Quo Vadis GOP?

[crazy canuck]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

I know, right?

[DGuller]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

If you worked for someone who was openly against people of Eastern European descent and they fired or otherwise discriminated against you would you sue? Would your employer be smart to retain them and not fire them when they found out about their views? Would  you consider firing your hypothetical boss be cancel culture?

It's not a free speech thing because no government involvement, I'm just curious on your opinion.

Your question already subtly makes their racism relevant to their job, which loads it quite a bit.  The usual application of cancel culture is someone revealing themselves to a racist outside of work, which leads to a righteous mob to pressuring their employer to fire them.  Not because their racism has anything to do with their job (until the mob itself makes it have something to with their job), but because losing a job is a bad thing to happen to a person, and the mob wants something bad to happen to that person.

If I were to unload your question, if my co-workers outside of the work environment turned out to be biased against Eastern European people, no, of course I would not support them getting fired.  For all the principled reasons I laid out above.  Would I think less of them?  Of course, but I'm capable of gradation in my feelings.  I don't want really bad things to happen to everyone I find flawed, that's a really authoritarian attitude to have.

[HVC]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

[DGuller]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

I know, right?

Dude, know when to take an L.  You're a Canadian lawyer, I don't expect you to understand the US Civil Rights Act.  However, the fact that you can even conceive that the US, or any liberal democracy for that matter, would make racism itself unlawful as opposed to discriminatory acts, is a very revealing moment than no amount of cheap snide sarcasm will wash away.

[crazy canuck]

Wow, I didn't expect the response to my quote of Josq to lead to people demonstrating how incapable they became of understanding the meaning of free speech.

I know, right?

Dude, know when to take an L.  You're a Canadian lawyer, I don't expect you to understand the US Civil Rights Act.  However, the fact that you can even conceive that the US, or any liberal democracy for that matter, would make racism itself unlawful as opposed to discriminatory acts, is a very revealing moment than no amount of cheap snide sarcasm will wash away.

I am sorry you don't understand.  I truly am.  You and others like you explain why your country is in such a dismal state.

It would really help if your country had a better education system so that basic concepts like what expression rights means were better understood.

[DGuller]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

I would be very surprised if employment law really worked like that.  You don't automatically convict people of murder because they murdered someone before.  I don't see why one would automatically convict someone of discriminatory act just because they've been found to be racist before (without even being proven to have acted on it).

[HVC]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

I would be very surprised if employment law really worked like that.  You don't automatically convict people of murder because they murdered someone before.  I don't see why one would automatically convict someone of discriminatory act just because they've been found to be racist before (without even being proven to have acted on it).

Tweet: "all Eastern Europeans are too dumb for office jobs, they shouldn't be be hired, and definitely shouldn't be promoted"

Tweet: " I can't stand to be around Eastern Europeans"

Tweet: " kill all Eastern Europeans"

"Your honour my racism was not the reason I fired Dguller"

Who would the judge side with?

[Razgovory]

Which civil rights act do you think that racism became unlawful in the US?

You got me Raz, I concede the US is lawless.

What a bizarre take.  The state will not punish people for saying the wrong thing there for it doesn't exist.

[crazy canuck]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

I would be very surprised if employment law really worked like that.  You don't automatically convict people of murder because they murdered someone before.  I don't see why one would automatically convict someone of discriminatory act just because they've been found to be racist before (without even being proven to have acted on it).

It depends on the level of trust the employer must have in the employee, in most circumstances the required level of trust is such that if the employer has evidence the employee is a racist, there will certainly be grounds for dismissal.

[crazy canuck]

Which civil rights act do you think that racism became unlawful in the US?

You got me Raz, I concede the US is lawless.

What a bizarre take.  The state will not punish people for saying the wrong thing there for it doesn't exist.

Who said the state would do the punishing?

