Until when? Affirmative action, which DEI largely replaced, had been around for almost 50 years. And there's no need to use a convoluted euphemism for present discrimination, Ibrahim X Kendi is more honest:
The governments responsible are long gone. The US carries out a rolling regime change, on an effectively continuous basis. I'd allude to the ship of Theseus, but even Theseus is long gone.
An argument for even less responsibility, I see. Well, I guess government contracts really don't need to be upheld from one regime to another, then. I suppose that would be quite in line with the current administration's views, after all.
Excluding someone because you are bigoted against their skin color is punishment.
In other words, yes, Riley Bishop should get exactly the same treatment in all ways as Jampijinpa Jangala even though their circumstances are very, very different.
How do you know this about anybody in particular? Do you just assume every White person has a murderous ancestor who wronged a Black person? And if a White person has an ancestor wrong by a Black person, do they also get to play the grievence game?
So it's not about race or ancestry but economic class? Well how 'bout that.
It is interesting that you always change "opportunity" to "treatment."
I'm not going to argue in favor of responsibility for things I'm not responsible for. If you want to talk about reparations to current citizens for current injustices, you have my attention and respect.
Irrelevant. I was pointing out how your logic works and how incredibly unjust it is at the core. I used a scenario that's based on actual happenings, but the principle of why it's so bad remains the same even without skin color. In the end, your logic quite seems to tailored to be nothing more than a selfish appeal to not hold you, personally, accountable and that you would bear no responsibility to fix things, even if you were the son in question and the murdered farmer's family wants the land back and/or reasonable compensation for what's been taken from them by way of criminal action.
A sentiment that would have more bite to it if say, the 13th Amendment didn't have a huge legal loophole in it that was exploited quite a lot to continue slavery in all but name, before getting to everything else.
You're just trying to find excuses to be bigoted against people with skin color you don't like.
This is Vaucluse, NSW, where my (to be clear, fictional) example Riley Bishop lives:
Which one is supposed to be worse?
The fact that you can't tell is impressive.
And the fact that you evade the question is unsurprising.
Well let's see. This seven bedroom, seven bathroom, triple garage house in Vaucluse is valued at AU$8.8 million. It could be yours for an up-front deposit of AU$1.7 million. On the other hand, I couldn't even find a listing for any of the ramshackle tin roofed shacks that make up the settlement of Kalkarindji, nine hours from the nearest hospital. Does that give you some idea of which of the two is "better" or "worse"?