Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Can you explain how correcting a past mistake is racism? Imagine you have two kids, and you only give one of them a cookie. Should you make up for it, by giving the next cookie to the kid who didn't get one? Of course!


> Can you explain how correcting a past mistake is racism?

Because its not correcting a past mistake. But rather make new ones that inevittably are going to lead to even more resentment. And also hurting the ones you are supposedly helping by making them question whether they got in through their abilities or through diversity points. Which can lead to quite a large reduction in their self confidence.

I would call the cookie example irrelevant to this.

Treating someone differently because of their race, no matter if positive or negative, is racism.


Just to clarify, you reasons against this are:

1. It will make some people resentful.

2. It will cause "doubt" among people who benefit.

In essence, your first argument is about further benefiting the people who are already in an advantaged position. And your second argument is blaming people who would benefit. Yikes. That is some twisted logic.


> Just to clarify, you reasons against this are:

I will NOT let you put words into my mouth

> 1. It will make some people resentful.

Thats not the reason I am against racism, that is a consequence of racism. The resentment will lead to racism against the people who benefited from the racism. You can't break that cycle with more racism.

> 2. It will cause "doubt" among people who benefit.

It will lead to a lower self esteem, which leads to less likely to negotiate for high salaries, which leads to a wage gap between different races in the same profession.

There are MUCH better ways to get a "better" ratio, like expanding the pool of applicants of underrepresented groups. For example, through advertisments in areas where such people could be located. I have nothing against that.

What I have a problem with, is justifying racism in the name of fighting racism.

> In essence, your first argument is about further benefiting the people who are already in an advantaged position. And your second argument is blaming people who would benefit. Yikes. That is some twisted logic.

This, to me, reads like arguing in bad faith.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: