4 ms·

> article about Facebook that says they don't hire enough black people. This is such a silly thing. I mean this is what is racist actually, hiring people base

by gkya 9y ago

> article about Facebook that says they don't hire enough black people. This is such a silly thing. I mean this is what is racist actually, hiring people based on their race, having to balance races and genders, and race and gender and whatnot being variables in the job market.

dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago
You're not American, are you? I understand your point - positive differentiation is differentiation after all. Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. That's a simple fact. What we as a society are truing to do is to undo the harm, in a way - to make chances equal, because we feel it's the right thing to do.
- DarkKomunalec 9y ago
  > you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons *White people in white-majority countries. Most countries aren't as opposed to favouring their own as Western countries are, so this advantage is geographically very limited.
  - metalon 9y ago
    I think it's pretty clear they were talking about the U.S., which IS a white majority country where white people DO have an advantage
    - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
      Yet even within the US there's an increasing number of (work)places where whites are no longer a majority or are at a disadvantage, as the article states.
      - metalon 9y ago
        This still has nothing to do with the point they were making, that black people in the U.S. are still disadvantaged due to historical reasons.
- badwulf 9y ago
  > Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. If everyone strongly believes that black people are still feeling the effect of slavery(despite not being alive when that was a thing), give them reparations and conclude that the playing field is level. > What we as a society are truing to do is to undo the harm, in a way - to make chances equal, because we feel it's the right thing to do. You don't undo harm by harming others, you don't fix racism by introducing racism against others. The main flaw I see in your thought process is you are trying to fix a perceived inequality of opportunity by introducing equality of outcome. If you really want to fix the lives are black people, fix the root cause, not the end result, it's too late at that point. I personally would start by fixing education.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    > If everyone strongly believes that black people are still feeling the effect of slavery(despite not being alive when that was a thing) That's a historically ignorant characterization. De jure discrimination existed long after slavery ended. Had Bill Gates been born a black kid in the south, he likely would've gone to a segregated school. De facto discrimination continues to present day. When Bill Gates got on stage to announce Windows 95, more than half of Americans didn't think that black people shouldn't marry white people. Do you think all those people admitted that view to pollsters, then went around in their schools, governments, and work places treating black people exactly the same as their white counterparts? Believing in Santa Claus would be less naive. > give them reparations and conclude that the playing field is level. People tend to think of that as a bizarre idea, but in reality that's the default way to remedy harms in the American legal system: awarding money damages. Here, the legal entities primarily responsible for the harm (the state and federal governments) are still around and can be held liable. Damages are often estimated by looking at the difference in income resulting from the harm. Here, that's likely north of $300 billion per year (assuming all of the black-white wage gap is explained by discrimination). > You don't undo harm by harming others, you don't fix racism by introducing racism against others. That's like saying you don't fix an infection by cutting out the infected tissue, which necessarily involves cutting out healthy tissue around it. Or that you don't fix cancer by collaterally poisoning a bunch of perfectly healthy non-cancerous cells. That's exactly how you fix disease! The idea that the harms caused by federal and state governments' laws protecting slavery and segregation will go away simply because you get rid of those laws is like believing that a paperclip will unbend itself, or that an overturned boat will right itself. Fantastically naive.
- gkya 9y ago
  I'm not american, but like any non-american I do know a bit of american history. It's just that I believe positive differentiation/discrimination does not help anything, and also comes with negative consequences and other harms to undo in the future. Also it causes gender, race etc. to leak into everything. It's best to just remove the obstacles and let the water flow: water flows and finds its bed, goes a turkish popular saying.
  - BoiledCabbage 9y ago
    > It's best to just remove the obstacles and let the water flow Would most Armenians agree? The problem is that after discrimination has been a part of a society for so long, the default state without intervention is continued discrimination. That's the fundamental argument. People in the majority/power group across whatever grouping believe the default state is equality. While people who have been on the receiving end of discrimination across generations (who are forced to be more attuned to it) believe the default state is continued discrimination. History has shown the latter group to be correct, but the argument still happens every decade or so.
    - gkya 9y ago
      The genocide is a different thing, a very different story product of a clashing national interests and temper that grew in the 19th century. A war that went berserk and turned onto civilians. People think many things but at the end facts count, and positive discrimination may render the formerly opressed temporarily content, but it leads to tension among the involved groups.
- eli_gottlieb 9y ago
  >Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. Sure, but you can't contain a flood by swimming hard-enough against it on a personal basis. You need to build a dam. There needs to be a measurable deliverable for antiracism, and it can't be defined only over variables like "proportionate representation at Facebook". Not only is that a noisy, overdetermined variable, but most black people simply are not going to work at Facebook. Most people of any demographic don't work at Facebook.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

by gkya 9y ago

dvfjsdhgfv 9y ago

You're not American, are you? I understand your point - positive differentiation is differentiation after all. Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. That's a simple fact. What we as a society are truing to do is to undo the harm, in a way - to make chances equal, because we feel it's the right thing to do.

