Discrimination -- the reality

Loading....

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?

BH

Super Moderator
Staff member
I believe this. I've actually been told by people I
was interviewed by but did not get a job that they couldnt give it to me because I was male and white. This was after they retired or were working someplace else.

Last edited:

BH

Super Moderator
Staff member
it is what it is. I'm not going to be angry or bitter about it. If my ancestors had treated minorities and women equally and not been discriminatory I might have lost out to them applying to a job anyway.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
Loren, what makes you think the progressive left, who simultaneously deny this happens and also claim it's good that it happens and cry more about it white boy, doesn't already know this?

Let's examine some of the nomenclature in the article. "Reverse discrimination". This term is both detestable and nonsense. Speeding on highway A southbound is speeding. Speeding on highway A northbound is not 'reverse speeding'. It's speeding.

In before Don2's "but muh reverse discriminationz!!111one!!1"

The only thing more detestable though, than the term 'reverse discrimination', is the use of the term 'diverse'. The white people who champion this term appear to be completely oblivious as to how it continues to centre the white, male experience as the background default. Everyone else is exotic and funny and provides some ethnic spice. No individual is 'diverse', unless he is lying on Grindr.

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Of course it's discrimination. It's deliberate discrimination ("reverse discrimination" if you will) which attempts to reverse centuries of discrimination against blacks.

How well does it work toward achieving its goal? I don't know; it's imperfect of course, but is there a better plan? And the very same white males that whinge about this discrimination are usually happy to deny that blacks themselves continue to suffer from many other forms of discrimination.

I watched a Chris Rock video where he says "There's not a white man among you who would trade places with me. And I'm rich!"

Whingeing against affirmative action is popular but misplaced IMO. Present company excepted of course, but I'll guess that many of the whingers are themselves racist.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
Of course it's discrimination. It's deliberate discrimination ("reverse discrimination" if you will) which attempts to reverse centuries of discrimination against blacks.

How well does it work toward achieving its goal?
It...works not at all. Because past discrimination cannot be reversed. Time travel into the past does not exist.

I don't know; it's imperfect of course, but is there a better plan?
It's not 'imperfect'. It is actively destructive. And the better plan is to stop discriminating by race.

And the very same white males that whinge about this discrimination are usually happy to deny that blacks themselves continue to suffer from many other forms of discrimination.

I watched a Chris Rock video where he says "There's not a white man among you who would trade places with me. And I'm rich!"

Whingeing against affirmative action is popular but misplaced IMO. Present company excepted of course, but I'll guess that many of the whingers are themselves racist.
Yes: discriminating against white men (and Asians, in a Western context) is at the heart of many affirmative action programs.

I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

Gospel

Unify Africa
I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

I'm with you on that. I have a question for you, are you a slavery in America & its effects on African American's denier? If so, thanks for being honest. If not, what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

I'm with you on that. I have a question for you, are you a slavery in America & its effects on African American's denier?
You will have to explain what you mean by that.

If so, thanks for being honest. If not, what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?
Again, you will have to explain what you mean by 'leveling the playing field'. What is the playing field, what time periods are you talking about, who are the players and what is the game, is leveling the playing field more important than every other consideration, and if so, why?

But if I understand what you mean, my proposal to 'level the playing field' is to stop discriminating by race. Slavery in America made all of America poorer. Discrimination by race made all of America poorer. Discrimination by race makes all of America poorer.

laughing dog

Contributor
Discrimination by race does make the economic pie for everyone smaller. But is a facile dismissal of the effects of discrimination because it makes the intended victims more poor.

southernhybrid

Contributor
There is all kinds of discrimination against minorities in the US to this day, even if some employers have been told to hire more Black folks and women.

