California is the first state to an hair discrimination

California on Wednesday became the first state to protect citizens from discrimination based on hair style, a law that is being greeted with both enthusiasm and a touch of dismay by people of color.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ban-hair-discrimination-crown-act/1643833001/


Any law to protect the bolds ?

 

A law protecting black people from white people cutting their hair when it's not to their cultural approval.
Yes... some white people are that racist in the US that this was needed.



Shame...


ding



Shame...


ding

 

I don't see anything wrong with dreadlocks, cornrows, or anything like that on women regardless on race. or men either

 

A tiny step out of a culture of darkness and superstition. What this proves is that there are 49 states where it is legal to discriminate based upon hair growth/style. Reminds me of the way women collaborators were treated when the Nazis were driving out of France.

 

LOL. Coming from a state in which every low income job has a posh dress code.
The companies in US has incredible amount of control over their employees outside of working hours. Pseudo democracy.
Good luck with that law.

 

It's called "Flawed Democracy":

 

Of course the United States is a flawed democracy. When violent mobs attack conservative meetings, when Christian bakers are bankrupted for their religious beliefs, when jobs and university admissions are based on racial discrimination -- you've got a flawed democracy. I would also add the influence of big money in politics, the power of various lobbies, the increasing intolerance in academia of ideas they don't like .

However, that's not what the authors of this report meant when they judged that the US was a 'flawed democracy'. Who are the authors? We don't know, just that they are supposedly 'experts' according to the Economist Intelligence Unit. Now The Economist is a fine magazine -- I've been a subscriber for decades. If I had to recommend just one publication for regular reading, it would win hands down. (People who look at PoliticalForum regularly, who have not seen The Economist, should take a look at it. This is a particularly provocative piece: https://www.economist.com/leaders/2019/07/04/the-global-crisis-in-conservatism)

But as with all publications, you need to know its biases: it could be called pro-market and socially liberal, which is the default position of the overwhelming majority of the European intelligentsia today. It almost always takes a bland 'centrist' view of politics. Nothing wrong with that, but don't take it as some sort of objective judgement.

Its writers tend to be very bright young graduates of Cambridge and Oxford -- at least that seems to be the consensus. Its articles are mainly anonymous. It has come in for criticism for this:

It's NOT a 'left-wing' or 'right-wing' publication in the American sense. As it describes itself,

It's not predictably liberal. It supported the invasion of Iraq (but then so did most prominent Democrats). It called for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. But also

So of course from the point of view of the people who write for this magazine, the United States is 'flawed'.

What are those flaws exactly? Evidently, the US scored badly on 'trust in government'. And when did this happen? The liberal Salon website lets us know:

Now I personally wouldn't think that trusting your government ["confidence in public institutions"] is necessarily an indicator of a flawless democracy.

Just the opposite, in fact.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist#Editorial_anonymity
https://www.salon.com/2018/01/31/new-report-classifies-us-as-a-flawed-democracy/
https://www.economist.com/help/about-us
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/09/04/why-are-the-economists-writers-anonymous

 

You are absolutely right in questioning the parameters of such an Index and it is sad to see that it is not spelled out thoroughly. However, here is the Index for 2007 and although the ratings have changed somewhat since then it is (in any case) better motivated, because as you say .....

So take a look at this one. It is broken down into categories of:
* Rank
* Category
* Overall Score
* Electoral process and Pluralism
* Functioning of Government
* Political Participation
* Political Culture
* and Civil Liberties

https://www.economist.com/media/pdf/DEMOCRACY_TABLE_2007_v3.pdf

 

I think the law would apply to white people too



Yes... some black people are that racist in the US that this was needed.

both sides have their racists it seems

 

Completely ridiculous. You know, dreadlocks are not cultural, it is religious: Rastafarian. In any case, men who shave their head are not all neo-Nazis. Just ridiculous.

 

Ok, thanks.

I'm very far from being an American apologist.

The Americans had an almost-ideal set up when they founded their country, except for slavery and a land bridge to the Spanish-conquered territories -- both of which are still causing major problems in the US today.

It was founded by dissident Protestants, who were constitutionally allergic to state religions and monarchy; they had a nearly-virgin continent to exploit with their work ethic, once they had exterminated or pushed out of the way the original inhabitants; they had no hostile neighbors, and they had the Atlantic and Pacific oceans to guard them.

They did pretty well at overcoming the curse of ethnic diversity which causes so much bloodshed everywhere else in the world -- almost 100% so far as Europeans and Asians were concerned, have not done too badly with Hispanics, although this may change as the in-flow increases. The big failure is with its African component. I don't know if it would work, but what is needed there is a Marshall Plan type effort ... but I suspect liberals would oppose most of the things that might make it effective (schools like this one), and conservatives would oppose spending money on it, money that's needed to police the world.

So they did pretty well, and became the world guardians of liberal democracy.

Now we face the twin challenges of helping to pull the Third World into modernity -- which is happening pretty much automatically due to the free market -- and managing the rise of China, which is the Big Issue.

But the internal culture of the US seems to be in rapid decline. It's hard to predict what the country will look like when the Snowflake Generation takes over, but I'm not optimistic.

Nonetheless, we must follow the advice of Romain Rolland, and have pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will!

 

The real discrimination, which California will soon pass legislation to outlaw, is discrimination based on vocabulary and grammar.
You can already get in trouble, as an academic, if you correct illiterate term papers -- it's called "micro-aggression".
And of course the requirement to speak English of any sort will soon go by the board first of all for government jobs , with others to follow.
I know this sounds crazy, but ... just wait.

