3 ms·
Nationalism is indirect racism. IE, if you make a law banning hiring anyone with an African citizenship, that is still racist, even though technically it still
by stale2002 9y ago
Nationalism is indirect racism.
IE, if you make a law banning hiring anyone with an African citizenship, that is still racist, even though technically it still effects people from South Africa.
If you make a law that "coincidently" only effects countries that are majority not white, guess what, that's racist.
Any offshoring law would mostly effect non white countries, and wouldn't do much to effect European countries.
If your proposal 90% effects people who are of a different skin color, thats still racist, even if the net is a little wider, and still 10% effects white people.
I don't care what word you use for it. Discrimination is discrimination.
"So where in that sentence do you explain that a union can force a company not to hire you?"
The literal next sentence of your post.
If you don't join the union, you are fired. There is literally a word for this. It is called being a union shop. And it is what right to work laws protect against.
I don't care what justification is used to force people to join them. I do not want them to negotiate for me.
And I will fight all attempts that try to force me to join them.
Fortunately for me, most other people in tech oppose them.
- Clubber 9y ago>Any offshoring law would mostly effect non white countries, and wouldn't do much to effect European countries. Is your argument that since the majority of the world population is not white, anything except wide open free trade with no borders are racist? Give me a break. There is plenty of offshoring to eastern bloc European countries. Research some of this stuff. It sounds like you read a hugely biased article as the sole source of your information on this topic.