|
Qtotonibudinibudet posted:it's not about race, it's about important caucuses in the democratic party I get that it's all realpolitik at this level, what rubs me the wrong way is that it's still discrimination couched in a kind of unassailable sanctimony. Not to mention how patronizing it is. Sure, appointing a black woman to placate your desired demographic is the plan--this stuff's been goign on since the beginning of democracy, but announcing your cynical power-politics is a finger in the eye to anyone paying attention. Come to think of it, it's also just bad tactics. Locking himself in a course of action when of course the situation can change. Maybe I'm just old and still clinging to the outmoded idea that people should be judged on the content of their character and not their sex or skin color. quote:one difference that seems relevant to the equal opportunity employment act (i am not a lawyer) is he isn't seeking applications for employment They are different situations I agree. Do the similarities in the analogy mean anything to you? aventari fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Apr 29, 2023 |
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
I would be more in support of meritocracies if, indeed, literally everyone started off on exactly the same footing with the same advantages, disadvantages, and so on. So "content of their character" sounds good and all but in reality such ideas work heavily in favor of those populations that already have the necessary advantages when they start running. And if those populations continue to get elected, they can (consciously or unconsciously) be blind to concerns that affect other groups that are ostensibly represented but are getting ignored anyway. To be fair, the whole racism blow up at the Los Angeles City Council has definitely not helped things. Of course, it should not be forgotten that Qtotonibudinibudet posted:it's not about race, it's about important caucuses in the democratic party
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:36
|
|
|
and for the record, I have proudly voted for katie porter for every year that she's been on my ballot. Unfortunately, district lines changed and I was not in her district for 2022.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:39
|
|
|
aventari posted:Maybe I'm just old and still clinging to the outmoded idea that people should be judged on the content of their character and not their sex or skin color. I'm not gonna post more about it then this singular post but you can consider some of the math at work here. You are filling one seat in government, you have 40 million people in the state. Your potential candidate pool of truly, legitimately qualified, candidates are not single digits, but thousands to tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of people... The United States as a whole has millions of people qualified to serve with very serious credentials. Among them are women and minorites who will never make it to a historically male and white dominated institution. This is despite having women and people of color who are eminently qualified and willing to serve. The appeal to meritocracy is another tool to limit representation. Another way to say that in a world where people are 'only judged on the content of their character', and that was the basis of appointment to government, then having a white and male dominated institution is an explicit admission of white male power.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:51
|
|
|
aventari posted:I get that it's all realpolitik at this level, what rubs me the wrong way is that it's still discrimination couched in a kind of unassailable sanctimony. Not to mention how patronizing it is. people paying active attention to politics are a minority in presidential primaries, and idk who the hell in that minority (at least in CA, which is realistically the only place that cares about which of our politicians Newsom chooses to appoint) doesn't already know that Gavbot is a relentlessly political creature first and foremost. his appointing Barbara Lee (probably) to the senate has way more upside for him than downside among the tiny percentage of CA primary voters who will realistically either vote for him over a Buttigieg or will vote for the year's designated progressive candidate anyway there is a significant population of older black democrat voters in the south that will understandably value a white politician being willing to work with and support black politicians a lot more than policy promises, because they've been burned a lot by the latter and have living memory of when the former really wasn't a thing. Newsom cares about their votes way more than he cares about Katie Porter maybe pushing the senate slightly more to the left than Lee, if he even cares about that in the first place
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:54
|
|
|
The actual problem is that anyone Newsom will appoint will be a wretched Democratic Party apparatchik no matter their gender or race. There are plenty of black women who are dead-eyed suits who have memorized liberal inclusion language and are also in love with finance capital and the police. It's the elite political equivalent of posting an "In This House We Believe" sign, and it's nearly as embarrassing to be upset about it as it would be to be excited about it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 05:58
|
|
|
I think it's okay to advocate for filling government roles with people from minority demographics who are historically underrepresented, even if we've ultimately seen that its effect isn't exactly a revolutionary change to the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 06:03
|
|
|
