Black_Zawisza
Banned
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 606
- Reaction score
- 259
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
It seems to me like a lot of people are missing the point here. In practice, yes, it clearly winds up being oppressive in nature.Yeah cause the qualification "but equal" is always added by a group that actually wants an unequal distribution of whatever. If they didn't think of the other group as "less than", they wouldn't want separate access to the same thing, so they (being in charge) go ahead and build drinking fountains that are inferior, or civil unions that aren't recognized by the fed or other states. If they actually wanted equality, they wouldn't be striving for separation in the first place. It's just a way to get the oppressed group to shut up and accept its status as inferior, and aside from that, I always want to tell someone with that mindset "YOU go call what you're doing a civil union."
But that's not at all what I'm asking. I'm asking if, theoretically, an equal system of segregation is possible. If it is, then segregation cannot be inherently unequal.
Last edited: