"Charlie Kirk was a racist because he said that Joy Reid only got into Harvard because of affirmative action." 2023. Joy Reid: "Let me be clear ...

[TimFitz]

Because it is anti-white discrimination and is hurting innocent white people. Very badly.

I have never seen any evidence of that save the individual ancedotal claims some people make.

 

[TimFitz]

I am old enough to remember those days as well. But, whereas Affirmative Action and DEI programs can be short-term catalysts to jump start a culture for more fuller employment for all races, Affirmative Action/DEI are not sustainable long-term.

Here’s why:

In order to achieve DEI goals, standards and criteria become secondary.

This assertions are obviously based on the assumption that minority applicants are inferior.

 

[TimFitz]

Wallowing in past injustices to justify modern wrongs, is not "accurate history".

Teaching about past injustices has nothing to do with "justifying modern wrong" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

It is about telling an accurate version of the American story.

Which should help inform future generations about the mistakes of the past, rather than sweeping them under the rug so they can be repeated.

 

[struth]

I really have no understanding of the white resentment of affirmative action. Nor, do I understand the obsession with “DEI”.

I am old enough to remember when discrimination in employment was very, very common. Blacks had few opportunities, and the only the worst choices.

Affirmative Action was meant to redress that imbalance and then fade away.

However the conditions that warranted it have decreased ,but not gone away. Indeed, right wing politicians have labored to make it less effective.

I also see no issues with promoting cultural diversity.

I also feel very strongly that our history should be taught honestly, warts and all. It still be a glorious pageant, but one more honestly than the fairytale we were taught.

discrimination on the bases of race is wrong, no matter your motives for it.

 

[Lisa558]

This assertions are obviously based on the assumption that minority applicants are inferior.

No, that’s your weak attempt to label people who don’t submit to DEI “racist.”

The assumption - which would be correct - is that when you exclude the majority of people from consideration because they’re white, you have in the majority of the cases excluded the most qualified individual.

Let’s say that 7 out of every 10 people have brown hair, but you have decided to hire from the pool of non-brown hair people. The odds are 70% that the best qualified was in the brown hair group, and you hired a less qualified person for the job because you eliminated from consideration people with brown hair.

You libs really need to take a stats course.

 

[Lisa558]

Teaching about past injustices has nothing to do with "justifying modern wrong" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

It is about telling an accurate version of the American story.

Which should help inform future generations about the mistakes of the past, rather than sweeping them under the rug so they can be repeated.

Schools still teach about slavery.

 

[LeftofLeft]

This assertions are obviously based on the assumption that minority applicants are inferior.

The assertions are that DEI and Affirmative Actions necessarily put personal attributes and characteristics above skills sets and qualifications.

 

[Correll]

I have never seen any evidence of that save the individual ancedotal claims some people make.

Your denial of what is obvious is just you being a dishonest lefty hack.

YOUr support of anti-White discrimination, makes you a racist.

 

[Correll]

Teaching about past injustices has nothing to do with "justifying modern wrong" (whatever that is supposed to mean).

Said the man pushing pretending that the massive anti-white discrimination of Affrimative Action and the ect,

has NOT resulted in large numbers of white people being discriminated against in hiring and admissions and promotions. And thus seriously hurt or harmed.

It is about telling an accurate version of the American story.

Which should help inform future generations about the mistakes of the past, rather than sweeping them under the rug so they can be repeated.

No, it's not. It is about lying about America, to justify the modern left's anti-white and anti-American policies.


You are a liar.

 

[Lisa558]

Said the man pushing pretending that the massive anti-white discrimination of Affrimative Action and the ect,

has NOT resulted in large numbers of white people being discriminated against in hiring and admissions and promotions. And thus seriously hurt or harmed.





No, it's not. It is about lying about America, to justify the modern left's anti-white and anti-American policies.


You are a liar.

They just pretend not to get it.

A black man and a white man apply for admission to an Ivy League school.

- The black man has a 3.4 GPA, ranked 29th in his class, has an SAT of 1200, and was the copy editor on his school paper.

- The white man has a 3.9 GPA, was 3rd in his class, has an SAT of 1500, and was the Editor-in-Chief on his school paper.

Because the school still hasn’t reached its 14% quota of blacks, the black man gets picked and the white man rejected.

The white man repeatedly applies to different Ivies, but blacks who are less qualified than he get in, and he does not.

He finally ends up going to a 2nd-tier school.

HOW DID THE AA POLICIES NOT HURT WHITE MAN?

 

[struth]

This assertions are obviously based on the assumption that minority applicants are inferior.

Isn’t that way you dembot created DEI? Because you didn’t think minorities could actually be successful on their own?

 

[Meathead]

I really have no understanding of the white resentment of affirmative action. Nor, do I understand the obsession with “DEI”.

I am old enough to remember when discrimination in employment was very, very common. Blacks had few opportunities, and the only the worst choices.

Affirmative Action was meant to redress that imbalance and then fade away.

However the conditions that warranted it have decreased ,but not gone away. Indeed, right wing politicians have labored to make it less effective.

