5 ms·

Sadly, it is not as simple as that: Imagine a society of squirrels and hamsters where squirrels have been oppressing hamsters for centuries. Then, one day, the

Sadly, it is not as simple as that: Imagine a society of squirrels and hamsters where squirrels have been oppressing hamsters for centuries. Then, one day, they decide to stop doing that and treat everyone the same. On average, a young squirrel will come from a family that is vastly richer and better educated than a young hamster. So, if they have to compete "fairly", the hamsters will remain much poorer for centuries more. This leads to a need to rebalance those two groups, and that rebalance means artificially propping up hamsters. Ideally, we would want to get to a world where the young squirrel and hamster can, on average, compete "fairly"... I have no idea how to achieve that while minimizing the negative side effects.

insert_coin 6y ago
If you begin by dividing society into squirrels and hamsters then of course you already lost.
visarga 6y ago
That would be like believing in original sin for squirrels, instituting the bad end of 'affirmative action' on them, all in the name of fairness of course.
- cutemonster 6y ago
  > would be like believing in original sin for squirrel What, no! :-) It's instead taxes, and free university education, and free health care for everyone. And reaching out to historically unfairly treated groups, and inspiring (some of) them to start their own companies or become politicians. And things like the first exchanges in job applications being without photos and real names But not blaming "everyone" living today, for what some people in the past generations did
  - timeslip1523 6y ago
    Those things would be ok (there are unrelated reasons to be against free university for everyone, maybe, but whatever) but what you're talking about isn't what 'social justice advocates' want. In fact, many of them are against blind auditions, as they don't end up sometimes don't end up hiring people in the 'right' proportions, instead saying people should discriminate based on race (in the 'right' direction, of course.)
- gambiting 6y ago
  Well but that's not such an outrageous concept, is it? Germany still pays war reparations, recognizing that due to their actions other countries have suffered. And yes, a young German nowadays might ask "well, why is my money going to foreign countries, for something that my grandparents did? How is that fair?". And well, they aren't entirely wrong, but they aren't entirely right either. Society has obligations which can last longer than a single generation. If society has systematically oppressed and made one group poorer, then society has the obligation to make it right. So yes, squirrels have the societal obligation to make it right for the hamsters, even if none of the original opressing squirrels are even alive.
  - visarga 6y ago
    > Well but that's not such an outrageous concept, is it? Germany still pays war reparations What makes me sad is when I hear stories like this - a young man who's passionate about some field got rejected even though he had a higher exam score. He put more time, more passion and more effort into it and yet it doesn't matter because his race-gender category is overrepresented. How can we discount personal effort in the name of justice?
    - gambiting 6y ago
      Because the society and its obligations require it, as harsh as it sounds. I know Americans are all about the individual rather than the group, but seriously, how else do you fix centuries of injustice, other than by giving a leg up to the groups that have been discriminated against for a very very long time and denied those opportunities? Because places are limited, giving those people priority access means someone else loses out. Yes, it's unfair. Let me go back to my example of Germany - German youth are very passionate, work very hard, they put in more time and passion into things....and yet can't have nicer living conditions, can't have better social care, better roads, better healthcare, better education, because their country is paying their taxes into foreign coffers for something that their grandparents did. Once again I ask you, how is that fair to those young people who like you said - are very passionate and very hard working, now have to be denied certain things they want and pay for? They are the ones losing out for something they haven't personally done. It's the same here. Yes, I'm truly sympathetic that a kid can get rejected from college because they are from the "wrong" social group, at absolutely no fault of their own. I truly am. But if society wants to repay its debt for the damages caused then that's one of the ways of doing this. The other solution, of course, is to create enough places in higher education that no one gets rejected for any reason. But that's a system Americans are unwilling to pay for, so that's not a solution within that context.
spottedgiraffe 6y ago
Ideally we would rebalance between those from poor families and those from rich and educated ones. Oppression exists in different forms and there are also poor squirrels.
durovo 6y ago
Thankfully this does not apply exactly to issues relate to gender. Genders should be uniformly distributed across socio-economic classes.

insert_coin 6y ago

If you begin by dividing society into squirrels and hamsters then of course you already lost.

visarga 6y ago

That would be like believing in original sin for squirrels, instituting the bad end of 'affirmative action' on them, all in the name of fairness of course.

cutemonster 6y ago
> would be like believing in original sin for squirrel What, no! :-) It's instead taxes, and free university education, and free health care for everyone. And reaching out to historically unfairly treated groups, and inspiring (some of) them to start their own companies or become politicians. And things like the first exchanges in job applications being without photos and real names But not blaming "everyone" living today, for what some people in the past generations did
- timeslip1523 6y ago
  Those things would be ok (there are unrelated reasons to be against free university for everyone, maybe, but whatever) but what you're talking about isn't what 'social justice advocates' want. In fact, many of them are against blind auditions, as they don't end up sometimes don't end up hiring people in the 'right' proportions, instead saying people should discriminate based on race (in the 'right' direction, of course.)
gambiting 6y ago
Well but that's not such an outrageous concept, is it? Germany still pays war reparations, recognizing that due to their actions other countries have suffered. And yes, a young German nowadays might ask "well, why is my money going to foreign countries, for something that my grandparents did? How is that fair?". And well, they aren't entirely wrong, but they aren't entirely right either. Society has obligations which can last longer than a single generation. If society has systematically oppressed and made one group poorer, then society has the obligation to make it right. So yes, squirrels have the societal obligation to make it right for the hamsters, even if none of the original opressing squirrels are even alive.
- visarga 6y ago
  > Well but that's not such an outrageous concept, is it? Germany still pays war reparations What makes me sad is when I hear stories like this - a young man who's passionate about some field got rejected even though he had a higher exam score. He put more time, more passion and more effort into it and yet it doesn't matter because his race-gender category is overrepresented. How can we discount personal effort in the name of justice?
  - gambiting 6y ago
    Because the society and its obligations require it, as harsh as it sounds. I know Americans are all about the individual rather than the group, but seriously, how else do you fix centuries of injustice, other than by giving a leg up to the groups that have been discriminated against for a very very long time and denied those opportunities? Because places are limited, giving those people priority access means someone else loses out. Yes, it's unfair. Let me go back to my example of Germany - German youth are very passionate, work very hard, they put in more time and passion into things....and yet can't have nicer living conditions, can't have better social care, better roads, better healthcare, better education, because their country is paying their taxes into foreign coffers for something that their grandparents did. Once again I ask you, how is that fair to those young people who like you said - are very passionate and very hard working, now have to be denied certain things they want and pay for? They are the ones losing out for something they haven't personally done. It's the same here. Yes, I'm truly sympathetic that a kid can get rejected from college because they are from the "wrong" social group, at absolutely no fault of their own. I truly am. But if society wants to repay its debt for the damages caused then that's one of the ways of doing this. The other solution, of course, is to create enough places in higher education that no one gets rejected for any reason. But that's a system Americans are unwilling to pay for, so that's not a solution within that context.

spottedgiraffe 6y ago

Ideally we would rebalance between those from poor families and those from rich and educated ones. Oppression exists in different forms and there are also poor squirrels.

durovo 6y ago

Thankfully this does not apply exactly to issues relate to gender. Genders should be uniformly distributed across socio-economic classes.