Printable View
The democratic primaries have shown me this to be an odious and unjust practice of paternalism. Competing camps have contended that the race of a Punahou Academy scholarship student and Harvard Law review editor were the product of "affirmative action". It simply does not work this way in law school.
It is odious and degrading. END IT NOW.
What say you?
OEC
I note with dry interest that the "white men need not apply for this job" rule is now being instituted in England.
I'm not even worried about caucasian men in this country. It is having an insidious effect on accomplished blacks and women at this point. People point to them and say "Yeah, we know how you got there". It is untrue. All it does is make things unequal amongst those who are marginal in terms of getting the place in school, getting the job, or winning the office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bikerpunk
I don't know what's going on in the UK. That is pretty unfair if they are excluding any group of people from possible employment etc.
OEC
I say end it as well, but for a different reason: If racial discrimination is wrong (and I believe it is), then it's wrong across the board.
You can't sanction it just to try to "even things up".
Instead, I think that we as a society should come down on people with both feet where we see blatant discrimination. From any side.
Equal protection argument? The only reason I don't use that (I do agree with the rationale): you end up with a very narrow reading of Section 5 of the 14th Amendment. This can have a bad effect on laws I may still see as just: ADA for example. I'd be for just ending affirmative action through legislative action.Quote:
Originally Posted by inox
OEC
excuse my politics, I have this medical condition that makes my knee jerk.
nevermind that if you took a white man's (why aren't women complaining about the patriarchy here?) job and gave it to every black person, than there would still be like a 8 to 1 ratio of white people employed instead of blacks.
But yeah, let's get rid of something because it pisses off white people, because ya know white people deciding what black people should and shouldn't do has only been the policy for the last 400 years. and if you say otherwise then you are a racist- against whites.
Oh fuck "white people". We need to get beyond these bullshit distinctions. I'm tired of affirmative action being used as a missive against successful minorities. It simply does not work in practice that way. I don't care about those crackers who use it to excuse their own failings. That's beside the point though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
End Affirmative Action. (Since you busted out the race card, you may want to check who is most disenfranchised by affirmative action in California. They are not caucasian)
OEC
well, at a guess I'd say probably Asians, because we don't even talk about them! I think most people forget that they are even here.
eh. fuck it. I'm done beating my head against a wall, at least for today.
I thought that they pretty much killed this everywhere anyway. people who are so inclined are never going to stop bitching at successful, hell, any, minorities.
Yeah most don not talk about them. I will though. My nephew is half-korean (korean for all intents and purposes). My brother-in-law is an MD. My cousin married a successful black man. Another cousin: A wonderful black woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
I hate those fucking people who blame successful immigrants. It's getting hard to avoid them. They look at me and make some joke about asians. I think of my nephew. I respect where you are coming from. Do you see what the unintended consequences of the policies are?
I'd be more for outreach to disenfranchised communities and more choices in education. We have to get past this "remedy" that has perverse effects on women and minorities.
OEC
I see where you are coming from. I guess I just see AA as an anti-discrimination clause, and that is what it was intended toward. But obviously there has been a lot of hostility towards it. I'll say that I want those opportunities (for success) to exist and that the people that complain about them should be weighed against those that benefit from them.
I don't want to see the people that want to get rid of ANY opportunities for minorities to be the ones who are gaining ground. Discussion of whether or not AA is the best way to do that, well, I'm up for that discussion, but I want that (the best way for opportunity) to be the focus.
The fact that "white folks" are the one's that are making the decisions, and that they ultimately are the ones that someone has to go to not only to directly provide services, but to provide approval, seems to me to point out that there is still a big racial issue in the system that needs to be worked on.
I'm for switching to more community outreaches. Give the kids a chance to go to the better schools in the area. There is definitely a major racial issue. We see it in a meltdown of charges of misogyny or racism amongst people who supported the original AA laws (actually a missive applied in the 70s to aspects of how the '64 bill was implemented.) Something has to change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
OEC
understanding that racism has hitherto been a factor in determining policy is necessary to make sure that it doesn't anymore in the future.
it's like after slavery ended, they said "that's the end." but they didn't address or change the way society had been created as a result of slavery, and so it still had an effect. that's what the civil rights movement was about, that's what AA was about, that's what we're still dealing with today.
Recognition that all people are equal is a big deal, it's a huge step. but if they haven't been before, than just doing that alone isn't gonna make it happen. It can't be the only step.
I know where you are coming from, I know what you are all about. But if you say that "we gotta end AA now" than the people that don't have the same goals as you are going to think that you are speaking toward what they want and get behind it.
I think the problems in disenfranchised communities are what needs to be dealt with. AA operates more at the margins of more affluent kids of different races. I see it used an excuse or missive towards minorities who earned their way and simply excelled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
OK, just wanted to get that out in the open.
I really agree with you on that last bit. that is a huge thing that people aren't talking about. I can definately see the advantages of a "bottom-up" approach instead of a "top-down".
If we are talking about people entering the job world and college, we're already too late. we've missed the mark, and a lot of people are beyond saving at that point.
That would be the area we should be targetting (the communities) and doing so at as young an age as possible. The people who get into professional schools cannot seriously be said to have done so by anything other than merit. They are often amongst the top students. They tend to come from affluent families. I agree AA was necessary in '64. I think we have to go beyond it though now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morning Glory
OEC
I think I know what your talking about, but I'm not exactly sure
For the record, I'm not talking about Affirmative Action.
I'm talking about policies, like those in Canada in the early 90s and now in the UK, that says white men are BARRED from even APPLYING.
That's the reason I moved to the US.
The only difference is, I don't begrudge anyone helped by this program, though I was personally affected as a result, though I do find it offensive in principle.