I think that there are good small-d democratic processes for apportioning seats in legislative bodies to ensure that groups that generally find it difficult to compete in electoral politics (because elections are a rich, white man's game) are represented. I also think it's ridiculous to think of Biden vowing to seat a black woman on the supreme court or Newsom promising to fill a senate vacancy with a black woman as anything other than very limp political messaging considering the deeply and structurally undemocratic characteristics of both of those bodies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 06:06
|
|
|
If Newsom actually tries to run for president in 2024, I'd still vote for Biden and I hope Newsom loses the Californian vote.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 06:26
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Staples Center is another one, hosts 4 teams with about 150 games a year plus concerts on top of that Isn't that how it is in most cities with a hockey and basketball team? Bruins and Celtics also play in the same arena. Although, I guess, the Crypt is a little unique in that it's two basketball teams sharing the same arena.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 06:30
|
|
|
Kenning posted:The actual problem is that anyone Newsom will appoint will be a wretched Democratic Party apparatchik no matter their gender or race is that not realistically the case for anyone with a realistic shot at a federal senate seat in this state? idk what Porter's background is since im not in socal but i'd figure anyone running as a democrat here past the local level is at some level ingratiated with the machine
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 07:07
|
|
|
The Glumslinger posted:Staples Center is another one, hosts 4 teams with about 150 games a year plus concerts on top of that You mean the Crypto.com Arena?  LA is an outlier. We got the Crypto, and we also have Rose bowl, Colliseum, Forum, SoFi, and the LAFC stadium, and all of them host concerts and events like monster trucks. And they're building a Clippers arena so there's another one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 07:32
|
|
|
also the dignity health sports center (though i still think of it as the home depot stadium)
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 07:45
|
|
|
aventari posted:I get that it's all realpolitik at this level, what rubs me the wrong way is that it's still discrimination couched in a kind of unassailable sanctimony. Not to mention how patronizing it is. Stop listening to Larry Elder dude.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Surely they're not just used for football though? They're also used for soccer teams and concerts. There are very few events that require 80 thousand seats like NFL games do. Maybe you get 10 or 15 more days of use. All the rest of the time, 340 days a year, you have an empty concrete ring surrounded by giant asphalt parking lots wasting space in your city. Almost any other use would be more beneficial.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
aventari posted:I get that it's all realpolitik at this level, what rubs me the wrong way is that it's still discrimination couched in a kind of unassailable sanctimony. Not to mention how patronizing it is. Are you also on the 'affirmative action is reverse racism' train too?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2023 20:08
|
|
|
Hey guys after receiving today's sound transit flier somehow California's Transit projects take less time I am impressed at how bad the country that isn't northeast is at making a yard of mile or taking two decades to start a bus line. What I'm saying is I will not complain about how slow California is with transit again lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2023 02:51
|
|
|
aventari posted:They are different situations I agree. Do the similarities in the analogy mean anything to you? what similarities, exactly
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2023 07:40
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Lol. I don't know who that is, but I appreciate your input to the discussion. Family Values posted:Are you also on the 'affirmative action is reverse racism' train too? I'm not really familiar with "reverse racism", what do you mean by that? The inverse of racism to me would be equality, but I don't think that's your meaning. OMGVBFLOL posted:what similarities, exactly The primary similarity being that you are declaring that only people of a certain skin color and gender will be considered for and allowed to fullfill an employment position. That's not a component of an ideology I'd want to be teaching my kids.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
aventari posted:The primary similarity being that you are declaring that only people of a certain skin color and gender will be considered for and allowed to fullfill an employment position. CA never had black senator before Kamala. Senate's had less than a dozen black senators in it's 230+ year history. Did you have a problem with that body and the CA senate office being basically whites only until the last decade?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
