Obama's election should bring an end to Affirmative Action - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Hyacinthe · 11-29-2008, 10:44 PM

We have a similar problems here that over the last 10 years or so has just gotten worse and worse it seems. Despite the affirmative actiosn taken by the government in regards to trying to "make up for past wrongs" it doesn't seem to be working.

We still have large groups of Aboriginal Australians roaming the streets at night (I am referring to 13 - 14 year old girls as opposed to adults) during the week and yet I am aware that a portion of the taxes I pay goes to monetary incentives for their parents to send those same kids to school. Yet despite those rewards I know most of those kids don't, that they will drop out after year 10 (our last compulsory year of schooling) if they haven't already stopped going.

Do the affirmative actions of governments around the world need to be looked at in regards to how we treat minority groups - yes they do. In some cases they are not effective and merely encourage the types of behaviours that we are hoping to avoid, but at the same time as long as you have people out there like the KKK still active - as long as people like Nelson Mandela (I know the man won a peace prize but look at a few of his less savoury actions in Africa and you'll see what I mean) are held up as being wonderful despite their actions towards those they should have the most sympathy for how can anyone claim that affirmative action should be stopped?

There are those out there in minority groups who do take advantage of the systems put in place to aid them but there are those out there that are caucasian or asian who do exactly the same thing (look at the dependenacy payments single mothers get for example or unemployment benefits). So that can't be put down to their sex, race or religion because unfortunately people from all walks of life seem to enjoy screwing others over.

Do I have any ideas on how to fix these problems - honestly no I don't. I don't have the background information, the statistics or the true understanding of what life is like for those people to be able to make an informed decision and I think very few out there really do.

****

Quote:

A large percentage of white children do not have fathers that are part of their family. Many white children are raised by their mothers or grandmothers and probably don't know who their real father is. If they do know who their real father is, he's probably in jail or has been in jail for committing any number of crimes.

Why would you study hard in school and look for a way out when you can go sling some dope on the corner and make a lot of money in a short amount of time? These kids grow up to perpetuate the same environment for the next generation.

This environment alone is not conducive to getting good grades in school and getting accepted to a good college or good job. The fault lies within the white community itself, not the system. Too many white people take the "easy" way out by selling drugs or living off of welfare and end up in trouble with the law. Plenty of opportunities are out there for anyone who wants to take them.

We should not accept lower standards just because some people don't want to put in the work to make the grade.

I know some people those paragraphs would describe perfectly with just the substitution of one word for another (obviously the bright green one) does that mean that I should tell my government to remove all benefits received by young white men and women?

Those types of views Timalkin are exactly why affirmative action is still necessary, as long as you are stereotyping the African American community Barrack Obamas election means nothing.

timalkin · 11-30-2008, 05:35 AM

Please point out where I said that ALL black people are like X. I'm specifically talking about the inner city black youths that were previously mentioned.

I don't think anybody would say that white people are not guilty of the same things. The difference is that a white person can be a huge fuck up and sit around doing drugs, drinking, and committing crimes and not claim that "the man" is holding him down. Describe a black person with those terms, and it's a racist viewpoint with the institutional racism holding him down.

There is a huge double standard between the two, and they are both equally worthless regardless of the color of their skin. Frankly, I don't want my taxpayer dollars propping up welfare queens and other non-contributors whose full-time job consists of figuring out ways to scam the government at every opportunity without having to work a day in their lives, no matter what color they are.

We are in the 21st Century. Time to get off your ass, get a job, take care of the kids you created, and stop blaming faceless white people for everything that sucks about your life.

As an aside, if anyone knows of any lending institution that discriminates against minorities, please report them to the authorities. There are federal laws against such things that are taken very seriously.

Tully Mars · 11-30-2008, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin

Please point out where I said that ALL black people are like X. I'm specifically talking about the inner city black youths that were previously mentioned.

So it's not all black people, just all inner city black youth?

dc_dux · 11-30-2008, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin

....As an aside, if anyone knows of any lending institution that discriminates against minorities, please report them to the authorities. There are federal laws against such things that are taken very seriously.