For example, anyone who follows the real estate market like I do, knows that Black homeowners are usually discriminated against when it comes to home appraisals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/25/realestate/blacks-minorities-appraisals-discrimination.html

Abena and Alex Horton wanted to take advantage of low home-refinance rates brought on by the coronavirus crisis. So in June, they took the first step in that process, welcoming a home appraiser into their four-bedroom, four-bath ranch-style house in Jacksonville, Fla.
The Hortons live just minutes from the Ortega River, in a predominantly white neighborhood of 1950s homes that tend to sell for $350,000 to$550,000. They had expected their home to appraise for around $450,000, but the appraiser felt differently, assigning a value of$330,000. Ms. Horton, who is Black, immediately suspected discrimination.
The couple’s bank agreed that the value was off and ordered a second appraisal. But before the new appraiser could arrive, Ms. Horton, a lawyer, began an experiment: She took all family photos off the mantle. Instead, she hung up a series of oil paintings of Mr. Horton, who is white, and his grandparents that had been in storage. Books by Zora Neale Hurston and Toni Morrison were taken off the shelves, and holiday photo cards sent by friends were edited so that only those showing white families were left on display. On the day of the appraisal, Ms. Horton took the couple’s 6-year-old son on a shopping trip to Target, and left Mr. Horton alone at home to answer the door.
The new appraiser gave their home a value of $465,000 — a more than 40 percent increase from the first appraisal. The couple’s bank agreed that the value was off and ordered a second appraisal. But before the new appraiser could arrive, Ms. Horton, a lawyer, began an experiment: She took all family photos off the mantle. Instead, she hung up a series of oil paintings of Mr. Horton, who is white, and his grandparents that had been in storage. Books by Zora Neale Hurston and Toni Morrison were taken off the shelves, and holiday photo cards sent by friends were edited so that only those showing white families were left on display. On the day of the appraisal, Ms. Horton took the couple’s 6-year-old son on a shopping trip to Target, and left Mr. Horton alone at home to answer the door. The new appraiser gave their home a value of$465,000 — a more than 40 percent increase from the first appraisal.
Racial discrimination takes many forms, so let's not pretend that it doesn't exist.

atrib

Veteran Member

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?
Yet our office is full of white people, and new employees, who are also white, keeping showing up on a regular basis. They must not have got the memo. Or maybe the author of the article is simply making up shit.

Gospel

Unify Africa

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?
Yet our office is full of white people, and new employees, who are also white, keeping showing up on a regular basis. They must not have got the memo. Or maybe the author of the article is simply making up shit.

Facts. At my job of roughly 50 people. 3 are black, 4 are latino and the rest is white. Management is all white.

Gospel

Unify Africa
What's crazy is we have an Equity and Diversity team consisting of 5 people. One is a black women, one is a male Asian and the rest are old white men. This is not my saying they aren't good people that are effective at their jobs.

laughing dog

Contributor

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?
Yet our office is full of white people, and new employees, who are also white, keeping showing up on a regular basis. They must not have got the memo. Or maybe the author of the article is simply making up shit.
Maybe. Or it is also possible that these managers are reporting what their interpretation of what they were told (e.g. promote diversity in hiring gets translated in their brain as stop hiring white men).

Toni

Contributor
My observation is that in my state, white people cannot do enough to prove how not racist they are ....with regards to black people who immigrated from Africa and their children. You know: the ones who came here the 'right' way. Not the ones who descended from enslaved people.

Staff member

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Metaphor is going to take some minor nit-pick from Gospel's question and blow it up.

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?
Yet our office is full of white people, and new employees, who are also white, keeping showing up on a regular basis. They must not have got the memo. Or maybe the author of the article is simply making up shit.

Facts. At my job of roughly 50 people. 3 are black, 4 are latino and the rest is white. Management is all white.

Facts? Do you think facts are of interest to people denying the efficacy of affirmative action and other policies to reverse racial discrimination?

Discrimination by race does make the economic pie for everyone smaller. But is a facile dismissal of the effects of discrimination because it makes the intended victims more poor.

If you accidentally leave out a key word or otherwise render your message intelligible, but have exceeded the Edit Time-out, feel free to contact me or another Mod to amend the unclear sentence.

Elixir

Made in America
Slavery in America made all of America poorer.
I can only imagine what a great place this would have been if the owner had been a little richer due to lack of slavery.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
Slavery in America made all of America poorer.
I can only imagine what a great place this would have been if the owner had been a little richer due to lack of slavery.

View attachment 41126

As usual, you are determined to not get the point, or perhaps you are simply economically ignorant.

