4 ms·

to quote from "how to be an antiracist" - a best selling book during this last year https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/08/10/ibram-x-kendi-prophet-of

by anoxor 6y ago

to quote from "how to be an antiracist" - a best selling book during this last year https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/08/10/ibram-x-kendi-prophet-of-anti-racism/ https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/08/10/ibram-x-k... >The defining question is whether the discrimination is creating equity or inequity. If discrimination is creating equity, then it is antiracist. If discrimination is creating inequity, then it is racist. . . . The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination. The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination. I'm not super fond of the idea of indefinite discrimination on race. How do we run those numbers, who decides what is or isn't a good policy, does that change with the politics of who is president every 4 or 8 years? Especially because I didn't ask to be born my race or sex, but I was told by my dean of STEM that "it's not advantageous for this position you are a white scientist" followed by "you came from a well-educated family right?". My lower class farmer dad thought that was funny. I've since left the college system due to what I feel is now labled antiracist discrimination.

sophacles 6y ago
I have to pay extra in my electricity, phone and postal fees to cover the extra expense of rural service as mandated by law. (and phone service, and a whole bunch more) I have to pony up some insane percentage of my taxes for farm subsidies. A bunch of my tax money goes to the schools set up in rural areas too. I have to pay for a bunch of county roads that are rarely used by a handful of families out in the country. I don't get to forgo taxes on gasoline I use to get to work. These are all laws of equitable discrimination - prior to them cities were getting ahead of rural areas by leaps and bounds, so the laws were passed to help rural folks maintain an equitable place in society. By having these in place it's much harder to point to a person and say "look they are from the country, they're not going to be good at tech since they didn't have access as a kid". Growing up rural is just as much an accident of birth as race, why are you not complaining about all the special benefits you got? I could make a pretty solid argument that I was was the victim of equitable discrimination since I didn't get any rural benefits growing up. Is it because they don't feel special, and that maybe you still had some hardship as a result? The goal of the equitable discrimination you're against is to get that same level of "its not special" (good or bad) for folks of all races, just like it is for folks who grew up in rural places. After that, we can maybe strive for even more equitable society.
- anoxor 6y ago
  I was literally discriminated on the basis of color of my skin and my assumed family of origin, and that seen as perfectly acceptable and it seems that is what you are argueing for. If we can't have shared definitions enough to say that isn't ok or to say that is not equitable, what's the point in discussing it. Do we simply assume every application with more melanin should have a leg up on any and every job application? Or how do we leagally measure the amount of non-equitable treatment an applicant has? There are a million reasons two people could be non equal, to institute hiring based on who is the best - but also most melanin even if they grew up in the top 1% with the best education money can buy is real bad. If we want workable solutions, teachers unions and schools and policies that have failed for decades need a serious rework. Charter schools in the same building as public schools with a lottery system for intakes have been shown to greatly outperform their public counterparts. I spent years in college, and simply put, something has to radically change before students get to college, and defense of teachers unions and a government mandated monopoly on educate must shift. Unfortunately, this isn't being considered politicaly and is often demonized.
  - sophacles 6y ago
    I am arguing that you have had some extra help in your life. You got the benefit of many programs in place to benefit you because of the demographic of your parents. Someone else may get some extra help because the demographic of their parent. Both those cases come at potential expense of others. I'm sorry you are upset that you weren't qualified for this extra help too, but sometimes being qualified for one form of help doesn't qualify you for other forms of help. This is because there are a million reasons two people can be non-equal. Look at how upset you are that you didn't get special consideration because you aren't a person of color. That you had someone make a decision about you based on that. Now imagine getting through all those years of college while experiencing that on a regular basis... seems like it might be hard, no? I would strongly consider the "extra melanin" as a giant bonus for candidates, they have shown they can put up with some pretty challenging stuff without quitting school over it. People that can handle challenges are the people I want on my team, not people who abandon goals the first time they encounter something that's personally difficult. As the random non-sequitor into education policy: * home schooling and private schools and religious schools have existed as alternatives to government run public schools forever. There is no monopoly. * Perhaps we could consider paying the teachers a decent wage instead of demonizing those who try to get them a decent wage? Do you think FAANG would stay at the top if they paid engineers shit, if not why would teaching be different? * What does this have to do with helping people get to an equitable place?

by anoxor 6y ago

sophacles 6y ago

I have to pay extra in my electricity, phone and postal fees to cover the extra expense of rural service as mandated by law. (and phone service, and a whole bunch more) I have to pony up some insane percentage of my taxes for farm subsidies. A bunch of my tax money goes to the schools set up in rural areas too. I have to pay for a bunch of county roads that are rarely used by a handful of families out in the country. I don't get to forgo taxes on gasoline I use to get to work. These are all laws of equitable discrimination - prior to them cities were getting ahead of rural areas by leaps and bounds, so the laws were passed to help rural folks maintain an equitable place in society. By having these in place it's much harder to point to a person and say "look they are from the country, they're not going to be good at tech since they didn't have access as a kid". Growing up rural is just as much an accident of birth as race, why are you not complaining about all the special benefits you got? I could make a pretty solid argument that I was was the victim of equitable discrimination since I didn't get any rural benefits growing up. Is it because they don't feel special, and that maybe you still had some hardship as a result? The goal of the equitable discrimination you're against is to get that same level of "its not special" (good or bad) for folks of all races, just like it is for folks who grew up in rural places. After that, we can maybe strive for even more equitable society.

anoxor 6y ago
I was literally discriminated on the basis of color of my skin and my assumed family of origin, and that seen as perfectly acceptable and it seems that is what you are argueing for. If we can't have shared definitions enough to say that isn't ok or to say that is not equitable, what's the point in discussing it. Do we simply assume every application with more melanin should have a leg up on any and every job application? Or how do we leagally measure the amount of non-equitable treatment an applicant has? There are a million reasons two people could be non equal, to institute hiring based on who is the best - but also most melanin even if they grew up in the top 1% with the best education money can buy is real bad. If we want workable solutions, teachers unions and schools and policies that have failed for decades need a serious rework. Charter schools in the same building as public schools with a lottery system for intakes have been shown to greatly outperform their public counterparts. I spent years in college, and simply put, something has to radically change before students get to college, and defense of teachers unions and a government mandated monopoly on educate must shift. Unfortunately, this isn't being considered politicaly and is often demonized.
- sophacles 6y ago
  I am arguing that you have had some extra help in your life. You got the benefit of many programs in place to benefit you because of the demographic of your parents. Someone else may get some extra help because the demographic of their parent. Both those cases come at potential expense of others. I'm sorry you are upset that you weren't qualified for this extra help too, but sometimes being qualified for one form of help doesn't qualify you for other forms of help. This is because there are a million reasons two people can be non-equal. Look at how upset you are that you didn't get special consideration because you aren't a person of color. That you had someone make a decision about you based on that. Now imagine getting through all those years of college while experiencing that on a regular basis... seems like it might be hard, no? I would strongly consider the "extra melanin" as a giant bonus for candidates, they have shown they can put up with some pretty challenging stuff without quitting school over it. People that can handle challenges are the people I want on my team, not people who abandon goals the first time they encounter something that's personally difficult. As the random non-sequitor into education policy: * home schooling and private schools and religious schools have existed as alternatives to government run public schools forever. There is no monopoly. * Perhaps we could consider paying the teachers a decent wage instead of demonizing those who try to get them a decent wage? Do you think FAANG would stay at the top if they paid engineers shit, if not why would teaching be different? * What does this have to do with helping people get to an equitable place?