“White People This is Your Future”

You mean like the term "Black on Black crime"?

 

That would be a term used in statistics, much like "white on white" crime. I cant believe I had to explain that...

 

No, it's a racist term---like White privilege.

 

Sure, those damn statistics....

 

And of those 57%, it is mandated that 35% of the contract total is subcontracted to non-whites.

Care to take a guesstimate on the racial breakdown in Chicago? On top of that, considering the percentages above, do you think whites are getting a fair shake?

 

Can you supply a link that doesn't look like it's gonna infect my computer?


There was no video, just a link.

 

Constituents like me? Well, not like me racially, of course. And thus not me and people of my skin color.

Yes, affirmative action helps certain minorities, especially blacks, by using racism against certain whites and Asian-Americans. Rich whites, or whites with influence, especially political, don't have to worry about the albatross of affirmative action. Like I said before, Chuck Schumer, a white man, was able to get both of his kids into Harvard, one of whom also went to Yale. He can support affirmative action proudly because he and his progeny are unaffected by it: he's already been to Harvard, and he's a 22-year U.S. Senator, and a Harvard alumnus.

 

Why would rich white people get rid of affirmative action? There is absolutely no benefit in doing so. Having affirmative action around gives them plenty of advantages. One, it does not affect them, nor their progeny. Two, being in support of it, it can be used as a tool for pandering, allowing them to virtue signal for more votes--especially woke whites (like yourself) and minorities who benefit from it. And if they're not a politician, they can virtue signal about how woke they are. In fact, they are so woke, they are sacrificing so certain minorities can reap the benefits and get that slice of the American pie. Except, of course, that they are not sacrificing anything, as it does not affect them, remember? Three, in today's American culture, white pride is connotatively racist. Woke award shows are celebrated for their diversity, which means less white people. Diversity is our strength means less white people. This means that whites, especially in positions of power, are less willing to help their fellow whites out of racial solidarity, and if it was found by the mainstream press that a white politician was legislating out of white pride, they media would have a field day with hyperbolic yarns about antebellum America and Jim Crow. Four, if it was known that a white politician wanted to get rid of affirmative action, they would immediately be branded a racist by the liberal mainstream press. And so on, and so on.

 

Are you saying it is racist even to keep such statistics? Or do you just think another term would be more appropriate? If so, what?

 

Your sarcasm meter is broken.

 

This is just ignoring reality. We know that the first best of a meritocracy is not available. The failure of passive policies, such as equal pay legislation, undoubtedly proves that.

 

Equal pay for whom? I hope you don’t mean women.

 

Any equal pay legislation, obviously.

 

But equal pay legislation is usually focused on salaried employees and not hourly. The problem with that is that salaried employees don’t all work the same hours.

For instance equal pay for men and women. On average men work 14 hours per month more than women. Should they get equal pay for working 14 hours less per month?

Equal pay for whites and blacks. On average Blacks demonstrably spend less time working every day than whites do. Should they get equal pay?

 

You're not interesting me. The point is simple: equal pay legislation has failed to remove discriminatory practices.

 

What discriminatory practices are you referring to?

 

The clue is in the title: equal pay legislation. The orthodox amongst us would understand it as unexplained wage differential measured by a wage decomposition methodology

 

In another thread, you made an emotive argument for toppling Confederate monuments. You told those against it to put on their "empathy hats," trying to imagine what is must feel like for a black person jogging, seeing the Confederate monuments and having a rush of depressing emotion in response. Using that same line of logic, where are you on toppling monuments of MLK? What happens when you put on your "empathy hat," trying to imagine what is must feel like for a female or a gay person jogging and seeing his statue, despite the fact that he was a homophobic womanizer who watched a rape? Certainly, you must be for toppling his statue, yes?

 

Is that your attempt to deflect the uncomfortable reality that whites are no longer at the top of the tree?

 

Caught out, were ya?

 

No idea what you’re going on about.

 

All we can do is provide the tools. We can't make people use them.

Pay has been equal for years. It's the law. It has not failed in any way. It's STILL illegal to pay two people differently, who are doing exactly the same job, who have the same amount of experience, and who are working the same number of hours. No company would risk breaking that very fundamental law. It would be far too costly when discovered, and they'd gain very little by engaging in it.

 

You were attempting to suggest that white people cannot have experienced discrimination (whether at home, or abroad .. it's still an 'emotional experience').

 

Between which groups?

 

Incorrect. I stated that I’ve asked white people to tell us about all this discrimination they have experienced in the US and it’s always crickets.