Zone1 What is race realism?

[Friends]

But I also would maintain that your position is consistent with most Americans. Most keep it private on going all the way with your ideology, but will be quite willing to quietly accept your racism.

The reason most Americans agree with me is because what I say is obviously true to anyone who has had extensive experience with the three major races, especially with Negroes. In this thread I have thoroughly documented my assertions about intractable and intrinsic racial differences. These differences appear everywhere in the world the different races exist. They always have. Where are the black majority, black run countries with well functioning governments, low crime rates, and high standards of living? There aren't any. There never have been any.

 

[Riff Raff]

Quotas are illegal but striving for a diverse campus is not. MERIT alone has never been the determiner.

What you describe here — racial bias for negroes by discriminating against White people — is illegal. It's also morally repugnant and against American values.

Social engineering via bias towards wealthy donors and alumni (who represent a much larger proportion of "special" admissions") means others will be discriminated against as well.

Favors for descendents of alumni donors is not "social engineering."

Equity opposed to what alternative?

Opportunity to be considered on merit. Certainly not equity, which is another term used by those who advocate for racism, racial quotas and against merit-based capitalism.

 

[Donald H]

Attention Coyote:

You muted me in another thread in Zone 1 for just mentioning someone's "racism." Here is a direct accusation. If you're to be a moderator with any credibility at all, do your job here.

That would only be fair.

 

[Lisa558]

...or gender, or social class, or monetary contributions, or athletic ability, but no one bothered about that.

That’s your opinion. But there is nothing illegal about discriminating in favor of athletic ability or monetary contributions. What is illegal is giving special advantages to those of a certain race and discriminating against those from other races.

 

[Lisa558]

I am well aware that there are 4 justices on the court who are rightist extremists and don't follow the the Constitution. You want it to be just about about race but it won't be, it will be about any preferential system, such as gender.

The four conservative justices are not “rightist extremists who don’t follow the Constitution.” To the contrary, the leftists are the ones who say the Constitution is “living” and should be adapted to the times, as they judge it of course.

 

[Lisa558]

Standards have not been lowered, the same standards of admission apply regardless of race.

Yes, they have been lowered. Deny it all you want, but the minimal GPA and exam scores have been lowered until enough blacks “make the cut.” That is why the majority of blacks with a 3.2 or 3.3 can get into medical school in this country - and less than a third of whites, and less than one fifth of Asians.

Time to end racist policies.

 

[Lisa558]

So it is ok to discriminate and admit "unqualified" students if it is for the purpose of financial gain, but not ok for racial gain? Why?

Because the latter is illegal. I know that liberals tend to ignore laws and go with what “feels” right, but if everyone did that, and just followed or ignored laws based on their feelings, we’d have chaos. In fact, we are heading that direction now

It's no different to those rejected despite having superior test scores. And yes, schools like Harvard admit more legacy/doner students than Black. I already posted a link.

Yes, and it’s already been explained that admits legacies for financial reasons. That’s different than picking and choosing who gets in based on skin color.

 

[Lisa558]

Liberals invent Constitutional rights, such as the right to an abortion. Reactionaries claim that what is not specifically authorized by the Constitution, such as much of the economic and environmental legislation passed during the twentieth century is un Constitutional.

This is my philosophy about the Constitution: if the Constitution does not clearly say something, we should assume that it is silent on the matter, and leave it up to the voters.

Precisely. The Constitution is about negative rights, from the government perspective. Unless it is explicitly laid out as under control of the federal government, it reverts to the people.

 

[Lisa558]

Riff Raff

You‘re new here, so I’ll point out that if you want to draw the attention of any poster, simply click on their name in the bottom right box within their post.

 

[BlackSand]

.

The stuff colleges are teaching isn't always what's in the books ... It's in the structure, admissions, ideology and every aspect of your life.

How useful it is in the pursuit of excellence is still questionable ...
And some of it will have to be untrained before a graduate can understand priorities better.

You don't have to throw it all in the trash, but if it doesn't serve your ambition, mission, vision or standards ...
They aren't going to need to carry that shit with them 24/7 and let it interfere with your goals.

Diversity is an attempt to add variables, and if the variables you are adding become counterproductive ...
Then you are not unwise in removing them.

.​

 

[Riff Raff]

So it is ok to discriminate and admit "unqualified" students if it is for the purpose of financial gain, but not ok for racial gain? Why? It's no different to those rejected despite having superior test scores. And yes, schools like Harvard admit more legacy/doner students than Black. I already posted a link.

Acting in financial and most other interests is not illegal. Acting with racial bias is illegal. Your arguments seem confused about this.

 

[Friends]

Precisely. The Constitution is about negative rights, from the government perspective. Unless it is explicitly laid out as under control of the federal government, it reverts to the people.

I am not sure how much I agree with you. The government has the right to initiate programs like environmental protection, Social Security, Medicare, laws to protect labor unions, and so on, even though the Constitution does not authorize those programs.

