Quote from phenomena:
A policy is only racist if white people are the beneficiaries. If non whites benefit at the expense of whites, that's not racist...
Quote from olias:
I don't think anyone thinks that. Defenders of quotas and the like will tell you, 'yeah, quotas are not right...in a perfect world. But in this world they are a necessary evil'
Quote from phenomena:
Of course they wont TELL you that, but in practice that's how it works. Quotas which benefited whites over non whites would be evil incarnate. Quotas which benefit non whites at the expense of whites are "necessary". Hence racism against whites is "necessary" and ethical when it benefits non whites.
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Washington, DC is majority black. The voters will inevitably prefer a corrupt black demagogue over anyone qualified. Whites need not apply for anything beyond city council ward elections. The last mayor, a young ,vaguely competent black man, was defeated because voters were upset that he had appointed a white woman as police chief and a korean woman to straighten out the schools.
So why is it necessary for Washington, DC to have minority preferences?
Quote from OPTIONAL777:
I suspect the area you live in (you know, the beltway...away from the poor and minority groups of D.C.) is majority white. The voters will inevitably prefer a corrupt white demagogue over anyone qualified. Blacks need not apply for anything beyond city council ward elections.
...and I'm not whistling Dixie.

Quote from OPTIONAL777:
I suspect the area you live in (you know, the beltway...away from the poor and minority groups of D.C.) is majority white. The voters will inevitably prefer a corrupt white demagogue over anyone qualified. Blacks need not apply for anything beyond city council ward elections.
...and I'm not whistling Dixie.