Microsoft CEO talks racial injustice and what company is doing to address it

Satya Nadella at Build 2018
Satya Nadella at Build 2018 (Image credit: Windows Central)

What you need to know

  • Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella laid out plans to address racial injustice in an email to employees today.
  • Nadella made firm commitments to increase investment in communities of color, additional training, and targets for increasing leadership diversity.
  • The plan follows an email Nadella sent to employees earlier this month to reaffirm Microsoft's commitment to improving its diversity efforts.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella laid out today concrete steps the company will take to "help address racial injusticy and inequity." In an email sent to employees (opens in new tab), Nadella emphasized a series of commitments to tackle issues of concern in Black and African American communities, but emphasized the company will also take more steps to address the needs of the Hispanic, Latinx, and other communities over the next five years.

"Over the past several weeks, the senior leadership team, board of directors, and I have spent time reflecting, listening, learning, and discussing what role the company – and all of us collectively – must play in helping to drive change, both within Microsoft and in our communities," Nadella said in his email to employees (opens in new tab). "With significant input from employees and leaders who are members of the Black and African American community, we have developed a set of actions that we believe are both meaningful to improving the lived experience at Microsoft, as well as driving change in the communities in which we live and work."

Microsoft will double the number of Black and African American managers and senior staff by 2025, Nadella said. The company is also planning to add another $150 million to its diversity and inclusion investment. Microsoft will also work with suppliers and partners to "extend the vision for societal change throughout our ecosystem," Nadella said.

Starting next fiscal year, Microsoft will require training on allyship, covering, and privilege in the workplace for all employees, including "new content on understanding the experience of the Black and African American community."

"We will expand on our leadership development programs for select Black and African American midlevel employees and their managers, to help prepare for promotion to Director/Principal," Nadella said. "For Director/Principal level, we will create a new development opportunity to expose them to the leadership expectations of the Partner/GM level and match them with senior-level sponsors and mentors."

Within its ecosystem and partner community, Microsoft plans to double the number of Black- and African American-owned approved suppliers over the next three years. The company also plans to double the percentage of transaction bolumes through Black- an African American-owned banks.

Turning to communities around the country, Microsoft plans to expand its work in justice reform to a $50 million, five-year "sustained effort." That's in addition to providing resources expand computer science education for to Black and African American students and adults. The company also plans to work on expanding access to broadband and devices for communities of color and institutions in urban centers.

"Change begins by looking inward. We expect this change in ourselves. Employees expect this change from their leaders," Nadella said "Our customers and partners expect this change from Microsoft. And the world demands this change."

Dan Thorp-Lancaster is the former Editor-in-Chief of Windows Central. He began working with Windows Central, Android Central, and iMore as a news writer in 2014 and is obsessed with tech of all sorts. You can follow Dan on Twitter @DthorpL and Instagram @heyitsdtl

  • Fire Natalia Domingo. That would be a start.
  • Great, they will fight injustice! They will fight abortion! Yes!!! "38.0% of all abortions in the U.S. in 2016 were performed on Black women, however, only about 13.4% of the total population is Black"
  • What does this have to do with anything?
  • Different people have different ways of seeing things on how things are connected, and different scale of values and how things are important.
  • I agree with you. In the United States, a black baby is almost nearly as likely to be killed in the womb as they are to be born. Also, black children are 50% more likely to grow up in a single parent home. Talk about a travesty.
  • Which goes to show there is work to be done on all sides does it not. Systematic on one half, and culturally on the other?
  • "Systematic" was ended almost 60 years ago when the Democrats' Segregation was finally broken.
  • Not this again. There's a difference between de jure and de facto.
    And you say "Democrats'" as some sort of gotcha as if the Southern Strategy and the exit of the Southern Democrats didn't occur.
  • Yes, it is a FACT that the systematic oppression (that is by law or, in other words, the system) ended nearly 60 years ago. There are, to my knowledge, no laws on the books that oppress anyone. If you can name one, please let me know so I can stand with you to fight against it. Wishy washy "the system" doesn't actually offer any real solutions. What these corporations are doing does not help black Americans for the same reason why Harvard, having lower admittance standards for black Americans, see a large percentage of them failing out. It's because they weren't ready. Fix the generational divide, broken homes, and broken culture which will set up black America for long-term success. Trying to fix it "now" doesn't actually fix anything and only causes bigger issues.
  • Black women exercise their rights over their bodies more than white women. Good on them.
