World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
"I want to attend your school just like my grandfather" = This is fine
"I want to attend your school because my grandfather wasn't allowed to" = This is not
Think about that for a second.
Legacy admissions shouldn't be a thing either, imo. It should be 100% about merit.
Absolutely.
And until that's the case, there's a clear double standard that benefits white people.
Right, so both should be illegal. We should be celebrating one injustice being corrected with this decision, while also pushing for more systemic issues to be corrected next.
This is a bad take.
Racial admissions existed to counter the other injustice - an imperfect solution to the inherent racism of legacy admissions.
Now that affirmative action has ended, the injustice of legacy admissions has been made even worse. Racism is now the law.
And it will never end.
So we need laws to not be racist? This is an insanely pessimistic take that nothing has improved the issue of racism in the US.
It's not pessimistic - it's simply an honest understanding of how white supremacism is fundamental to the US. To be clear, things like affirmative action didn't really improve things all that much - it was a band-aid on a traumatic amputation - but it was at least something.
It was a good band-aid for the time because racism was a massive problem back then, though, I sincerely doubt it's needed today. I'm not saying racism isn't a problem today, but the idea that universities must be regulated for them to accept non-white applications ignores the strides we've taken as a society. We don't need the band-aid anymore.
The US is as fundamentally white supremacist today as it was way back then - if you need reminding, just think back to 2016 when more than half of all white people in the US voted a KKK-approved colostomy bag full of tanning lotion into the Waffle House. Or you could just take a look at who the main victims of the carceral slavery system are.
Segregation; lynchings; slavery; these are all things that were systematically outlawed and struck down in our society today. To say that white supremacy is just as bad as it was in 1960 is an utterly blind take and completely ignores what we've accomplished today. It's still a problem today, yes. But if what we're complaining about is a spray-tanned muppet who is now being legally shredded apart, I think we've come a long way.
Stating purely that over half of white people voting for the clown is also ignoring the other half who did not- or the intentions of the half who did vote for him. I highly doubt that a majority of the half who did vote for him were crossing their fingers for the next racial uprising.
Segregation in the US is alive and well. We watch cops lynching black people on tv all the damn time, and slavery is literally enshrined in the constitution.
It's not a problem - it's a feature of a fundamentally white supremacist society.
A spray-tanned muppet that was enthusiastically endorsed into the Waffle House by the majority of white USians while he was hurling around white supremacist dog-whistles.
Its very easy to forget, but theres a difference between the majority of Americans and the majority of American voters... it was more like 15% of the country that voted for him and of that 15% about 60% were white, 40% nonwhite. so it's more in the range of 5-10 percent of the US population that you're misrepresenting as a majority white supremacist sentiment.
To be clear the Supreme Courts decision here is a regulation on the universities. Not a removal of regulations.
Affirmative action was an option that institutions could choose if they thought was appropriate... schools that used to ban POC wanted to accept disproportionately more of them. Now that option has been regulated away.
Ask me how I know you're white lol
You are correct here, why would we not celebrate this just because there are more issues that need corrected?
A pure merit-based approach also overwhelming benefits white people though, because they have a lot more generational income to help their kids get ahead in life.
Hook me up with that generational wealth. The ATM doesn’t accept race as a condition for providing money.
I invite you to understand population statistics vs. individual statistics.
It really should be income/circumstance based instead of race based. Sure they're correlated, but there's plenty of disadvantage white people and plenty of wealthy minorities
I get that what you're saying but the policy wasn't just about "financially disadvantaged groups" - it was actually about race and having a diverse student body because diversity is beneficial to one's education and to society at large.
It's only been since the 1960's that schools have not been allowed to block black students from even attending. Ruby Bridges is still alive! That's not just "poverty" as a disadvantage. That's something else entirely that no poor white child has ever had to face. You don't just pass a law making it illegal and say "the problem has been solved." There is momentum in society around these things.
You could absolutely give advantages to lower-income people and still have an all-white campus. These colleges select such a vanishingly small percentage of all students that the number of "qualified students" greatly outnumbers the number of slots to be filled so you can mix and match students however you like. These schools have felt that it was better to have a diverse population than not. I don't know if AA is needed to make that happen, but it was a tool for them to self-police.
Wait is this actually a thing?
Legacy is a much more weighted merit than affirmative action was.
Yeah, mostly for the super prestigious universities though. I don't know anyone who was a legacy admissions to their school, but then again I don't know anyone who went to ivy league.
It's stupid, and it benefits certain rich, mostly white families who could afford those types of schools for generations. It needs to end as well.