sb hermit posted:I would be more in support of meritocracies if, indeed, literally everyone started off on exactly the same footing with the same advantages, disadvantages, and so on. So what you're saying is the way people should be treated should not be based on their character and qualities. Instead you think they everyone should be treated individually based on a rubric consisting of (i assume) their ancenstry, sex, gender identity, childhood opportunities, etc? This is problematic to say the least. First of all, what criteria decide the characterstics included in this rubric? Who scores these characteristics? Is it regional? Immutable? I could go on but I think you get the point. If this isn't what you mean I'd love clarification. Other than this rejection of MLK principles, the only other argument I'm hearing is straight up Machiavellian politics to ensure demographic support for something that's not clear. Who or what exactly are we trying to lock down the votes for? Newsom's future presidential bid? I don't think that's something many people are clamoring for. Keeping a democratic seat in the Senate? That doesn't make sense, CA sending two dems to the Senate is already a fait accompli. aventari fucked around with this message at 20:34 on May 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Huh, usually I have to go out to Morro Bay to hear the sea lions
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
You can't just magically establish equality and meritocracy in a white supremacist nation where many cities are still informally segregated. Some historically oppressed and still currently oppressed demographics require greater support and representation. Now sure, sometimes depending on the context, it comes off as cynical, manipulative, or just surface level, especially when in the hands of white liberals and especially when they just utilize it to continue the white supremacist status quo and/or apologize for it. You can't just go "oh gosh don't you want to treat people based on the content of their character starting...TODAY" while in a white supremacist state that has been brutally persecuting minority groups for the entirety of its history and continues to do so. It takes healing, reparations, and recompense first, and not one of these things has been seriously offered by the American establishment. Just scraps and symbolic gestures. The process hasn't even started yet. You can have your "judge me by my character" when you pay us the gently caress back. Punkin Spunkin fucked around with this message at 20:50 on May 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:46
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:CA never had black senator before Kamala. Yes I have a few problems with it. One is that those bodies being virutally only white males, with a very high confidence stastically we weren't getting the best and brightest candidates serving. This is a huge disservice to everyone. Another problem is that is was unfair to anyone who wasn't a white male that they would either not be considered, or legally barred from participating. Now consider our current situation where the only people being allowed into these senate positions are black females. Do you see how this is the same problem, just switching a few arbitrary physical characteristics around? CPColin posted:Huh, usually I have to go out to Morro Bay to hear the sea lions aventari fucked around with this message at 20:50 on May 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:46
|
|
|
They should remove all identifying characteristics from political candidates.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
i want to see the parallel world were aventari lives, a world where a governor making a temporary appointment in a massive power vacuum isn't a by its very nature going to be a visceral mix of political maneuvering and personal ambition. a world in which one can calculate an objective score of individual suitability for a senatorship as the basis of a placid and scientific technocracy at the end of history i don't know if i would want to live there, but it would be fascinating to experience edit: jokes posted:They should remove all identifying characteristics from political candidates. oh yes, a ruling class of brains in jars, featureless and serene GhostofJohnMuir fucked around with this message at 20:54 on May 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:52
|
|
|
Combating systemic racism isn't as simple as saying "let's just stop doing the racism and all be equal now." Biases are already build into the system and the people who make up the system are racially inequitable relative to the general population. People of color are disproportionately underrepresented in the US Senate and would continue to be so even if Newsom selected a black woman for Feinstein's position. As to the previous arguments of meritocracy, we do not all enjoy the same socio-economic circumstances and growing up in a stable, middle-income or higher home is a privilege many people do not get to enjoy which rigs the "meritocracy" from the get go. This is the whole idea behind affirmative action: in universities for example admissions overwhelmingly overrepresent white and Asian applicants. This is not because black, Hispanic, and indigenous applicants are inherently stupider, or don't work as hard, but because they are much more likely to have had to face massive systemic barriers to attending a good school, having the luxury of putting time into and getting help with their education, and thus being able to obtain top tier standardized testing scores. So you give those people a boost in your admissions formula, even if it means they might get in over a white student who had a better GPA and test scores. No, there's no real perfect way to break out a calculator and say growing up in Englewood in a one-parent household below the poverty line and forced to attend one of the worst public schools in the state is worth +300 points on your SAT score, and it might not seem "fair" or even "racist" that a black student with lower scores gets in over a white student with higher ones. The alternative, however, would be to continue operating a "fair" admission system that does not consider these socio-economic factors and thus shuts many of people of color out from receiving a higher education, which just reinforces those demographics trending towards being poor and under-educated. Bringing it back to the