Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Pateach]

Not that White guys are a bad thing. I personally think they are very nice. They just don't represent the wonderful diversity of America. (And so far they always win the presidential election.Always.)
Question to the Dave's international crowd-Americans are pretty angry with the mismanagement of our country and the war right now. Are we angry enough to pick an African American guy or a liberal woman? Both Obama (spelling?) and Clinton are pretty good at raising money, a key to campaigning in the US (for better or worse.) Could they pull it off, because of the timing?
Or is this just wishful thinking on my part and the part of the intellectual and political left?

[Pligganease]

[dulouz]

Diversity = Crap

[dogbert]

"Doomed" is an interesting choice of words.

Let me guess, you are a white woman.

[twg]

No.

Like every other "democratic" nation, you're doomed to be ruled by whichever wealthy person with the most backers runs a better media blitz.

But regardless of the skin color, just remember: Politicians are glorified civil servants and they don't give a crap about you.

[Peeping Tom]

[bucheon bum]

[seoul_nhl]

Yes and thank god!

[thepeel]

[mateomiguel]

I really hope my fellow americans don't make a rash decision about our next leader based on simple anger. Anger doesn't last 4 months, much less 4 years. I hope they pick someone based on the issues.

[Manner of Speaking]

I don't think white women would do a very good job running the US, because they just don't seem to have the ability, ambition, or brains to do well in politics - at least compared to white men. Look at the US's history: for over 200 years, there have been just as many white women as white men in the US in the population, yet during that history how many of them have risen to the top, politically? The fact that so few of them have done so seems to indicate that white women just "don't have what it takes", so to speak.

In the past 200 years, very few white women have shown much interest in politics, beyond voting as their husbands have told them to do. Even today, the majority of white women voters vote for white male candidates, rather whan white women candidates.

The obvious conclusion is that white men predominate in elections because white women are just too disorganized, disinterested, or unskilled to participate significantly in the political system. It's not for a lack of white women: the sex ratio is around 50:50. That being the case, why should white men be blamed for being successful?

[Gamecock]

[bucheon bum]

nope, MOS was 100% serious of course.

[Gopher]

Interesting discussion. Seems premised on the claim that white males have little or no relevance to American life anymore, as if they hardly even appear on the scene.

"They just don't represent the wonderful diversity of America" suggests to me that this writer has already written whites off as nonentities, except that they remain in power by some sleight-of-hand or some other sinister device. "Diversity" = "anything but a white male." It has become something of a sharp dichotomy.

Look. There is diversity in America. And our government, as with everything else, ought to reflect said diversity. Eventually this is inevitable. But, as one white male who qualifies for precious few fellowships or grants in our alleged academic meritocracy simply because he is a white male, it sure feels an awful lot as if many believed two wrongs made a right, or the ends justified the means, or however you want to phrase it.

Whatever happened to chosing people by merit and ability? I will tell you: it went down the drain as soon as all the PC types started indiscriminately scapegoating "white males." We saw the same trajectory in feminism and "women's studies": they left "equality" behind decades ago...

I am a white male. I assure you I do not receive a "white guy" check in the mail every month. I struggle just like "the diverse" people struggle to survive and live. And we do not meet every quarter to review the status of our centuries-old project to oppress women and keep them "invisible."

On Obama: my preferring him over all other presently-declared candidates has nothing at all to do with his ethnic background. I like the way he carries himself, presents himself, and speaks. I like the substance of what he says. He strikes me as a professional and a good potential leader.

People are backing him for his skin color. To me this is just as reprehensible as opposing him for his skin color. The practical side of me says "I'll take it" = who cares why everyone might vote for him? Just so long as they vote for him. On the other hand, I also feel a blister of resentment emerging over this...

[Pateach]

Hmm...
Shouldn't a democracy in a country with an ever growing non-white and non-male population at least aim to be more representative?

Manner of speaking-I REALLY hope that you are kidding. Really.