,
22 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
@AOC's obsession w/ identity politics is sickening. Her focus on the racial composition of journalists assigned to the 2020 election by @CBSNews and suggestion that journalist's race is to be taken into account is abhorrent.
#SaturdayThoughts
#IdentityPolitics
#OcasioCortez
#SaturdayThoughts
#IdentityPolitics
#OcasioCortez
When you judge people by individual merit (competency, experience, qualifications), it is impossible to ensure that racial quotas ("diversity") are satisfied. The only way to ensure that each identity group is given proper "representation" is to discriminate against people on...
...the basis of immutable characteristics deliberately. If too many white people are hired, some must be descriminated against in order to give their spots to "people of color" and vise versa.
A conceptual example:
In a group of 120 applicants, only 12 are selected. When...
A conceptual example:
In a group of 120 applicants, only 12 are selected. When...
...assessing the merit of each applicant, irrespective of race, 6 black people are selected, 4 white people are selected, and 2 asian people are selected. Given the selections the racial quotas are inbalanced, there must be equal representation amongst all racial groups.
2 black people must be removed for being the wrong race in order to give the jobs to asians. Is this fair to the black people who where the best in the applicant pool? Absolutely not. However, this must be done to ensure that the selections are "diverse".
Alternatively, employers could preemptively discriminate against applicants of the basis of immutable characteristics. Out of the 12 available positions, black people would only be eligible for 4. Said individuals are the wrong race for the other 8 positions. These...
...individuals could be outstanding in terms of individual merit. However, if they are given the positions, there would not be equal representation amongst the racial groups (blacks, whites, & asians).
This is something "progressives" simply refuse to acknowledge. Their...
This is something "progressives" simply refuse to acknowledge. Their...
...demands for "diversity" or "representation" are inherently racist. Unfortunately, these zealots would rather discriminate against others on the basis of race then admit that their efforts for equal outcome are nothing more than fantasy. An evil, vindictive, revolting fantasy.
Another common argument common amongst the far-left is that immutable characteristics confer expertise on particular matters. Of you do not possess said immutable characteristics, it is literally impossible to understand certain perspectives. This logic is frequently utilized...
...to dismiss opinions on the basis of race, gender, etc. A clear example is the issue of abortion. To the far-left, only the opinions of women are valid. Men simply lack the ability to understand the issue. Based on this erroneous logic, zealots demand sexual quotas in...
...various institutions in order to ensure that women are "represented". The same is true for race. Zealots demand that certain racial groups be given "representation" as a result of their belief that each racial group possesses an exclusive opinion/perspective that cannot...
...be comprehended or held by members of other racial groups. Further, while it is known that each individual possesses individual agency and shall fomulate their own opinions on various matters, far-left activists continue to dismiss said agency and treat each racial group...
...as a monolith in order to uphold their idea that their is a black perspective, white perspective, asian perspective, etc.
Another conceptual example:
On a panel about law enforcement, "progressive" zealots demand that there is equal representation amongst...
Another conceptual example:
On a panel about law enforcement, "progressive" zealots demand that there is equal representation amongst...
...racial groups in order for the black perspective to be heard. In order to satisfy the far-left demand for quotas ("diversity"), those inviting panelists invite 3 black individuals and 3 white individuals. When assessing the views of the panalists, irrespective of race, 5 of...
...the 6 panelists are in concurrence. When separating the panelists based on race, it is observed that the 5 are comprised of 2 black individuals and the 3 white individuals. The same could be true for 2 white individuals and the 3 black individuals. The reason for this...
...is because experiences and perspective vary per individual. Each black individual approaches the issue in different manner given their diverse experiences. The same is true for white individuals. While the conclusions may be in concurrence, the reasonings are never...
...exactly the same.
This is where "progressives" lose the plot. They depend completely on collectivism. They refuse to acknowlege that individuals think differently from one another, in turn completely defeating the argument of an exclusive experience or perspective amongst...
This is where "progressives" lose the plot. They depend completely on collectivism. They refuse to acknowlege that individuals think differently from one another, in turn completely defeating the argument of an exclusive experience or perspective amongst...
...a particular racial group. Each individual possesses different experiences, observations, and knowledge on certain topics. To state that there is a "black experience" (the "progressive" position), is to deprive black people individuality.
"Progressives" utilize this fundamental misunderstanding of human nature to justify discrimination on the basis of immutable characteristics. In other words, discrimination is just as otherwise the perspective exclusive to a particular racial group will not be heard.
Until society condemns "intersectional" identity politics (the practice of categorizing individuals on the basis of immutable characteristics and assigning value to each identity group), bigotry shall remain mainstream. This regressive nonsense needs to end. Utter lunacy.
Another related tweet from @AOC:
