CRT skeptics: Tell us what YOU would consider "systemic racism"

[pecksniff]

You always demand examples of "systemic racism," and, when they are presented, you deny they qualify as such. So let's turn it around: Tell us what you, hypothetically, would consider an instance of systemic racism. It has to be something now possible -- so revival of slavery wouldn't count -- but need not be something now existent.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

A law that says black people can't own property, purchase guns, be considered for jobs above a certain level, cannot petition their government for redress of grievances, cannot speak publicly, or are not afforded due process.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

A law that says black people can't own property, purchase guns, be considered for jobs above a certain level, cannot petition their government for redress of grievances, cannot speak publicly, or are not afforded due process.

So if there was a law or defacto law that said POC couldn't own land in a certain area, you'd be cool with that since they could still own land?

 

[Bud_Spencer]

So if there was a law or defacto law that said POC couldn't own land in a certain area, you'd be cool with that since they could still own land?

What an idiotic construction. No, I would not be cool with that.

 

[Rightguide]

You always demand examples of "systemic racism," and, when they are presented, you deny they qualify as such. So let's turn it around: Tell us what you, hypothetically, would consider an instance of systemic racism. It has to be something now possible -- so revival of slavery wouldn't count -- but need not be something now existent.

The Democrat system of slavery established in the Antebellum South which was crushed and burned to the ground by Republican Union armed forces from the North.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

You always demand examples of "systemic racism," and, when they are presented, you deny they qualify as such. So let's turn it around: Tell us what you, hypothetically, would consider an instance of systemic racism. It has to be something now possible -- so revival of slavery wouldn't count -- but need not be something now existent.

How about something extant: Affirmative Action. Minority set-asides. Racial admissions preferences. Racial quotas.

Those are all systemically racist.

 

[Rightguide]

How about something extant: Affirmative Action. Minority set-asides. Racial admissions preferences. Racial quotas.

Those are all systemically racist.

As is the Minimum Wage. It was originally designed to keep blacks out of the work force and it still doing that job.

 

[RoryN]

The people who claim discriminatory laws have to exist for systemic prejudice to occur, are the same people who scream that being admonished on forums and social media is "censorship" & "oppression".

You can't make this shit up.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

As is the Minimum Wage. It was originally designed to keep blacks out of the work force and it still doing that job.

I'd agree with that.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

The people who claim discriminatory laws have to exist for systemic prejudice to occur, are the same people who scream that being admonished on forums and social media is "censorship" & "oppression".

You can't make this shit up.

We do have discriminatory laws. I just pointe out a number of them. Asians, in particular, are getting the shaft as the race-hustlers keep them snake charmed by including them in the POC pool.

 

[CornusKousa]

You always demand examples of "systemic racism," and, when they are presented, you deny they qualify as such.

That's because you lot always try to present something other than racism, as racism.

Inequity for example.

So let's turn it around: Tell us what you, hypothetically, would consider an instance of systemic racism. It has to be something now possible -- so revival of slavery wouldn't count -- but need not be something now existent.

Any system of society that is deigned and or administered for the purposes of racism.

The people who claim discriminatory laws have to exist for systemic prejudice to occur, are the same people who scream that being admonished on forums and social media is "censorship" & "oppression".

You can't make this shit up.

Nobody claims being admonished is censorship & oppression.

You're just a liar.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

The problem is that the Left has quietly changed the definition of "racism" on us again.

 

[RoryN]

Nobody claims being admonished is censorship & oppression.

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=93882669&highlight=censorship#post93882669

There is no "curtailment of civil liberties" in Twitter or Facebook banning Trump, they're private companies, they get to do that.

Legally yes, in effect censorship is still censorship

 

[Rightguide]

I'd agree with that.

Actually, here's a couple of paragraphs from a pretty good but longer article here:

"George Mason University professor, Walter Williams, is the man responsible for opening my eyes to the disastrous effects of minimum wage. In his book, Race and Economics, he discusses the racist history of minimum wage and other forms of labor regulation.