 

You say that you are not "optimistic" but whatever measure of optimism you do possess it exceeds mine by a very long shot.

 

The fact is, history -- and we're smack dab in the middle of it right now -- is affected by so many factors, many of which we are probably not even aware, many of them linked to each other in non-linear ways, that it's impossible to predict the future.

A lot of human misery is caused by defects in our genome. Disease, low IQs, other behavioral problems like impulsiveness -- all these may soon (historically speaking -- in a couple of generations) come under our control. What would the world be like if all our descendants had the IQ of the Jews, the self-control of the Chinese ... or better than that?

As I'm sure you know, most social indicators for the world have been improving, dramatically, in the last few decades. The number of people living in extreme poverty has plummeted, most kids in the world are vaccinated, girls are going to school in record numbers. The species progresses.

I had a lot of hope for the One Per Child project, which seems to have fizzled out for the moment. But surely something like it will come along again.


But ... we're still divided into competing states with powerful militaries, not always led by wise and beneficient leaders ... and technical progress pushes forward here too. There are probably half a dozen countries in the world, and probably an Islamist research group or two, that are doing the cost/benefit math on just what effect a few hundred drones flying in a comprehensive search pattern, releasing a mutated delayed-action virus (to which they had the vaccine), could do to their enemies.

So much depends on the accidents of character of leaders. If Churchill had been killed by the taxi that knocked him down in New York in the early thirties ... if Hitler had not been an impulsive gambler and had waited until he had the V1 and V2 and nuclear weapons, or if he had not responded to FDR's goading by needlessly declaring war on the US ... if the US had had a Republican isolationist president in 1940 ... the world could have turned out far differently.

We probably owe a lot to two different Russians who could have -- and should have, according to their standing orders -- started World War III, once during the Cuban missile crisis, once during the first term of Reagan. There are probably dozens of such accidents we don't even know about.

The desire to live as a free person in a law-governed society is slowly spreading -- but there are powerful counter-currents, like Islam. Socialism is dead, but the new generation of radicals have found other ways to try to destroy free societies.

So who knows?

No one does, certainly not me. So we've just got to keep on trucking. Fight back against the fascists of the Left and the Right, give a few dollars to your favorite charity, don't get depressed. Look how far the human race has come... and with a bit of luck, we're going to the stars.

Say not the struggle nought availeth,
The labour and the wounds are vain,
The enemy faints not, nor faileth,
And as things have been they remain.

If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars;
It may be, in yon smoke concealed,
Your comrades chase e'en now the fliers,
And, but for you, possess the field.

For while the tired waves, vainly breaking
Seem here no painful inch to gain,
Far back through creeks and inlets making,
Comes silent, flooding in, the main.

And not by eastern windows only,
When daylight comes, comes in the light,
In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly,
But westward, look, the land is bright.

 

I do not agree. Poverty has not plummeted. It has spread.

The so-called Missile Crisis was a planned out lesson to the Americans. Khrushchev wanted to give Kennedy a bloody nose and make him eat crow for the placement of American missiles in Turkey … and he succeeded. The fact that the American population know nothing about it proves that the U.S. is cruising for another bruising such as Vietnam, Afghanistan, Somalia, 9/11, etc. The outside world hears the threats coming from Washington and they are taking notes. But they won’t be scurrying. They will be setting into motion the best plans laid out in advanced preparation. Make no mistake, Washington is playing a dangerous game and the outcome is clearer to its opponents who are tight-lipped.

I cannot possibly disagree with you more than I do right now:

* Islam is an entity unto itself. This has never been much of a problem (other than to colonists) until the West started stirring the hornets' nest. Leave the Islamic world alone and you can pursue your dreams of being a “free person in a law-governed society”. Islam is no hinder if that is what you want.

* Socialism is NOT dead. American efforts to undermine it have not succeeded nor should it. Socialism is the best of all the alternatives. The west, in general, has done quite a job in turning the population against Communism and with the likes of Stalin, Ceausescu, and ilk its destruction has been child’s play. But Socialism is another cookie and it has brought humanity to greats heights of freedom and prosperity. For that reason “the people” cannot be conned by CIA operations – black flag or otherwise. Middle Europe is already on the march. When the smoke clears (from whatever treachery the U.S. has up its sleeve) Socialism will rise.

 

I spot a massive difference. The black woman has an opinion about the guys hear. And you got a problem with her opinion. AN OPINION!!! White people go further than that, and take measurements and cut the hair of black people. It's in the link of the OP, champ.

 

You know what happened to the High Sparrow don't you.

 

Damn.

If I still lived in CA, I'd get some serious corn rows just for fun.

 

Zero to nazi in 3 posts!!! Nice! Question for you: Should firefighters be allowed to grow beards?

 

Relevant analogies are always "nice" and if I had waited for the 4th. post someone else would have beat me to it.

I wasn't allowed to wear a beard in the Army for the same reason and Hitler chopped his mustache for that reason too. And that was before he became a Nazi.

 

it doesn't matter...in 3-5 years ALL residents of Commiefornia will be wearing sombreros

 

Okay, so the question was if a firefighter should be allowed to wear a beard.

 

I already told you. Figure out why I wasn't allowed one in the army and wy Hitler chopped his mustache. How difficult can that be?

 

most people that shave their head do it cause they are bald on part of it... stop discriminating based on hair or lack of hair - now if they have nazi tattoos to go with that - different matter

and buzz cuts for blacks and whites is cause it's easy to manage, you wake up looking the same as when went to bed, and you can just do it yourself at home, no need to get your hair cut

 

That is EXACTLY what I did not do. Reading comprehension difficult for you?

I fail to see what it has to do with the east.