Here is a parallel: war makes everyone poorer, even if certain actors may be temporarily better off. There is a net loss overall.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza

We keep hearing the justice warriors saying that it's about ending discrimination. Why are the people doing the hiring being told to discriminate?
Yet our office is full of white people, and new employees, who are also white, keeping showing up on a regular basis. They must not have got the memo. Or maybe the author of the article is simply making up shit.
Maybe. Or it is also possible that these managers are reporting what their interpretation of what they were told (e.g. promote diversity in hiring gets translated in their brain as stop hiring white men).
EDIT: I have been told directly that we can't have another male on our team.

TomC

Celestial Highness
I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

I'm with you on that. I have a question for you, are you a slavery in America & its effects on African American's denier? If so, thanks for being honest. If not, what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?

Do you think that the answers to big social issues of the 1970s are still the best in the 2020s?

I don't.

What should have been done 50 years ago, and was, has little to do with what should be done now. Institutional Racism, aka Affirmative Action, served a very different purpose half a century ago.
Tom

BH

Super Moderator
Staff member
I am a white male, my niece is hispanic, and have cousins half white half black. I've date white, hispanic and black women in the past.

All discussion about this is futile. it case of a crooked stick cant be made straight. you have a bunch of white men who know they can do a job but dont get it. You have every racial minority who can say with honest truth they at one point in life have felt discriminated against with certainty and will always wonder if something at work didnt work out for them if racism had something to do with it.

To me it doesnt matter and I dont worry about it. If everyone had been treated right in the past and the black and hispanic people had been educated and employed fairly in the past I might still have lost out them just by luck of the draw or they may have been more qualified.

laughing dog

Contributor
I read the article. It reports that 16% of managers report they have been told to “deprioritise” hiring white men. Literally interpreted, the OP claim to “stop hiring” is false.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
I read the article. It reports that 16% of managers report they have been told to “deprioritise” hiring white men. Literally interpreted, the OP claim to “stop hiring” is false.
The OP put in a direct link to a webpage. That is the title of the webpage. Also, you do not know that the 'stop hiring' claim is false. The article does not reveal the question wording and the answer options.

The OP claimed only that the people doing the hiring are being told to discriminate, which is true, whether that is a blatant 'stop hiring', or a euphemistic 'deprioritize' (which means either stop hiring, which is discrimination, or favour candidates of other races, which is discrimination).

TomC

Celestial Highness
I read the article. It reports that 16% of managers report they have been told to “deprioritise” hiring white men. Literally interpreted, the OP claim to “stop hiring” is false.

You have a great deal more Faith in modern media than I have.
Tom

laughing dog

Contributor
I read the article. It reports that 16% of managers report they have been told to “deprioritise” hiring white men. Literally interpreted, the OP claim to “stop hiring” is false.
The OP put in a direct link to a webpage. That is the title of the webpage. Also, you do not know that the 'stop hiring' claim is false. The article does not reveal the question wording and the answer options.
There is nothing in the article that says anyone was told to stop hiring.
Metaphor said:
The OP claimed only that the people doing the hiring are being told to discriminate, which is true, whether that is a blatant 'stop hiring', or a euphemistic 'deprioritize' (which means either stop hiring, which is discrimination, or favour candidates of other races, which is discrimination).
“Deprioritise” could also mean to stop automatically ranking white men first. Which would mean they are not being told to discriminate.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
I read the article. It reports that 16% of managers report they have been told to “deprioritise” hiring white men. Literally interpreted, the OP claim to “stop hiring” is false.
The OP put in a direct link to a webpage. That is the title of the webpage. Also, you do not know that the 'stop hiring' claim is false. The article does not reveal the question wording and the answer options.
There is nothing in the article that says anyone was told to stop hiring.
There is also nothing in the article that rules it out. You don't know the question wording and you don't know what the authors meant by 'deprioritize'. There is no evidence that the claim is false.

Metaphor said:
The OP claimed only that the people doing the hiring are being told to discriminate, which is true, whether that is a blatant 'stop hiring', or a euphemistic 'deprioritize' (which means either stop hiring, which is discrimination, or favour candidates of other races, which is discrimination).
“Deprioritise” could also mean to stop automatically ranking white men first. Which would mean they are not being told to discriminate
I suppose it could mean that, though I would find that a strange way to put it. Discriminating against white people (and white men in particular) is also consistent with the other findings in the survey, like 52% saying their own company practises "reverse" discrimination and 48% say that often or very often they "pass on qualified candidates because they are not "diverse enough"

​

Gospel

Unify Africa
I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

I'm with you on that. I have a question for you, are you a slavery in America & its effects on African American's denier? If so, thanks for being honest. If not, what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?

