Inauguration Day 20 Jan 2021

[Jim_MDP]

A quick review will reveal my post begins as a reply to another. How I begin or end depends on where I intend to go within that post as my personal literary choice. You may be a bit behind as the response and the hypothetical was not addressed to you. You can choose to like it or not but there it is.



I can feel something from your multiple replies to my posts that seems like a seething desire to scorn a Trump supporter. By all means feel free to play. I'm not here at the ICF as a Conservative because I fear debate....[emoji106]



I voted Trump in 2016, 2020, and I'll likely vote for him in 2024 if he runs.

Uh... what's the ICF?

*checks keyboard* nope, not getting it.

 

[Jim_MDP]

Interesting how much faith Bubba puts in a decidedly non-Christian Chinese cult.

I thought they were the poster boys for the "war on c (sorry) Christianity".
See... poison gas one subway train... and everyone turns against you. Oops. [emoji20]

 

[Jim_MDP]

What makes one qualified? My experience is there are a lot of people of color that are simply denied opportunities because of their color. Does a degree from an Ivy league school make one more qualified then if you graduated from Howard or Grambling?



I worked in the Tech sector for 30 years and the number of African Americans I worked with could be counted on 2 hands. I remember applying for the same position as an African American friend of mine. He was far smarter than me and yet I got the job. The only explanation for that was his color. Not that the people doing the hiring were deliberately racist, just that they chose the person whom they were comfortable with. The person who looked like them.

Thats the core of what my first reply a few posts upthread meant. It's unconscious and systemic. Not evil, but "soft" racism all the same.

And I really dont want a seven week back and forth with no resolution just explaining that. As would be expected. [emoji20]

"See the whole board."

 

[Jim_MDP]

Fortunately the presidential nominees were both old white men; you don't want to go overboard with diversity.

Yeah, someone (?) upthread desired only young folk to govern.
As an almost oldie, I see both the upside and the downside.
I lean towards the younger side (in moderation). [emoji1]

 

[Cavemonster]

I am glad our mockery about you being gone for x weeks after 20 Jan caused you to be back so quickly after your dreams dashed.



It is pretty much first time I agree with ChrisBFRPKY, at least as he wrote. I consider quotas, gender parity, etc as feel-good measures that won't actually do anything except fulfilling ideological wankery of left.

Actual problem is equality (or rather lack of it) of opportunity, lack of social mobility, increasing wealth inequality etc. Gender/race/whatever quotas are, at best, small pink bandaid on gaping wound.

Most jobs (And especially elected political positions) involve a lot of qualities for qualification that are incommensurate.

To say "who is the most qualified" past a certain point, tends to involve a fair amount of subjective calls.

Let's imagine we had no active racism in the world. No one hates or judges based on the color of skin, people are trying to be chill and objective, but otherwise the world looks like it does right now.

I think we still have a problem because even absent active racial animosity, people tend to gravitate to hire people who feel familiar, who share a speaking style, a dress style, a cultural background. When you get into the subjective realm, as all hiring does, those gut feelings even with a best effort to be objective, are going tofall along race lines to some extent. Who feels likely to "fit in" in the office culture? Someone from the same culture.

People also get jobs because of people they know. People their family knows, people they met through school growing up or through college, people who lived in their neighborhood.

But our neighborhoods tend to break around race lines. So do our schools. And of course families, duh.

And there are racial disparities with who is in a hiring position. We don't need to analyze how we got here or argue about how it came to be to recognize that there are disparities along race lines of who runs companies, who is in a hiring position in lucrative careers, and yes, who is in political office.

The point is that even without any active racism, the system is set up in such a way that a sincere attempt at meritocracy and "ignoring race" would still inevitably favor people of the same race as the people already holding power and influence to a greater degree. That's why I don't have too much of a problem with recognizing race among the many incommensurate qualities. Failing to do so is a compounding disadvantage for peope who have been historically marginalized.

 

[Jim_MDP]

It's been fun over the last couple of days to watch Trump supporters (including senator Rand Paul) being outraged over Biden attacking them in his inauguration speech, when what Biden actually condemned was white supremacists.

Saying a little more than they intended, perhaps.

Oh please, gift us a link to highlights if you have any. [emoji1]
He's such an ******* tool (it's generational, I see).

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited for rule 10

 

[Jim_MDP]

I read somewhere on the internet that those were actually QAnonists masquerading as antifa. Classic false flag.

I read that as well... just now.
"People are saying!"


[emoji1]

 

[Jim_MDP]

Most jobs (And especially elected political positions) involve a lot of qualities for qualification that are incommensurate.



To say "who is the most qualified" past a certain point, tends to involve a fair amount of subjective calls.



Let's imagine we had no active racism in the world. No one hates or judges based on the color of skin, people are trying to be chill and objective, but otherwise the world looks like it does right now.



I think we still have a problem because even absent active racial animosity, people tend to gravitate to hire people who feel familiar, who share a speaking style, a dress style, a cultural background. When you get into the subjective realm, as all hiring does, those gut feelings even with a best effort to be objective, are going tofall along race lines to some extent. Who feels likely to "fit in" in the office culture? Someone from the same culture.



People also get jobs because of people they know. People their family knows, people they met through school growing up or through college, people who lived in their neighborhood.



But our neighborhoods tend to break around race lines. So do our schools. And of course families, duh.



