5 ms·

https://www.fairforall.org/about/ https://www.fairforall.org/about/ is a group that seems to fill the void left by the ACLU abandoning their previous stance o

https://www.fairforall.org/about/ https://www.fairforall.org/about/ is a group that seems to fill the void left by the ACLU abandoning their previous stance of being apolitical.

pvg 5y ago
The ACLU has never had a stance of being 'apolitical'. That wouldn't make much sense given the nature of their work.
- jevoten 5y ago
  'Principled' and 'non-partisan' described them better.
- mrkstu 5y ago
  They used to stand for protecting constitutional freedom, even if that conflicted with other leftist causes. Now they don't stand for protecting freedoms per se, rather advancing a more general progressive agenda. i.e. they used to protect freedom of speech for Nazis (literally)- now they consider viewpoint discrimination acceptable.
  - pvg 5y ago
    I don't think this really holds up if you look at it a bit more closely - it's a somewhat ahistorical view based on ACLUs own public mythology (everyone knows about that one time the ACLU represented some Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, etc) and the responses to it. The whole point of the ACLU is to advocate for a particular interpretation of certain constitutional 'principles' - interpretations which have changed quite significantly over time, both in the courts and the ACLU. This tells us something about the difficulty in even defining what it means for an organization to be defined by principles, never mind 'constitutional freedom'. ACLU's very first national chair publicly resigned over disagreement about principles, their meaning and prioritization. This was in 1940 so the notion the ACLU 'changed' now and didn't before is clearly inaccurate. You can't really have an organization like the ACLU without change. It's mostly a matter of whether you like the change or not.
joshuamorton 5y ago
Is there...anyone in that group who is left of center? Like Bari Weiss, Kenny Xu, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Andrew Sullivan, Will Reilly, John McWhorter, Abigail Shrier, Megyn Kelly, Zaid Jilani, Peter Boghossian, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Glen Loury are all people who I'd either describe as "generally conservative" or "have known clearly intolerant views against some group", whether it be immigrants, Muslims, or transgender people. (and those are the only names I recognize, except for Angel Eduardo who I know nothing about except that he's been criticized by people I follow on Twitter for being a part of FAIR). It's really, really, really hard to believe that an organization claiming to be against "racism and intolerance" is apolitical, when there's no notable left-of center representation on its board, and a good 10-20% of its board members are notable primarily because of their intolerance towards certain groups. Like you could perhaps make the argument that this group is devoted very, very specifically to free speech and I'd believe you. But "intolerance", no. Those two things are fundamentally at odds.
- Manuel_D 5y ago
  Most of them? That having liberal views on almost every flashpoint issue (guns, abortion, immigration, vaccines, etc.) save one or two, usually just one. Take Kenny Xu, how do you justify categorizing him as "racist and intolerant"? Is the idea that college admissions should not discriminate on the basis of race really so abhorrent?
  - joshuamorton 5y ago
    I guess I should have been more precise and specified left/liberal on the relevant issues. Someone's position on guns probably doesn't matter, but their position on race does. That said, Xu specifically just very much is a conservative. He self-identifies as conservative and positions himself in opposition to the left, he's worked for conservative groups like the YAF and The Federalist, and generally holds conservative positions (like on Abortion: https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/01/new-yorks-barbaric-abortion-law-prompt-doctors-stand-life/ https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/01/new-yorks-barbaric-abor..., as well as immigration and vaccination if you look at his twitter). Like, he's I'd argue more conservative than most of the people I listed (or at least more explicitly so). But you asked specifically about him being racist and intolerant. And that deserves a slightly deeper dive. Part of the issue is that you're framing him based on one of his most moderate positions. Yes, Xu thinks that affirmative action is problematic. If that were his only thing I think you'd have a reasonable point, but it isn't. He's not just anti-affirmative action, he's strongly anti-CRT (https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1481295452804898820 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1481295452804898820, which amusingly misrepresents CRT) and generally against diversity and inclusion period. [aside: so much of his twitter content is just completely making up positions and then being outraged about them. Like I'm not saying that CRT or progressives approach to race is "right", there's enough debate within those groups that that's clearly silly. But Xu doesn't actually engage with any, he just argues with positions he makes up] More specifically, he tweets stuff like https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1480674815283400708 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1480674815283400708 and https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1484930804425838594 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1484930804425838594, the first is some mild transphobia and I have a hard time coming up with a not-racist explanation for the second. Like his worldview seems to be that "Black culture" is bad while mainstream US culture is good, and that therefore it is black cultures responsibility to better integrate. But further recognition of good things within Black culture, or even help integrating, are anti-meritocratic and therefore harm Asian people (and further, that this harm is racist, which is circular). He even essentially says as much explicitly : https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1483282964272365574 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1483282964272365574, equivocating "diversity" with "anti-Asian racism". At the point where you're arguing that all attempts to improve diversity and inclusion are bad, I think it's fair to say that you're intolerant. I think that when so much of that intolerance is based around race, racism is a reasonable conclusion to draw.
everybodyknows 5y ago
Board of Advisors: https://www.fairforall.org/about/board-of-advisors/ https://www.fairforall.org/about/board-of-advisors/ Quite an overlap with the U of Austin crowd: https://www.uaustin.org/board-of-advisors https://www.uaustin.org/board-of-advisors https://www.uaustin.org/founding-trustees https://www.uaustin.org/founding-trustees
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

https://www.fairforall.org/about/ https://www.fairforall.org/about/ is a group that seems to fill the void left by the ACLU abandoning their previous stance of being apolitical.

