Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't object to the idea of diversity, just the way it's applied.
You have a 97% wealthy, white attendance in Manhattan at an art museum and that's OK.
You have a 97% working class, black attendance at a rap concert and that's OK.
You have a 97% working class, white attendance at a MAGA rally and that's not OK because it's not "diverse".
If people were serious about diversity they would be grabbing black people and working class whites off the street and forcing them to look at art. They would force white people to go to rap concerts and black people to go to MAGA rallies.
Diversity does not mean everyone is homogoneous or does the same things, it's the opposite of that. I don't think anyone thinks MAGA rallies aren't diverse enough, in fact I think most liberals don't understand why anyone other than whites would want to attend one. Where are you getting that anyone thinks more dark skinned people should attend MAGA rallies?
In Houston, 19 Black women were appointed to various judicial positions.
In the Dallas County District Courts, of the thirteen judicial spots, at least five of them are filled by Blacks.
To the small minded, these people attained their seats due to "diversity" or "Affirmative Action".
To others, it may be that a diverse bench adequately represents a diverse constituency and makes perfect sense?
Dallas County never had a single black judge until 2014, decades after affirmative action was passed.
The 19 black, female judges in Houston, all of whom are in Harris County, were all elected to the bench, not appointed, so again, not due to affirmative action but put there by Harris County voters. I don't know if the Dallas County judges were elected as well, but it is likely if that is the way the Texas judicial system apparently works.
Dallas County never had a single black judge until 2014, decades after affirmative action was passed.
The 19 black, female judges in Houston, all of whom are in Harris County, were all elected to the bench, not appointed, so again, not due to affirmative action but put there by Harris County voters. I don't know if the Dallas County judges were elected as well, but it is likely if that is the way the Texas judicial system apparently works.
My bad. I meant elected. got things mixed up with federal court. I think there's been a miscommunication here with your response, because I was not saying that they were there due to affirmative action. On the contrary, I stated that their election represents their diverse cities. So I guess you're backing up what I said? who knows. "Affirmative Action" and "Diversity!" are the first things some folks scream just because.
btw, it's a given that if they're from Houston, they'd be in Harris County since it's the county seat.
My bad. I meant elected. got things mixed up with federal court. I think there's been a miscommunication here with your response, because I was not saying that they were there due to affirmative action. On the contrary, I stated that their election represents their respective cities. So I guess you're backing up what I said? who knows.
btw, it's a given that if they're from Houston, they'd be in Harris County since it's the county seat.
It sounded like you were saying it was up for debate and a matter of opinion whether they were there due to affirmative action, but it's all good.
But it was at the time anyone's land to take. That was the rules the world the Indians, the Brits and everyone else were operating under the time. Britain had been invade several times in its history before then. Today you can hate the game but don't hate the players or just one team.
Not so. According to the international law of the day, Europeans didn't have the right to take the land. The law of nations at the time recognized that the land belonged to the Native nations, and required the European powers to negotiate for the land. Spain ignored this agreement, but England, France, and Holland held to it. Whether or not the Native peoples and their leaders understood the European concept of purchasing land in perpetuity, vs. giving gifts for temporary use of a parcel of land as was their custom, remains a topic of ongoing debate.
Can you point to some program that is aimed at making America brown or black, which seems to be the undercurrent in this thread?
There's no conspiracy to wipe out whites, which seems to be what you're implying.
I can point to the most obvious 'program'.. the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. It undid America's deliberate effort to replenish population with European immigrants & started replenishing America with non-White immigrants. It can be easily researched, and the demographic change can be clearly discerned.
I agree, there is not a coordinated 'conspiracy' to eradicate White Americans. But the net (demographic) effect is basically becoming that reality. I believe we are on an ultimate trajectory to become a mestizo-like 3rd World society (similar to Brasil). Peace.
I can point to the most obvious 'program'.. the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. It undid America's deliberate effort to replenish population with European immigrants & started replenishing America with non-White immigrants. It can be easily researched, and the demographic change can be clearly discerned.
I agree, there is not a coordinated 'conspiracy' to eradicate White Americans. But the net (demographic) effect is basically becoming that reality. I believe we are on an ultimate trajectory to become a mestizo-like 3rd World society (similar to Brasil). Peace.
Why don’t you use Houston as an example?
Possibly the most diverse city in the country and known as the energy capital of the World.
I know ... people like you don’t understand that a black or Hispanic person can be a doctor or engineer.
I understand what's taking place, I just don't think the US has any obligation to take them in. It's tragic that Sub-Saharan Africa is an uncivilized wasteland, but it's ultimately not our problem. Accepting hordes of these Africans is not beneficial to the US in any way.No, no, my friend. Let's not play games. "For whatever reason" is not a sufficient explanation. The last place any African immigrant would choose to go is Minnesota. None of these "refugees" CHOSE to go to Minnesota. They were PLACED there, deliberately.
Why single out Somalians?
The us has taken in Hmong refugees. Is laos an uncivilized wasteland? Or how about Vietnam? The us took in Bosniaks. Is the former Yugoslavia an uncivilized wasteland? Has the us “benefited” more from those groups? Or really any other group? The us has a history of taking in refugees.
And let’s put this fearmongering anti immigrant thing to rest.
I understand what's taking place, I just don't think the US has any obligation to take them in. It's tragic that Sub-Saharan Africa is an uncivilized wasteland, but it's ultimately not our problem. Accepting hordes of these Africans is not beneficial to the US in any way.No, no, my friend. Let's not play games. "For whatever reason" is not a sufficient explanation. The last place any African immigrant would choose to go is Minnesota. None of these "refugees" CHOSE to go to Minnesota. They were PLACED there, deliberately.
It becomes our problem when we go to their country and change their government
Is like the neighbor that keeps on going to your garage to rearrange things and then gets mad when you go to his garage and ask for water.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.