Is tolerance intolerant?

[bennyboy]

Side note, I don't believe in reverse discrimination any more than I believe in reverse racism.

Wut?  Reverse discrimination is the GOOD kind of discrimination-- you know, the one that makes societies function better and more happily.  The only way you wouldn't believe in that is if you knew what the word "discrimination" meant.

Oh wait. . . you probably DO know what it means.

[Angrboda]

Side note, I don't believe in reverse discrimination any more than I believe in reverse racism.

By reverse discrimination and reverse racism I take it you are referring to affirmative action, and just would prefer not to use that term, for "reasons." I could care less whether you believe in affirmative action or not, but I would like to hear if you have specific reasons for opposing it. Given your entry here, it would help if you would tell us what you think "reverse discrimination" is, what you think it is intended to accomplish, and why that is either bad or not realistically achievable.

[no one]

There is only one race of people on this planet, the human one! Hating people because they are different than you is absolutely asinine!

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I always though 'reverse discrimination' was hating people while you walk backwards.  No?

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

There is only one race of people on this planet, the human one! Hating people because they are different than you is absolutely asinine!

Not always.  I hate rapists and child molesters, and they're WAY different from me.

Boru

[tackattack]

discrimination is the recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
Racism is belief in the superiority of one race over another or bigoted views relating to race.
Reverse discrimination is discrimination against members of a dominant or majority group, in favor of members of a minority or historically disadvantaged group.

I believe reverse discrimination is bullshit and racism is racism, regardless of whether you the minority, majority or any color under the sun.
Affirmative action, being an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, would be fine when that is not the only value of their position.

I discriminate things all day, I discriminate on what's good and bad to eat, what music I like and don't, what's a safe place for my kids or not. I do all of those things based on a value assessment and merits. If your only merit is you're a minority or because you've been discriminated against, that has ZERO value assessment in my eyes.


Benny, it can make societies better but doesn't have to. There have been a lot of affirmative action moves that have been beneficial to societies over the years. Affirmative action with no reason or value assessment is just public outrage and emotionalism and is not productive to long term happiness, IMO.

Where this relates to the thread is that intolerance breed more intolerance and galvanizes sides. Posturing and emotionalism leads to more intolerance and the cycle continues. I think compassion, understanding and valuing the position apart from the person's personal integral value is an important step forward in society and affirmative action isn't getting us there, IMO.

[Angrboda]

So, in other words, you don't know the theory behind affirmative action and just enjoy your ignorant opinion. Gotcha.

[bennyboy]

Benny, it can make societies better but doesn't have to. There have been a lot of affirmative action moves that have been beneficial to societies over the years. Affirmative action with no reason or value assessment is just public outrage and emotionalism and is not productive to long term happiness, IMO.

I'm sorry, you missed my tone.  I was being sarcastic-- I don't think so-called "reverse" discrimination or racism is acceptable on any grounds or for any reason.  I don't think any kind of discrimination, "reverse" or otherwise, ever leads to an overall improvement in the constitution of a society. Either we tolerate differential behavior toward people based on their race, or we do not.  I believe we should not.

For example, should Obama's kids get preference for Harvard, while my (much less advantaged) kids don't?  I think obviously not.  Should Bubba's kids, who are white as the driven snow but from an impoverished background, get preference?  Maybe, since they haven't so far had real equal opportunity.  Should a black kid from the ghetto get preference?  I'd say yes, for the same reason.

To me, how you best frame it is this-- a higher education is a right for ALL citizens, and any citizens who are impoverished should have support from the cradle to the Harvard application.  I believe it's in America's interest to have the best-educated population it possibly can, not only for moral reasons, but in preparation for global competition from China and other nations, and that means making sure everyone has a chance. Whatever anyone thinks about this or that race-- the better geared ALL citizens are, the better the US will be able to maintain its dominance, and given that China and Russia are next in line, that's absolutely critical.

What it does not mean is measuring melanin, or asking people if they identify as black, white or "other, fill in the blank." Any political world view (read: PC identity politics) that insists on using race as a metric is explicitly racist, and is in the wrong.

[GrandizerII]

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).

[tackattack]

Jor I do understand the theory behind affirmative action. I agree with equal opportunities and diversity of opinion. What I don’t agree with is forced, unmerited equality. I feel that is just another form of unhealthy discrimination. Feel free to correct any of my ignorance in bullet format if you like.
Benny, sorry I missed your sarcasm. My meter needs tuning. I agree with your post 100%.

I don’t believe XX should get YY because ZZ is ever valid unless ZZ is a positive value statement. Being Jewish, a veteran, white, minority, or majority would never pass validation IMO