 

[Lisa558]

Acting in financial and most other interests is not illegal. Acting with racial bias is illegal. Your arguments seem confused about this.

That’s because liberals rely on what “feels right” - and the law is secondary.

 

[Lisa558]

I am not sure how much I agree with you. The government has the right to initiate programs like environmental protection, Social Security, Medicare, laws to protect labor unions, and so on, even though the Constitution does not authorize those programs.

Not really. The government can initiate those programs only if the people’s elected representatives vote for it.

We are a republic rather than a pure democracy because our founders realized it would be impracticable to put every decision up to a vote at the individual level. Hence, we have a system where people vote for representatives to, well, represent their interests. If they fail to do so, they, like Liz Cheney, will be kicked out.

 

[Friends]

I like diversity, but only if it is voluntary and based on merit. I enjoy dining at ethnic restaurants, shopping at ethnic shops, attending ethnic festivals, and so on. Those who do not enjoy doing that should not be pressured to do so.

Our most successful companies, like Microsoft hire many people who were born in other countries, who are non white, and who speak English as a second language. Nevertheless, Microsoft does not have an outreach program to attract a work force that "looks like America." Microsoft hires the best professionals and managers in the world, and pays them what it needs to to hire them and get them to the United States. That is the only kind of diversity that is worth while. There is no diversity of merit.

I see no benefit whatsoever in reducing objective criteria of excellence for blacks in order to admit more of them to college, and to hire more of them.

 

[Friends]

Not really. The government can initiate those programs only if the people’s elected representatives vote for it.

We are a republic rather than a pure democracy because our founders realized it would be impracticable to put every decision up to a vote at the individual level. Hence, we have a system where people vote for representatives to, well, represent their interests. If they fail to do so, they, like Liz Cheney, will be kicked out.

All right. I have should have made that clear.

 

[Riff Raff]

.

The stuff colleges are teaching isn't always what's in the books ... It's in the structure, admissions, ideology and every aspect of your life.

How useful it is in the pursuit of excellence is still questionable ...
And some of it will have to be untrained before a graduate can understand priorities better.

You don't have to throw it all in the trash, but if it doesn't serve your ambition, mission, vision or standards ...
They aren't going to need to carry that shit with them 24/7 and let it interfere with your goals.

Diversity is an attempt to add variables, and if the variables you are adding become counterproductive ...
Then you are not unwise in removing them.

.​

"Diversity," as defined by the DIE/CRT movement, is not logically conducive to most organizations goals. Unity in plan, action and goal makes more sense. "Diversity," by definition, is an antonym (opposite) of "unity."

The DIE people use references to organizations benefiting, such as increased profits, better employees, etc with disunity, but those references lead no where or to other Leftist proponents ("scholars", "experts," "studies," etc) that are less than credible. Yet, DIE continues to infiltrate government, schools, businesses and other organizations. It now exists in the US federal government, the US military, most universities, all of the Fortune 100 and most of the Fortune 500, for example.

 

[Riff Raff]

That’s because liberals rely on what “feels right” - and the law is secondary.

And what "feels right" is manipulating the good intentions and generosity of the American people, who have since their nation was founded have set the modern standard of diversity and inclusiveness. The nation, it's majority population and new immigrants made assimilation a desire. It was not imposed. Often by the second generation, immigrants from diverse backgrounds were proud to be Americans.

Ironically, this more recent campaign of "diversity, inclusion and equity" (DIE) is anything but that. It is an imposed campaign that divides and rejects assimilation, rejects America's traditions, rejects America's majority and, in practice, rejects democracy and capitalism ("equity").

 

[BlackSand]

The DIE people use references to organizations benefiting, such as increased profits, better employees, etc with disunity, but those references lead no where or to other Leftist proponents ("scholars", "experts," "studies," etc) that are less than credible.

.

Someone's race doesn't make them a better employee, or the employer better equipped to meet their goals.
Unless your job is peddling or marketing race or race relations ... Race has nothing to do with your bottom line.

There is no reason to praise unity if all you are doing is making a bunch of cruddy employees,
regardless of race, feel better about themselves and their work environment.

Priorities ... Product, Service, Quality, Ambitions, Vision, Mission, Standards and Customer Satisfaction ...
None of which are necessarily bound to race ...

.​

 

[Riff Raff]

Someone's race doesn't make them a better employee, or the employer better equipped to meet their goals.
Unless your job is peddling or marketing race or race relations ... Race has nothing to do with your bottom line.​

Yet the DIE promoters, who's primary job is peddling race, claims otherwise.

There is no reason to praise unity if all you are doing is making a bunch of cruddy employees,
regardless of race, feel better about themselves and their work environment.​

There is no reason to praise diversity and disunity if all you are doing is making a bunch of cruddy employees and a less cohesive organization.

Priorities ... Product, Service, Quality, Ambitions, Vision, Mission, Standards and Customer Satisfaction ...
None of which are necessarily bound to race ... ​

All of which are best served with unity of purpose.