(Jun 13, 2017 12:40 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: I prefer the priveleges of the Anonymous. Oh wait, that's us.
lol
it does occur to me that to single out a group of people that casts them in conflict with social cohesion is an act of segragation.
thus literarily one should be able to scientifically apply the process to define the nature of the working example of simplistic logic.
if there is not simplistic logic then it is more likely to be a defined discrimination.
for those a little lost e.g
privilage as a process of social order should be quantifiable by most variant groups by the very nature of social process.
just like discrimination as a function can apply to all groups so should privilage.
if it does not then there is likely a miss use of the functional process of the terms being used.
predominant culture by its nature is exclusive to all those who are outside the group regardles of the type of group.
Scientifically defining a point of equality may well be impossible if there is a process to deliver a post event value based on an undefinable level of inequality.
Equally so in a mechanism that uses some type of prioratisation like money then there will always be bias.
Attempting to negotiate a point of equality inside that system of bias is something you are liekly to never see discussed as the majority of those seeking to influence the outcome
(on both and/or often all sides) have a desire to ensure equality is delivered unequally to remedy the unquantifiable previous inequality.
how does the system balance the lack of historical funding & access to education ?
is equal access(regardles of wealth or income) to education for children something that is collectively considered a right ?
(collectively i would argue in the case of the USA that answer has yet to be defined by the society.)