Your language overall makes me think you’re fine but I’d be lying if I didn’t say this particular part didn’t catch my attention. Is there a reason you felt the need to say this? In the context of affirmative action being repealed in the US it feels a tad loaded. Giving the benefit of the doubt here truly, but still curious why you felt the need to say this.

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

This is a common argument against affirmative action (which was not repealed in the US overall, just banned in a few very conservative states (although if I missed some major news about it being repealed on a federal level please don't hesitate to educate me) ), I'm addressing that common counterargument by saying that it's not what anti-racism seeks to do. Same as the example counterargument before it. That one's referring to the types who spout nonsense such as "But that's just being racist to white people!!1!". They're correct that it wouldn't be helpful, but incorrect in their assessment that that's the main goal of the movement.

That said, I do think that some movements and initiatives, which I will preemptively decline to name because the details and scope of these initiatives are irrelevant, are misguided in how they want to bring about equity. These movements do feed into the arguments of people who claim that affirmative action is just giving queer/nonwhite/poor/otherwise marginalized people special privileges, and that's why I want to set them aside as separate from the concept as anti-racist.

[–] bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 4 months ago

Makes sense. Appreciate the elaboration!