Given that there is only a finite amount of money/resources available to help people, giving extra to someone based on their race is equivalent to depriving another of help based on their race.

Hiring/acceptance is zero-sum. Privileging one group is taking spots away from another.

Is there something you can point me to, in order to learn more about Canada's approach? So you're saying that a program specifically to give cash to white men only as "extra help to own houses" would be perfectly fine?

Affirmative action programs have a specific constitutional carve out up here:

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html#:~:te....

Isn't "[Race] is given extra help to own houses" the same as "[not-Race] is given no extra help to own houses"?

On average [Not-Race] has more wealth to afford houses, or home ownership is more common than [Race] in these programs.

You do see anger when individuals perceive they can't afford homes, school, or other big ticket items and perceive that they aren't given help - but that isn't quite the same as denying people something.

>On average [Not-Race] has more wealth to afford houses //

Which is fine if you're part of that the well-off, but if you're just a person and not benefitted by the categroy association with rich people who happen to be the same race -- a simplistic association that discriminatory, racist people make -- then you're shit out of luck.

Discriminating against people is denying them something, it's denying them a fair shot, fair treatment by the government. Regardless of their sex or skin colour they deserve fair opportunity.

> perceive that they aren't given help - but that isn't quite the same as denying people something.

How is that not denying them help?

> On average [Not-Race] has more wealth to afford houses, or home ownership is more common than [Race] in these programs.

So why not just have your aid program be based on wealth, rather than race?

Odd, I suspect the same people would offer the idea that wealth disparity is bad.

I don't understand how this logic can hold up when resources are finite.

It doesn't, they were just looking for a way to justify discrimination that they saw as positive and no one was there to defend against it.