Disparate impact is the abolition of private property. In an institution with more than 15 employees, it is illegal to hold individuals to any standard of competence or behavior.
Posted by freedomforall 2 weeks ago to Government
Excerpt:
"The narrowly-construed, for-public-consumption story of the Civil Rights Act was that it was merely meant to prevent explicit discrimination (i.e. “this is a whites-only neighborhood”).
But very early on (starting in 1971, with Griggs v. Duke Power), courts realized that an anti-discrimination statute that only outlawed explicit discrimination was toothless — people who wanted to discriminate could simply find another reason to deny a loan, a lease, a job, etc.
So they came up with the “disparate impact” standard.
“Disparate impact” assumes that human beings are precisely alike across all protected classes, and therefore any statistically significant difference in aggregate outcomes can be regarded as prima facie evidence of illegal discrimination.
Any economic behavior of sufficient scale to allow this kind of analysis must avoid applying any standard which reveals group differences between protected classes — which turns out to be any dimension against which human beings might be measured and compared, any standard of behavior or capacity whatsoever.
The group differences need not be extreme to show up dramatically in the tails, which is where such standards matter most.
Which means that enforcing anti-discrimination with a disparate impact standard doesn’t just require “loosening” of standards to some lower baseline.
The disparate impact standard mandates the total abolition of all categories of distinction.
...
This means that, in any space controlled by an institution with more than 15 employees, it is illegal to hold protected individuals to any standard of competence or behavior.
There is no bottom — the only limiting factor is the time and expense required to investigate, test, and dismantle each such standard one by one.
In combination with the nebulous prohibition on creating a “hostile work environment”, disparate impact legally obligates all government and corporate institutions to enforce and propagate this assertion of human equality as a totalizing ideology.
The fact that this ideology is at odds with reality is a feature, not a bug.
It provides the justification for endless revolution — a totally unbounded mandate to regulate and expropriate.
This is a pretty sweet deal for the regulators, and for the most dysfunctional and antisocial members of the protected classes — but it’s a terrible deal for everyone else — including most other protected individuals, because it renders vast regions of the social landscape de facto non-excludable, and thus subject to the tragedy of the commons.
DETROIT'S STAGGERING ABANDONED HOUSE FOOTAGE
The more your social environment is controlled by government and corporate interests, and the more it is populated by protected individuals, the more the common spaces will suffer from social defection and neglect, and the more the environment will become unsafe, dilapidated, and barren.
If you live and work in a dense urban environment, this describes essentially the entire world beyond your front door."
"The narrowly-construed, for-public-consumption story of the Civil Rights Act was that it was merely meant to prevent explicit discrimination (i.e. “this is a whites-only neighborhood”).
But very early on (starting in 1971, with Griggs v. Duke Power), courts realized that an anti-discrimination statute that only outlawed explicit discrimination was toothless — people who wanted to discriminate could simply find another reason to deny a loan, a lease, a job, etc.
So they came up with the “disparate impact” standard.
“Disparate impact” assumes that human beings are precisely alike across all protected classes, and therefore any statistically significant difference in aggregate outcomes can be regarded as prima facie evidence of illegal discrimination.
Any economic behavior of sufficient scale to allow this kind of analysis must avoid applying any standard which reveals group differences between protected classes — which turns out to be any dimension against which human beings might be measured and compared, any standard of behavior or capacity whatsoever.
The group differences need not be extreme to show up dramatically in the tails, which is where such standards matter most.
Which means that enforcing anti-discrimination with a disparate impact standard doesn’t just require “loosening” of standards to some lower baseline.
The disparate impact standard mandates the total abolition of all categories of distinction.
...
This means that, in any space controlled by an institution with more than 15 employees, it is illegal to hold protected individuals to any standard of competence or behavior.
There is no bottom — the only limiting factor is the time and expense required to investigate, test, and dismantle each such standard one by one.
In combination with the nebulous prohibition on creating a “hostile work environment”, disparate impact legally obligates all government and corporate institutions to enforce and propagate this assertion of human equality as a totalizing ideology.
The fact that this ideology is at odds with reality is a feature, not a bug.
It provides the justification for endless revolution — a totally unbounded mandate to regulate and expropriate.
This is a pretty sweet deal for the regulators, and for the most dysfunctional and antisocial members of the protected classes — but it’s a terrible deal for everyone else — including most other protected individuals, because it renders vast regions of the social landscape de facto non-excludable, and thus subject to the tragedy of the commons.
DETROIT'S STAGGERING ABANDONED HOUSE FOOTAGE
The more your social environment is controlled by government and corporate interests, and the more it is populated by protected individuals, the more the common spaces will suffer from social defection and neglect, and the more the environment will become unsafe, dilapidated, and barren.
If you live and work in a dense urban environment, this describes essentially the entire world beyond your front door."
Why use the qualifier: protected classes?
Why not 'human beings are all alike'?
What am I missing here?