Replies

Interesting. Sad. Requiring “us to provide race/gender breakdowns” is simply the unethical work of illogical and lazy people. The people who built Apollo 11 in 1969 did not worry about skin color. Rockwell in Downey in 1969 only worried about quality and design perfection. They knew every tree where their lumber came from and every foundry their bolts came from. Yup, they had a variety of races and genders that no one noticed. Worrying about race and gender will not put a man on the moon.

If I were younger, I'd emigrate to Poland, Hungary, or Russia.

Worrying about race and gender will not put a man on the moon.

Or a reliable car in your garage, a cell phone in your pocket, a computer on your desk or the means for them to talk to each other.

I could say something about reliable printers too but that would be going too far. ;o)

I always loved this article on affirmative action by Pittsburgh newsman Al Julius. It says it all and it was broadcast on KQV-AM on April 11th, 1966:

Y' CAN'T SUBSTITUTE ONE PREJUDICE FOR ANOTHER OR ONE QUOTA FOR ANOTHER QUOTA

Written and broadcast by Al Julius

April 11, 1966

At the very outset let's get one thing straight, everyone should be entitled to compete for a job based solely upon his qualifications to fulfill that job, and not upon his race religion or ethnic background ... That's the ideal proposition, that's the way it should be in the field of employment ... When you fill out an application for a job, the only salient points that should be of interest to the personnel manager is whether you have the background to enable you to perform the job so that you will be an asset to your employer, so that your work will prove profitable to him and this profitable to you, except in certain specific and minor cases there is no room on an application blank for race, religion or where your grandparents come from ... Thus we'll say that a firm has an opening for a qualified engineer, and a negro and a caucasian apply for the job, the man with the highest qualifications and greatest potential should be the one who finally gets the position, that's the only good common business sense because an employer is going to pay out dollars and cents in wages for the greatest return which in this case is work done, if he allows prejudice to play a part in his choice then he is decreasing his prime purpose in business which is to show a profit ... And it must be remembered that prejudice is a two edged sword, it can hack and cut in either direction, causing much pain and much more anger ... That mythical personnel manager can hire the less qualified caucasian over the more qualified negro just because he doesn't like negroes and that is prejudice, or because he is afraid of public opinion or he is out to satisfy certain vocal groups he will hire the less qualified negro over the more qualified caucasian, and make no mistake about it this too is prejudice ... Call it a repayment for many years of injustice, call it an attempt to balance a series of wrong doings, however you want to disguise it, it still fits the definition "a judgment or opinion held in disregard of facts that contradict it", and that's the definition of prejudice ... Minority groups have been wronged, minority groups have been sinned against, and there is such a thing as second class citizens, but this was caused by prejudice, and this will not be remedied by prejudice, even if they call it reverse prejudice ... By the same token everyone agrees that quota systems are bad, they are bad when they work against minority groups, and when they are turned around used as a tool for the minority groups it doesn't necessarily cleanse them and make them good because their purpose has changed ... They are still quota systems, they are still the misbegotten child of prejudice, they are still wrong ... You can't fight something one day and then turn around and use it the next day because now it happens to suit your purposes ... Therefore is one prejudice being substituted for another ... Is one quota system replacing another ... Are we losing sight of what should be the goal ... Judge a man as an individual, rate him on his merits ... His merits alone. This ... Is Al Julius

The US is no longer a meritocracy. It is a doddering empire on the eve of its destruction, like the Soviet Union in 1987.