Quote:
I don't understand why you would propose this if you are opposed to "government sponsored discrimination."
I think you are finding some portion of an argument that you think is unanswerable and present it as your position. It doesn't seem heartfelt, but more that you think this will finally "get" the other people you're debating against. I see this behavior a lot in these threads, but maybe you aren't doing it here and I misread your intent. If so, then please explain how this doesn't contradict your own logic outlined earlier that you are opposed to discrimination of any form.
|
I'm sorry, but the idea of AA is to give those that have been held down a hand up. Unfortunately it doesnt take into account those who's families HAVE climed up themselves, since it's based purely on race. I'm not contradicting myself, I believe that the idea of a hand-up is great, and sorely needed. Others here are contradicting themselves in saying that to fight racism, only racism will work. You can claim I'm only showboating on my beliefs and they're not "heartfelt" but that's because no one can refute that AA is racist.
Here's my logic in it's simplest form.
Racism = Bad
Helping poor families get an education and better jobs = Good
Using Racism to help only a select few = Bad
Using economic factors to decide those that need help = Good
Using Racism to beat Racism = Eating more food in hopes of losing weight