32 ms·

> I understand the sentiment, but I also understand that if you truly want to get rid of racial bias, gender bias, whatever else bias completely, then not payin

> I understand the sentiment, but I also understand that if you truly want to get rid of racial bias, gender bias, whatever else bias completely, then not paying it mention in any sphere is how you get there. We lived in a world where racism exists, regardless of your own personal attitude. This is just like global climate change - simply because you personally are carbon neutral doesn't mean we don't have a systematic crisis on our hands. You are far, far too willing to wash your hands of the whole topic, and it is very naive. The fact of the matter is that advantages and disadvantages are built into your socioeconomic class, and race is a very strong indicator of your class affiliation. On top of this, like or it not, there are a huge number of racists of all types, ranging from people who proudly burn crosses to much more subtle or unintentional racism. Denying that people's attitudes is something that must be taken into consideration is just... staggering. To put it quite simply: the fact that you, an enlightened individual, do not take race into your moral consideration is laudable but it in no way affects the fact that hundreds of millions of people are already racist and you are willfully putting blinders on to this fact. The most concerning part is that many of these actively (or passively) racist people are in positions of power. Ignoring that is just childish. [There is a strong analogy to this comic by XKCD about the ridiculous beliefs of US Senators.](https://xkcd.com/154/ https://xkcd.com/154/) > And if you can't accept that people view this issue differently and think there are different solutions, you are part of the problem. Pot, meet kettle.

treehau5 10y ago
[removed]
- firstworldman 10y ago
  Getting the interview in the first place is a good marker of the privileged upbringing that most tech industry job applicants have. The path to getting a high paying, high quality job interview is littered with cul-de-sacs where smart, hard working people without access to those same opportunities are asked to build their houses and stay for good. And class mobility (the American Dream) is mostly a myth (for a good and accessible look at this issue, check out the recent On the Media series on poverty, Busted http://www.wnyc.org/series/busted-americas-poverty-myths http://www.wnyc.org/series/busted-americas-poverty-myths ), so hard work is not the way out either.
- untog 10y ago
  The debate the OP is getting is this: 'people' vs. the individual. I think everyone agrees that the goal is for people to treat each others the exact same, but 'people' is a very messy concept. Is it better for me, as an individual, to treat you the same as I do anyone else and wait for gradual societal pressure to push others to do the same, or is it better for me, as an individual, to highlight the oppression that very much still exists, in a bid to make others notice? I don't think there is a right and wrong answer here, just different approaches to a problem. The good thing is that we can all agree the problem exists, which isn't always a given.
- libertymcateer 10y ago
  I understand if my tone came off as more condescending than necessary - I am a corporate lawyer I am prone to being a bit incisive - so I apologize for that. I do tend to adopt a bit of snark when writing online - it gets those precious, precious upvotes. However, in the end, my point is this: I am of the opinion that collective action is necessary to address this issue and I believe the weight of the evidence is on this side. The point that you (appear) to have made, and I am reacting to, is that ignoring the problem is the best way to address it, and I think that is demonstrably ineffective. It is just not the world in which we live.
  - danbruc 10y ago
    The point that you (appear) to have made, and I am reacting to, is that ignoring the problem is the best way to address it, and I think that is demonstrably ineffective. I think you are misunderstanding the point treehau5 wanted to make. I think he wants to say the same thing as I [1], we should take action to boost disadvantaged groups in order to close existing gaps as quickly as possible but that should be done in away that avoids focusing on the distinction one wants to go away. It is not about ignoring an existing issue, it is about not additionally emphasizing it. What good is it, if you want to get rid of racial bias, to point out the race in a context where it does not matter at all? Maybe you could argue that there are people believing that black people made no significant contributions to our world and you are trying to correct that but that does not seem a very strong argument to me. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13707121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13707121
    - libertymcateer 10y ago
      The (now deleted) comment said: > I understand the sentiment, but I also understand that if you truly want to get rid of racial bias, gender bias, whatever else bias completely, then not paying it mention in any sphere is how you get there. I do not see how that is open to interpretation and it appears to run entirely contrary to your point.
      - danbruc 10y ago

treehau5 10y ago

[removed]

firstworldman 10y ago
Getting the interview in the first place is a good marker of the privileged upbringing that most tech industry job applicants have. The path to getting a high paying, high quality job interview is littered with cul-de-sacs where smart, hard working people without access to those same opportunities are asked to build their houses and stay for good. And class mobility (the American Dream) is mostly a myth (for a good and accessible look at this issue, check out the recent On the Media series on poverty, Busted http://www.wnyc.org/series/busted-americas-poverty-myths http://www.wnyc.org/series/busted-americas-poverty-myths ), so hard work is not the way out either.
untog 10y ago
The debate the OP is getting is this: 'people' vs. the individual. I think everyone agrees that the goal is for people to treat each others the exact same, but 'people' is a very messy concept. Is it better for me, as an individual, to treat you the same as I do anyone else and wait for gradual societal pressure to push others to do the same, or is it better for me, as an individual, to highlight the oppression that very much still exists, in a bid to make others notice? I don't think there is a right and wrong answer here, just different approaches to a problem. The good thing is that we can all agree the problem exists, which isn't always a given.
libertymcateer 10y ago
I understand if my tone came off as more condescending than necessary - I am a corporate lawyer I am prone to being a bit incisive - so I apologize for that. I do tend to adopt a bit of snark when writing online - it gets those precious, precious upvotes. However, in the end, my point is this: I am of the opinion that collective action is necessary to address this issue and I believe the weight of the evidence is on this side. The point that you (appear) to have made, and I am reacting to, is that ignoring the problem is the best way to address it, and I think that is demonstrably ineffective. It is just not the world in which we live.
- danbruc 10y ago
  The point that you (appear) to have made, and I am reacting to, is that ignoring the problem is the best way to address it, and I think that is demonstrably ineffective. I think you are misunderstanding the point treehau5 wanted to make. I think he wants to say the same thing as I [1], we should take action to boost disadvantaged groups in order to close existing gaps as quickly as possible but that should be done in away that avoids focusing on the distinction one wants to go away. It is not about ignoring an existing issue, it is about not additionally emphasizing it. What good is it, if you want to get rid of racial bias, to point out the race in a context where it does not matter at all? Maybe you could argue that there are people believing that black people made no significant contributions to our world and you are trying to correct that but that does not seem a very strong argument to me. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13707121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13707121
  - libertymcateer 10y ago
    The (now deleted) comment said: > I understand the sentiment, but I also understand that if you truly want to get rid of racial bias, gender bias, whatever else bias completely, then not paying it mention in any sphere is how you get there. I do not see how that is open to interpretation and it appears to run entirely contrary to your point.
    - danbruc 10y ago