Again, you jump right to the simple answer.....because it is illegal, it probably is not occuring.

Employment discrimination exists even though it is illegal. It is just not as overt as in the past.

And lending discrimination exists even though it is illegal, just not as overt as the past because of a variety of factors, including the fact that in many cases, the laws dont require lenders to collect or provide personal data, including race.

From a June 2008 GAO report:

Quote:

GAO's June 2008 report found that most research suggests that discrimination may play a role in certain types of nonmortgage lending, but data limitations complicate efforts by researchers and regulators to better understand this issue. For example, available studies indicate that African-American owned small businesses are denied loans more often or pay higher interest rates than white-owned businesses with similar risk characteristics. While the primary data source for these studies, a periodic FRB small business survey, provides important insights into possible discrimination, it also has limits compared to HMDA data...

U.S. GAO - Fair Lending: Race and Gender Data Are Limited for Nonmortgage Lending

This is not from a generation or two ago.....this was six months ago.

I guess that since "most research suggests...and available studies indicate..." is not 100% conclusive or irrefutable, you have your out.

If you accept even the possibility that available studies indicate that African-American owned small businesses are denied loans more often or pay higher interest rates than white-owned businesses with similar risk characteristics....how is that the fault of the black community?

I honestly dont understand why you cant see that the issue of discrimination and racism is not as simple (or black and white as it were) as you suggest at every opportunity. It is simply wrong, in no uncertain terms, to blame it all on the black community.

Rekna · 11-30-2008, 07:42 AM

What do you think happens more often:

1) A black guy is picked over a white guy because of AA.
2) A white guy is picked over a black guy because of racism.

I don't know which happens more but i'm sure they both happen. The AA system is no where near close to perfect but at least it is trying to solve a real problem. I personally think AA needs to focus more on social programs and education. But that would be crazy socialism and the right would say the world is coming to an end.

Sun Tzu · 11-30-2008, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Putting test question bias aside, might test results be influenced by the fact that middle and upper class white kids are more likely to afford to have access to pre-test tutorials, with sample math/science questions from previous tests, than inner city black kids?

A meritocracy or can money buy the opportunity to achieve a higher score?
-----Added 29/11/2008 at 10 : 31 : 40-----
And this doesnt even take into consideration the fact that there are significant disparities in K-12 education....a far higher student/teacher ratio in inner cities school and a far lower student/computer ratio in those schools than in predominately white suburban schools...an issue that has been addressed in other threads.

I agree with you, that whats I mean by the problem starting well before the exams. The answer isnt to change college standards. The same studies we are both talking about shows there is a common relationship between the scores of the exams and how well students do in their freshman year.

asaris · 11-30-2008, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin

The difference is that a white person can be a huge fuck up and sit around doing drugs, drinking, and committing crimes and not claim that "the man" is holding him down.

Actually, I know plenty of white people who would do exactly that. Like the couple I ran into in Missouri who got into trouble for running an erotic haunted house. There are also plenty of lazy, stupid white people who blame not being able to get a job on AA. So I'm not sure that there's any sort of real difference between black people and white people here.

ratbastid · 11-30-2008, 09:54 AM

There are human beings who like to work as little as possible and blame their lack of success on an oppressive force bigger than them. So far in this thread, I'm not convinced that there's anything racial about that.

But go on, timalkin. Convince me. Your whole argument rests on that being a "black thing". You know, like fried chicken and hip hop. You understand The Blacks so well, please, explain it to me.

Cynthetiq · 11-30-2008, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyacinthe

We have a similar problems here that over the last 10 years or so has just gotten worse and worse it seems. Despite the affirmative actiosn taken by the government in regards to trying to "make up for past wrongs" it doesn't seem to be working.

We still have large groups of Aboriginal Australians roaming the streets at night (I am referring to 13 - 14 year old girls as opposed to adults) during the week and yet I am aware that a portion of the taxes I pay goes to monetary incentives for their parents to send those same kids to school. Yet despite those rewards I know most of those kids don't, that they will drop out after year 10 (our last compulsory year of schooling) if they haven't already stopped going.

