Jump to content
Trik'Stari
Trik'Stari Trik'Stari poochyena

I have a question.

 

Is it okay to fire people based on race? Is that legal? Because the democrats did exactly that in the last week or two, on a monday. They fired most of their white staffers, citing a "lack of diversity".

 

How is that acceptable in any way shape or form, and how is it that the supposedly anti-fascist left have become fascists themselves?

  1. poochyena

    poochyena

    It should be legal, yes. People should have the freedom to hire and fire anyone they want just like they have the right to choose to shop or apply to any business they want.

  2. Trik'Stari

    Trik'Stari

    But according to leftist dogma and the letter of the law as it currently stands, firing someone for being a certain race is illegal, and in fact racist.

     

    To be fair, I am actually in agreement with that doctrine. I do however think you should be able to hire and fire people based on their political leanings. For example, I wouldn't hire leftists if I owned a business. For fear that they would go out of their way to make my company appear cruel and greedy, in an effort to make capitalism look bad.

     

    And I don't know if anyone answered your question in the earlier thread, but there is a legally defined difference between a publisher and a platform.

     

    A publisher can pick and choose (see: editorialize) what is shown to the public via their infrastructure, a platform does not.

     

    Legally speaking, Facebook, Youtube, Google, and Twitter, are behaving as publishers more so than platforms. Because they deliberately downplay or outright silence content coming from sources of a specific political ideology.

     

    The problem, is that under the DMCA (either that or the 1996 Telecommunications act, I can't remember which), these "platforms" are granted immunity from slander or libel lawsuits, provided that they remain neutral, in the same way a telephone company is not liable for anything you do or say on their infrastructure. There are some differences, I agree, but there is still a legally defined difference between a publisher and a platform.

  3. Nowak

    Nowak

    Sounds more like liberals thinking they're doing "the right thing" more than it does leftists to me tbh

  4. poochyena

    poochyena

    > But according to leftist dogma and the letter of the law as it currently stands, firing someone for being a certain race is illegal, and in fact racist.
    It is against the law and racist. You just simply asked if I thought it was "ok" or not. I don't think they should, just that they should be allowed to.

    Also, why would anyone care what "leftist dogma" thinks? That phrase doesn't even really mean anything.

     

    > A publisher can pick and choose (see: editorialize) what is shown to the public via their infrastructure, a platform does not.
    In that case, then what is an example of a platform?

×