Now for a long time, heads has been weighted to be the result for a while. So say the last 50 flips, it was 40 heads and 10 tails.
So you evaluated the coin and realize it’s imbalanced. Would you weigh the tails side so the next 50 flips show more tails so that over the 100 total flips, it’s balanced?
Or do you remove the imbalance completely, and can say the next 50 will be fair.
Statistics would say the later, but seems people feel the first option would make it “fair” even though it’s not balanced.
Judging someone (or refusing to consider someone for a job) based on the color of their skin is racism. At least to most Americans. Which is why this is politically smart for the red team. The weird variation where you dismiss racism directed towards groups that were historically powerful is a fringe left idea, recently outlawed even in liberal California when affirmative action was banned.
Racism: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.
Putting my PoliSci cap on… Most Americans would say, “Two wrongs don’t make a right. Being racist today isn’t a valid fix for the harms of people being racist yesterday.” And that’s why Republicans win when Democrats focus too much on racial issues - the 7 in 10 perceive it as a new form of racism directed at them.
Do you want to be right at all costs? Or do you want to win this election?
None of which applies to redressing the balance by hiring someone in the minority who would normally not be hired for the job despite being just as skilled as a member of the majority
Was it racism when Mae Jemison was selected to be the first black woman to be an astronaut? Or was it because most astronauts before her were white men, so it was about fucking time?
We’re having two different conversations. I’m not here to say whether Biden was right or wrong to only hire black women for those roles. I’m not even going to pass judgement on how to redress the balance, as you put it. Those questions are way above my pay grade.
I’m merely here to say that when Republicans say “The people hiring based on DEI are the racists, not us”, the data shows that the majority of Americans agree with them. Therefore, as a purely political strategy, criticizing Biden and democrats for not considering white women for certain roles is a net win because more independents will agree than disagree.
Democrats are free to say “But we have to use a calculated form of counter-racism as a cure for historical wrongs.” They may even be right. It may be the only moral thing to do. Disagreeing may be evil and immoral. But none of that changes the fact that it’s not a winning electoral strategy to say or focus on those things in the 2024 presidential race.
I’m just talking about the way most Americans define it. You don’t have to agree, but from a political science perspective, you’re playing a losing game if you stick to that definition. The majority of Californians don’t even agree with it, so imagine how much worse it polls in the rest of the country…
Now you’re twisting my words. I’m not trying to defend Republicans. I’m trying to help you understand the nature and intent behind their words so you realize they aren’t as dumb as you think. Respect thy enemy and all that.
Most Californians think hiring based on race is wrong, and racist. Across the country, the margins on that get even better.
Republicans are just playing into that. You can downvote me all you want, but it doesn’t change the political reality of the situation.
Edit: I just checked - 7 in 10 Americans oppose affirmative action (reverse racism). To quote Biden, “It’s a fact, Jack!” You may support it, but that doesn’t make it a winning campaign strategy.
Balancing the scales is not racism.
Let’s simplify this down to a coin flip.
Now for a long time, heads has been weighted to be the result for a while. So say the last 50 flips, it was 40 heads and 10 tails.
So you evaluated the coin and realize it’s imbalanced. Would you weigh the tails side so the next 50 flips show more tails so that over the 100 total flips, it’s balanced?
Or do you remove the imbalance completely, and can say the next 50 will be fair.
Statistics would say the later, but seems people feel the first option would make it “fair” even though it’s not balanced.
Equating “the attempted mitigation of generations of systemic oppression” with “coin flips” is both idiotic and deranged behavior.
You’re not being “logical”, you’re being flippant.
But, sure, let’s play in your space. Heads or tails. My coin is “fair”. Of course.
Heads, I kill something you like. Maybe friends, maybe family, maybe you like having all your fingers. It doesn’t matter; it’s all hypothetical.
Tails? Well, we just flip again.
Aaaaand, it’s Heads. Off goes the thumb.
Heads again, and I take the middle finger.
Heads, Heads, Heads! Might as well just take the whole arm while I’m at.
Oh, but alas! My coin was not fair; “unwittingly” balanced toward Heads. I’ll use a balanced coin now.
Yes, your arm is gone but it’ll be fair in the future.
Exactly! I’m glad you understand. And weren’t overly aggressive or anything.
Unless tails has the option to regrow said fingers or arm. You need to move forward with what is fair for everyone.
It’s pretty much impossible to balance anything after the fact. You need to have a forward thinking mentality for progress to be made.
Judging someone (or refusing to consider someone for a job) based on the color of their skin is racism. At least to most Americans. Which is why this is politically smart for the red team. The weird variation where you dismiss racism directed towards groups that were historically powerful is a fringe left idea, recently outlawed even in liberal California when affirmative action was banned.
No, only ever hiring white people is racism.
Hiring black people because white people are the ones who almost always get the job is redressing the balance.
That would also be racism. Any time you use race as a hiring factor in the US, you are breaking the law and promoting racism.
You really don’t understand the concept of racism.
Racism: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group.
Putting my PoliSci cap on… Most Americans would say, “Two wrongs don’t make a right. Being racist today isn’t a valid fix for the harms of people being racist yesterday.” And that’s why Republicans win when Democrats focus too much on racial issues - the 7 in 10 perceive it as a new form of racism directed at them.
Do you want to be right at all costs? Or do you want to win this election?
None of which applies to redressing the balance by hiring someone in the minority who would normally not be hired for the job despite being just as skilled as a member of the majority
Was it racism when Mae Jemison was selected to be the first black woman to be an astronaut? Or was it because most astronauts before her were white men, so it was about fucking time?
We’re having two different conversations. I’m not here to say whether Biden was right or wrong to only hire black women for those roles. I’m not even going to pass judgement on how to redress the balance, as you put it. Those questions are way above my pay grade.
I’m merely here to say that when Republicans say “The people hiring based on DEI are the racists, not us”, the data shows that the majority of Americans agree with them. Therefore, as a purely political strategy, criticizing Biden and democrats for not considering white women for certain roles is a net win because more independents will agree than disagree.
Democrats are free to say “But we have to use a calculated form of counter-racism as a cure for historical wrongs.” They may even be right. It may be the only moral thing to do. Disagreeing may be evil and immoral. But none of that changes the fact that it’s not a winning electoral strategy to say or focus on those things in the 2024 presidential race.
I’m just talking about the way most Americans define it. You don’t have to agree, but from a political science perspective, you’re playing a losing game if you stick to that definition. The majority of Californians don’t even agree with it, so imagine how much worse it polls in the rest of the country…
Do you have evidence to show that the majority of Californians think that Harris was a “DEI hire?”
Now you’re twisting my words. I’m not trying to defend Republicans. I’m trying to help you understand the nature and intent behind their words so you realize they aren’t as dumb as you think. Respect thy enemy and all that.
Most Californians think hiring based on race is wrong, and racist. Across the country, the margins on that get even better.
Republicans are just playing into that. You can downvote me all you want, but it doesn’t change the political reality of the situation.
Edit: I just checked - 7 in 10 Americans oppose affirmative action (reverse racism). To quote Biden, “It’s a fact, Jack!” You may support it, but that doesn’t make it a winning campaign strategy.
7 in 10 Americans… wonder what skin color those 7 in 10 predominantly have…
I’m not defending them. It is possible to describe a political reality without endorsing that reality. That’s all I’m doing.