5 ms·

Hence the fact that so many people are sick of the racism card and voted for Trump. As you point out, the same behaviour would be called bad policy (and possibl

Hence the fact that so many people are sick of the racism card and voted for Trump. As you point out, the same behaviour would be called bad policy (and possibly illegal) if it's against blacks but not against whites. That seems fundamentally problematic.

Dylan16807 9y ago
Sometimes local bias can make things fairer overall. The difference is that something anti-black is obviously making things worse, while something anti-white might be helping or hurting in various ways. You have to be intentionally myopic to think all bias is equally unfair. Especially consider how racist you can make desegregation sound, even though it's giving everyone the same treatment: "They're going to start sending most of the kids of one race to much worse schools!".
- peoplewindow 9y ago
  You have to be intentionally myopic to think all bias is equally unfair Intentionally myopic? Why is the law intentionally myopic? I don't see any written law that says it's OK to be racist against white people? Are you saying the law should be changed? Attitudes like this make me agree with the right-wingers who say that people who campaign against racism, sexism etc really just hate white men. A few years ago I wouldn't have agreed with that at all, but as time goes on and I see more attitudes like this, I feel more and more like it must be true.
  - Dylan16807 9y ago
    > the law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States#Legal_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_Unit... > Attitudes like this make me agree with the right-wingers who say that people who campaign against racism, sexism etc really just hate white men. And what do you say about a person that ignores 90% of racism and sexism unless it harms white men? The world is full of little biases. Ideally we'd get rid of all of them. But until someone invents a magic button we need to keep context in mind. Give charity to the people that have been mistreated and need charity, etc.
    - peoplewindow 9y ago
      Do such people exist? I've never met anyone who ignores racism or sexism unless it harms white men. And yes, the US Supreme Court has a habit of not applying the law as written, but that is itself rather controversial isn't it. Because the law doesn't say it's OK to be racist to white people, not even if the reasons seem well intentioned.
      - Dylan16807 9y ago
        > Do such people exist? I've never met anyone who ignores racism or sexism unless it harms white men. Ahaha thanks for the laugh. Anyway I hope you have a nice day.
      - dang 9y ago
        It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle for a while now. That's an abuse of the site, and we ban accounts that do it (regardless of how correct their underlying points may be), so would you please not do that? The spirit of the site is intellectual curiosity, and while there's some overlap with political topics, the battle thing is not compatible.

Dylan16807 9y ago

Sometimes local bias can make things fairer overall. The difference is that something anti-black is obviously making things worse, while something anti-white might be helping or hurting in various ways. You have to be intentionally myopic to think all bias is equally unfair. Especially consider how racist you can make desegregation sound, even though it's giving everyone the same treatment: "They're going to start sending most of the kids of one race to much worse schools!".

peoplewindow 9y ago
You have to be intentionally myopic to think all bias is equally unfair Intentionally myopic? Why is the law intentionally myopic? I don't see any written law that says it's OK to be racist against white people? Are you saying the law should be changed? Attitudes like this make me agree with the right-wingers who say that people who campaign against racism, sexism etc really just hate white men. A few years ago I wouldn't have agreed with that at all, but as time goes on and I see more attitudes like this, I feel more and more like it must be true.
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  > the law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States#Legal_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_Unit... > Attitudes like this make me agree with the right-wingers who say that people who campaign against racism, sexism etc really just hate white men. And what do you say about a person that ignores 90% of racism and sexism unless it harms white men? The world is full of little biases. Ideally we'd get rid of all of them. But until someone invents a magic button we need to keep context in mind. Give charity to the people that have been mistreated and need charity, etc.
  - peoplewindow 9y ago
    Do such people exist? I've never met anyone who ignores racism or sexism unless it harms white men. And yes, the US Supreme Court has a habit of not applying the law as written, but that is itself rather controversial isn't it. Because the law doesn't say it's OK to be racist to white people, not even if the reasons seem well intentioned.
    - Dylan16807 9y ago
      > Do such people exist? I've never met anyone who ignores racism or sexism unless it harms white men. Ahaha thanks for the laugh. Anyway I hope you have a nice day.
    - dang 9y ago
      It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological battle for a while now. That's an abuse of the site, and we ban accounts that do it (regardless of how correct their underlying points may be), so would you please not do that? The spirit of the site is intellectual curiosity, and while there's some overlap with political topics, the battle thing is not compatible.