Do you think that the answers to big social issues of the 1970s are still the best in the 2020s?

I don't.

What should have been done 50 years ago, and was, has little to do with what should be done now. Institutional Racism, aka Affirmative Action, served a very different purpose half a century ago.
Tom

TomC. I'm not sure what conversation you're reading. Metaphor finds discrimination by race vulgar. I also find it vulgar. I then asked Metaphors' opinion on what should have been done instead of affirmative action (which I did not get an answer for), then you chime in with "Do you think herp derp, answers to social issues of the 70's is best in the 20s herp derp?". you should know the answer to that already. I said Affirmative action is vulgar. My question was, other than affirmative action, what could have been done to help African Americans have the same opportunities as everyone else? You have any ideas? I have one, they could have enforced the laws by punishing people who discriminated against Americans by race. In my opinion the affirmative action was chosen to avoid punishing people for being racist but instead force them to appear less racist.

Gospel

Unify Africa
A whole lot of white people should have been thrown in Jail and the legal slavery in our jail system should have been loaded with the white racist pricks who supported the war against America anyway. And if you say, man there was just too many of them. Deputise the former slaves and give them all the support they need to jail (or kill if they resist) those clowns. Black folks would have built cities put up monuments for leaders of the Union rather than the dumb ass confederacy.

Gospel

Unify Africa
The war shouldn't have ended until we lay the smack down on every last remnant of the confederacy sympathizers.

laughing dog

Contributor
There is also nothing in the article that rules it out. You don't know the question wording and you don't know what the authors meant by 'deprioritize'. There is no evidence that the claim is false.
I know what is actually reported in the article. You have provided no evidence except pedantic reasoning to support the OP claim.At a minimum, the OP claim is bullshit.

Metaphor said:
“Deprioritise” could also mean to stop automatically ranking white men first. Which would mean they are not being told to discriminate
I suppose it could mean that, though I would find that a strange way to put it.
So ?
Metaphor said:
Discriminating against white people (and white men in particular) is also consistent with the other findings in the survey, like 52% saying their own company practises "reverse" discrimination and 48% say that often or very often they "pass on qualified candidates because they are not "diverse enough"

​

The former needs more explanation, and the latter does not mean necessarily mean discrimination.

Gospel

Unify Africa
Could have avoided the whole civil rights movement if racist pricks weren't allowed to keep their power and status.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
There is also nothing in the article that rules it out. You don't know the question wording and you don't know what the authors meant by 'deprioritize'. There is no evidence that the claim is false.
I know what is actually reported in the article. You have provided no evidence except pedantic reasoning to support the OP claim.At a minimum, the OP claim is bullshit.
The OP (written by Loren) did not claim managers had been told to stop hiring white men. The OP claimed there was discrimination, and he linked to an article with that title.

You are the one choosing to believe that that the wording in the body of the article contradicts the title of the article. They are not contradictory.

Metaphor said:
“Deprioritise” could also mean to stop automatically ranking white men first. Which would mean they are not being told to discriminate
I suppose it could mean that, though I would find that a strange way to put it.
So ?
So I find that less plausible than the other alternatives.

Metaphor said:
Discriminating against white people (and white men in particular) is also consistent with the other findings in the survey, like 52% saying their own company practises "reverse" discrimination and 48% say that often or very often they "pass on qualified candidates because they are not "diverse enough"

​

The former needs more explanation, and the latter does not mean necessarily mean discrimination.
The former means discrimination. "Reverse" discrimination is discrimination. The latter also means discrimination. Passing on qualified candidates because of unchangeable demographic characteristics (like their whiteness and sex) is discrimination.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
I find it vulgar to discriminate by race.

I'm with you on that. I have a question for you, are you a slavery in America & its effects on African American's denier? If so, thanks for being honest. If not, what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?

Do you think that the answers to big social issues of the 1970s are still the best in the 2020s?

I don't.

What should have been done 50 years ago, and was, has little to do with what should be done now. Institutional Racism, aka Affirmative Action, served a very different purpose half a century ago.
Tom

TomC. I'm not sure what conversation you're reading. Metaphor finds discrimination by race vulgar. I also find it vulgar. I then asked Metaphors' opinion on what should have been done instead of affirmative action (which I did not get an answer for),
That is not what you asked.