DarkKomunalec 9y ago
> you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons *White people in white-majority countries. Most countries aren't as opposed to favouring their own as Western countries are, so this advantage is geographically very limited.
- metalon 9y ago
  I think it's pretty clear they were talking about the U.S., which IS a white majority country where white people DO have an advantage
  - DarkKomunalec 9y ago
    Yet even within the US there's an increasing number of (work)places where whites are no longer a majority or are at a disadvantage, as the article states.
    - metalon 9y ago
      This still has nothing to do with the point they were making, that black people in the U.S. are still disadvantaged due to historical reasons.
badwulf 9y ago
> Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. If everyone strongly believes that black people are still feeling the effect of slavery(despite not being alive when that was a thing), give them reparations and conclude that the playing field is level. > What we as a society are truing to do is to undo the harm, in a way - to make chances equal, because we feel it's the right thing to do. You don't undo harm by harming others, you don't fix racism by introducing racism against others. The main flaw I see in your thought process is you are trying to fix a perceived inequality of opportunity by introducing equality of outcome. If you really want to fix the lives are black people, fix the root cause, not the end result, it's too late at that point. I personally would start by fixing education.
- rayiner 9y ago
  > If everyone strongly believes that black people are still feeling the effect of slavery(despite not being alive when that was a thing) That's a historically ignorant characterization. De jure discrimination existed long after slavery ended. Had Bill Gates been born a black kid in the south, he likely would've gone to a segregated school. De facto discrimination continues to present day. When Bill Gates got on stage to announce Windows 95, more than half of Americans didn't think that black people shouldn't marry white people. Do you think all those people admitted that view to pollsters, then went around in their schools, governments, and work places treating black people exactly the same as their white counterparts? Believing in Santa Claus would be less naive. > give them reparations and conclude that the playing field is level. People tend to think of that as a bizarre idea, but in reality that's the default way to remedy harms in the American legal system: awarding money damages. Here, the legal entities primarily responsible for the harm (the state and federal governments) are still around and can be held liable. Damages are often estimated by looking at the difference in income resulting from the harm. Here, that's likely north of $300 billion per year (assuming all of the black-white wage gap is explained by discrimination). > You don't undo harm by harming others, you don't fix racism by introducing racism against others. That's like saying you don't fix an infection by cutting out the infected tissue, which necessarily involves cutting out healthy tissue around it. Or that you don't fix cancer by collaterally poisoning a bunch of perfectly healthy non-cancerous cells. That's exactly how you fix disease! The idea that the harms caused by federal and state governments' laws protecting slavery and segregation will go away simply because you get rid of those laws is like believing that a paperclip will unbend itself, or that an overturned boat will right itself. Fantastically naive.
gkya 9y ago
I'm not american, but like any non-american I do know a bit of american history. It's just that I believe positive differentiation/discrimination does not help anything, and also comes with negative consequences and other harms to undo in the future. Also it causes gender, race etc. to leak into everything. It's best to just remove the obstacles and let the water flow: water flows and finds its bed, goes a turkish popular saying.
- BoiledCabbage 9y ago
  > It's best to just remove the obstacles and let the water flow Would most Armenians agree? The problem is that after discrimination has been a part of a society for so long, the default state without intervention is continued discrimination. That's the fundamental argument. People in the majority/power group across whatever grouping believe the default state is equality. While people who have been on the receiving end of discrimination across generations (who are forced to be more attuned to it) believe the default state is continued discrimination. History has shown the latter group to be correct, but the argument still happens every decade or so.
  - gkya 9y ago
    The genocide is a different thing, a very different story product of a clashing national interests and temper that grew in the 19th century. A war that went berserk and turned onto civilians. People think many things but at the end facts count, and positive discrimination may render the formerly opressed temporarily content, but it leads to tension among the involved groups.
eli_gottlieb 9y ago
>Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons. Sure, but you can't contain a flood by swimming hard-enough against it on a personal basis. You need to build a dam. There needs to be a measurable deliverable for antiracism, and it can't be defined only over variables like "proportionate representation at Facebook". Not only is that a noisy, overdetermined variable, but most black people simply are not going to work at Facebook. Most people of any demographic don't work at Facebook.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]