Do the affirmative actions of governments around the world need to be looked at in regards to how we treat minority groups - yes they do. In some cases they are not effective and merely encourage the types of behaviours that we are hoping to avoid, but at the same time as long as you have people out there like the KKK still active - as long as people like Nelson Mandela (I know the man won a peace prize but look at a few of his less savoury actions in Africa and you'll see what I mean) are held up as being wonderful despite their actions towards those they should have the most sympathy for how can anyone claim that affirmative action should be stopped?

There are those out there in minority groups who do take advantage of the systems put in place to aid them but there are those out there that are caucasian or asian who do exactly the same thing (look at the dependenacy payments single mothers get for example or unemployment benefits). So that can't be put down to their sex, race or religion because unfortunately people from all walks of life seem to enjoy screwing others over.

Do I have any ideas on how to fix these problems - honestly no I don't. I don't have the background information, the statistics or the true understanding of what life is like for those people to be able to make an informed decision and I think very few out there really do.

****

I know some people those paragraphs would describe perfectly with just the substitution of one word for another (obviously the bright green one) does that mean that I should tell my government to remove all benefits received by young white men and women?

Those types of views Timalkin are exactly why affirmative action is still necessary, as long as you are stereotyping the African American community Barrack Obamas election means nothing.

I just went to a Q&A with Baz Luhrman who spoke about the undertone of his recent epic Australia and that he wanted to bring forward the idea of the "stolen generation" which went on until the 1970s.

The Stolen Generation - TIME

It has been very interesting to me to learn about this "new" concept.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

What do you think happens more often:

1) A black guy is picked over a white guy because of AA.
2) A white guy is picked over a black guy because of racism.

I don't know which happens more but i'm sure they both happen. The AA system is no where near close to perfect but at least it is trying to solve a real problem. I personally think AA needs to focus more on social programs and education. But that would be crazy socialism and the right would say the world is coming to an end.

I'm not sure, but I find both bothersome because we are talking about race being the deciding factor.

Quote:

View: What if the NBA had quotas?
Source: Jewishworldreview
posted with the TFP thread generator

What if the NBA had quotas?
What if the NBA had quotas?

By Larry Elder

Judaism: The Jewish site | Imagine the following press release:

In a closed-door meeting, the owners voted to limit the number of black players, in order to increase attendance from non-black customers. The NBA now consists of over 80 percent black players, which creates a non-diverse and less enlightening experience for the predominately non-black fan. Thus, in order to continue basketball's popularity, the NBA determines player diversity a necessity to maintain the game's prosperity.

— NBA commissioner David Stern.

Before you could say "Michael Richards," in swoop the Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, as well as the other usual suspect "black leaders." Marching, screaming, stomping and howling will precede enough lawsuits to keep the entire American and National Bar Associations fully employed for the next decade.

Yet when it comes to colleges and universities admitting Asian-American students, this is, in effect, exactly what is happening. Because of the superior performance of Asian students on high school grades and pre-college aptitude tests, many colleges and universities, through unannounced policies, place these "minority students" at the back of the line.

California, in 1996, outlawed race-based preferences. After this new law, the percentage of Asian students enrolled at the elite, competitive campus of UC Berkeley increased from 34.6 percent to 42 percent by fall 2006. Similarly, the state of Washington outlawed preferences in 1998, and Asian enrollment at the University of Washington increased from 22.1 percent to 25.4 percent by 2004. Michigan recently passed laws outlawing the use of race in government hiring, contracting and admission into public colleges and universities. Expect an increase in the Asian student body at the University of Michigan.

Question: Why do Asian students and their parents put up with it?

Jian Li does not intend to. Li, a permanent U.S. resident, immigrated to America from China at the age of 4. He graduated at the top 1 percent of his high school class. On his SATs, he received a perfect 2400, and totaled 2390 (10 points less than perfection) on his SAT II subject tests in math and science. Yet Li received rejections from Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, the University of Pennsylvania and MIT. Li is not alone. Attorney Don Joe from Asian-American Politics, an enrollment-tracking Internet site — says he receives complaints "from Asian-American parents about how their children have excellent grades and scores but are being rejected by the most selective colleges. It appears to be an open secret."

