Affirmative Action

[MethodMan]

Racism has been legislated SOOOOOOO many times in the US I am surprised this claim has been made. Most OBVIOUS example..."Whites Only"

AA is NOT reverse racism because it is NOT African Americans as a group, oppressing whites as a group.

How did Jessie Jackson's son get the Budwieser franchise?

 

[praying]

Should the government be trying to forcibly correct what it at most these days a social issue?

Good question, but at the root of that question is, is it at most a social issue?

What really gets me, is that I, who was raised to be a colorblind as possible without forcibly removing my eyes, am catching flack for things done by dead people to other dead people.

On this you are absolutley wrong. The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, do you not think there are people alive who suffered numerous injustices at the hands of American apratheid alive today? Also, though it was passed in 1964 it was at least 20 years before serious societal attitudinal changes took place. I know you are not of the belief that the day after the civil rights bill was signed into law that miraculously discrimination/apratheid disolved.

No black person living today was ever an American slave. No white person living today was a slave holder.

True in the literal sense as in chattel slavery but it could be resonably argued that thugh chattel slavery ended in 1864 apratheid and all of its' ugly ramifications existed until the 1960's and h=beyond really.

How long do white people who haven't done anything have to say "Sorry" for things that people who don't exist anymore did?

Well I am not asking anyone to say sorry, but make no mistakes, there are people alive today that suffered from American apartheid.

I'm not sorry, because I never did those things, and decry them.

And therefore you have no reason to be apologize.

I am trying to achieve the actual equality (as in everyone is treated completely equally) that has been trumpeted so long, and it seems like the people who were so adamanet for calling for it now want it not to happen.

I would like to see equality under the law, but without the "nanny" state, I don't think we will see it, not completely at least and even with the "nanny" state we will not see it completely.

 

[praying]

. Oh, how many African-Americans are in the NHL??? (not being serious on the last question.)

ohh I know I know. One he plays for the Pittisburgh Penguins or he did.




Do I win a prize?

 

[praying]

I did. They were white Democrats.

And, do you have point here.

 

[Jetgirl]

Good question, but at the root of that question is, is it at most a social issue?

Since it is already illegal to discriminate on basis of race, I think so.

What is still hanging around is attitude, and you can't legislate attitude or opinion. All you can do is silence people with bad attitudes or opinion, which will eventually just alienate more people than before.

On this you are absolutley wrong. The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964, do you not think there are people alive who suffered numerous injustices at the hands of American apratheid alive today? Also, though it was passed in 1964 it was at least 20 years before serious societal attitudinal changes took place. I know you are not of the belief that the day after the civil rights bill was signed into law that miraculously discrimination/apratheid disolved.

Good point. I was born in 1981, and could probably be considered concious around 1984. I grew up in an integrated area, with teachers and role models of all colors and creeds, and there really was none of this "apartheid" thing.

It seems like only the older people have any problems with each other.

True in the literal sense as in chattel slavery but it could be resonably argued that thugh chattel slavery ended in 1864 apratheid and all of its' ugly ramifications existed until the 1960's and h=beyond really.

But it's not that way today, and if it's being done it's clearly illegal and you can take successful legal action to correct it.

Things HAVE changed.

I walk through my neighborhood and practically all the couples are mixed-race, there's every different kind of person imaginable, and we're all on the same basic economic level. There's four different kinds of churches including a synagog and a mosque and stores from around the world (where I can thankfully get some really good paneer).

When I went to college I was in the minority: 75% of my college's population was of Asian decent or recently immigrated.

Well I am not asking anyone to say sorry, but make no mistakes, there are people alive today that suffered from American apartheid.

Point taken. But are they suffering now? Have things gotten better at all?

And therefore you have no reason to be apologize.

I'm expected, however, to make special concessions for black people on the basis of this stuff that happened before I was born that did linger, but I never participated in.

I would like to see equality under the law, but without the "nanny" state, I don't think we will see it, not completely at least and even with the "nanny" state we will not see it completely.

Of course we won't, because any more changes are going to have to be made in the hearts and minds of the citizens, and the government really has no jurisdiction over that.

All the govenment can do at this point, IMO is make things worse by trying to force things to be OK.

 

[12volt_man]

And, do you have point here.

Yes. There is a history of racism and segregation in the Democrat party.

In fact, your leader in the Senate is a former Klansman.

Just as the Democrats were trying to seperate us by race in the 50's and 60's, they're trying to do it now by reverse racism, affirmative action.

 

[Donkeytron]

Yes. There is a history of racism and segregation in the Democrat party.

In fact, your leader in the Senate is a former Klansman.

Just as the Democrats were trying to seperate us by race in the 50's and 60's, they're trying to do it now by reverse racism, affirmative action.

Democrats-the timeless evil. Taking a page from ann coulture?

You don't need to get vicious or partisan to trash AA. And on a vicious, partisan note, which now deceased senator holds the filibuster record?

 

[praying]

Since it is already illegal to discriminate on basis of race, I think so.

