knowitall

dewme said:

Apple is on the right side of this argument as qualified by their statement quoted in the article:

"In lieu of "workable race-neutral alternatives," the companies wrote, affirmative action was still the best possible option."

What Apple and these other companies understand, and something that is lost on many of those who live on the privileged side of the chasm, is the full meaning and impact of the words "systemic" and "institutionalized."

When one compares affirmative action to reverse discrimination they are assuming that a level playing field exists. It doesn't. A reduction in privilege of the dominant race in a society whose operating system is biased against other races, one which is backed by hundreds of years of treating other races as sub-human, is not equivalent to reverse discrimination. It's a small gesture of corrective and remedial action to address a huge inequity. 

When one references the Supreme Court, or conflates it to be akin to a "Divine Court" of absolute justice, they fail to see that the court is also part of the same institution that codified and protected, due to constitutionally enacted tenets, the unequal and inhumane treatment of one race by another. What is accepted by many as the binding fabric of our republic was deeply flawed and far from being a divine inspiration. It was created by man, had race inequality baked into it, and was subject to all of the flaws and biases that are part of the human condition. Yes there have been amendments, corrections, rulings made, words spoken, and actions taken over the years to scrub the most abhorrent stains from the founding documents and laws that define the fabric of our society. But a lot of what was baked into US society and culture from its earliest days persists to this day, both the good parts and the bad parts, regardless of what exists in the documents.

Change comes easy on paper, but it comes much harder in the hearts of man. This is especially true when the signals that trigger the systemic and institutionalized social mechanisms of discrimination cannot be hidden from view or kept to oneself. Race neutrality is an abstract notion that does not exist in human minds or in society or culture as a whole. Top-down laws and edicts haven't moved the needle, at least not fast or far enough. Change must come from the bottom-up and it must be tangible, implementable, and measurable. Even a cursory or narrowly focused blinder perspective of where we are today as a society and culture tells an unflattering story. The data doesn't lie.

The long standing, entrenched systems and institutions that are dominating the status quo of institutionalized inequity are very resistant to change. Those in-charge are overwhelmingly those who are privileged by the status quo. They are the ones who must change and take action. Harvard University recognizes this reality and has decided that now is the time for action and is applying what they, and Apple and other companies, feel is their best possible option. If we were even remotely close to having a level playing field we could ruminate over philosophical subtleties and notions like race neutrality. What Apple and these companies are saying is that we no longer have time for philosophical musings. The suffering must end. Action is needed. Now. I agree with Harvard and Apple.

headfull0wine said:

When Steve first introduced the iPhone, he compared the pricing with the cost of a phone and and iPod. You can buy a laptop and a tablet for the price of the Surface Book 3, but you’d be carrying 2 devices around. You pay a premium for the hybridization. I can see a use case where people want both laptop and tablet, yet need Windows OS. The Surface Book 3 fits the bill.