Prior to the adoption of these laws, African Americans had higher levels of employment than their white counterparts. According to the Department of Commerce, in 1910 71% of blacks over age nine were employed compared to 51% for whites. In 1900, the employment to population ratio for non-whites was 57.4 compared to 45.5 for whites."

https://medium.com/the-enclave-of-others/the-racist-history-of-minimum-wage-5dd71ebf0770

 

[CornusKousa]

The problem is that the Left has quietly changed the definition of "racism" on us again.

It's used regularly as a synonym for anything they don't like.

They fucking hate it when you call them on it too.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Actually, here's a couple of paragraphs from a pretty good but longer article here:

"George Mason University professor, Walter Williams, is the man responsible for opening my eyes to the disastrous effects of minimum wage. In his book, Race and Economics, he discusses the racist history of minimum wage and other forms of labor regulation.

Prior to the adoption of these laws, African Americans had higher levels of employment than their white counterparts. According to the Department of Commerce, in 1910 71% of blacks over age nine were employed compared to 51% for whites. In 1900, the employment to population ratio for non-whites was 57.4 compared to 45.5 for whites."

https://medium.com/the-enclave-of-others/the-racist-history-of-minimum-wage-5dd71ebf0770

I'd add to that the Democrat policy of mass illegal immigration that so depresses wages at the low end of the scale and adds so much competition for low-skilled and younger workers. Even Biden's own economists recognize this phenomenon, but it's not considered racist because it's for the benefit of the Democrat Party.

 

[CornusKousa]

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?p=93882669&highlight=censorship#post93882669

Rory confirms I am correct and that he doesn't understand the difference between being banned/silenced and being admonished.


Thanks Rory!!

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Rory confirms I am correct and that he doesn't understand the difference between being banned/silenced and being admonished.


Thanks Rory!!

He's a troll, nothing more.

 

[CornusKousa]

He's a troll, nothing more.

Oh I know, this is why I always enjoy making him look like the the total fucking retard that he proves himself to be every time he posts.

 

[RoryN]

Rory...doesn't understand the difference between being banned/silenced and being admonished.

https://i.imgur.com/GYvWXdr.gif

No one is "silenced" when they are banned on a social media platform. They have plenty of other venues to express themselves in. Or, they can continue to express themselves on the same venue they're "banned" on if they wish, through different means.

Deplorables call it being "silenced" because their snowflakey, online-life-only feelings get hurt when their chosen handles are no longer available for them to spout hatred under.

 

[Earthlyone]

Oh I know, this is why I always enjoy making him look like the the total fucking retard that he proves himself to be every time he posts.

What's with his avatar picture that looks like Dr Fauci humping a podium?!

 

[Rightguide]

I'd add to that the Democrat policy of mass illegal immigration that so depresses wages at the low end of the scale and adds so much competition for low-skilled and younger workers. Even Biden's own economists recognize this phenomenon, but it's not considered racist because it's for the benefit of the Democrat Party.

This is true, the Democrat Party has always used racism to benefit their party.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

This is true, the Democrat Party has always used racism to benefit their party.

How long did they embrace characters like Woodrow Wilson (an academic, let us recall), Bull Connor, Robert Byrd, George Wallace? How many policies did they implement to the detriment of black Americans: slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, not to mention those mentioned here?

If you want racism, the DNC is the place to go.

 

[CornusKousa]

https://media1.tenor.com/images/eec388748c6e8e5e7c0e92bc63330ff6/tenor.gif?itemid=15297552

No one is "silenced" when they are banned on a social media platform. They have plenty of other venues to express themselves in. Or, they can continue to express themselves on the same venue they're "banned" on if they wish, through different means.

Deplorables call it being "silenced" because their snowflakey, online-life-only feelings get hurt when their chosen handles are no longer available for them to spout hatred under.

Look at all that deflection......because Rory displayed his ignorance and got called on it.

Still censorship, still not admonishment.

Words mean things Rory, the sooner you learn that the sooner you stop looking like a fuckin' retard.

 

[CornusKousa]

What's with his avatar picture that looks like Dr Fauci humping a podium?!

Homage to his lord and savior???

IDK...