You asked:
what do you propose should have been done to level the playing field for African Americans in an environment where the majority didn't want them to succeed?
When I asked for clarification, you did not provide any, and agreed with ZiprHead's characterisation that my question was 'bait'.

But you are wrong when you say you did not receive an answer. I said people should stop discriminating by race.

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
All in how you write the headline, isn't it? "Only 16% of hiring managers report ever having been asked to prioritize non-white applicants" doesn't have quite the same ring.

Gospel

Unify Africa
I said people should stop discriminating by race.

And how does that look exactly? How does it manifest itself in the 1960's when black people were denied promotions, positions in high skilled Jobs or flat out not hired?

Gospel

Unify Africa
When I asked for clarification, you did not provide any

No one can clarify anything for you. With you clarifications need clarification.

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
All in how you write the headline, isn't it? "Only 16% of hiring managers report ever having been asked to prioritize non-white applicants" doesn't have quite the same ring.
What per cent of hiring managers being told to discriminate by race is an acceptable per cent?

EDIT: Remember when ZiprHead posted an article with a headline claiming a Florida bill required students to register their political views with the state?

When I objected to ZiprHead using that title for his thread title, I was...politely rebuffed. As it turns out even Salon -- S A L O N -- agreed (albeit after a year) that its headline was false.

Never happened here though.

TomC

Celestial Highness
I said people should stop discriminating by race.

And how does that look exactly? How does it manifest itself in the 1960's when black people were denied promotions, positions in high skilled Jobs or flat out not hired?
You do realize that the 60s were 2 generations ago, right?
Tom

Metaphor

Čarobnjak iz Oza
I said people should stop discriminating by race.

And how does that look exactly? How does it manifest itself in the 1960's when black people were denied promotions, positions in high skilled Jobs or flat out not hired?
You see, this is why I asked for clarification. You apparently had a specific time period in mind.

My answer is still the same: stop discriminating by race. In fact...I find myself in agreement with your own answer:

they could have enforced the laws by punishing people who discriminated against Americans by race.

Gospel

Unify Africa
Know how the NAACP could have been avoided? Arrest the entire management staff in the store shown below & then go to the business owners home and arrest that asshole too.

Bronzeage

Super Moderator
Staff member
As a white man who has always benefited from the advantages the system has afforded me, the idea of "reverse discrimination" has always seemed more than a little specious. To claim it's suddenly unfair to consider race as a factor in hiring, even more so.

I know my life began with a head start which I was granted simply because of the happenstance of birth. I didn't create these circumstances, but I'm not arrogant enough to believe it was because of some innate quality I possess.

In my youngest days, being socially aware meant providing two water fountains, with a sign above one which read "WHITE" and the other "COLORED". It takes a very long time to wash this kind of systemic discrimination out of the economic structure.

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
I said people should stop discriminating by race.

And how does that look exactly? How does it manifest itself in the 1960's when black people were denied promotions, positions in high skilled Jobs or flat out not hired?
You do realize that the 60s were 2 generations ago, right?
Tom
Ah, so all that wealth just disappeared, eh?

As opposed to creating entire neighborhoods of economic desperation, where two/three generations of kids have grown up with very little hope of gaining solvency because the system is still heavily weighted against them, due to being in direct competition with two generations of suburban white kids who grew up in relative affluence, in an economic game that heavily favors those with inherited investments?

Suppose someone stole your car and gave it to a friend, then died. Would you accept the argument that you should not be allowed to seek the return of or compensation for the car? Since the original thief is now dead, the person who they gave it to is now the fair and legal owner of the stolen car?

Gospel

Unify Africa
I said people should stop discriminating by race.

And how does that look exactly? How does it manifest itself in the 1960's when black people were denied promotions, positions in high skilled Jobs or flat out not hired?
You do realize that the 60s were 2 generations ago, right?
Tom

Yes. You do realize that I asked a question about what should have been done in the 60's right?

Gospel

Unify Africa
As a white man who has always benefited from the advantages the system has afforded me, the idea of "reverse discrimination" has always seemed more than a little specious. To claim it's suddenly unfair to consider race as a factor in hiring, even more so.

