Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let me begin by noting that racism is due not to the presence of discrimination but to its absence. We condemn the racist because he fails to discriminate among different members of the same race. Instead, he lumps them all together indiscriminately on the basis of group membership, when they’re really unique individuals with different characters and abilities. We call his action “discrimination” because he discriminates between members of his own race and those of another by judging the former as individuals but not the latter. But observe that what we really object to in the racist is his lack of discrimination. What we find offensive is that he is not sufficiently discriminating – that he does not discriminate enough among individual members of the same race. The cure for racist stereotyping is more discrimination, not less.
Agreed! Every man is unique. In this sense, we need to discriminate, or discern each person one-by-one.
"Latin discriminatus, past participle of discriminare, from discrimin-, discrimen distinction, from discernere to distinguish between." -Merriam-Webster on-line Dictionary
There's this mantra in America that everyone is equal, everyone is the same.
We're all "winners" and rules are put into place to force that.
It's not working but the majority don't see that yet.
Why should I see it, if you feel in not that smart due to my skin color why should I believe you and why should I abide by those rules? Lots of you have the old southern mentality in which certain people can't do or handle the job.
Not saying you are but we are all equal if you don't think that then to be honest that discrimination.
We may all not be on the same page which I feel is more of the problem in America but I believe anyone who works hard can achieve in America, unfortunately some don't want to work.
Why should I see it, if you feel in not that smart due to my skin color why should I believe you and why should I abide by those rules? Lots of you have the old southern mentality in which certain people can't do or handle the job.
Not saying you are but we are all equal if you don't think that then to be honest that discrimination.
We may all not be on the same page which I feel is more of the problem in America but I believe anyone who works hard can achieve in America, unfortunately some don't want to work.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
We are not all equal in skill and ability.
I agree that we are all equal though when it comes to opportunity..each should be able to "go for it". But if you are not qualified, regardless of your skin color, religion, sex, etc. then there should not be special rules in place that lowers the bar just for you.
There's this mantra in America that everyone is equal, everyone is the same. We're all "winners" and rules are put into place to force that.
The only one's repeating that mantra are those intent upon bastardizing the concept.
The mantra without editorial embellishment is, "everyone is equal under the law."
As for the idea, that we are all winners. Well, for the life of me I can't see what is positive or productive about encouraging people to feel that they are losers. Now outside of rules for little league athletic teams that let every kid feel like they won something, I'm dying to know what these rules for the larger society that you might be referring to, particularly when you consider that most major aspects of American society, be it politics of sports, make it abundantly obvious that their are winners and losers in everyday life. But losing at some event is not the same as making the individual internalize that by losing they are a lesser human being. I suppose this is another reason why I find reactionaries such as your self so enigmatic.
Another clever attempt at justifying racial discrimination. Unfortunately for the author, his cab driver example pretty much invalidates his entire core argument. It assumes that just because 5/6 robbers are young black men, EVERY young black male bears an 85% liability of being a robber. Classic case of erroneous extraction. And then what about the other 15 percent who are NOT young black men? Would it not be just as "rational" to pass them up too, in the interest of maximizing safety to the highest possible degree?
The example also conveniently failed to take into account the fact (a fact that was even cited in the example) that while the cabbie is discriminating from among members of the black race by specially targeting the sub-demographic of young black men, he is still (and to a larger extent) discriminating against them vis-a-vis similarly-dressed white men. So the discrimination, no matter how the author tried to cloak it, is still racial in nature.
In short, garbage article, but nice try.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
