> history which has led to you having a cushy, high-paying desk job doing whatever you do
So when a white person gets a high-paying job, it's because of history of slavery. If a black person gets a high-paying job, it's because they worked hard. Did I get that right?
No wonder Trump got elected when this is the agenda.
> You don't get to ignore the history that has led to the life you currently live just because Genghis Khan burned down your (great)^30th ancestor's village. It has nothing to do with that.
So Genghis Khan has nothing to do with that. But slavery has everything to do with that. Is there a threshold I'm not aware of? How far in the past we have to look at to be able to claim "event X led to event Y".
Lots of Jews ended up in US during World War 2, and now their grandkids are doing quite well. Should they be thanking Hitler because he is the "history that has led to the life they currently live"?
> Do you believe in some sort of original sin handed down by your ancestors?
Obviously I don't, but that's what this person implied.
> You're making some seriously insane judgements based on a person's ancestry.
When I speak your language, I sound insane. Good.
> Hiring from a limited pool of candidates is sub-optimal
To me "optimal" is the minimum amount of effort that leads to maximum results. E.g. if you get enough resumes by posting a job on your website you don't need to put extra effort to find more candidates. I'm curious to hear what's your definition. I suspect it requires augmenting math with morals.
Finally, here's a couple of questions for you to think about:
1. How should countries with homogenous skin color deal with history of slavery?
2. Should we exclude Nigerian Americans from DIE / affirmative action policies, because they are doing better than average American?