  • For literally burning, poisoning, crushing, and tearing apart their babies? How fiendish.
  • That's your view, others disagree.
  • Others prefer not to know.
  • So, you don't find the literal burning, poisoning, crushing, and ripping apart of innocent children fiendish? If so, then you're part of the problem. Moral relativism matters not.
  • I would oppose that if it was what was happening.
  • "Microsoft will double the number of Black and African American managers and senior staff by 2025"
    "The company also plans to double the percentage of transaction bolumes through Black- an African American-owned banks" This is affirmative action and will do more harm in the long run. And it's really just posturing in the current climate. If you wanted to talk racial injustice, then where is the assistance for other communities like Asians who work their butts off harder than anyone else? "..emphasized the company will also take more steps to address the needs of the Hispanic, Latinx, and other communities over the next five years"
    Yup sure, but you're not doubling the promotion rate of Asians, are you? Something should be done for racial injustice, but do it equally. Affirmative action for one group isn't helping and indicates PR rather than anything else.
  • What on earth is Latinx???
    Like Whitx, Blackxx, Asianx, Hispanix and humanx beingx?
    Is this an affirmative axtion?
  • Latinx is a shorthand for describing both males and females of Latin heritage. In Spanish, personal pronouns are different by sex: Latino and Latina. Latinx is a construction that many, but not all, prefer to describe male and female together.
  • few* prefer - fixed that for you.
  • I know that. And it is ridiculous.
    I am of "Latin heritage".
  • Your point is well taken. It's hard to be aware of prejudice. Stating that Asians work their butts off is actually a stereotype.
  • But, by and large it is true. Asian Americans make up the highest income earners in the US (way more than whites) in spite of past adversity. And to those that think they didn't face adversity allow me to point you to the trans-america railway and Japanese Internment Camps.
  • All appointments she’s be merit based, with the best candidate winning. Obtaining diversity by erasing another cultures history or positive discrimination will do more harm than good in the long wrong. BLM has caused nothing but more division in the U.K. We need unity. Bob Marley would be turning in his grave.
  • If it's merit based it would result in roughly equal demographics inside corporations as in society.
  • So would MLK. Well said.
  • Do you have data for the claim affirmative action doesn't work? Aside from that, I don't understand your statement "something should be done for racial injustice, but do it equally." Something like affirmative action came into existence due to things being unequal in the first place.
  • Affirmative action came into place because of LBJ's great society ideas. Like many ideas from that time, it was ultimately a failure. If the goal was to eliminate poverty or bring blacks out of poverty it was a failure. Black poverty in the US is largely unchanged despite black poverty being on the decline PRIOR to these policies going into affect (between 20-30%). Today that rate is beginning to see more of a decline which I think it most likely attributed by the record employment statistics more than anything (before COVID there were more open jobs than people to fill them). I'd recommend Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Thomas Sowell for more information.
  • Sowell is a genius.
  • Striving to ensure your corporate demographics nearly match the demographics of the nations you operate in is not affirmative action, it is ensuring you are hiring the best and the brightest talent as there is no gap in such divided by ethnicity. If your corporate demographics do not roughly match your national demographics, you are certainly missing out on significant talent and in fact providing affirmative action for the overrepresented demographics.
  • That is really bad logic. Merit doesn't care about melanin.
  • Your right! So if you are promoting based on merit you will typically end up with a workforce at most levels that looks a lot like national demographics since, after all, talent and merit don't care about melanin.
  • I don't think that's true because job roles don't break down along racial lines. Nor sex lines. For instance NBA, NFL, etc have much higher black/African America representation than population. And elementary schools have much higher female representation than the population. Unless you make the case less blacks/African Americans need to play football and less women need to teach in elementary schools you will naturally have a deficit in other areas. I know it's not an exact model but it presents the idea I think pretty well. That said, if a black/African American wants to be a manager at Microsoft I think that's awesome. I'm just pointing out that representation by mere population isn't a good metric I don't think.
