5 ms·

Jim Crow laws were also about wages vs profits. White people wanted to not have their wages lowered via competition with blacks. The racist components of the Ne

Jim Crow laws were also about wages vs profits. White people wanted to not have their wages lowered via competition with blacks. The racist components of the New Deal were almost entirely economic. If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. That's not an argument to eliminate H1B, that's merely an argument to replace it. I'm arguing against eliminating/reducing it and comparing many of those who favor it to Jim Crow types. As for "brain drain", the same can happen with the black community. A black person may get a good job in white America and then leave his predominantly black neighborhood. He might then marry a white woman and never look back. Oh noes! Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. (Yeah, isn't it a bit disconcerting when I describe the black community the way you describe a nation?) And again, like I said, these are all empirical criteria. Even if you have exact thresholds in each criteria which India currently satisfies but "Black America" does not, one could easily imagine a future where Black America does cross those thresholds. Should we bring back segregation at that time, and require black Americans to get a B1B visa to live and work in white America? If you oppose this, then your stated criteria are not your real ones.

crdoconnor 12y ago
>If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. Of course you are. I'm sure you don't believe there are any social issues that cannot be solved with the healing power of the holy market. >Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. * Black Americans (whom I assume you are referring to) live in the first world, which reaps the benefit of their education it paid for. * Education for black Americans is largely paid for by the state and indirectly paid for and supported by citizens of the United States. I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective.
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Let me again point out - you've brought up a bunch of empirical criteria. Suppose the situation changes and black Americans suddenly satisfy those empirical criteria. Do you favor imposing the same restrictions on them that we impose on Indians? For example, if the educational funding situation changes, and most black people are educated via black people-funded community organizations, would requiring visas before we allow them to work be acceptable? If not, why is it acceptable to do this to Indians and Haitians? Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective. Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so?
  - crdoconnor 12y ago
    >Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Government. A nation is served by an institution that delivers (more or less) consistent policy that can be shaped to benefit (or harm) those under it. It makes sense to have opinions about how institutions should operate. It does not make sense to have opinions about how the government of the non-existent nation of American white (or black) people should operate because it does not exist. >Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I'm not trying to wish it away like you are. Given that it does exist, it should operate for the benefit of its citizens. >Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. ...is exactly what you were doing by bringing race into this discussion. >I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so? Amusing :)
    - yummyfajitas 12y ago
      Given that it does exist, it should operate for the benefit of its citizens. We aren't discussing giving welfare or medicaid to Americans but not Nigerians. We are discussing threatening the Nigerian with violence if he works for an American in America. ...is exactly what you were doing by bringing race into this discussion. I did nothing of the sort. I said directly that nationalism is just as bad (morally) as racism. I didn't say it was racism. I'll note that you've yet again ducked the question of whether it's morally correct to treat black Americans as badly as we treat Kenyans under any particular circumstance.

crdoconnor 12y ago

>If you want to alter the H1B program, I'm all for auctioning off work permits. Of course you are. I'm sure you don't believe there are any social issues that cannot be solved with the healing power of the holy market. >Similarly, a black person who attends Howard University and then works as a plastic surgeon for rich white women has also had his investment paid for by the black community, but the first world is getting the whole benefit. * Black Americans (whom I assume you are referring to) live in the first world, which reaps the benefit of their education it paid for. * Education for black Americans is largely paid for by the state and indirectly paid for and supported by citizens of the United States. I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective.

yummyfajitas 12y ago
Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Let me again point out - you've brought up a bunch of empirical criteria. Suppose the situation changes and black Americans suddenly satisfy those empirical criteria. Do you favor imposing the same restrictions on them that we impose on Indians? For example, if the educational funding situation changes, and most black people are educated via black people-funded community organizations, would requiring visas before we allow them to work be acceptable? If not, why is it acceptable to do this to Indians and Haitians? Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I think regarding racism you should probably be a bit more introspective. Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so?
- crdoconnor 12y ago
  >Choosing "first world" rather than "white America" is a completely arbitrary division of humanity. I'm asking why a nationalistic division is legitimate but a racial one is not. Government. A nation is served by an institution that delivers (more or less) consistent policy that can be shaped to benefit (or harm) those under it. It makes sense to have opinions about how institutions should operate. It does not make sense to have opinions about how the government of the non-existent nation of American white (or black) people should operate because it does not exist. >Are you merely taking the legitimacy of the nation state as some moral first principle? I'm not trying to wish it away like you are. Given that it does exist, it should operate for the benefit of its citizens. >Ah yes - dislike what someone has to say, so hint that they are racist. ...is exactly what you were doing by bringing race into this discussion. >I'm currently interpreting your comment as being intended in a somewhat hostile manner. Am I correct in doing so? Amusing :)
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    Given that it does exist, it should operate for the benefit of its citizens. We aren't discussing giving welfare or medicaid to Americans but not Nigerians. We are discussing threatening the Nigerian with violence if he works for an American in America. ...is exactly what you were doing by bringing race into this discussion. I did nothing of the sort. I said directly that nationalism is just as bad (morally) as racism. I didn't say it was racism. I'll note that you've yet again ducked the question of whether it's morally correct to treat black Americans as badly as we treat Kenyans under any particular circumstance.