Yes, that is correct. until they become a majority oppressing a minority you cannot compare them to the Nazis. You can compare Mugabe's goons to the Nazis for the same reason.
Correct, but that freedom does not include the freedom to fire someone or not hire someone just because of their appearances.
Why not? The 14th Amendment prohibits government from hiring by race but it doesn't prohibit the people from doing it. Why does engaging in commerce nullify your right of free association? Where is the constitutional authority for passing these laws?
So, you want to stop hiring a person just because he's black and you want blacks to stop hire whites?
Before those laws were passed we had a nation where people were free to judge people by merit. But after sliding down that slippery slope our brave new color-blind meritocracy:
BEfore those laws were passed, blacks were legally disbarred from entering places where whites were. They were not allowed to hold jobs because of their skin color.
Do you think that was correct? and good?
Has schools encouraging Black pride groups, Hispanic pride groups and homosexual pride groups (but start a white, heterosexual pride group and you get hammered). We weren't like that in the 1950's.
Those groups should be banned. But in the 1950s there wouldn't have been those groups because blacks and Hispanics would not have been allowed in those schools -- they were segregated. Unless you think that that is correct. So that whites should stick together and blacks together etc. etc.
So, you want to stop hiring a person just because he's black and you want blacks to stop hire whites?
No, but I don't want to take away that right by allowing laws that ban it. We don't need laws that ban racial discrimination. And we don't need laws that allow the state to discriminate or force people to discriminate. (As Ann Coulter has pointed out, the Democrats have always been the party of racial discrimination. Before they joined the civil rights movement, it was not uncommon for Democrats to be KKK members. But now they support discrimination against whites and Asians).
We don't need to ban discrimination because businesses have to do what is in their best economic interest. Under Apartheid in South Africa there were laws against hiring blacks, but since there were as many intelligent blacks as there were whites, economic pressure forced companies to find ways around the laws.
In the US blacks did not gain entry into the music, sports and film industry because of civil rights laws or because of discrimination lawsuits. It was changing social attitudes that did it.
But if we have civil and criminal laws against discrimination we enter an Orwellian society that prosecutes people for "de-facto" segregation. We try to discern what is in a man's mind. The racial balance of the workplace becomes an issue. The way he phrased a comment about Kwanzi becomes an issue. The thought police become more powerful.