I know my life began with a head start which I was granted simply because of the happenstance of birth. I didn't create these circumstances, but I'm not arrogant enough to believe it was because of some innate quality I possess.

In my youngest days, being socially aware meant providing two water fountains, with a sign above one which read "WHITE" and the other "COLORED". It takes a very long time to wash this kind of systemic discrimination out of the economic structure.

I respect that however I disagree. We wouldn't be having this reverse discrimination discussion if the racist people were not allowed to keep their status. Discrimination should have been a felony level criminal offense until later done away with when it's no longer necessary rather than force racist people to appear less racist so they can keep their status.

What I mean is, yes any discrimination (even the alleged reverse ones) should be unacceptable. Too many concession were made which resulted in a weaker and less effective attempt to end discrimination.

Bronzeage

Super Moderator
Staff member
As a white man who has always benefited from the advantages the system has afforded me, the idea of "reverse discrimination" has always seemed more than a little specious. To claim it's suddenly unfair to consider race as a factor in hiring, even more so.

I know my life began with a head start which I was granted simply because of the happenstance of birth. I didn't create these circumstances, but I'm not arrogant enough to believe it was because of some innate quality I possess.

In my youngest days, being socially aware meant providing two water fountains, with a sign above one which read "WHITE" and the other "COLORED". It takes a very long time to wash this kind of systemic discrimination out of the economic structure.

I respect that however I disagree. We wouldn't be having this reverse discrimination discussion if the racist people were not allowed to keep their status. Discrimination should have been a felony level criminal offense until later done away with when it's no longer necessary rather than force racist people to appear less racist so they can keep their status.

What I mean is, yes any discrimination (even the alleged reverse ones) should be unacceptable. Too many concession were made which resulted in a weaker and less effective attempt to end discrimination.
One of the lessons that was pounded into us at Emperor Training School was, "never give an order you do not expect to be obeyed." That goes along with another lesson, "Don't prescribe a cure worse than the disease."

The reason we are discussing this is because racism is now seen as a societal evil and thus unacceptable. In the colored only water fountain days, it was considered a rational way of thinking. It was supported by science and the law. That kind of thing has lost the support of science and law, but if reason could solve society's problems, life would have reached perfection a long time ago.

Gospel

Unify Africa
As a white man who has always benefited from the advantages the system has afforded me, the idea of "reverse discrimination" has always seemed more than a little specious. To claim it's suddenly unfair to consider race as a factor in hiring, even more so.

I know my life began with a head start which I was granted simply because of the happenstance of birth. I didn't create these circumstances, but I'm not arrogant enough to believe it was because of some innate quality I possess.

In my youngest days, being socially aware meant providing two water fountains, with a sign above one which read "WHITE" and the other "COLORED". It takes a very long time to wash this kind of systemic discrimination out of the economic structure.

I respect that however I disagree. We wouldn't be having this reverse discrimination discussion if the racist people were not allowed to keep their status. Discrimination should have been a felony level criminal offense until later done away with when it's no longer necessary rather than force racist people to appear less racist so they can keep their status.

What I mean is, yes any discrimination (even the alleged reverse ones) should be unacceptable. Too many concession were made which resulted in a weaker and less effective attempt to end discrimination.
One of the lessons that was pounded into us at Emperor Training School was, "never give an order you do not expect to be obeyed." That goes along with another lesson, "Don't prescribe a cure worse than the disease."

The reason we are discussing this is because racism is now seen as a societal evil and thus unacceptable. In the colored only water fountain days, it was considered a rational way of thinking. It was supported by science and the law. That kind of thing has lost the support of science and law, but if reason could solve society's problems, life would have reached perfection a long time ago.

That's rubbish. Hundreds of thousands of people died in the civil war over slavery. The number given is in the 600,000's. You mean to tell me after all that no one was familiar with the concept that racism was unacceptable? I doubt that. What should have been done during the rebuilding process was the slaves not being left to the mercy of their former masters. Black people should not have been given reparations or land but the racist white people should have been given the opportunity to get over it or fuck off to jail and let someone else do it.

Edit: The error of letting the racist pricks keep their status is what things like the civil rights movement, Affirmative action and the current violence in the black community is a result of. If we let black people build and hold status (remember black wall street?) we would have better race relations today. but nooooooooooo