Lesh]

Again. The Court didn't say that Affirmative Action was wrong. They said since in their opinion racism no longer exists it is not needed.

Of course they are wrong. Racism is still an issue

 

[Laslow]

Again. The Court didn't say that Affirmative Action was wrong. They said since in their opinion racism no longer exists it is not needed.

Of course they are wrong. Racism is still an issue

In your estimate, would it ever be possible for equal under the law to be sufficient? What would have to happen for you to believe that life is fair enough to leave race out of legislation? It is so hard to find people to work, if an applicant shows up who can do the job and stick around, I seriously doubt the employer gives a crap what the person looks like. I'm not going to say life is fair, or that racism doesn't exist, but I fail to see the need for racial legislation.

 

[IM2]

In your estimate, would it ever be possible for equal under the law to be sufficient? What would have to happen for you to believe that life is fair enough to leave race out of legislation? It is so hard to find people to work, if an applicant shows up who can do the job and stick around, I seriously doubt the employer gives a crap what the person looks like. I'm not going to say life is fair, or that racism doesn't exist, but I fail to see the need for racial legislation.

When have whites left race out of the equation? You don't seem to grasp the reality that white is a race and white right wing legislators make race a part of every law they propose.

 

[Lesh]

I seriously doubt the employer gives a crap what the person looks like. I'm not going to say life is fair, or that racism doesn't exist, but I fail to see the need for racial legislation.

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

They DO see the need for AA to offset racism. They just dishonestly claim it no longer exists.

Even you note that's not true

 

[scruffy]

The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

They DO see the need for AA to offset racism. They just dishonestly claim it no longer exists.

Even you note that's not true

The stupidity of it is the left thinks it can cure racism with a little legislation.

How'd that work out for you the last 50 years, morons?

 

[gipper]

Since Asians were not discriminated against, what SCOTUS did was the result of activist judges. And what AA did was ensure equal treatment.

Now let me get to the inane comment made by whites, who have been exclusively helped by government policy for 188 out of the 247 years America has been a country, about blacks being told they can't make it. That's retarded given what has been done for whites. This idiot talks about government forced outcomes when what whites have is the sole result of government forced outcomes. It's time white amnesia got a cure.. Now for his last sentence, I will once again repost a statement from a member of this forum.

“I can say for sure that happens because I did it. Before retirement, I was an Engineer. For the last 20 years of my career, I was a Manager and Director and I hired hundreds of people. I reviewed well over a thousand resumes for all kinds of positions. Everything from Secretaries to Engineering Managers. Both Salary and Hourly. I always culled out the resumes with Black Ethnic names. Never shortlisted anybody with a Black Ethnic name. Never hired them.

Since the Fortune 50 company I worked for had a stupid “affirmative action” hiring policies I never mentioned it to anybody and I always got away with it. A couple of times I was instructed to improve my departmental “diversity” demographics but I always ignored it and never got into any trouble. My stereotype is that anybody with a stupid ghetto Black ethnic name is probably worthless. I could have been wrong a couple of times but I was also probably right 99% of the time.

Glad I did it. I would do it again.”

This statement was made 3 years ago. And he's not by himself. There are all kinds of people in this forum doing the same thing. And the republican argument against AA boils down to this: that the way somebody looks means they have to be unqualified. Only whites can be qualified.

The OP's argument is hogwash.

Do you think the consequences of this ruling will be blacks will no longer obtain job offers and college acceptance?