‘The New York Times’ faces a discrimination lawsuit claiming racial bias against a white man

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission should not exist. Like Dr. Yaron Brook said, “equal is unfair.” What the EEOC represents is the equality of outcomes instead of maximizing opportunities. Some might call it “reverse racism” that a white man be represented by the organization but it’s just racism. As long as there are laws on the books to protect some for the benefit of everyone else, there will always be an uneven playing field for those who wish to gain or keep their positions.

The EEOC shows themselves to be part of the problem as they do not represent objectivity. Without such an administration, there would be a complete revolution in the way that job seekers and keepers sustain themselves. This unnamed white man had been “violated” against for the fact he’s white.

This is how ugly DEI has always been. The lack of consideration for the best and the brightest in favor of filling quotas is disgusting. The EEOC determines the stories of men and women of all colors that have been blocked by private institutions in particular. The New York Times is one of the most left-leaning publications in America. DEI is a horrific movement and EEOC just fans the flames.

What makes it even more awful is that people don’t realize how this disturbing trend has been going on for the past sixty years, at least. This is a terrible record and a blight against the lives of people who wish to be productive, selfish, and flourishing human beings. The EEOC is a barrier that should be privatized at best. This is the way the organization has to be viewed.

Once anyone applies for a job, all nonessentials like race and sometimes gender should never be considered. In the private realm, however, the employer should be able to turn away whomever they wish for whatever reason. If someone is vying for a position, their education or know-how and experience should be balanced along with other factors.

There should be a clear and laser-like focus on the reality of how the career chase is always going to be a brutal fight to the top. Companies spend billions of dollars on trying to vet certain talent to their companies. What does the EEOC have any business in sticking its head into the process of how employers choose their candidates. As a government organization, it is the power of the State that shows that you can’t even sneeze wrong if you’re trying to hire people.

This latest case presents an issue in the macrovision of the government alphabet soup that doesn’t need to exist. It does not protect individual rights. In fact, it disrupts, distorts, and damages the whole process of the negotiations of businesses.

With a powerful nation such as the United States, it is undercut and demoralized by this government body. That’s the problem with what it means to be an EEOC agent. To understand better, this has been the exchange of ideas among this group and the firms that have to comply with its demands or expect to be penalized, even shuttered.

It doesn’t appear like the NYT will be going anywhere anytime soon. It may, however, experience discomfort in trying to hire people. It’s an ugly world in which we live when prejudice and discrimination is judged by the government. With a wet nurse combing through documents and sometimes literally looking over the shoulders of employers, it’s such an issue to try to think about today.

What will be the greatest evolution would be to drain the swamp and allow private companies especially to hire who they like.