3 ms·

> My guiding principle is that when the diversity of a workforce does not match the diversity of its surroundings, that is a problem. The people who talk like

> My guiding principle is that when the diversity of a workforce does not match the diversity of its surroundings, that is a problem. The people who talk like this argued that Asians don’t deserve equal admission to Harvard or UNC because there’s “too many”. I think that kind of racism is disgusting — choosing people based on skin color is horrific.

makeitdouble 4y ago
You’re putting words in parent’s mouth. I personally never heard someone jumping from one to the other, and don’t see the logical bind either.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  UNC and Harvard both argued before the Supreme Court in 2022 that their anti-Asian racism is for “diversity”. A lot of people are dishonest about that, but the people who crow about “diversity” consistently engage in racialized language — and discrimination based on race, such as discrimination against Asians at those universities. (You can see GP works himself around to the racial angle by the end.) I didn’t put any words in GPs mouth: I pointed out he’s using the language of modern bigots, such as those at Harvard and UNC.
  - makeitdouble 4y ago
    You are commenting on a case that is still open, and while you seem squarely in favor of SFFA, their claims are far from being validated (they’ve been rejected by lower courts up to this point) What I find interesting in particular from those lawsuits: one of the main argument was the representation of Asians being lower than “white” ethnic groups adjusted for selected academic achievements. That basically goes against your thesis, as doing that intentionally would lower diversity.
marcosdumay 4y ago
Yes, there exist people that do that. Yet, we are talking about a real barrier for many kinds of people that was suddenly lifted, and people are still making an effort to classify the people that pointed "hey, there was a barrier here" as racist. The rhetoric of this thread is amazing.
- abduhl 4y ago
  People are not making an effort to classify the people that pointed out that there was a barrier as racist. They are making an effort to classify people that are currently saying “hey there IS STILL a barrier here and the best or only way to demolish it is by looking at a person’s skin color” as racist. And they are definitionally correct.

makeitdouble 4y ago

You’re putting words in parent’s mouth. I personally never heard someone jumping from one to the other, and don’t see the logical bind either.

zmgsabst 4y ago
UNC and Harvard both argued before the Supreme Court in 2022 that their anti-Asian racism is for “diversity”. A lot of people are dishonest about that, but the people who crow about “diversity” consistently engage in racialized language — and discrimination based on race, such as discrimination against Asians at those universities. (You can see GP works himself around to the racial angle by the end.) I didn’t put any words in GPs mouth: I pointed out he’s using the language of modern bigots, such as those at Harvard and UNC.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  You are commenting on a case that is still open, and while you seem squarely in favor of SFFA, their claims are far from being validated (they’ve been rejected by lower courts up to this point) What I find interesting in particular from those lawsuits: one of the main argument was the representation of Asians being lower than “white” ethnic groups adjusted for selected academic achievements. That basically goes against your thesis, as doing that intentionally would lower diversity.

marcosdumay 4y ago

Yes, there exist people that do that. Yet, we are talking about a real barrier for many kinds of people that was suddenly lifted, and people are still making an effort to classify the people that pointed "hey, there was a barrier here" as racist. The rhetoric of this thread is amazing.

abduhl 4y ago
People are not making an effort to classify the people that pointed out that there was a barrier as racist. They are making an effort to classify people that are currently saying “hey there IS STILL a barrier here and the best or only way to demolish it is by looking at a person’s skin color” as racist. And they are definitionally correct.