  • 1) Very few jobs offer any advantage based on gender or ethnic traits. Do some exist? Sure, but in this context we are discussing multinational corporations not the NBA where you must be 6'3" to even consider a job (unless you are a truly exceptional talent). The total number of such jobs don't even make a tiny blip in the overall job market and absolutely would not affect national or corporate sector employment numbers. 2) Women teach in elementary schools mostly due to opportunity deficits, and when we leave our culture we find that in other countries the gender balance is considerably different (this is true for STEM careers too, in many countries women take as many if not more STEM education paths than in the US). These jobs do not have physical or other requirements that are predicated on gender or ethnicity, so we should take a hard look at why they end up being unrepresentative, as well as how that lack of representation harms society as a whole (for instance, young children are disproportionately exposed to only women in their early childhood education, biasing them in gender roles and expectations going forward, perpetuating the cycle). 3) Again coming back to it, the point of the article was about major corporation equity in opportunity, atmosphere, employment and advancement. In that context there is absolutely no reason to not have a mostly representative workforce, and the representation should become more of a match the larger the total number of employees due to sample size.
  • Counter point to #2: women choose to work in jobs that relate to people. In countries with the highest freedom for women in the workforce, they overwhelmingly join jobs that relate to people such as in hospitality, nursing, and education. My wife, for example, chose to be a teacher despite having a much higher paying job. Why? Because she had the financial freedom to do so. This questionnaire from 2007 is pretty illuminating: For the same reason the gender pay gap has been debunked: Women, on average, choose it. Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome and shouldn't. The same reason Scabrat is right in saying some people are genetically advantaged. Look at the top 100 track and field records, all held by blacks. We should celebrate our differences and achievements, not shoehorn demographics to match some preconceived notion of what equality looks like.
  • 1) Nations without the same biases as the US see similar rates of women in other fields as men 2) Tech, science and math also relate to people. That the perception is that they do not is an indictment of the industries rather than a statement about women's preferences. This is why so much technology is hostile to human society and gets so much wrong. This is a strong argument for increasing the number of women in the field, rather than accepting complacency. 3) The gender paygap is not a myth and claiming it is is telling about you. The past few years of tech companies revealing demographics and pay has been a stark reminder of how real it is. 4) Women tend to group in certain professions for many reasons, among them social acceptance around those roles, prevalence of other women who are presumably more supportive and less likely to harass or assault (safety) and opportunities to be promoted. There is no evidence this has anything to do with any inherent skills, this is all social construct. 5) Unclear why you keep choosing extremely specialized 'professions' as some sort of an example. Yes having small hands makes you better at polishing tiny ceramics and long legs make you better at basketball. And people of certain ethnicities who happened to immigrate to the US often have those traits (usually because they immigrated or were kidnapped for those traits and passed them on rather than as proof their ethnicity all has the trait). None of that is relevant when discussing giant corporations with payrolls in the hundreds of thousands of employees. When Microsoft becomes a basketball team, those arguments may have some sort of merit, until then it's a smokescreen.
  • Not all demographics achieve equally.
  • I mean yeah, I've noticed fascists are pretty low IQ in general, so that's certainly a low achieving demographic.
  • Isn't it racist to hire someone just based on skin color? Or choose a supplier based on skin color?
  • I see how you can say that but it was somewhat racist not to do those things in the first.
  • Comment was removed.
  • It is. There is lots of very compelling evidence that even large, diverse companies run by very liberal people of color discriminate against blacks in hiring. So those companies take steps to remedy that by actively recruiting blacks. This is not rocket science.
  • No it’s not rocket science. It’s positive discrimination.
  • So, Microsoft will push even more discrimination based on intersectionality! So much for ethics. As someone that worked at Microsoft for 10 years, I know that I was personally discriminated against based on me being a "white guy." How do I know? I was actually told that I lost out on a position because I was discriminated against… twice. The two times that I know for sure that I was discriminated against was when I was informed that I was passed over specifically because HR refused to promote me - not because I wasn't qualified or the best candidate, but because of my sex and my ethnicity. The first time was when my manager was trying to get me a level promotion and HR denied it, giving it to someone else who couldn't do their job (manager's viewpoint). My boss had to explain to me that I didn't get the promotion because I was a "white male" and the other person wasn't. (The other person wasn't even submitted for a promotion, but HR chose to do it anyway.) The second time that I am aware of was when I was applying for a manager position and HR denied me, telling me it was due to their "diversity quota." When I asked what that meant, the HR manager only said, "you're a white guy" before walking away and refusing to discuss it any further. So what did I learn? Microsoft cared more about playing politics than putting the most qualified people in the right jobs. They had no problem having someone less qualified if it meant that they met their "diversity quota" goals. If someone is more qualified, then they should get the promotion or job, but if the "qualification" is based on how many intersectionality points that person has, then that is unethical and doesn't help Microsoft build software or services. With this announcement, Microsoft is saying that they will go even further in their discriminatory practices and I can't see how this doesn't violate EEO laws. (I wonder what would have happened if I would have "identified" as something else?)
