Pfizer proudly promotes racist policies

Pfizer Inc. is a multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology corporation that was established in 1849 and headquartered on 42nd Street in Manhattan, New York City.  Pfizer's current net worth is $262.77B.

Pfizer recently launched a Breakthrough Fellowship Program that offers college juniors the following:

  • 10-week summer internship
  • Two years of full-time employment following undergraduate graduation
  • A full scholarship to pursue a two-year graduate program after the two-year employment period
  • A future job offer after the completion of a postgraduate degree

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said the following about the program:

As students receive mentoring and professional development, they also will have the opportunity to grow within the organization, which will lead to parity at all levels to create a vibrant culture where every colleague has the opportunity to succeed.

Sounds like a fine opportunity for the young who desire an instant rise up the corporate ladder with benefits in every way, including pecuniary ones.

But before you think of applying yourself or asking promising young individuals you know to apply, you must know that there is a condition that must be satisfied.

This particular program is only applicable to individuals of Black/African-American, Latino/Hispanic, and Native American descent.  

So if you happen to be Caucasian or Asian, Pfizer doesn't want you for the program.

This is contrary to Pfizer's claim in its Frequently Asked Questions brochure about the nine-year program that it is an "equal opportunity employer."

This is obviously a blatant case of racial discrimination.

But Pfizer isn't embarrassed about it; in fact, it is very proud.

Its website proudly states the following:

One of Pfizer's Bold Moves is to create a workplace for all, and we are committed to increasing diversity by fostering a more inclusive workplace — a nine-year commitment to increase minority representation at Pfizer, designed to enhance our pipeline of diverse leaders. The Breakthrough Fellowship Program, first-of-its-kind, works to advance students and early career colleagues of Black/African American, Latino/Hispanic, and Native American descent  with a goal of developing 100 fellows by 2025.

Gail Heriot, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, told the Washington Free Beacon that the fellowship presents a "clear case of liability" under federal law: a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which bans racial discrimination in contracting, and Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans racial discrimination in employment.

Every lawyer contacted by the Washington Free Beacon said the case against Pfizer was open-and-shut.

David Bernstein, an expert on civil rights law at George Mason University School of Law, said the Breakthrough Fellowship was "obviously illegal."

Dan Morenoff, the executive director of the American Civil Rights Project, called it a "very facial violation" of Title VII.

Jonathan Berry, a partner at Boyden Gray & Associates, said it was "hard to see any way" the program is legal.

Let's look at some scenarios that will occur as a result of the program:

If you are the offspring of former president Barack Obama, who is black, and whose net worth is around $70 million, you qualify for the program.

If you happen to be the offspring of Jennifer Lopez, whose net worth is around $400 million and who is Latino, you qualify.

If you are the child of Native American film star Jason Mamoa, whose net worth is $25 million, you qualify.

However, if you are the child of an impoverished and widowed South Asian Indian mother who works three jobs to put food on the table, and you have shown great promise in school, earning acclaim from your teachers and good grades as well, you do not qualify.

If you are a child of a Caucasian man who is struggling with his business after punishing pandemic lockdowns and have shown great aptitude academically, you do not qualify.

If you are a Chinese-American orphan whose parents allowed you to flee persecution in communist China, or racial discrimination in some place like Malaysia or Indonesia, and who has a strong academic and overall record, you do not qualify.

There are other open questions, too.

What about people of mixed race? 

What if an individual is an offspring of an interracial marriage, where one parent is from Pfizer's permitted race and the other is from Pfizer's restricted race?  Does the individual qualify?

Who gets preference if there is one place left and they have one Black/African-American, one Latino/Hispanic, and one Native American who qualify?

What about those who may have Black/African-American, Latino/Hispanic, or Native American genes but appear white?

Isn't it misogynistic to favor a man for the fellowship over a woman, just because of race?

Isn't it homophobic to favor a straight individual for the fellowship over a homosexual, just because of race?

Isn't it transphobic to favor a straight individual for the fellowship over a transgender, just because of race?

Why even have academic qualifications as a criterion at all?  Perhaps an individual couldn't afford to go to college because of financial problems.  Why not allow such a person, too?

Why even have a program to evaluate candidates?  Perhaps they are underperforming because of their background.  Allow all of them to qualify.  Let there be no grades, and let everybody get a lucrative job.

Why stick to just a particular fellowship?  Open up the whole firm for Black/African-American, Latino/Hispanic and Native American only!  Perhaps the Caucasian CEO should resign?

If this continues for long, what will be the future of Pfizer or any other company that practices racial discrimination such as this?

"Why are you picking these rare scenarios; you racist?  We are attempting to help those who have been historically discriminated against" is how Pfizer will respond.

A principle that doesn't work for all can work for none.

Favoritism toward one on any criteria is discriminatory toward another.

What about historical discrimination?

The era of slavery is long over, and the people who engaged in those vile practices are dead.

The era of segregation is also over, and proponents of this abhorrent practice — i.e., primarily Democrat party leaders — are gone, too.

The notion of collective guilt doesn't work simply because an individual cannot be blamed for the misdeeds of his forefathers.

In fact, dedicating programs to certain races is a form of bigotry, the implication being that they are not smart enough to compete with everyone, so they have to be given a special facility.  What happens to these individuals when they go out in the real world or seek another job?  Would they be able to proudly say that their primary qualification to enter Pfizer was their race?  How will potential employers who are seeking employees of talent and diligence look at such a candidate?

If Pfizer really wants to help the downtrodden and facilitate diversity, Pfizer could donate to schools in impoverished areas and ensure they offer a quality education irrespective of race, color, sex, religion, or any other attribute.

How has Pfizer's record overall been?

Pfizer saw record profits due to its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and the antiviral pill Paxlovid.

The CDC states that "there is a rare risk of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, mostly among males ages 12 through 39 years."

Perhaps Pfizer can begin its charity by helping out those who suffered as a result of its vaccine first? 

Back to the racist fellowship program.

The likes of Pfizer, despite their virtue-signaling, present significant impediments to realizing MLK's dream of a society that sees people for the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. 

It ought to be corrected right away.

Image: Corporate logo via Wikimedia Commons, public domain.

If you experience technical problems, please write to