Is tolerance intolerant?

[bennyboy]

Any political world view (read: PC identity politics) that insists on using race as a metric is explicitly racist, and is in the wrong.

Not if it's using that metric in an attempt to minimize/reverse the effects of racism. Based on my personal experience IRL, people who say the sort of stuff you say tend to be racists but don't want to admit to themselves that they are, so they resort to this rationalizing nonsense to make themselves feel better and because they're under the delusion that if they say stuff like this no one could reasonably accuse them of being racist (and thereby feel they can get away with this "subtle" approach to bigotry).

This is the PC narrative: if you say you do not want ANY racism at all, you are obviously a racist.  Should we encourage women to rape men more, in order to "minimize/reverse the effects of rape"?  No, because rape is wrong.  It should be minimized as much as possible.

---

Then please fill me in on what your objection to it is, because so far you haven't done so.  It isn't forced, unmerited equality.  That is not the goal of affirmative action.  Affirmative action aims to stop the cycle of inequality that results from prior discrimination.  Apparently you have a problem with that.  What it is, I don't know.

Affirmative action, if it actually upholds that goal, is fine. But why apply it based on racial identity? Why not socioeconomic need? Technically, if a school accepts Obama's kids with low grades, it is achieving affirmative action based on race. What it is not doing is solving the problem of black poverty.

My solution is this-- establish higher education as a right for all citizens, and provide assistance based on socioeconomic need from cradle right up to the Harvard application. The Obamas don't have a problem, and don't need to be included in affirmative action plans-- but both Shaniqua from the 'hood and Bubba from the bayou should get all the help they need, pretty much from birth.

As for racist acceptance policies, in both work and in school, I'd support global rules to remove arbitration from the process as much as possible. For example, the grades and entrance exams of all accepted students should be made public, and should be associated with numerical IDs rather than names or pictures.

As for the bolded-- you sure about that? Is it not true that in order to fulfill race quotas, schools will reject Asian students with better grades? Is not the fact that they've studied 8 hours a day outside school since kindergarten of at least equivalent value to a genetic increase in melanin in the skin?

---

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/14/world...index.html

If the thread isn't totally derailed already, here's an interesting issue in Canada, involving a struggle between atheist parents and a school board, which the atheists won.

The school board, in response to complaints by the parents about "decorating elves," suggested adding Hannukah and other traditions, but the parents insisted that they objected to ANY religious iconography is the schools.

So this is not really just an issue of hurt feelings-- it is a real battleground issue, which limits even the teaching of religious traditions for educational purposes.