4 ms·

> If BLM was just that, most people, even on the political right, would have no problems with it. Let's get real. People on the political right have been yelli

> If BLM was just that, most people, even on the political right, would have no problems with it. Let's get real. People on the political right have been yelling about kneeling in the NFL since that particular form of protest began. And it has few/none of the associations you describe. > I'm a fan of racial equality, and by that I mean completely eliminating racism quotas, making hiring based purely on merit and not melanin. Sounds great in theory. Now try to ascertain if someone made a hiring/promotion decision based on merit or on melanin without some kind of Star Trek era brain scan.

sparkie 6y ago
> Sounds great in theory. Now try to ascertain if someone made a hiring/promotion decision based on merit or on melanin without some kind of Star Trek era brain scan. I'm of the opinion that business owners should be the sole arbiters of who is hired and promoted anyway. The State should mind its own business. A good business owner will promote the best talent which will make their company grow. If they start filtering talent based on skin color, they're hurting their own pocket. You can't ascertain whether individual hiring decisions are based on merit or not, but you can make a statistical guess at what percentage of each ethnicity would be promoted based on the demographics where the hiring is taking place. If the population is 10% black and 90% white, you'd expect an organization to be 10% black and 90% white on average, if no racial screening is occurring. However, the common "diversity quotas" which are commonly employed now want a different outcome. They want to see at least 50% of hires from BAME, even if BAME are only 20% of the demographics. There's a term for this. It's called racism.
- AlexandrB 6y ago
  > However, the common "diversity quotas" which are commonly employed now want a different outcome. They want to see at least 50% of hires from BAME, even if BAME are only 20% of the demographics. I'm pretty sure this is a straw man. 50% quotas are common for women (50% of the population), but otherwise I could find no evidence of 50% quotas based on race.

sparkie 6y ago

> Sounds great in theory. Now try to ascertain if someone made a hiring/promotion decision based on merit or on melanin without some kind of Star Trek era brain scan. I'm of the opinion that business owners should be the sole arbiters of who is hired and promoted anyway. The State should mind its own business. A good business owner will promote the best talent which will make their company grow. If they start filtering talent based on skin color, they're hurting their own pocket. You can't ascertain whether individual hiring decisions are based on merit or not, but you can make a statistical guess at what percentage of each ethnicity would be promoted based on the demographics where the hiring is taking place. If the population is 10% black and 90% white, you'd expect an organization to be 10% black and 90% white on average, if no racial screening is occurring. However, the common "diversity quotas" which are commonly employed now want a different outcome. They want to see at least 50% of hires from BAME, even if BAME are only 20% of the demographics. There's a term for this. It's called racism.

AlexandrB 6y ago
> However, the common "diversity quotas" which are commonly employed now want a different outcome. They want to see at least 50% of hires from BAME, even if BAME are only 20% of the demographics. I'm pretty sure this is a straw man. 50% quotas are common for women (50% of the population), but otherwise I could find no evidence of 50% quotas based on race.