Supreme Court rejects affirmative action at colleges as unconstitutional

[Phoenixmgs]

Wild shit, being against reparations because they're racist

Is discriminating against a race racism? Yes or No?

As far as I can see, Phoenixmgs's argument can be summed up as: if a person is discriminated against because of their race, society cannot do anything about that otherwise it would be racist.

I just don't really know what anyone can be expected to do with that.

Do we allow murder victims to kill the murderer to enact justice?

How /I'm/ defining AA? But /you're/ the one who chose to introduce those concepts into this discussion.

So if you think they do count, then you have to abandon the idea that all American AA is racist. But if you don't think they count, then why did you bring them up? Your counterargument falls through.



Uh-huh. So AA counts as the innocuous, unavoidable form of discrimination. It doesn't count as the racist, undue favour form of discrimination. Clear enough?

I never said all American AA is racist... I said the racist part(s) that the SCOTUS struck down is racist because it's racist (literally the thread title and link in the first post). And just about everyone that initially posted understood that and was like 'yeah, that's good, a bit less racism' whereas you 3 are arguing some point that nobody cares about. Yet, I get accused of strawmanning... Do you not see how ridiculous this is? The only explanation is you all are just trolls or arguing in bad faith.

 

[Ag3ma]

Do we allow murder victims to kill the murderer to enact justice?

A truly amazing statement on several levels.

Not least the fact that you appear not to have noticed that your country does, indeed, still have the death penalty.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Is discriminating against a race racism? Yes or No?

Is redressing the results of that racism also racism? Because you're saying yes

 

[Phoenixmgs]

A truly amazing statement on several levels.

Not least the fact that you appear not to have noticed that your country does, indeed, still have the death penalty.

I think there's been a lot more than 23 murders in the US this year. Death penalty is not the standard punishment.

Is redressing the results of that racism also racism? Because you're saying yes

Is discriminating against a race racism? Yes or No?

 

[Silvanus]

I never said all American AA is racist...

You said there's "no could be or could not be"-- that American AA was definitely racist. You absolutely did argue that American forms of AA are automatically racist.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You said there's "no could be or could not be"-- that American AA was definitely racist. You absolutely did argue that American forms of AA are automatically racist.

The parts that are racist... (literally what the thread is about...)

 

[Silvanus]

The parts that are racist... (literally what the thread is about...)

That's tautological. "I only said the bad stuff is bad" is meaningless waffle.

You said there was no "could not be" about American AA being racist. That very clearly excludes the possibility of American AA sometimes not being racist. And now you're trying to shift your own argument again, once it's become clear you were contradicting yourself.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

That's tautological. "I only said the bad stuff is bad" is meaningless waffle.

You said there was no "could not be" about American AA being racist. That very clearly excludes the possibility of American AA sometimes not being racist. And now you're trying to shift your own argument again, once it's become clear you were contradicting yourself.

Check out the 1st page of the thread, like everyone understood what it was about. If American AA had racist parts then it couldn't not be racist... What's so hard to understand...? When you mention affirmative action to anyone in conversation, it's assumed you're talking about the whole aspect of admitting/hiring minorities to a certain percentage.

 

[Silvanus]

Check out the 1st page of the thread, like everyone understood what it was about. If American AA had racist parts then it couldn't not be racist... What's so hard to understand...?

OK, let's have a thought experiment. I've got a box of lego, with 10 blue bricks, 10 red bricks, and 10 green bricks.

The lego box has red bricks in it. Do you therefore think it's true to say that lego "can't not be red"?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

OK, let's have a thought experiment. I've got a box of lego, with 10 blue bricks, 10 red bricks, and 10 green bricks.

The lego box has red bricks in it. Do you therefore think it's true to say that lego "can't not be red"?

Makes no sense...

 

[Silvanus]

Makes no sense...

'Tis a simple question. Is it true to say that the lego in my box "can't not be red"?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

'Tis a simple question. Is it true to say that the lego in my box "can't not be red"?

Yup

 

[Silvanus]

Yup

So legos in my box-- some of which are blue-- "can't not be red" in your opinion.

What about the blue ones? Are they red?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

So legos in my box-- some of which are blue-- "can't not be red" in your opinion.

What about the blue ones? Are they red?

The legos as a set {10 blue, 10 red, 10 green} can't not be red.

 

[Silvanus]

The legos as a set {10 blue, 10 red, 10 green} can't not be red.

Let's follow this line of logic. You're essentially arguing that if a descriptor can be applied to a subset of a group, then it can equally be applied to the entire group.

So, just as much as the legos "can't not be red", they also "can't not be blue".

Let's apply the same to affirmative action, then. By your own admission, some instances of AA are racist, and some are not racist.

So therefore, if we use the same approach as with the legos... AA can't not be racist. But it also... can't be racist.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Let's follow this line of logic. You're essentially arguing that if a descriptor can be applied to a subset of a group, then it can equally be applied to the entire group.

So, just as much as the legos "can't not be red", they also "can't not be blue".

Let's apply the same to affirmative action, then. By your own admission, some instances of AA are racist, and some are not racist.

So therefore, if we use the same approach as with the legos... AA can't not be racist. But it also... can't be racist.

The subset is part of the set...

So then no group of people are racist unless the whole group is comprised of racists?

What is the point of all this? Was there racism present in AA? Yes or no.

 

[Silvanus]

The subset is part of the set...

Indeed. And descriptions that apply to subsets do not necessarily apply to the set.

So then no group of people are racist unless the whole group is comprised of racists?

You could say there's a certain level of prevalence of racism within any given group, and it varies. But no, its nonsense to conclude that entire groups of people are racist because individuals within it are.

Its odd that you've also been moaning about the term "racist" being applied too loosely, when you're the one pushing for us to use a definition that would classify all groups of humans as racist.

What is the point of all this? Was there racism present in AA? Yes or no.

Present in? Yes. Nobody disputed that-- not even me or Agema.

Similarly, racism was "present in" business, but I don't see you calling for business to be outlawed.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Present in? Yes. Nobody disputed that-- not even me or Agema.

Similarly, racism was "present in" business, but I don't see you calling for business to be outlawed.

And that's all I ever said literally for 25 pages now.

Business policy that was racist was fixed. AA policy that was racist was fixed.

 

[Silvanus]

And that's all I ever said literally for 25 pages now.

You repeatedly said American AA was necessarily racist, essentially denying that there was non-racist AA.

Business policy that was racist was fixed. AA policy that was racist was fixed.

...alongside banning stuff that wasn't racist.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You repeatedly said American AA was necessarily racist, essentially denying that there was non-racist AA.



...alongside banning stuff that wasn't racist.

Nope, never did that ever.