senate selection, I don't have a problem with Newsom's pledge and the fact is there are multiple eminently qualified black women for the position and he will select from that pool. aventari mentioned Schiff and Porter as examples of qualified candidates who would be overlooked because of the pledge, but I haven't seen any explanation for why they are any more qualified for the position than, say, Barbara Lee. Maybe even if Newsom wasn't under pressure to tap a black woman for the seat, he'd still pick Lee anyway given her qualifications. And if he didn't, would the person he picked be because of 100% meritocratic reasons? Based on his last pick - a long time political ally and friend of Newsom - I'd argue that no, he'd just pick somebody that would help him with his future aspirations again. The alternative to Newsom's pledge isn't a purely meritocratic pick, it's some other public or backroom consideration instead.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:56
|
|
|
Mr. Biden are you a bad enough dude to enact the Acts of Sortition, and destroy political factionalism?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
At risk of indulging this silliness: let’s say you were truly looking at this like a dumb mathematical formula where candidate quality is the variable you’re optimizing for in the long run. It might well be that gating candidacy by race today — which you say compromises candidate quality — increases access to opportunity in the long run. This then increases candidate quality in the long run. You ought to be open at least to that possibility. More fundamentally, you should really rethink the idea that someone’s job history maps at all to their potential as a legislator.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 21:04
|
|
|
jokes posted:They should remove all identifying characteristics from political candidates. The Masked Singer but for elections?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
aventari posted:Now consider our current situation where the only people being allowed into these senate positions are black females. Ah yes, the only people being allowed. When we're talking one seat. And putting a black person in that seat would increase the number of black senators by 33% It's basically the same thing. Anyhow, you're basically making an argument against affirmative action and in favor of colorblind policy, which is dumb because colorblind policy simply pushes forward the status quo and leave existing injustices active. Whomever said you were talking "reverse racism" is right but you don't even know your own position well enough to catch that it would seem.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 22:12
|
|
|
aventari posted:So what you're saying is the way people should be treated should not be based on their character and qualities. Instead you think they everyone should be treated individually based on a rubric consisting of (i assume) their ancenstry, sex, gender identity, childhood opportunities, etc? Under represented groups tend to have their voices suppressed and their powers diminished. With a national stage, it's more likely that their concerns and priorities can come to the forefront. I think if Gavin wants to appoint someone from a historically under represented population, who seems qualified to do the job, he should be able to do it. Representation has been the only argument I've seriously made. There is no perfect rubric to judge anything and everything. That's why elections occur and we have people use their own judgements to elect a senator. Meanwhile, my opinion is to just let Gavin use his judgement until elections roll around.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 22:18
|
|
|
I have a very hard time caring about whichever democrat drone Gavin Newsom picks
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 22:36
|
|
|
It would be nice if he didn't pick another doddering senior with big black holes on their CT scan
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
aventari posted:Another problem is that is was unfair to anyone who wasn't a white male that they would either not be considered, or legally barred from participating. These two lines being directly next to each other is extremely funny to me because it acknowledges that it has already been unfair to non-white/male candidates then immediately goes 'okay lets purge all that human history entirely from our memory and pretend this is a game of madlibs instead'
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:It would be nice if he didn't pick another doddering senior with big black holes on their CT scan Gavbot appointing Pelosi to the senate and London Breed to CA-11 would definitely be a hellworld scenario but i wouldn't put it past him
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
jokes posted:They should remove all identifying characteristics from political candidates. ??? but we already have gavin
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 00:47
|
|
|
jokes posted:They should remove all identifying characteristics from political candidates. Like, take their faces off or what. How do I register to vote for this
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
I think we all know that the only potential senator who could truly encompass the complexity and diversity of a constituency like the California Republic is Raymond "Shrimp Boy" Chow.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 05:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 19:49 |
|
|
Sad that the most action the thread gets before Firenado season is some 90s-assed reverse racism libertarian. I posit instead: the California Burrito stands heads above TexMex and is rivalled only by the Burrito Ahogado.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2023 05:58
|
|