  • Well, identify yourself as something else: pink unicorn, or green walrus. The more absurd it gets, the better.
  • Yeah, that's exactly how it works! Let's address a long history of discrimination in hiring based on sex, ethnicity, race and sexual orientation by pretending those categories are no better than ridiculous ones you just made up!
  • What about work for pregnant mothers, or with larger families? I think there is much to be done in this area, where jobs require endless hours of work every day.
    (I do not know what Microsoft does in this regard).
  • To be fair I think MS gives a year of paid maternity/paternity leave and does offer programs to help with day care.
  • Thanks for the reply.
  • I made these ridiculous categories not because I support unjust discrimination, but to show that I am not sure about the results of this "affirmative action".
    I do not live in the US, and I do not understand the society of that country, so my comments have little value.
    But what about creating opportunities for people with less opportunities, not in hiring, but before? In nutrition, education, mentoring, training, health, housing, etc.
  • @Andrew G1
    You are right. My previous comment does not make much sense.
    I think I cannot delete it now.
  • It was fine, as it highlighted the absurdity of identity politics.
  • It's an all of the above problem. The US is inherently built on racist institutions, ranging from slavery of kidnapped Africans to literal removal of Chinese. Even when those practices ended, preferences and a hierarchy was formed in all aspects of society, ranging from law to location to hiring. While virtually all non-whites were discriminated against, blacks were treated the worse, often by other ethnic groups as well. A really good primer on this topic can be found here: If you are honestly curious how we got here, it's a fantastic and incredibly well researched read. I can safely say I did not know most of this beyond the large obvious issues, and it changed my thinking on these topics considerably.
  • Unless it's demanding reparations from Democrats -- who went to war to save slavery -- it's nonsense.
  • Hey, that's just like, your opinion man!
  • No, that's historical fact.
  • Anything to avoid the nations ongoing addiction to racism I guess. So strange that you think people like me don't include Democrats in that group or give a crap who 'started it'.
  • That wasnt discrimination and ALL job work places has to hire, promote different people of different genders and race. I dont know how you think that was discrimination. I also highly doubt HR @ MS would say anything on why they did not promote you.
  • This is the very definition of discrimination: the act, practice, or an instance of making a distinction categorically rather than individually (Webster). In other words, HR made a distinction because of his race and gender (or someone else's) based on their category (i.e. race and gender).
  • I worked at Microsoft for 11 years and I can state definitively that this story is complete bullshit. Nobody was ever denied a promotion for being a 'white guy'. If this person ever worked there at all they invented this reason in thier mind or heard what they needed to hear to get over the fact that they were not promo worthy but in denial about it. Microsoft is very aggressive at promoting top talents, and ethnicity is never a factor even when it probably should be (sooooo many white managers sent to regions they don't understand). MS's focus is on the recruiting side, where they've spent the past 20 years making certain they are present at colleges and universities that were traditionally overlooked in favor of the top state and Ivy League schools.
  • Either you are lying and have never actually worked at MSFT, or you did work at MSFT but many years ago. Things have changed drastically in the last 5 years since Satya's Grace Hopper moment. Everyone I've talked to knows someone who's had this happen. I know 3 people who have had this happen to them. I also know at least one person who is talking to a lawyer...
  • My best friend has my old job from when I left back in 2011. He's also a white dude like me. I am still in contact with many of my long term colleagues. Your friends are deluding themselves. They couldn't measure up and it's not the old boy's club it was during Gates' tenure anymore (that's when I started there). No more strip clubs, no more women as window dressing, no more homophobic Brian Valentine bullshit, no more nepotism of senior managers recruiting their buddies so they can get drunk and do drugs while inviting a bunch of women over that they hired for their looks and then disrespected their actual talent (one of my closest friends had this happen) to their backyard hot tub parties where they can convince them to imbibe and try to hook up. No more formal wife swapping between mid-level managers as used to be endemic in the Windows division back in the early 00's (seriously). That culture is dead. Ballmer started weeding it out and Satya has taken it further and it's one of the best things that ever happened to their corporate culture. I used to be embarassed to be seen in public with my colleagues and beg out of all 'morale building' exercises knowing they were going to behave like entitled ******** and abuse the staff and other patrons wherever we went. I'm not sorry that you and your buddies can't hack it when the playing field is nearly level (it ain't quite there yet, especially for women). Got a tiny violin over here.
