I thought we were never going to get into politics.
We've already talked about it by referring to taxation, income equality, and so on.
Having done something sneakily makes it all right to do so in the open?
Do not seek logic, as there is hardly any in this world.
Ask, and you will receive. Search, and you will find.
It really sounds like one of the self-help books, not to mention very similar teachings in other religions and philosophies. There are billions of people wanting to be billionaires, but we know that only few of them are going to succeed.
In fact, none of the books says "Or your money back."
Anyway, I heard that some female voters in the US are agonizing over the issue of rewriting Hillary into Sarah.
They represent different political parties, and hence, supposedly different agenda.
Many people are voting based on the race and the gender of the presidential candidates and their running mates.
Quite a few voters checked the box for Hillary in the primary as support for a fellow woman, I heard.
Many of African origin are staunch supporters of Barack.
Isn't that natural? It perfectly fits with what you have been describing as biology. We all back someone who is biologically closer.
I also heard about people who were in a quandary because they wanted to support Barack for his underrepresented race and Hillary for her underrepresented gender.
Makes sense.
You think so? Neither Condi nor Colin had much to do with improvement of racial discrimination in the US, just as Indira and Benazir had little influence on the status of women in India and Pakistan.
The mere facts that Condi and Colin became the US Secretary of State were symbolic achievement for people of the same color. And don't forget that the rich-poor gap matters more than the men-women gap in South Asia. I also think that one knows more about her/his own race and gender.
But that doesn't mean s/he knows what is best for her/his race and gender, much less whether s/he would adopt policies that benefit the group.
Again, your biology says s/he would.
Then again, that shouldn't be the case.
Is it "let not biology dictate you," one more time?
How good is a politician if s/he favors a certain ethnic and/or gender group, just for that reason?
It is an attempt to redress the unfair inequality that exists, not to confer special advantage.
If a competent person is elected as the president, priorities would be similar, irrespective of her/his biological attributes.
Take Hurricane Katrina. The poor who need the most assistance are not getting enough of it, and they happen to be the black people. If the governor of Louisiana had been of the same background, things could have been different.
We tend to disagree on what is a fair share. In the eyes of the privileged, the underprivileged ask for more than fair, once one of them gets elected to high office. It could be lack of empathy and understanding that they see the situation in that manner, but can we say that there has been absolutely no abuse of power in such cases?
Take as much as you can while you're there, because you have missed out and may miss out again in the future...
I'm concerned about the candidates' principal labeling by race and gender. Whatever s/he does, those biological factors are taken to be the cause.
Because he is black, because she is a woman...
That line of thinking is precisely what is behind unfair treatment. If Barack takes the office and performs miserably, we would hear "never a black president again."
But it's just Barack.
If Hillary had taken the office and made a further mess of, for example, the social security system, it would be "never a female president again."
But it's just Hillary.
If someone is chosen for her/his race or gender, s/he can be rejected for that, too. In a fair world, we do not care about race or gender. They simply would not be an issue. The act of voting for a candidate who has the same biological attributes as ours---and mainly for that reason---perpetuates what we denounced to begin with.
Do you think we will ever be free of judgment based on what we see first in a person? In a split second, we usually know the race and the gender. If we don't, some of us feel uncomfortable.
I know that one. It can get as tactless as, "So, what are you?"
You once replied that you were a human being.
That's what I am! Just as we have come to treat people more or less independently of how pretty that person is, we should have the capacity to be color and gender blind.
Hmmm... Are you sure about not being affected by pretty faces?
Well, I think we try harder, at least, to treat each individual fairly.
What about voice? We are attracted to certain ones.
Any person should be judged by what s/he can do and does for the designated job, not by what s/he does after work, like singing in a jazz bar...
Posts
