3 ms·

A person can both have advantages in society and yet have specific situations in their life that are much more impactful. You could have used the same argument

A person can both have advantages in society and yet have specific situations in their life that are much more impactful. You could have used the same arguments in 1860... Not all black people were enslaved, some were quite prosperous in fact! Therefore there was no benefit to being white.

rootusrootus 4y ago
And thus the exact problem. It's okay to observe that a whole class of people enjoy a privilege. Where it goes off the rails is when you use that knowledge to discriminate against individuals in an attempt to correct the historical injustice.
- peter422 4y ago
  And thus we perpetuate the injustice indefinitely! Your essential argument seems to be that once an injustice is over one generation old, it is as if it never happened, no matter if the after effects continue to cascade into modern day. You cannot just magically pretend an individual is not part of a society.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - catiopatio 4y ago
  - yibg 4y ago
    What's the proposed solution? Put a finger on the scale against the privileged group? By how much? for how long? Lumping any race together and treating it as the same is a problem in my view.
    - peter422 4y ago
      And ignoring it altogether is better? I don't have a magical solution, but I also am not going to flip out everytime a private company chooses to give some type of minor preferential treatment to historically underprivileged groups to attempt to balance out systemic inequities. I can't say with complete confidence one way or the other if Twilio's policy is right or wrong but I can say with confidence a lot of the critiques are both in bad faith and lack any real attempt in understanding the rationale behind the policies.
      - yibg 4y ago
        If there is an unfairness in obtaining opportunity, either lack of education opportunity or whatever, that seems like the right thing to address. Not at the end of the process and then trying to tilt things.
        peter422 4y ago
        That reminds me of what happens when we see a house on fire: We let it burn to the ground (don't want to upset the status quo of the house on fire), then say we'll make a few small tweaks to the building codes to prevent any house fires in the future. A major problem should be tackled in all of the areas where there is injustice. The beginning, the end and the middle.
        yibg 4y ago
        That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying (in my opinion), there are other areas more worthy of investment that for whatever reason the populous aren't behind. How about we provide easier and cheaper access to education? More after school programs, child care, social safety nets etc so that disadvantaged groups don't stay disadvantaged.
    - Natsu 4y ago
      > What's the proposed solution? There actually is an equitable solution there: help all of the poor equally. To the extent any identifiable group has been historically disadvantaged, this solution will balance things out by disproportionately helping those groups. I really don't know why it's not more popular as a way to make society more fair, or why group-based interventions are seen as necessary despite the existence of a simple and stable way of leveling the playing field and keeping it closer to level over time, instead of constantly debating how much we have to tip it in which direction(s) and for how long. Of course, there's still the problem that things will probably never be perfectly fair no matter what we do and that grievance can always be used as a reason for people to push for rules that favor their groups over others.

rootusrootus 4y ago

And thus the exact problem. It's okay to observe that a whole class of people enjoy a privilege. Where it goes off the rails is when you use that knowledge to discriminate against individuals in an attempt to correct the historical injustice.

peter422 4y ago
And thus we perpetuate the injustice indefinitely! Your essential argument seems to be that once an injustice is over one generation old, it is as if it never happened, no matter if the after effects continue to cascade into modern day. You cannot just magically pretend an individual is not part of a society.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- catiopatio 4y ago
- yibg 4y ago
  What's the proposed solution? Put a finger on the scale against the privileged group? By how much? for how long? Lumping any race together and treating it as the same is a problem in my view.
  - peter422 4y ago
    And ignoring it altogether is better? I don't have a magical solution, but I also am not going to flip out everytime a private company chooses to give some type of minor preferential treatment to historically underprivileged groups to attempt to balance out systemic inequities. I can't say with complete confidence one way or the other if Twilio's policy is right or wrong but I can say with confidence a lot of the critiques are both in bad faith and lack any real attempt in understanding the rationale behind the policies.
    - yibg 4y ago
      If there is an unfairness in obtaining opportunity, either lack of education opportunity or whatever, that seems like the right thing to address. Not at the end of the process and then trying to tilt things.
      - peter422 4y ago
        That reminds me of what happens when we see a house on fire: We let it burn to the ground (don't want to upset the status quo of the house on fire), then say we'll make a few small tweaks to the building codes to prevent any house fires in the future. A major problem should be tackled in all of the areas where there is injustice. The beginning, the end and the middle.
        yibg 4y ago
        That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying (in my opinion), there are other areas more worthy of investment that for whatever reason the populous aren't behind. How about we provide easier and cheaper access to education? More after school programs, child care, social safety nets etc so that disadvantaged groups don't stay disadvantaged.
  - Natsu 4y ago
    > What's the proposed solution? There actually is an equitable solution there: help all of the poor equally. To the extent any identifiable group has been historically disadvantaged, this solution will balance things out by disproportionately helping those groups. I really don't know why it's not more popular as a way to make society more fair, or why group-based interventions are seen as necessary despite the existence of a simple and stable way of leveling the playing field and keeping it closer to level over time, instead of constantly debating how much we have to tip it in which direction(s) and for how long. Of course, there's still the problem that things will probably never be perfectly fair no matter what we do and that grievance can always be used as a reason for people to push for rules that favor their groups over others.