  • I was in a meeting with a CVP who literally said they were hiring less qualified engineers just so they could improve their "diversity pipeline". Satya is openly saying he will provide special promotion training only to blacks. I don't know how you call that a "level" playing field. Look, I'm sorry that you and your MSFT buddies were racist wannabe womanizers. But your clique certainly didn't reflect all of MSFT. And you haven't been at MSFT for over a decade so you clearly have no clue what it's like now.
  • 1) You were not, stop lying 2) Whatever you claim to have heard was not what was being said, it's how you chose to hear it to fit your own fears around your mediocrity 3) Wasn't my clique, it's a primary reason I left in 2001 and came back in 2004: Ballmer cleaned that bullshit up. 4) I didn't just stop knowing everyone I worked with for years because I left. I know, it's tough to admit that you just don't measure up, and that the people who do don't look the same as you. But if you put half as much time into improving your skills and performance as you do trying to bash equity policies on the internet you might actually merit a promo. Until then, expect to keep getting passed over.
  • Ignorance is unbelievable on here. 🤦🏾‍♂️
  • It's like calmer, better educated Fox News.
  • Yup. Disagree with the what a left wing nut job thinks- and they go straight to character assassination. (Oh look at Trumps hair)
    The most intolerant of species, someone with left wing ideology.
  • "and they go straight to character assassination" "The most intolerant of species, someone with left wing ideology."
    Why would anyone take you seriously after contradicting yourself with so few words? Just say: we should avoid sweeping generalizations. Because right now, you're railing against it, then doing it yourself.
  • That's description, not overgeneralization. Character assassination is a defining characteristic of "left wing nut jobs."
  • That is ironic.
  • This is just checking the box. Any true ethical company would already pushing real equality (not equity) every day as part of their corporate guildelines and policies. "Laying out a plan" is redundant. Also, the point of equality is to provide equal opportunity, not equal results. MS is going down a slippery slope with these changes.
  • There is lots of clear evidence that large companies discriminate against blacks in hiring. That's not equal opportunity. You have to actively correct that or you'll never get equal opportunity.
  • Andre G1. Not in the U.K. it’s a governmental reportable set of statistics for certain size companies and above. Your theory is just your made up view.
  • Racial discrimination doesn't correct racial discrimination.
  • The fact is, whites on average have a higher IQ then blacks and that's the reason they used to get hired more often. Not anymore, affirmative action has put an end to that. Now, this is the true anti-white racism.
  • Improved the ironing board, traffic light, refrigerated trucks, color IBM monitor and gigahertz chip, home security system, automatic elevator doors, peanut butter, potato chips, electric microphone, carbon light bulb filament, the curling iron, instrumental in putting a man on the moon, etc. etc, etc.... Thank God for these low IQ individuals.....
  • A friend of mine's father was one of the lead engineers for the Power4 platform, also African-American. What stuns me is that these people who say things like this have never considered what an indictment of the IQ test such statements are. Even if it's true (it's not once they correct for biases in the testing), it would say much more about the test than the people being tested.
  • Just stopping in to say that I like your avatar. Saw the trio three times before they retired and Peart passed. Glad I did. Three of the most memorable nights of my life.
  • Damn racist Microsoft fighting racism! No I'm not the racist you are!
  • "Nadella said 'Our customers and partners expect this change from Microsoft...."
    No, I don't. I, as a customer expect you to hire the best people for the job to create the best product for my money, regardless of sex, race, culture, or geographic location.
  • Absolutely. This is what I expect as a customer.
  • I expect good products, and I expect also social responsibility.
  • I always have a tough time believing that these companies are doing anything that actually helps the situation. It sounds more like they are throwing everything they can out there to get on the good side of groups. These companies just seem to make the situation worse in the long run. They don't exist to be our arbiters of change in culture, etc. They exist because they provide something we, as a planet, want to have. I doubt most people buy a car or a cell phone because they want that company to be active in politics, etc. It seems a bit insulting to think they have to go out of their way to hire or promote a black person or any race. I mean read what he said. All these programs to help black employees get to higher levels in the company. How is that not an insult to these black employees? As if they need help and not just keep moving all employees up as they earn it. Is there any real data that shows Microsoft was keeping various groups from being hired or promoted? Was it not fair before this? Are they admitting they have been racist this whole time? Donating money to causes and such I get, but I just don't see how these programs will help anything. It seems more divisive than anything. He says they want to double the number of black partners as well as new hires and promotion, but what Are the hard numbers? Committing to those things is saying that these groups couldn't have earned a spot otherwise, another insult. It'll be interesting to see if these companies get in any legal trouble. We all need to be spreading a uniting message. Acknowledging the good people and addressing the bad ones when exposed and fairly investigated. We start with rules and standards that apply to every one. A system of checks and balances that can reliably help anyone that is treated unfairly. As long as you are being fair in your hiring and you prove that over a period of time, I don't think companies need to do anything else. Respect every human. Its an easy fix. I just hope others can accept that and unite.