And there are racial disparities with who is in a hiring position. We don't need to analyze how we got here or argue about how it came to be to recognize that there are disparities along race lines of who runs companies, who is in a hiring position in lucrative careers, and yes, who is in political office.



The point is that even without any active racism, the system is set up in such a way that a sincere attempt at meritocracy and "ignoring race" would still inevitably favor people of the same race as the people already holding power and influence to a greater degree. That's why I don't have too much of a problem with recognizing race among the many incommensurate qualities. Failing to do so is a compounding disadvantage for peope who have been historically marginalized.

[emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]

Well put.

 

[Mader Levap]

Let's imagine we had no active racism in the world. No one hates or judges based on the color of skin, people are trying to be chill and objective, but otherwise the world looks like it does right now.

I think we still have a problem because even absent active racial animosity, people tend to gravitate to hire people who feel familiar, who share a speaking style, a dress style, a cultural background. When you get into the subjective realm, as all hiring does, those gut feelings even with a best effort to be objective, are going tofall along race lines to some extent. Who feels likely to "fit in" in the office culture? Someone from the same culture. (...)

While I agree some sort of quota would address this issue...

...I will say that in my opinion there are more pressing issues than "people tend to gravitate to hire people who feel familiar, who share a speaking style, a dress style, a cultural background".

 

[trustbutverify]

I read that as well... just now.
"People are saying!"


[emoji1]

I just read some guy on the internet saying he read it too... so it's not just me.

 

[Cavemonster]

While I agree some sort of quota would address this issue...

...I will say that in my opinion there are more pressing issues than "people tend to gravitate to hire people who feel familiar, who share a speaking style, a dress style, a cultural background".

Those aren't the issues directly, they're just some parts of a long chain of seemingly benign circumstances that will result in white dudes hiring other white dudes.

There's not much that can be done about those less tangible evaluations and biases. That's why I think that correcting somewhere else in the process makes sense.

It's why race blindness is going to favor the race that's the majority and happens to already be in positions of power.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Lying is a literary choice now?

I think you could make a case that it is a lifestyle choice, but probably not one I would aspire to.



No, I have no desire to scorn you. And I don't really think you intend to debate in an honest way. Especially since you seem to think lying is a literary choice.



And there is another reason I don't expect the truth to matter much to you. I don't intend to debate with someone who believes alternative facts and thinks lying is the best way to start a post. But I may still step in to point out when I see post with lies in it. Not always, that would be too exhausting, but occasionally, if I have the time.

Please feel free to point out any lie within my post by quoting it and placing highlites. After which we can have a discussion of your objections and how they may or may not apply.

Please be clear and to the point with your concerns for all to see.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Uh... what's the ICF?

*checks keyboard* nope, not getting it.

Sorry, it's what I get for having an overactive index finger and not taking the time to proofread a post. *ISF

 

[Dr. Keith]

Please feel free to point out any lie within my post by quoting it and placing highlites. After which we can have a discussion of your objections and how they may or may not apply.

Please be clear and to the point with your concerns for all to see.

Sure, but I already did:

I wonder if there is a difference between hiring/placing the best qualified person for the job regardless of skin color as opposed to the best qualified person of a certain skin color for that job.

This is a lie. You do not in fact wonder. You admitted as much.

Based on your posting history I believe it would be more honest of you to say:

I believe there is an important difference between hiring/placing the best qualified person for the job regardless of skin color as opposed to the best qualified person of a certain skin color for that job.​

This appears to be a stylistic choice of yours. It makes your posts less clear. Maybe that is your intent, I do not know. But, the cloak of lying for stylistic purposes is hardly a shield against criticism of both form and function.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's a pretty sad statement on where we are right now that the appointment of a centre-right rich old white man as president has people in tears but I guess we should be thankful for small mercies at the moment. it could have been a lot worse.

I shall repeat what another said because it needs repeating over and over.

You frame* an elected official who won by more than 6 million votes, "appointed". No, Biden was elected.

And as for the "rich old white man", no, that's who we got rid of. (And yes, I meant how I framed that.)



*Frame as in how one words something to convey a message.

 

[Stacyhs]

I shall repeat what another said because it needs repeating over and over.

You frame* an elected official who won by more than 6 7 million votes, "appointed". No, Biden was elected.

And as for the "rich old white man", no, that's who we got rid of. (And yes, I meant how I framed that.)



*Frame as in how one words something to convey a message.

FTFY

 

[Susheel]

I thought they were the poster boys for the "war on c (sorry) Christianity".
See... poison gas one subway train... and everyone turns against you. Oops. [emoji20]

If I remember right, that wasn't eh Falun Gong...it was another cult, Japanese this time: Aum Sin Ri Kyu (If I remember correctly). Or was that some martial art technique?

 

[erwinl]

If I remember right, that wasn't eh Falun Gong...it was another cult, Japanese this time: Aum Sin Ri Kyu (If I remember correctly). Or was that some martial art technique?

Those were the ones.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

How rich do you think Joe is?

Richer than pretty much everyone who voted for him?

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

I shall repeat what another said because it needs repeating over and over.

You frame* an elected official who won by more than 6 million votes, "appointed". No, Biden was elected.

And as for the "rich old white man", no, that's who we got rid of. (And yes, I meant how I framed that.)



*Frame as in how one words something to convey a message.

He was elected on election day, and appointed President on inauguration day.

And yes he is a rich old white man.