this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
159 points (100.0% liked)

196

16490 readers
2920 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
159
not a moral pr(ul)ecept (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by emstuff@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
 

sorry i got my rhetoric ™️ wrong last time i am just attempting to illustrate the thesis of Tolerance is not a moral precept by Yonatan Zunger so check that out if ur curious thanks babes <3

[Tolerance] is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

violent and hateful acts of bigotry are outlawed and have been for quite a while

Someone hasn't been paying attention to all the laws deliberately victimising and discriminating against racial minorities, LGBTQ+ people, poor people, unemployed people and all immigrants (not just the undocumented ones) coming out of Congress, the white house and the states for the last 250 or so years 🙄

[–] bob_wiley@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We can only talk about today, not 250 years ago. What are the laws today which support racial discrimination, for example? Lets get rid for those if they exist. I don't see how continuing to complain about stuff from 250 years ago, which was struct down long ago, is helpful for moving forward. We can't change the past, we can only change the outlook for the future.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

'For the last 250 years" means continuously, not that it stopped 250 years ago.

As for current laws which support racial discrimination? gestures towards the entirety of the "justice" and voting systems

Here's an overview article

[–] bob_wiley@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That overview doesn't really say anything other than ~~ trust us, it's there ~~

They want to charge me $32 to read the actual paper, which I'm not going to spend.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tbf, anyone claiming that every sector of state and federal level American governance isn't dripping with systemic racism and other discrimination is either arguing in bad faith, wilfully ignorant or an idiot. I have a feeling you might be the trifecta.

[–] bob_wiley@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I just always hear people talk about systemic racism, but never point to anything specific which can be changed or fixed. How can anything be fixed if it can't be defined? That's isn't bad faith, ignorant, or idiotic, it's how you solve problems. Step 1... define it. You'll never be satisfied if you don't know specifically what you're upset about, because you'll never know when it's been resolved. Are you just parroting others; is that why you resorted to personal insults instead answering the question for yourself? Instead you sent me to an article I assume you also haven't read, since it's behind a paywall.

I'm not saying there aren't things in society that can be improved. Everything can always be improved. But if you want any improvement to happen you need to know what those things are and be able to explain it. This shouldn't be a hard question for someone who claims to care.

I can probably get you started... can we assume gerrymandering is on the list? So then what would the solution be? I'm not an expert on political districts, do we just make in a grid across all the states, maybe scaling the size of the grid up or down to account for population density? I don't think there is a law that requires gerrymandering, but I'm on board with redrawing the districts to eliminate the madness there.

What else?