  • You're too reasonable. Well said!
  • As a former long time employee I can say that over the 11 years I was there these programs helped drastically and didn't work in the way you described. The number one way they got more people of color and women into higher levels was by recruiting in places traditionally over looked, which widened the talent pipeline and made certain the typical white dudes had a much larger amount of competition. They also took steps to double blind candidates from managers, eliminating identifying information from resumes so they were evaluating purely based on skills and experience rather than what nationality or gender they believed someone to be. Promos get reviewed by external teams to minimize favoritism and racial/gender bias. Trainings started occurring top to bottom to teach conscious and unconscious bias, and the hiring process was standardized. There is a lot more too, but the result turned out to be that when you double blind candidates and recruit in more places you organically start to end up with a more diverse workforce, and over time since talent is not tied to skin color or gender, you end up with more of those people working their way up the ladder. It's not perfect but it's improving.
  • Social responsibility is nothing more than a buzz-phrase that means appeasing the group that is screaming the loudest at the time.
  • If your demographics don't roughly match the markets you are operating in then you are not hiring the best and the brightest. Talent is not tied to ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation, but your customers are.
  • You just contradicted yourself in only two sentences. Impressive. You say "Talent is not tied to ethnicity," but also that demographics somehow determine the "best and brightest". So which is it? Also, do you seriously believe that a Hispanic person needs to only buy products developed by other Hispanics? How does it help a black Excel user that the software engineers were also black? That's some serious racist mental gymnastics going on there! lol
  • 1) That's not a contradiction. If talent is level between various groups and your corporate demographics are not, you are necessarily missing out on talent and accepting mediocre in some spaces. 2) Not at all, but as someone who worked at MS through several scandals in other countries where we used iconography or words that had different meanings in other markets we sold into, you absolutely improve products when you have people who would know those things as part of your product design, development and marketing teams.
  • What about laying out a QA plan for Windows 10? Too many bugs.
  • Lmao. Priorities, man!
  • I work at Microsoft, and I can tell you Satya has been creating an internal civil war. With this latest effort, where only blacks will be given these special training programs that will lead to promotions, divisions are starting to form along racial lines. It's quite disturbing. Satya and the SLT (leadership team) are creating racism where there was none before. A lot of people are upset with what he's doing. It's not going to end well, either for MSFT or its shareholders.
  • More misinformation and misrepresentation about what is going on. I'm sorry you are not a top performer, you should probably focus on you. I am aware though that when privilege is lost it can feel like oppression.
  • Ah yes, Ad hominem attacks, the sign that someone truly has lost an argument. Thank you
  • What do you think what you are doing is? You are ad homing that black people are getting undeserved promotions. That is an attack without evidence. Every time you assert that you deserved it more than another person you are attacking that person's qualifications and performance.
  • Merit, not melanin.
  • Want to expose the hearts of people? Write an article about racial inequality. I would imagine the majority of the people that have an issue with this topic are people that are not of a darker complexion.. That haven't been discriminated against. That haven't been treated differently. Being stared at by everyone in a store as if you don't belong there. Ignored by store reps, because they think you don't have money or worse yet pretending to be working but following you around to make sure that you don't steal anything. Working for a company for years, yet someone that is less qualified is given a promotion before you after you have trained him or her. It happens. These are the same people also that say that "racism doesn't exist;, If you don't talk about it it'll go away; It's just something you're making up in your head; They're pulling the race card!" It took a man being choked to death, by police for nearly nine minutes on social media, for the world to wake up and realize that not everyone is treated equally. That is why all the changes are taking place now. People are beginning to develop a conscious and awareness of unfair treatment of others. Some of the policies that some organizations are trying may not work, but at least they're trying. It's better than doing nothing.