pvg 5y ago

The ACLU has never had a stance of being 'apolitical'. That wouldn't make much sense given the nature of their work.

jevoten 5y ago
'Principled' and 'non-partisan' described them better.
mrkstu 5y ago
They used to stand for protecting constitutional freedom, even if that conflicted with other leftist causes. Now they don't stand for protecting freedoms per se, rather advancing a more general progressive agenda. i.e. they used to protect freedom of speech for Nazis (literally)- now they consider viewpoint discrimination acceptable.
- pvg 5y ago
  I don't think this really holds up if you look at it a bit more closely - it's a somewhat ahistorical view based on ACLUs own public mythology (everyone knows about that one time the ACLU represented some Nazis who wanted to march in Skokie, etc) and the responses to it. The whole point of the ACLU is to advocate for a particular interpretation of certain constitutional 'principles' - interpretations which have changed quite significantly over time, both in the courts and the ACLU. This tells us something about the difficulty in even defining what it means for an organization to be defined by principles, never mind 'constitutional freedom'. ACLU's very first national chair publicly resigned over disagreement about principles, their meaning and prioritization. This was in 1940 so the notion the ACLU 'changed' now and didn't before is clearly inaccurate. You can't really have an organization like the ACLU without change. It's mostly a matter of whether you like the change or not.

joshuamorton 5y ago

Is there...anyone in that group who is left of center? Like Bari Weiss, Kenny Xu, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Andrew Sullivan, Will Reilly, John McWhorter, Abigail Shrier, Megyn Kelly, Zaid Jilani, Peter Boghossian, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Glen Loury are all people who I'd either describe as "generally conservative" or "have known clearly intolerant views against some group", whether it be immigrants, Muslims, or transgender people. (and those are the only names I recognize, except for Angel Eduardo who I know nothing about except that he's been criticized by people I follow on Twitter for being a part of FAIR). It's really, really, really hard to believe that an organization claiming to be against "racism and intolerance" is apolitical, when there's no notable left-of center representation on its board, and a good 10-20% of its board members are notable primarily because of their intolerance towards certain groups. Like you could perhaps make the argument that this group is devoted very, very specifically to free speech and I'd believe you. But "intolerance", no. Those two things are fundamentally at odds.

Manuel_D 5y ago
Most of them? That having liberal views on almost every flashpoint issue (guns, abortion, immigration, vaccines, etc.) save one or two, usually just one. Take Kenny Xu, how do you justify categorizing him as "racist and intolerant"? Is the idea that college admissions should not discriminate on the basis of race really so abhorrent?
- joshuamorton 5y ago
  I guess I should have been more precise and specified left/liberal on the relevant issues. Someone's position on guns probably doesn't matter, but their position on race does. That said, Xu specifically just very much is a conservative. He self-identifies as conservative and positions himself in opposition to the left, he's worked for conservative groups like the YAF and The Federalist, and generally holds conservative positions (like on Abortion: https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/01/new-yorks-barbaric-abortion-law-prompt-doctors-stand-life/ https://thefederalist.com/2019/02/01/new-yorks-barbaric-abor..., as well as immigration and vaccination if you look at his twitter). Like, he's I'd argue more conservative than most of the people I listed (or at least more explicitly so). But you asked specifically about him being racist and intolerant. And that deserves a slightly deeper dive. Part of the issue is that you're framing him based on one of his most moderate positions. Yes, Xu thinks that affirmative action is problematic. If that were his only thing I think you'd have a reasonable point, but it isn't. He's not just anti-affirmative action, he's strongly anti-CRT (https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1481295452804898820 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1481295452804898820, which amusingly misrepresents CRT) and generally against diversity and inclusion period. [aside: so much of his twitter content is just completely making up positions and then being outraged about them. Like I'm not saying that CRT or progressives approach to race is "right", there's enough debate within those groups that that's clearly silly. But Xu doesn't actually engage with any, he just argues with positions he makes up] More specifically, he tweets stuff like https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1480674815283400708 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1480674815283400708 and https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1484930804425838594 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1484930804425838594, the first is some mild transphobia and I have a hard time coming up with a not-racist explanation for the second. Like his worldview seems to be that "Black culture" is bad while mainstream US culture is good, and that therefore it is black cultures responsibility to better integrate. But further recognition of good things within Black culture, or even help integrating, are anti-meritocratic and therefore harm Asian people (and further, that this harm is racist, which is circular). He even essentially says as much explicitly : https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1483282964272365574 https://twitter.com/kennymxu/status/1483282964272365574, equivocating "diversity" with "anti-Asian racism". At the point where you're arguing that all attempts to improve diversity and inclusion are bad, I think it's fair to say that you're intolerant. I think that when so much of that intolerance is based around race, racism is a reasonable conclusion to draw.

everybodyknows 5y ago

Board of Advisors: https://www.fairforall.org/about/board-of-advisors/ https://www.fairforall.org/about/board-of-advisors/ Quite an overlap with the U of Austin crowd: https://www.uaustin.org/board-of-advisors https://www.uaustin.org/board-of-advisors https://www.uaustin.org/founding-trustees https://www.uaustin.org/founding-trustees

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]