So if two people have precisely the same qualifications and fitness for a role, but one of them has a racial or sexual difference and is either advanced or held back because of it, you could legitimately say that the subjects had been treated unequally.
Even in a country as tolerant and open as Britain, it is undeniable that historically people have been disadvantaged because of their sex, sexuality or skin colour. Roles for which they have been eminently fit and suited have been closed to them because of a characteristic over which they have no say. Not all the bad blood from this has gone away.
Of course the way to dissipate any remaining bad blood would be to visibly and consistently strive to appoint people to positions based on their merit, confident that in the course of time people of ability will rise to the positions which they deserve. But what would be the most divisive way in which to go about trying to address such inequalities? Well, that would be to very visibly and obviously create and institute a mirror version of the old system: to attempt to carve out special privileges for people who look like those who suffered discrimination in the past, and to treat with a special disdain and contempt the people who look like they might have once benefited from discrimination.
Read More
Related
ZH: "White Lives Don't Matter" Academic: "I Resist Urges To Kneecap White Men"
Summit News: Cambridge University Defends (Ugly Indian-Born) Academic Who Said “White Lives Don’t Matter”
DM: Cambridge University backs academic who tweeted 'White Lives Don't Matter' - and PROMOTES her to professor - after she received barrage of abuse and death threats
Summit News: Cambridge University Defends (Ugly Indian-Born) Academic Who Said “White Lives Don’t Matter”
DM: Cambridge University backs academic who tweeted 'White Lives Don't Matter' - and PROMOTES her to professor - after she received barrage of abuse and death threats