Lowering entrance standards to some prestigious school, so that rich and privileged people get an advantage doesn't somehow make up for treating an underprivileged poor person just because they have the same skin tone. All that does is sweep the actual problem being faced by the underprivileged person under the rug.
No, it does not (or at least the claim that it does has never been properly substantiated and in any case conflates very different forms of discrimination, and then there's the issue of constant general misrepresentation of AA as being of one particular form) but sweeping actual problems under the carpet is definitely what you do when you repeatedly engage in what is, effectively, attempted, albeit subtle, racism denial, on this forum, and plainly encourage other obvious and more open racism deniers into the bargain. These are actions which are deeply at odds with the (for the most part) fine words in the rest of your post.
Imo, no one who claims to have genuine, benign or straightforward motivations and concerns could possibly engage in the sort of attempted discrediting of persuasive and concerning evidences of racism that you and Loren do, of which the debacle of unsupported and inaccurate claims (by Loren) and even more serious additional allegations (by you) regarding the estate agent unequal service issue in two other recent threads is but one example of a pattern observed over a long period. Your extended posting record stands as evidence against you, whatever other things you might sometimes say to the contrary, usually in the context of being pressed to do so in this or that series of discussions.
In other words, your general silence is also noted as part of the pattern, when certain things could be said or discussed but more often aren't. What you choose not to spend most of your time dwelling on is as potentially telling as what you do. I have lost count of the number of reasonable discussions you have basically hijacked with your overstated paradigms and efforts to minimise or discredit evidences and make the tail wag the dog. It's a routine and usually unwarranted occurrence. In my personal opinion, it's disgraceful behaviour, [removed] imo.
I say to you what I said to Loren. I agree that the issues and concerns are sometimes exaggerated and even on occasion exploited, but that is no excuse for you or anyone to incessantly do the same in the opposite way. One skew is as bad as the other. Unreasonably and inaccurately playing something up is no better than unreasonably and inaccurately playing it down.
One final thing. Obviously, and without getting into it all for the hundredth time, I reject your suggestions that either your ethnicity, or mine, ultimately matters as much as you sometimes imply in all of this, but your repeated citation of both of them, especially when conjecturing (negatively and inaccurately, imo) about my motivations and and my race and my experiences, runs counter to your claiming to eschew identity politics, which is a stance you you clearly only stick to when it suits you, as is often evident (eg discussions on gender issues). I don't bring your ethnicity into discussions, but you have on several occasions brought both yours and mine in, in a particular way. There's nothing per se wrong with bringing an individual's race into things, including one's own, but the way you bring it in (to more or less exculpate yourself and critisise others) is what I would call odd for someone with your stated position on identity politics.