Li filed a complaint with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, with the matter currently under review. On his college applications, Li left blank his country of origin and his race, although he did put down his citizenship and listed Chinese as his first language spoken and the language spoken at home. Inquires about his race, said Li, "[S]eemed very irrelevant to me, if not offensive."

Why did he sue? Li said he wants to "send a message to the admissions committee to be more cognizant of possible bias, and that the way they're conducting admissions is not equitable."

A study of the University of Michigan's 2005 applicants by the Center for Equal Opportunity documented the hit that white and Asian students take because of race-based preferences. In an apparent desire to increase the number of blacks and Hispanics, the school admitted Asian applicants with a median SAT score of 1400 (out of a possible 1600 for the test in use at that time). This made the Asian median 50 points higher than the median for admitted white students; 140 points higher than Hispanics; and 240 points higher than blacks. Of Asian students with 1240 on the SAT and a high school GPA of 3.2 in 2005, only 10 percent got into Michigan. But 14 percent of whites with those stats were admitted, as were 88 percent of Hispanics and 92 percent of blacks.

What's more, the "boost" given to Hispanic and Latino students by racial preferences often backfires. Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and a black attorney, said, "Would college administrators continue to mouth platitudes about affirmative action if their students knew that preferential admissions cause black law students to flunk out at two-and-a-half times the rate of whites? Or that black law students are six times less likely to pass the bar? Or that half of black law students never become lawyers?"

What took Asians so long to figure this out and file more lawsuits?

Perhaps Asians remain unaware of the damage these policies do to their own admission possibilities. Perhaps they consider themselves a discriminated minority, and thus support programs to "offset" the negative effects of their perceived opposition. Or perhaps they feel that despite the negative effect of race-based preferences on their own possibilities of admission, they feel sympathetic toward to the "need" to "help" blacks and Hispanics. Who knows?

In any case, 17-year-old freshman Jian Li now attends Yale. Not a bad foundation for a future. Just ask Yale law school grad and former President Bill Clinton, who, by the way, supports race-based preferences.

Now that you've read the above article and noted that it came from the Jewish World Review, take note that it was written by Larry Elder, a black man known as the Sage from South Central, who somehow managed to rise from poverty and attend Brown University.

Making thing about race continues to focus on race.

dc_dux · 11-30-2008, 11:50 AM

cyn....I am still interested in your thoughts on a meritocracy based on the questions I raised earlier:

Is the college admission system based on a meritocracy?.....when according to the preponderance of studies on the subject, standardized admission tests may have a bias against minorities?....or when legacy admissions are given to kids whose parents or grand parents attended the university? or that affluent white kids are more likely to be able to afford pre-test tutorials, with sample questions from previous tests and buy the opportunity to achieve a higher score?

Is it a meritocracy when white small business owners are more likely to get loans at better rates than minority small business owners? (see post #44).

Regarding women and AA....before Title 9 (an AA program) provided some level of equity in athletic scholarships, was it a meritocracy that boy soccer players or swimmers or tennis players or golfers had access to full athletic scholarships and girl soccer players or swimmers or golfers did not?

BTW, Larry Elder has often said he benefited from AA.
-----Added 30/11/2008 at 03 : 01 : 39-----
Here is example on another issue....disparity in prison sentencing and the criminal justice system based on race.

Generally, a state issue; this is from the Wisconsin State Sentencing Commission, but similar results can be found in many states:

Quote:

African-Americans and Hispanics convicted of drug trafficking in Wisconsin are more likely to wind up in prison than white drug dealers, according to a report on race and sentencing by the state Sentencing Commission.

Compared with whites, Hispanics are 2 1/2 times as likely to be imprisoned, while blacks are nearly twice as likely to end up behind bars for dealing drugs, according to the report issued last month.

The amount of racial disparity found in sentences increased as the offense severity decreased. Less severe crimes, such as drug trafficking, robbery, burglary and third-degree sexual assault, showed greater levels of prison/probation racial disparity than more severe offenses such as armed robbery, sexual assault of a child and first- and second-degree sexual assault.