[The Minsky Moment]

Civil rights act bars private sector discrimination based on race in employment decisions and public accomodations (hotels, common carriers etc). 68 Act extended that prohibition to housing.  Discrimination is not barred in other private contexts under federal law.  Private clubs can discriminate on the basis of race or any other basis, as long as they don't take public money and are consistently closed to non-members.  However, many states passed laws that expand the accommodation right to include private clubs as well.

That said, the Supreme Court's decisions in cases like Masterpiece Cake Shop has undermined anti-discrimination law in the US by using the Free Exercise Clause as a loophole.

[DGuller]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

I would be very surprised if employment law really worked like that.  You don't automatically convict people of murder because they murdered someone before.  I don't see why one would automatically convict someone of discriminatory act just because they've been found to be racist before (without even being proven to have acted on it).

Tweet: "all Eastern Europeans are too dumb for office jobs, they shouldn't be be hired, and definitely shouldn't be promoted"

Tweet: " I can't stand to be around Eastern Europeans"

Tweet: " kill all Eastern Europeans"

"Your honour my racism was not the reason I fired Dguller"

Who would the judge side with?

Again your example of racism sneaks work right into the middle of it.  I'm starting to think that it's hard to come up with a defensible hypothetical if you don't do that.

[Razgovory]

Civil rights act bars private sector discrimination based on race in employment decisions and public accomodations (hotels, common carriers etc). 68 Act extended that prohibition to housing.  Discrimination is not barred in other private contexts under federal law.  Private clubs can discriminate on the basis of race or any other basis, as long as they don't take public money and are consistently closed to non-members.  However, many states passed laws that expand the accommodation right to include private clubs as well.

That said, the Supreme Court's decisions in cases like Masterpiece Cake Shop has undermined anti-discrimination law in the US by using the Free Exercise Clause as a loophole.

Thus the US is lawless.

[HVC]

So your belief rests on your view that once in an office environment a racist person would not act on their racism? I don't agree with that view, but at least now I get where you're coming from. But you didn't answer the part about would you sue if you were fired by a racist boss (I'll concede to your view that you don't think they'd be racist to you at work, so let's say he were just fired because he didn't like you for non racist reasons). That's the crux of it from an employers position. If you have proof they're racist you've basically won the case (unless they've got good cause like stealing )

I would be very surprised if employment law really worked like that.  You don't automatically convict people of murder because they murdered someone before.  I don't see why one would automatically convict someone of discriminatory act just because they've been found to be racist before (without even being proven to have acted on it).

Tweet: "all Eastern Europeans are too dumb for office jobs, they shouldn't be be hired, and definitely shouldn't be promoted"

Tweet: " I can't stand to be around Eastern Europeans"

Tweet: " kill all Eastern Europeans"

"Your honour my racism was not the reason I fired Dguller"

Who would the judge side with?

Again your example of racism sneaks work right into the middle of it.  I'm starting to think that it's hard to come up with a defensible hypothetical if you don't do that.

Fine ignore the first tweet. Do you still think a judge would believe your boss with the other two tweets floating around. What proof do you personally need to be convinced someone's racism lead to firing an employee? the boss writing "I'm firing you because you're Eastern European, have a good day"? I'm not a lawyer so I could be wrong (minsky?) but showing someone has clearly racist views would offer more then enough evidence (reasonable doubt? Iffy on the proper terms) in a civil case. If the law talking dudes disagree with me then fine, I'll concede.

[DGuller]

Civil rights act bars private sector discrimination based on race in employment decisions and public accomodations (hotels, common carriers etc). 68 Act extended that prohibition to housing.  Discrimination is not barred in other private contexts under federal law.  Private clubs can discriminate on the basis of race or any other basis, as long as they don't take public money and are consistently closed to non-members.  However, many states passed laws that expand the accommodation right to include private clubs as well.

That said, the Supreme Court's decisions in cases like Masterpiece Cake Shop has undermined anti-discrimination law in the US by using the Free Exercise Clause as a loophole.

I think you're getting too technical, even some lawyers here don't understand the difference between discriminatory acts and the thought crime of being racist.  We're going to need some time to process that difference before we get into the weeds of what kind of discrimination is covered and not covered.