Well how big of a societal problem is the question then. I don't know the answer, but I am inclined to believe it is not a huge issue, thus I don't think AA is needed in employment except in perhaps construction.

What is still hanging around is attitude, and you can't legislate attitude or opinion. All you can do is silence people with bad attitudes or opinion, which will eventually just alienate more people than before.

No you can't legislate attitude that is for sure, if that was the case we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Good point. I was born in 1981, and could probably be considered conscious around 1984. I grew up in an integrated area, with teachers and role models of all colors and creeds, and there really was none of this "apartheid" thing.

It seems like only the older people have any problems with each other.

It isn't only older people really because unfortunately we pass on our prejudices and notions to our children and where you grow makes a huge difference in your attitudes about others, those not the same as you. I had started a thread in Ethics and Morality about how I love where I live because it is diverse, sounds quite similar to where you grew up. Diversity forces you asses your attitudes, to perhaps readjust your thinking from imagined preconceived stereotypes to be based on real interactions with people you have dealt with. I would absolutely hate living in an mostly Black area or a mostly white or mostly one of anything.

But it's not that way today, and if it's being done it's clearly illegal and you can take successful legal action to correct it.

No it is not that way today not even close and I was not trying to imply it was, my only point is discrimination has not stopped

Things HAVE changed.

Indeed they have and much for the better.

I walk through my neighborhood and practically all the couples are mixed-race, there's every different kind of person imaginable, and we're all on the same basic economic level. There's four different kinds of churches including a synagog and a mosque and stores from around the world (where I can thankfully get some really good paneer).

My kind of place like I stated.

When I went to college I was in the minority: 75% of my college's population was of Asian decent or recently immigrated.

Interesting where was that?

But are they suffering now?

Hmm, another good question. I would venture to say the answer is probably yes, not on the job front but emotionally. I imagine the scars of racism run b pretty deep.

This is an excellent read, Sincerely Wrong.

Have things gotten better at all?

Absolutely things have gotten tremendously better.

I'm expected, however, to make special concessions for black people on the basis of this stuff that happened before I was born that did linger, but I never participated in.

I not sure why you feel that way. Concessions?

 

[praying]

paneer

 

[12volt_man]

Democrats-the timeless evil.

Actually, the Democrats used to be an honorable party. But those days are long gone.

You don't need to get vicious or partisan to trash AA.

Nothing I said was vicious.

Partisan? Maybe. I don't see how you can discuss the Democrats' history on racial issues and not be partisan.

Unless, of course, you agree with the stand they took in those days.

 

[praying]

Yes. There is a history of racism and segregation in the Democrat party.

In fact, your leader in the Senate is a former Klansman.

Just as the Democrats were trying to seperate us by race in the 50's and 60's, they're trying to do it now by reverse racism, affirmative action.

You know, when my Dad was in boot camp in Alabama and people were calling him [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] before he was going to serve the very country that treated him like a second class citizen, he didn't stop to ask are you a democrat. He saw a white face.

The 3 little girls who died in the church bombing in Birmingham, their Moms didn't ask who did this Democrats or Republicans, they knew who did it, white people.

When lynchings were public parties, those in attendance were both white Democrats and white Republicans.

Are you following my theme here?


In the trenches with fire hoses being aimed at you , the KKK burning crosses on your lawn, and your children beaten and killed for looking the wrong way etc no one was asking are you a Democrat or a Republican.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Ummm...AA is not needed where there is no prevalence of racism.

What should the policy be to disabuse a few hundred years of racism? Should we pretend racism no longer exists?

So how far do we go ? Where is the AA for Asians ? Oh right, they never were discriminated against in the US.

The policy to “disabuse a few hundred years of racism” is called Non-discrimination. Non-discrimination doesn’t pretend that racism doesn’t exist – that’s why the law was put there in the first place.

AA says that racism will always exist, so we’ll just give up and try to tilt the field back in certain minorities favour. As a blunt instrument, it works in some cases. But it’s morally bankrupt.

 

[praying]

So how far do we go ?

I don't now that answer though like I stated I think it should be limited to college admissions at this point.

Where is the AA for Asians ? Oh right, they never were discriminated against in the US.

Untrue, Asians were discrimianted against and are considered in AA.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

AA does not take lower qualified candidates over better qualified ones.

But it DOES use race as a selection criteria – otherwise known as racial discrimination. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

It governments use AA, then they lose any moral right to complain about racism and discrimination. If it’s OK for the government to discriminate, then they can’t complain when members of the public decide to “even things out” either.

 

[k]

How did Jessie Jackson's son get the Budwieser franchise?

Let's say he got it through ______ means. How is that microscopic example possibly relevant?

 

[k]

ohh I know I know. One he plays for the Pittisburgh Penguins or he did.




Do I win a prize?

How about a hug?

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

That’s putting the cart before the horse. AA was instituted to combat discrimination that was already present.

No, anti-discrimination legislation was introduced to combat discrimination that was already present.

