Epic Beard Man
Bearded Philosopher
That's what I wonder.
The OP is about one thing, yet another is being debated but without any debate.
As your friend too is debating another subject.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
That's what I wonder.
The OP is about one thing, yet another is being debated but without any debate.
Whites in the history of this country and many other countries have created the most tragic and historic homicides we have known in human history but damn these facts! Whites in the history of this country, as well as others have created systems (not temporal laws) we are talking about systems that favor one ethnic group over another.
In my experience, "minority issues" only really happen when someone takes it upon themselves to make it an issue. And we talk about it because of those people who want to ***** about whatever nonsense. When we don't have to talk about it anymore, it won't be an issue anymore.Because they are terrible at communicating and wish to present their ideas in as counterproductive a manner as possible?
It's not affirmative action, but I recently saw a promotional tweet by a company that boasted that their diversity initiatives had been so successful that 80% of their managers were now women.
I wonder at what point diversity initiatives stop being successful...
The High Price of Stale Grievances
"In the fall of 2016, I was hired to play in Rihanna’s back-up band at the MTV Video Music Awards... as the date approached, I learned that one of my friends had been fired and replaced. The reason? He was a white Hispanic, and Rihanna’s artistic team had decided to go for an all-black aesthetic—aside from Rihanna’s steady guitarist, there would be no non-blacks on stage...
One thing, however, is clear. If the races were reversed—if a black musician had been fired in order to achieve an all-white aesthetic—it would have made front page headlines. It would have been seen as an unambiguous moral infraction. The usual suspects would be outraged, calling for this event to be viewed in the context of the long history of slavery and Jim Crow in this country, and their reaction would widely be seen as justified. Public-shaming would be in order and heartfelt apologies would be made. MTV might even enact anti-bias trainings as a corrective...
Only a black intellectual, for instance, could write an op-ed arguing that black children should not befriend white children because “[h]istory has provided little reason for people of color to trust white people,” and get it published in the New York Times in 2017. An identical piece with the races reversed would rightly be relegated to fringe white supremacist forums...
...to call it a ‘pro-black bias’ slightly misses the mark. It is better described as a tacit acknowledgement that modern-day blacks must be seen through the filter of history—not as autonomous individuals living in the present, but as dominoes in a chain of causation that stretches back to the middle passage...
Given America’s brutal history of white racism, it is understandable that the pendulum of racial double-standards has swung in the opposite direction—indeed, it is a testament to our laudable, if naïve, desire to fix history—but the status quo cannot be maintained indefinitely. Cracks in the reparations mindset are beginning to show themselves. Whites are noticing that black leaders still use historical grievances to justify special dispensations for blacks who were born decades after the end of Jim Crow—and many whites understandably resent this. Asian students are noticing that applying to elite colleges is an uphill battle for them, and are understandably fighting for basic fairness in admissions standards. The majority of blacks themselves are noticing that bias is not the main issue they face anymore, even as blacks who dare express this view are called race traitors.
As these cracks widen, the far-Left responds by doubling down on the radical strain of black identity politics that caused these problems to begin with, and the far-Right responds with its own toxic strain of white identity politics. Stale grievances are dredged up from history and used to justify double-standards that create fresh grievances in turn. And beneath all of this lies the tacit claim that blacks are uniquely constrained by history in a way that Jewish-Americans, East Asian-Americans, Indian-Americans, and countless other historically marginalized ethnic groups are not. In the midst of this breakdown in civil discourse, we must ask ourselves—academics, journalists, activists, politicians, and concerned citizens alike—if we are on a path towards a thriving multi-ethnic democracy or a balkanized hotbed of racial and political tribalism."
Thoughts? Are racial double standards ever ethically justifiable? If the goal is racial equality, are they beneficial in this regard?
(The thread title is pretty much clickbait, don't take it at face value)
Some criminologists think we could be simply confusing race for poverty or inequality: black people tend to offend more because they tend to be more disadvantaged, living in poorer urban areas with less access to public services, and so on.
If you control for deprivation, people of different races ought to be similarly predisposed to commit crime. Or that’s the theory, at least."
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-black-americans-commit-crime