• yarr
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    they’re being excluded

    Correct. They’re being excluded, based on their race.

    • Andy@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Again: they definitely aren’t being excluded based on their race anymore. The supreme court banned this practice completely. So I don’t know what there is to argue about.

      I think it’s a distraction, though, because the underlying issue is that these institutions are a corrupt parasitic power retention project. They offer a very small number of people access to networks to ensure they can dole out favors in a carefully controlled manner, and then we argue about whether the people they’re choosing to let into this artificially limited power sharing network are unfairly discriminated against by race, as though what they’re doing would be okay if it had no racial bias.

      I’m not here to argue that their use of racial discrimination was a good thing, but I think it’s a distraction from the fact that even now that they’ve ended the racial element of the program, they’re STILL a corrupt parasitic antidemocratic cabal. They’re still excluding people unnecessarily, it’s just the criteria they use has been changed to ensure that those people are unable to organize themselves into any kind of class action lawsuit.

      • yarr
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        use of racial discrimination was a good thing

        I can never agree to this, in any context.

        • Andy@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m not here to argue that their use of racial discrimination was a good thing

          Yeah, as that sentence clearly says, that’s not my point.

          I feel like you’re looking for a conflict where there is none. Do you think their policies were bad and treated people unfairly? I agree. They were bad and they treated people unfairly. The point I’m trying to make is that we should demand more than JUST an end to racially restrictive admissions. I’m "yes-and"ing you. There’s no reason to argue.

          • yarr
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            I think we are on the same page.