Subj : Diversity
To   : Richard Falken
From : Lee Lofaso
Date : Tue Aug 20 2019 00:53:52

Hello Richard,

>>There is only one race - the human race.
>
>[...]
>
>>How to make it fair for races of all colors to be considered as
>>equals for employment?
>
>Not to be very anal, but if you are trying to make a case for egalitarism
> basing it on the idea that there is only a single human race, you should
> not talk in a follow-up argument about the integration of diferent races.
> It sounds self-defeating to the cause.

There is only a single branch of the human race that counts, as
there are no others still around.  However, there are some folks
who have gotten the twisted notion that different pigmentation
of skin represents separate races of man.  Of course, we all know
this not to be true, as woman rules all of mankind regardless of
the color of his skin.

>To be honest, I never go near the "there is a single human race" argument
> because it usually doesn't work well.

Have you ever tried to do it with a dog?  I watched a woman do that,
and with the dog doing it to her, live on Bourbon Street in New Orleans
on Mardi Gras.  Have you ever tried to do it with a cow?  I watched
a classmate do it in the pasture while waiting for the bus, which
he missed to his extracurricular activities.  He earned the nickname
"Moo" for his efforts.

>It is usually paired with the implicit idea that every man should have the
> same rights because we are of the same race.

"All men are created equal." ~Thomas Jefferson

Some more equal than others, no doubt.  And then there are women.
And children.  And gays.  And lesbians.  And transgenders ...

>The problem is that the whole argument breaks when you see a picture of
> Obama next to a picture of Trump and realize that large segments of the
> population share sets of characteristics that allow to get people
> classified into races.

Obama was a mutt, having been bred by a black brother and a white
sister.  Just think of what his yellow siblings must think.

>Just like you can classify dogs and horses by breed.

It takes generations to breed dogs and horses to be what you
want them to be.  Only then can you classify them properly.

>You then hit the fallacy that since we are not the same race then we don't
> necessarily have the same rights.

Because we are classified as humans, we all have the same rights.
This was not always the case.  Black folks were not considered as
being human until after Lincoln's death, and even then were subjected
to segregation for an additional century afterwards.  Women did not
have the right to vote until 1920, and 18-year-olds had to wait decades
longer.

>In my opinion, it is better for everybody to avoid that can of worms
> entirely and just declare that every functional human being has the same
> set of essential basic rights and be done with that, because we are
> convincing nobody than Obama and Trump cannot be classified in different
> groups.

"The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" only
existed for rich white men who owned property in Thomas Jefferson's
day, most of them well past their teens.  Should we return to the
days of old, when only elderly white men who owned property could
vote and decide how everybody else should live?

>In any case, the human resources stuff I was talking about was no quota
> driven. And I mean, there was no quota mandating to have x% minorities
> hired. As far as I know it was a PR policy from the firm. There is a lot of
> myth that business do what is best for them, but I am sure everybody here
> has had their share of lame managers... firms are ran by human beings and
> human beings are falible. They make mistakes. Some even let politics ruin
> the firm. Last time I checked, some workers of this firm complaint that a
> lot of the new recruits were underperforming very badly because technical
> merits had turned into a secondary consideration for recruitment. Go
> figure. I think this is the sort of thing people gets worried about when
> they hear of diversity enforcement plans.

Affirmative action is not quota-driven.  However, opponents of
affirmative action falsely claim it is.  Why is that?  Because
those who oppose affirmative action want to keep the status quo,
that of denying everyone their fair shake when it comes to being
considered for employment.

Look at it this way.  The number of white police officers far
outnumbers what is reflective of the population at large.  So why
not enact of policy of hiring more black police officers, at least
until the numbers are reflective of the population at large?

Rather than being racist, that is what is known as fairness.

>And I will say I agree with those fears.

Why should white folks be scared of competition from black folks?
You don't find black folks complaining about white folks applying
for the job ...

>I have actually been in the blunt end of a quota-based law that left me out
> of a job position somewhere else and it was not very fun, by the way. Just
> sharing for the sake of full disclosure :-P

You don't get it, man.  You have to put on whiteout before you
apply blackface.  Otherwise, the makeup just won't work ...

--Lee

-- 
We Make Your Wet Dreams Come True

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
 * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

.