Sure it was wrong. Unfortunately, business owners break the law regularly. Proving the case would be next to impossible.

I lost three fingers in a table saw accident fifteen years ago. The owner was in violation of safety laws. He stood to be fined about $60,000, but someone at OSHA warned him the day before the inspector arrived. All the guards were quickly installed, and after he left, they were just as quickly removed.

If people were honest, we’d have no need for laws and regulations.

So, to use your example, we should fine any business owners who have an accident on their premises regardless of whose fault it was, because we all know that some of them break the law ?

In your case, the outcome would’ve been right ( as it was the owner’s fault ), but it would have hurt lots of other people needlessly.

AA is like saying “we know that a certain demographic dodges tax, so we’ll just take an arbitrary sum of money from all of them, because we know in the end it will even things out and affect a few non-payers”


BTW - hope you are OK these days

 

[Jetgirl]

Well how big of a societal problem is the question then. I don't know the answer, but I am inclined to believe it is not a huge issue, thus I don't think AA is needed in employment except in perhaps construction.

In this area construction and contracting is almost all minorities, you'd have to implement AA to get the quota of white folks up to par with population. Not that it's just the disadvantaged that go into construction, these are some very succesful, prosperous companies.

It isn't only older people really because unfortunately we pass on our prejudices and notions to our children and where you grow makes a huge difference in your attitudes about others, those not the same as you. I had started a thread in Ethics and Morality about how I love where I live because it is diverse, sounds quite similar to where you grew up. Diversity forces you asses your attitudes, to perhaps readjust your thinking from imagined preconceived stereotypes to be based on real interactions with people you have dealt with. I would absolutely hate living in an mostly Black area or a mostly white or mostly one of anything.

I think the best solution to racism, etc.. is exposure.

It's hard to hate someone that you find thinks like you, IS like you.

No it is not that way today not even close and I was not trying to imply it was, my only point is discrimination has not stopped

I don't think it has stopped either, I just think we may be approaching, through a combination of demographics and changing times, where the pressure needs to be taken off.

Otherwise I fear we're running the risk of creating racism where there would and should be none.

Interesting where was that?

UCSD. Could have changed since I graduated.

Hmm, another good question. I would venture to say the answer is probably yes, not on the job front but emotionally. I imagine the scars of racism run b pretty deep.

That seems like something to move on from though, not to hold on to.

This is an excellent read, Sincerely Wrong.

That was an excellent read. It does state a lot of how I feel about AA though, doing something wrong out of the best intentions.

I think one of the reasons I grew up the way I did was that my mother grew up in the segragated south, and her father was exremely bigoted. She always felt terribly bad about seeing how others were treated in her town.

I not sure why you feel that way. Concessions?

Inequalities would really be a better word than concessions.

At my college, though Asian students were in the vast majority, they were allowed to choose to live in all-Asian dormatories because they might feel uncomfortable having to room with the white "majority".

White kids had no such choice.

If we were all equal, why would Asian students get Asian dorms, but white students not get white dorms? In a backhanded way, that policy was inferring that white students will somehow harm Asian students if they're forced to live together.

Makes one feel very low. It can make one very resentful, especially someone like me, who really isn't racist.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Untrue, Asians were discrimianted against and are considered in AA.

But in practice, because Asians have a high representation in colleges, AA says “hey – you’re doing fine, no discrimination against you” It’s a brute quota system, with all the associated flaws.

 

[12volt_man]

You know, when my Dad was in boot camp in Alabama and people were calling him [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] before he was going to serve the very country that treated him like a second class citizen, he didn't stop to ask are you a democrat. He saw a white face.

And yet, you belong to the same party that did these things to him.

The 3 little girls who died in the church bombing in Birmingham, their Moms didn't ask who did this Democrats or Republicans, they knew who did it, white people.

So, do you think that these white people were Republicans or Democrats?

Having grown up in Alabama, just outside Birmingham, and knowing the political climate and history of that city at that time, I can assure you that it was a Democratically run city.

The dogs, the fire hoses, Bull Connor (known for nothing, if not his brutal treatment of blacks), Al Boutwell, Art Hanes (who actually ordered that city parks and public facilities be closed altogether, rather than be desegregated), J. W. Morgan and George Wallace (who once declared "segregation now, segregation forever!") were all Democrats.

The segregationists were overwhelmingly Democrat. In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking of any Republicans. Evidently, LBJ had the same problem. He praised the Republicans for rescuing the Civil Rights Act from the Democrats.

In the trenches with fire hoses being aimed at you , the KKK buring crosses on your lawn, and your children beaten and killed for looking the wrong way etc no one was asking are you a Democrat or a Republican.

Actually, I've shared many times here about how my family had a cross burned on our lawn (before I was born) and my mother's car was firebombed because they were staunch Civil Rights supporters.

In fact, it was the Democrats stand on segregation and racial issues that led my them to switch parties to the Republicans.

You still cannot deny that the people who did these things were Democrats.