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.
If that were true, then the U.S. wouldn't have had to cripple the Civil Rights Act with the Hicks ruling. Jim Crow still exists, but white America equates truth with plausible deniability, so it continues.
I hope not; there are dozens of other examples, such as the documented history of the CIA transporting drugs into the U.S. for distribution in the ghettos, vote disenfranchisement, etc.
I wish you had preempted it by posting your debunking.
Violence-related trash talk? Look to the leftist OWS movement for that. Figures this would turn into another conservative bashing thread. Hint....most conservatives are not like that.
I'm talking about the extreme far right and folks like Rush Limbaugh and other talk radio hosts who really use very violent language when they talk about the President and liberals.
I'm sure that does not include all conservatives. However, I see a lot of that same language here on cd.
When the U.S. was getting rid of racism, the system worked like this:
If management made a decision that was not in the best interest of the entity and also resulted in disadvantages for non-white employees, then the victims of the decisions would file a charge against the employer, and the employer was required to explain the business benefit of the decision. If there were no business benefit, then it was racist since it served only to damage minorities.
But since Hicks, if management makes a decision that's not in the best interest of the entity, the victim is required to 1)prove that the decision maker was motivated by racism and 2)prove that management sufficiently high in the organization was negligent in allowing the racist practices.
What this means is that Title VII claims are always covered up because the only option for a true victim is to settle for pennies.
Most of what you've heard about Affirmative Action and EEO are just rumors; they're completely false. No unqualified negros were being promoted over polite society Christians on the basis of race. The Civil Rights Act, which was made into something formidable by McDonnell Douglas Corp v Green, was exquisitely fair and consistent with classic liberalism and capitalism.
America is a racist country.
Last edited by The Homogenizer; 10-07-2012 at 07:58 PM..
The Civil Rights Act, which was made into something by McDonnell Douglas Corp v Green, was exquisitely fair and consistent with classic liberalism and capitalism.
Which Civil Rights Act?
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 both, IMO, violated the Constitution and certainly the right of association of business owners.
Title VII, as I mentioned after I edited, was definitely a violation of the businessman's right of association; a violation of classical liberal principles.
Title VII, as I mentioned after I edited, was definitely a violation of the businessman's right of association; a violation of classical liberal principles.
Do you consider theft to be a principle of classic liberalism?
Despite there being racism and discrimination today, race relations are much better now than they were decades ago. What is attributed to the massive improvement of race relations? Government policies or cultural changes in American society?
I think it's a combination of both.
I don't agree that there has been any massive improvement in race relations.
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.