I’m happy to discuss alternative ideas.
But not if the discussion essentially comes down to “Let’s immediately abandon affirmative action and any other program with similar goals. And let’s pinky swear that we’ll consider getting together at some indeterminate point in the indefinite future to maybe talk about the possibility of developing something that might replace it.”
I’m curious. How can you tell when somebody has you on their ignore list?
It can’t just be that Will isn’t responding to your posts. He doesn’t respond to a lot of the posts written by other people.
Mostly well, IMO. Not perfect. And it’s just one tool of many.
I assume you mean Communism, but I’m not sure how Stalin and affirmative action equate.
Ah, yes, the old “Why can’t we all just be called Americans?” bit. Here’s one reason: racism is still an issue. So an incident in my town from two years ago would have been reported like this: “An American man is in serious but stable condition after being stabbed by an American man who was outraged that the American man was kissing an American woman.”
[swirling space-loops]I read his mind.[/swirling space-loops]
I find it interesting that the left believes in the concepts of racial and gender differences when convenient and doesn’t believe in those concepts when convenient.
Replace your “convenient” with “relevant”, and see if it still baffles you.
Do you believe right wingers like yourself have a subjective or objective definition of race?
I find cryptic statements like this rather boring. If you want to interact, ask questions or challenge statements. Cryptic nonsense doesn’t really add anything.
You mean politically relevant? Because I don’t see any way to reconcile the hypocrisy.
What do you mean by right wingers? It seems to me that groups of biological organisms are very difficult to precisely define. It’s hard to define what a planet is as well. I try not to get sidetracked with the pointless question of precise definitions of fuzzy sets.
I choose how I wish to interact. You might find it rather boring and that’s your right. Your dismissive attitude is an interesting tactic of discredit but again you’re entitled to employ such tactics.
Okay. I stand ready to answer any questions or respond to any disagreements if you decide that’s what you’d like to do.
Dammit, I knew I should have paid for the extended membership package.
So, if you have shifting definitions of race because it is difficult to define, why do you criticize liberals for having similar views?
That’s a real question.
This is your question:
If you are ignorant of the policy being applied, then it is absolutely a relevant and GQable topic. * If* you’re actually interested in learning about it.
I don’t criticize liberals for not being able to precisely define these sort of terms. I criticize liberals for inconsistency regarding the existence and utility of these fuzzy sets based purely on political/ideological concerns.
Some definitions are incredibly precise and easy to devise.
Liberals: those who say that the people complaining loudly and persistently about being discriminated against because of race are the legitimate judges of these terms.
Conservatives: those who believe that only whites’ definitions and judgements count.
Liberals: those who are totally baffled that people can believe anything that inhuman.
Can you give an example of this inconsistency?
Racism, as I have pointed out, is a set of irrational beliefs. So you have to take that irrationality into account when you’re opposing racism.
There’s no logical reason why white racists in America hate black people more than they hate Asians. But they do. So we need to spend more resources opposing racism directed against black people than we spend opposing racism directed against Asian people.
Our policies have to be somewhat fuzzy because we’re opposing people who have fuzzy brains. If racists could articulate a consistent precise set of their beliefs and actions then we could address them with consistent and precise counter-actions. But if racists were capable of that kind of thinking, they wouldn’t be racists.
This is a very liberal answer to give, and it smacks of ignorance. I have worked alongside minorities for years, as an equal - I’m not a supervisor or anyone’s boss. There is no agreement whatsoever among them as to what constitutes discrimination, and many would chafe at this view that puts minorities in such a neat little box with a pretty little bow on top.