Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

Trausti said:
That Alabama county is super-majority Black and has been so for generations. If the residents there feel that the county should provide them with sewer, or fix their septic, they can look to their own elected local government. No need to invent nebulous "environmental racism."
Click to expand...

The Alabama government was actually supposed to address this on the 28th, but unfortunately the state government shuts down on the fourth Monday of every April to honor the traitors who fought a war to keep Black people enslaved because none of this is about racism.
 
Emily's Cat said:
So here's the thing - it's a self-fulfilling prophecy sort of a situation. If you actually think through it, you'll see that the premise is that if an environmental risk affects one race more than another, then the reason for that risk must be racism. It defines racism as being a discrepancy that involves race. It conflates correlation with causation.

This isn't limited to environmental racism, by the way - this is the underlying premise of anything that gets labeled systemic racism. It assumes that racism is the cause of an observed difference in outcome. It's such bad logic that anyone who claims to be a skeptic should immediately bristle at it.
Click to expand...

Unsurprising. You're trying to whitewash the situation by conveniently ignoring the many, many government actions that specifically targeted black people on various fronts and the many government actors that very unevenly applied programs for racist reasons. To invoke Trump's recent use of similar logic - If you take out all of the negative numbers, GDP is up! He didn't use those exact words, sure, but the logic is similarly worthy of little more than an eyeroll.

Emily's Cat said:
If you actually give it a bit more thought and a bit more looking into, you would see that a huge amount of environmental harm from poor waste control, pollution, etc. occurs in appalachia, and it actually hurts a huge number of white people.

At the end of the day, the problem is pollution and lack of environmental oversight - and that's something that absolutely should be addressed, and it should be addressed irrespective of the melanin content of the people impacted by it.
Click to expand...

Should it all be addressed? Absolutely! Whining about programs that are working to address more specific parts of the problem doesn't even remotely do that, though. As ever, the GOP is far more interested in tearing down efforts to actually address the problems than they ever seem to be at making efforts to lift everyone up. If you were actually concerned about the issues there, you should be horrified that the program was stopped, on top of advocating for even more support for all those suffering.

Clearly, that's not actually your concern, though.
 
jt512 said:
No, you hadn't, but finally you have. Now, try answering the question I actually asked: What did I write, that, as you claimed, implied that problem doesn't exist?
Click to expand...
Well, actually aside from the problem being quite explicitly explained in the link, even with photographs, I did state the nature of the problem in posts 2164 and 83 (if my scrawl is correct), but anyway. As I replied also, perhaps it was excessive to say you claimed the problem doesn't exist (or maybe you did not read that, so I'll say it again, that may have been a bit exaggerated, but in approving the summary abandonment of the project to repair it and cavalierly suggesting that they could easily solve it some other way, you certainly declared it of trivial importance.
 
Aridas said:
Should it all be addressed? Absolutely! Whining about programs that are working to address more specific parts of the problem doesn't even remotely do that, though. As ever, the GOP is far more interested in tearing down efforts to actually address the problems than they ever seem to be at making efforts to lift everyone up. If you were actually concerned about the issues there, you should be horrified that the program was stopped, on top of advocating for even more support for all those suffering.
Click to expand...
I absolutely support programs to address the actual problem. I don't support programs that selectively address problems only when they can be framed as racism. I'll quite happily advocate for a revised program that removes reference to racism from it's justification and reasoning.
Aridas said:
Clearly, that's not actually your concern, though.
Click to expand...
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. You can't read my mind, which is obvious because you're entirely wrong. Don't make the mistake of believing you're somehow able to know me better than I know myself.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Then fix the sewage without consideration for the race of the people involved.
Click to expand...
How? Can it be unseen? Nobody fixed the sewage for years. The program to fix the sewage was canceled because it was targeted wrong, but without the targeting, it wasn't fixed. It's unseemly to guess why, but the fact remains that it wasn't. What do you think will change now? Any attempt now to rectify the situation will likely be condemned as a change in policy owing to wokeness. It's circular now.
 
Emily's Cat said:
That's a mischaracterization. jt512's position, as I understand it, is that programs should not be based on race. That doesn't imply that there is no problem, only that the problem should not be addressed via racial discrimination - it should be addressed on the basis of public health, safety, poverty, etc.
Click to expand...

You very much need to open your eyes and see what the Trump administration is doing instead of myopically pretending that everything occurs in a vacuum.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I absolutely support programs to address the actual problem. I don't support programs that selectively address problems only when they can be framed as racism. I'll quite happily advocate for a revised program that removes reference to racism from it's justification and reasoning.
Click to expand...

You need to ask yourself why these programs reference racism in the first place.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I absolutely support programs to address the actual problem. I don't support programs that selectively address problems only when they can be framed as racism. I'll quite happily advocate for a revised program that removes reference to racism from it's justification and reasoning.
Click to expand...

Trying to sweep wrongs under the rug in ways that pretty much guarantee that they continue to remain unaddressed isn't some noble thing, though. Using the program in question as a springboard to advocate and rally for further action for, as you suggested, Appalachia, as well as more generalized help for all regardless of race, would be fine and good. Supporting what the Trump Administration just did? It ends up as nothing more than supporting continued inaction, across the board.

Emily's Cat said:
◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊. You can't read my mind, which is obvious because you're entirely wrong. Don't make the mistake of believing you're somehow able to know me better than I know myself.
Click to expand...

Maybe. A deeply unfortunate truth is that any and all claim to nobler principles that you may profess to, though, is thrown out the window by your support for and defense of the Trump Administration. Actions speak louder than words and the Republican Party's actions just keep showing that their words about noble principles are naught but deceit. That reflects, then, on you, even if you actually do happen to be one of the unusual members who actually truly hold to some particular principle.
 
Last edited:
Lukraak_Sisser said:
And that's the beauty of the US racism system.
The people there are poor, as they have been for generations. And because they are poor the local government has less money for schooling, amenities etc etc.
But they won't be given help from the state or US government because the 'pull up by your bootstraps' myth that keeps the poor in their place.
Now a program was made to actually benefit them, and clearly that is evil and wrong.
The 'Screw everyone, I got mine' attitude in the GOP is clearly shown here.
Click to expand...
The problem is the land itself. It is not amenable to sewer or septic. That's not a racist system. That's just mother nature.
 
Emily's Cat said:
That's a mischaracterization. jt512's position, as I understand it, is that programs should not be based on race. That doesn't imply that there is no problem, only that the problem should not be addressed via racial discrimination - it should be addressed on the basis of public health, safety, poverty, etc.
Click to expand...
This I think is correct. DEI characterizes the issue as "racism" when there is no evidence of that. People in Appalachia also have this problem due to the land. Do they also get to allege racism? If the government created a problem to assist low-income rural folks - of any race - to get appropriate septic tanks, that'd be different.
 
arthwollipot said:
Then why are people living in that particular place at all?
Click to expand...
Why do people live in arid areas with little water? Why do people live in the hollows of West Virginia? Why do people live anywhere?
 
Last edited:
godfreyracismsexism.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom