[quote]AlisaV wrote:
For the last time, I am not calling you any names or belittling your experience. I have no doubt that you’re an admirable person. I know you don’t have a silver spoon in your mouth. And why on earth would I hate white people? I assure you I’m not a bigot.
You’re the one making personal attacks, and I’d rather not get into that. There is an argument to be made from your side, and I do think it can’t be dismissed lightly. The question really is, what is equal treatment? Do you treat two people as equals if you deal with them identically? I would say, not necessarily – think of Aristotle’s example of Milo the great boxer and his scrawny assistant. It’s not “unfair” to give Milo six pounds of food and his assistant only one. The fairness is proportionate. Fairness is not treating an employer and employee identically, or a parent and a child. I wonder if this kind of proportionate fairness might not apply to different groups in society – if differential treatment could actually be the means to equality. That is not the same as claiming the innate superiority of a race, or basing institutions on such a claim, which is the definition of racism.
I feel like we’re at odds here, and I’m happy to agree to disagree – just wanted to clarify so I’m not mistaken for some hate-crazed nut.[/quote]
But exactly as I have shown, you cannot make an intelligent link between race and experience. There is a difference between a parent making individual decisions for each of their children and the government making collective racial decisions, you are attempting to equate to unlike things. A race, does not have rights, it is not an entity, it does not deserve protection or favoritism. Only individuals do. It is also not the place of the government to make things the same (not equal). It is also goes against the whole idea of a constitutional republic to include empathy in the law. The whole idea of blind justice.
I also donâ??t care whether you think you belittle me or not, each time you refer to â??reverse discrimination, you do, every time you doubt the moral indignation of the â??white manâ??, you do, every time you attempt to justify prejudice against me, you do, every time you said that me fighting against systematic discrimination of my race because of â??common senseâ??, you did. You attempt to sweep away the reality of MY LIFE by connecting it with some sort of â??extremistâ?? political philosophy.
Despite, my direct factual contradiction to your view, you remain obstinately devoted to your prejudices, for that, yes, I label you a bigot (never said you hate white people, but you do seem to apologize for your race). I consider it a factual description more than name calling. Sorry if I label a tree a tree, even if it thinks itâ??s a rose bush.
If someone came on here claiming the racial reverse of the same thing Iâ??d call them a bigot too, because I treat people equally, but Iâ??m sure I wouldnâ??t need to because there would be plenty here who would refute them. Thatâ??s fine if you donâ??t want to stand up for me in the face of a wrong, but Iâ??ll be damned if you are going to morally refute me for it.
I do not treat people the same, I treat them equally, there is a difference. The government owes us equal opportunity, NOT equal results. Thatâ??s what equality in the political sense of the word means. Regardless of background, or color, you get a chance to do what you want with your life. That none of those things should matter (the exact opposite of what youâ??ve been arguing).
As for your boxer reference: No, it isnâ??t unfair for people of different appetites to ACQUIRE different quantities, but it IS wrong for the government (or you) to decide how much either of them should get. Itâ??s even more atrociously wrong to decide what they deserve based on race. The only fair thing to do is to let them provide for themselves and protect them from having someone like you steal from them for re-distribution.
You yourself just equated the relationship and contract between a government and itâ??s people with that of a parent and child. I happen to agree with the founding fathers that an individual adult has ultimate right and the Government must answer to him. If you donâ??t see the difference between that and a parent/child, relationship, there is no hope for you. A government doesnâ??t have the same rights as a parent, and even if it did, a parent makes individual decisions about their children and should not care which has a darker complexion.
Different treatment can be the means to sameness, but flies in direct contradiction to equal opportunity, and individual rights.