  • This is classic leftist emotional thinking. It's all anecdotal statements that mean nothing. You've been brainwashed by Democrats to assume everything bad that happens is because of racism. How do you know why you were ignored by the store reps? Are you a mind reader? Maybe they were having a bad day or just sucked at their job in general? How do you know why you were stared at in the store? Could it be because you were walking around with your pants down and your underwear showing? Which is literally what some gang wannabes do. Guess what, that's nothing to do with race, it's because you were dressing like a clown. Look, I've been treated differently in a store. I've had others promoted over me even though I felt I was more qualified. I've been ignored by store reps. But I try not to make assumptions. And I most definitely don't listen to Democrat explanations for these situations, because Democrats are actively trying to start a race war to get votes.
  • 😂 Wow ....... Priceless!. Thank you for proving my point. Everything that I said, you tried to turn it around and make as if it was my fault or mere coincidence. I've been called the n-word as a child to my face, I have been in line checking out and had people go before me even though I was there first, from a child, to a teenager, to an adults I have been followed around in stores on occasion. I have had someone pulled out a knife on me and call me out of my name, for no reason in a restroom in an attempt to scare me. Pulled over by police for no reason other than that I had a nice ride. But I guess all of that is mere coincidence... I've been on this earth almost 50 years. I think that I know what racism is... I don't need anyone to tell me how to think, because I have experienced it. You say that you don't like to make assumptions, yet you assume that I was some little youngster that wore sagging pants with my underwear showing. And wrong assumptions like that, happen quite often against blacks. And that statement you made pretty much bordered on sounding racist When did this turn into a political topic? I don't know much about politics but I do know crazy and Donald j Trump is a nutcase. Race war? have you not been paying attention to the great president's statements for the last 3 years? Just recently calling the coronavirus the Kung Flu, when a reporter of Asian descent asked him about the pandemic response, he told her to ask China. Calling all Mexicans murderers and rapists and to build a wall. Not wanting Muslims in the country. Calling a quarterback that was taking a knee for the Injustice of police brutality against blacks an S.O.B. never once denouncing the behavior of white supremist at his rallies. Tear gassing peaceful protesters, just a hold a Bible upside down in front of a church and even threatening not being as nice if anyone shows up to his rallies to protest. And those are just things that he done off the top of their head. The list goes on and on. Nope, nothing divisive about that behavior.
  • "And that statement you made pretty much bordered on sounding racist " And there it is! Typical leftist tactic, call anyone who opposes your opinion a racist/sexist/homophobic etc. So predictable, it's laughable. And it's a surefire sign someone knows deep down that they are wrong. I made no assumptions about you. I asked questions. For the time being that is still allowed in this country, until BLM and the Democrats seize full power. And again, everything you've listed you're making assumptions! The cop pulled you over ONLY because you had a nice car? Is that what he told you? I doubt it. Someone bullied you in a restroom? You think only black people get bullied or mugged? How do you know they did it because you are black? Literally everything you said about Trump has been debunked or is invalid. I don't even know where to begin. Trump NEVER said ALL Mexicans were that. Why does the race of a reporter matter to you? Trump is supposed to tailor his answers based on the race of the person asking the question? The supposed "Muslim ban" was a list drawn up by OBAMA! lol Trump has denounced white supremacists multiple times. My fingers are getting tired debunking all your myths. When did this get political? How about during the last 20 years the Democrats have been calling anyone who doesn't agree with their ideology a racist/sexist/homophobe. How about the month long riots, resulting in murder and vandalism, committed EXCLUSIVELY by the left. How about the Democrats ,BLM, kaepernick, lying about the police, propagating the myth of "systemic racism"? These are all false narratives, disproven by facts and statistics, being driven completely by the political left in an attempt to get votes. It's sickening.
  • Whew! You. Are.Special. Yep, I can tell that you are a Donald Trump supporter. Because you do what he does best: Deflect and lie. Dude, everything I said about him I literally saw him say it on the TV. This is also the same guy, that on TV, suggested injecting yourself with disinfectant to kill the coronavirus. Lol. That he made juneteenth popular and told his supporters at his campaign that he told them to slow down the covid testing to keep the numbers from going up. All on TV. Debunk that. But all of this doesn't matter. I know what kind of person I'm dealing with now. I can't take you seriously anymore. If you argue with a fool you will become one. But like I said, if you really want to expose a person's heart, bring up a topic about racial Injustice. You are special. 😉
  • I mean sure, you can just straight up lie about what Trump says. But anyone can go and view his statements, so I don't know what you're trying to do here. Just to take one of your lies, here's what he said about Mexico:
    "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best....They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with [them]. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." So right there, he's talking about illegal immigrants. Unless you think all of Mexico has illegally immigrated to the US, you're statement is false. He never said "all Mexicans murderers and rapists". I just debunked you in real time. There are just two possibilities here. Either you have been completely brainwashed into jumping at racist shadows. Or you are purposefully spreading democrat propaganda and falsehoods. I try to believe in the best in people, so I'll pretend it's the former.
