• @TheFriar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    97 days ago

    But I think the point is, equally qualified people both have equal claim to the job. Adding in centuries of lost opportunities for being part of a minority group means that righting the balance makes sense.

    Think about it economically. Reparations are paid because of the massive imbalance in opportunity. Where do you stand on that?

    • JackGreenEarth
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -117 days ago

      You’re not helping the individuals who were discriminated on in the past, you’re favouring an individual who has no specific connection to other members or the discriminated group besides their shared characteristic, and did not choose to be a part of that group.

      • @TheFriar@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        …exactly. They did not choose to be a part of a minority group, but that fact means they have almost certainly been discriminated against in the past—their ancestors most definitely have, meaning less generational wealth and a diminished starter point due to centuries of racial oppression. If you’re born middle class, or upper class, there is a greater likelihood for opportunity and upward mobility. That drastically decreases the poorer you are, and minority groups are disproportionately represented in the lower classes…again, due to a long history of racial discrimination.

        Trying to right that trend has to start with the current generation, and that generation is made up of individuals, whether you think they deserve to be the first in line to receive the benefits of balancing the scales or not.

        It has to start somewhere.

        • JackGreenEarth
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -47 days ago

          In some instances you’re right, and that’s a different matter. In many others though the current individual is not disadvantaged because of their status as belonging to a minority group.