In 1964 "race" implied several defined races. The US has never been just Black and white. Are you really still trying to defend that stupid claim of yours?I dont see it. Your assumptions are amusing and vaque. Where does it specify only or primarily Black people? Your assumptions are not credible. I asked for a link.It shows that in mentioning Race and Color as the First and Second protected groups.
Are you dismissing the sacrifices that White Americans have made for Blacks because some women and hispanics might have also benefited?
In 1964, which Race and which Color do you think they were referencing?
That is not an assumption, it is having some knowledge of the historical context.
Are you dismissing the sacrifices that White Americans have made for Blacks because some women and hispanics might have also benefited?
Which Races and COlors do you think they were passing the 64 Act for?
Whites? Lol!
HIspanics? LOL, in 1960 they were 3.2% of the population and they weren't the ones marching and rioting.
Are you dismissing the sacrifices that White Americans have made for Blacks because some women and hispanics might have also benefited?
Whatever "sacrifices" that you imagine have been made up many times over through white females benefitting from Affirmative Action more than any other demographic.
Furthermore, the income disparity between whites and every other demographic in America is still substantially tilted in favor of the white population as a whole.
That being said the "discrimination" that you claim has been practiced against the white population is a figment of your persecuted imagination. So yes, I am completely dismissing the ridiculous notion of ANY "sacrifices".
The legislation passed in 1964 was to right a number of wrongs that had existed since America became a country. Get over it. You're not a victim
I have listed as one example the hiring/promotion of less qualified blacks over more qualified whites as one.
The fact that white females have made gains over a similar period does not change that fact.
The fact that white females have made better gains from a law aimed primarily at people based on "Race" and "Color" does not change the cost to individual whites of not getting jobs or promotions they were more qualified for.
As for it being a figment of my imagination, I have linked to documentation on the 310 point SAT bonus blacks get in Ivy League Admissions, I have sited a Supreme Court case and personal experience as a manager trying to promote the most qualified people.
The remaining income disparity? Against every other demographic? You sure about that? I have my doubts about Asians, they have moving up fast.
But regardless, you can have massive discrimination in favor of blacks, and still have a large income gap.
You just have to have even MORE MASSIVE dysfunction in the black community to outweigh the benefits of the pro-black discrimination.