  • Danny, thank you for your contributions and I'm sorry your emotional labor was not recognized by Thorten, who is aggrieved that his personal privilege may merely become equal to others at some point. Stay strong and look me up if you ever need a referral.
  • Yep, that's pretty much what it boiled down to , but he just didn't want to admit that. I'm fine. I actually found it funny and sad at same time that some people have a mentality like that.
  • Selection and confirmation biases are difficult to overcome, unfortunately. But your effort was valiant and remember that for everyone who comments in these threads at least ten others read and learn from them so your effort isn't wasted.
  • Awww, aren't you two cute! But yes, once readers of these comments researched what Trump actually said, they found that Danny was posting outright falsehoods. And David, once they saw your tired copy/paste SJW insults, they see you have no argument. Neither of you are posting any facts to prove your arguments. Just emotional sob stories. You want an example of Confirmation bias. How about Danny's assertion that everything bad that's happened in his life is because of racism, LOL Here is what facts look like. Check this:
    A quote: "African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict" Also, either of you, how do you figure that giving special training to only blacks is "equal to others"? That's a rather Orwellian definition of "equal".
  • As if everything that you have said has been 100% the truth. Riiight. Hypocrite much? Yes, please fact check Trump tells Asian reporter to ask China: Trump Calls NFL player S.O.B for kneeling: Trump says kneelers shouldn't be in the country: Trump disrespects widow of soldier who died in combat: You conveniently ignored the last three things I said about him in my last response. That must be a sign that you lost that argument. Here let me help you: 1. Trump suggests using uv rays and injecting body with disinfectant to kill coronavirus. Watch the look on the doctor's face in the video 😂: 2. Trump said that he made juneteenth famous: 3. Trump tells officials to slow down covid-19 testing to keep the numbers down: Facts If the links don't open for some reason, just Google it and I guarantee you'll find all of it to be true. I find it interesting that you are so triggered by anyone mentioning anything about racial Injustice yet you're the first one to scream race war. You call me brainwashed but you keep saying the same thing over and over again about democratic propaganda. Sounds like you are the one that has been programmed what to say and think. There's a lot more that I could say and share, but you're really not worth it. . Anyways enjoy the facts that you're already aware of 🙃
  • I think he got his feelings hurt. You know how fragile these snowflakes tend to be.
  • Trump never called all Mexicans criminals; he was referring correctly to a subset of illegal immigrants. That alone shows how unreliable you are. Trump deals with international reporters, China and its Useful Idiots in the Leftist media had been smearing him for days, she was snarky, and she tried to turn it into a "race" issue. It was an understandable question. Trump was right call out someone disrespecting the flag. Trump's entitled to his opinion about kneelers. Trump was thinking out load as Dr. Birx explained. Where are the years of Obama, Biden, CNN, and New York Times' tweets celebrating Juneteenth? You just found out about it yourself. Even though he denied it (probably overwhelmed by the constant smears from people like you), Trump was obviously joking about slowing testing.
  • You literally just made my point. African-Americans make up 12.6% of the population yet account for about 25% of those killed by police. That means the rate of police killing black people is twice that of the overall rate. As for the other part about black crime, that is literally the result of over policing. The more police you put in a location, the more 'crime' they will find.
  • The virtue-signaling bigot is playing with numbers? Last year, unarmed whites were shot fatally by law enforcement twice as often as unarmed blacks were. In 2016: -Twice as many blacks killed whites in interracial violence; -Thousands of blacks were murdered by other blacks; -Blacks (14% of the population) committed half of all murders; And the genocide of abortion sometimes results in more abortions than live births. Tell the truth.
  • The BLM movement just lost all meaning when Newsome told the host, "if this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it. This isn't about justice or peace, this is a childish temper tantrum being played by dangerous people out to overtake the entire government!
  • Nah, they are right. Every empire dies when its slave class finally burns it to the ground. We meet the demands or we follow the Trojans.
  • There are no slaves in America ... except those who enslave themselves.