I also see no issues with promoting cultural diversity.

I also feel very strongly that our history should be taught honestly, warts and all. It still be a glorious pageant, but one more honestly than the fairytale we were taught.

So you want to limit the opportunities of those who had nothing to do with slavery or Jim Crow to support the underqualified that were never affected by them.

 

[Concerned American]

Schools still teach about slavery.

As they should. To do anything else would be to marginalize a major part of the history of this country and that would be fraught with a myriad of problems of its own.

 

[Lisa558]

As they should. To do anything else would be to marginalize a major part of the history of this country and that would be fraught with a myriad of problems of its own.

Of course. But leftists are acting as if schools have stopped teaching about slavery.

 

[Concerned American]

Of course. But leftists are acting as if schools have stopped teaching about slavery.

And many of those same leftists would be howling at the moon if the schools stopped teaching that subject matter. They just want to rewrite the history to vilify all caucasions throughout history.

 

[martybegan]

I really have no understanding of the white resentment of affirmative action. Nor, do I understand the obsession with “DEI”.

I am old enough to remember when discrimination in employment was very, very common. Blacks had few opportunities, and the only the worst choices.

Affirmative Action was meant to redress that imbalance and then fade away.

However the conditions that warranted it have decreased ,but not gone away. Indeed, right wing politicians have labored to make it less effective.

I also see no issues with promoting cultural diversity.

I also feel very strongly that our history should be taught honestly, warts and all. It still be a glorious pageant, but one more honestly than the fairytale we were taught.

The thing is the left doesn't want it to fade away, which is why they came up with the whole "Equity" trope, so they can keep putting their fingers on the scale.

It's not just whites who have an issue with AA, ask the Asians about it as well, both Eastern and Southeastern.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

And many of those same leftists would be howling at the moon if the schools stopped teaching that subject matter. They just want to rewrite the history to vilify all caucasions throughout history.

New Florida standards teach that Black people benefited ...​

NBC News
https://www.nbcnews.com › news › us-news › new-flori...
Jul 20, 2023 — Florida's public schools will now teach students that some Black people benefited from slavery because it taught them useful skills.

 

[Correll]

New Florida standards teach that Black people benefited ...​

View attachment 1163566
NBC News
https://www.nbcnews.com › news › us-news › new-flori...
Jul 20, 2023 — Florida's public schools will now teach students that some Black people benefited from slavery because it taught them useful skills.

Couple of points.

1. That some blacks learned skills and benefited from that is part of the reality of history. That you spin that as a defense of slavery is odd.

2. The standards require that the point be mentioned. There is nothing to imply that it will be a major theme in the lesson. It certainly is not offered as a defense of slavery as you are trying to imply.

3.That you don't want even this tiny... nuance, mentioned, is telling. If historical accuracy is the standard then you would be happy about this. It seems that you oppose it, becasue it is NOT smearing whites, or America.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Couple of points.

1. That some blacks learned skills and benefited from that is part of the reality of history. That you spin that as a defense of slavery is odd.

That was DUHSantis, not me.

2. The standards require that the point be mentioned. There is nothing to imply that it will be a major theme in the lesson. It certainly is not offered as a defense of slavery as you are trying to imply.

Yes it is.

Florida’s public schools will now teach students that some Black people benefited from slavery because it taught them useful skills, part of new African American history standards approved Wednesday that were blasted by a state teachers' union as a “step backward.”

The Florida State Board of Education’s new standards includes controversial language about how “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit,” according to a 216-page document about the state’s 2023 standards in social studies, posted by the Florida Department of Education.

3.That you don't want even this tiny... nuance, mentioned, is telling. If historical accuracy is the standard then you would be happy about this. It seems that you oppose it, becasue it is NOT smearing whites, or America.

It's defending whites for slavery.

So, why even bring it up?

Everyone knows slaves built things, dug ditches, plowed fields, learned farrier skills cooked and other chores.

Like saying prison is GOOD for people because they learn skills.

 

[Correll]

That was DUHSantis, not me.

Nope. That was you. You put that spin on it. THe fact remains that the history of that is accurate.

Yes it is.

Florida’s public schools will now teach students that some Black people benefited from slavery because it taught them useful skills, part of new African American history standards approved Wednesday that were blasted by a state teachers' union as a “step backward.”

The Florida State Board of Education’s new standards includes controversial language about how “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit,” according to a 216-page document about the state’s 2023 standards in social studies, posted by the Florida Department of Education.

Nothing in that indicates that it will be a major theme or portion of the course.

I vaguely recall learning about the field house slave divide in school. It was mentioned, discussed for a few minutes and then we moved on. No one really cared. It was an interesting historical factoid. Only interesting to me, because I am a history buff.

It's defending whites for slavery.

So, why even bring it up?

Everyone knows slaves built things, dug ditches, plowed fields, learned farrier skills cooked and other chores.

Like saying prison is GOOD for people because they learn skills.

It is not defending whites for slavery. Whites don't need to be defended for slavery.

YOU seem to think that hte point of teaching history is to ATTACK whites.