(side bar) Among all offenses examined, compared with whites, black offenders were 1.7 times as likely to receive a prison sentence, while Hispanic offenders were almost twice as likely to go to prison.

Drug sentences worse for blacks - JSOnline

While other factors (such as access to expensive, top quality legal counsel as opposed to inexperienced public defenders) may influence sentencing, should the racial factor be ignored?

Cynthetiq · 11-30-2008, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

cyn....I am still interested in your thoughts on a meritocracy based on the questions I raised earlier:

Is the college admission system based on a meritocracy?.....when according to the preponderance of studies on the subject, standardized admission tests may have a bias against minorities?....or when legacy admissions are given to kids whose parents or grand parents attended the university? or that affluent white kids are more likely to be able to afford pre-test tutorials, with sample questions from previous tests and buy the opportunity to achieve a higher score?

Is it a meritocracy when white small business owners are more likely to get loans at better rates than minority small business owners? (see post #44).

Regarding women and AA....before Title 9 (an AA program) provided some level of equity in athletic scholarships, was it a meritocracy that boy soccer players or swimmers or tennis players or golfers had access to full athletic scholarships and girl soccer players or swimmers or golfers did not?

BTW, Larry Elder has often said he benefited from AA.
-----Added 30/11/2008 at 03 : 01 : 39-----
Here is example on another issue....disparity in prison sentencing and the criminal justice system based on race.

Generally, a state issue; this is from the Wisconsin State Sentencing Commission, but similar results can be found in many states:

While other factors (such as access to expensive, top quality legal counsel as opposed to inexperienced public defenders) may influence sentencing, should the racial factor be ignored?

No it isn't and wasn't based on meritocracy... when I didn't get into a UC school because a black student was black and had lower scores than I did.

The article I quoted states that it isn't in the current fashion.

As far as testing materials is concerned. Parents make sacrifices. How is it that immigrant parents seem to have values where education is important and their don't buy a bunch of namebrand crap?

How is it that immigrants learn how to game the system AS IT IS? They too many know know the bow of the ship, but they LEARN what the requirements are and learn how to participate within those confines. Yet, the black community continues to decry being educated as being a bad thing.

Now this article by a gentleman from Nassau writes it up better than I can. Why can't the group take care of themselves as others have?

Quote:

View: Black people and black crab syndrome
Source: Thenassauguardian
posted with the TFP thread generator

Black people and black crab syndrome
Black people and black crab syndrome
Craig F. Butler

by Craig F. Butler

We as black people are our own greatest enemy. How many times have we heard one another use references such as, boy you have good hair, or look at her with her picky head, blackus or our most popular phrase now nigger.

With this we seek to denigrate the other whilst appearing to be superior. What we fail to realize is that we do our race a disservice, by pulling everyone down just as the caged black crabs do. This is not totally our fault though, for we as a people have been indoctrinated into this. The following is taken from an address by Willie Lynch, a British slave owner delivered in 1712 on the banks of the James River. His plantation was in the West Indies but Lynch was teaching American slave owners how to control their slave population. The tragedy is how well it worked and still works today.

"Gentlemen, I greet you here on the bank of the James River in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and twelve. First, I shall thank you, the gentlemen of the colony of Virginia, for bringing me here. I am here to help you solve some of your problems with slaves. Your invitation reached me on my modest plantation in the West Indies where I have experimented with some of the newest and still the oldest methods of control of slaves. Ancient Rome would envy us if my program were implemented. As our boat sailed south on the James River, named for our illustrious King, whose version of the Bible we cherish. I saw enough to know that your problem is not unique. While Rome used cords of wood as crosses for standing human bodies along its highways in great numbers you are here using the tree and the rope on occasion.

I caught the whiff of a dead slave hanging from a tree a couple of miles back. You are not only losing a valuable stock by hangings, you are having uprisings, slaves are running away, your crops are sometimes left in the fields too long for maximum profit, you suffer occasional fires, your animals are killed. Gentlemen, you know what your problems are: I do not need to elaborate. I am not here to enumerate your problems, I am here to introduce you to a method of solving them. In my bag here, I have a fool proof method for controlling your Black slaves. I guarantee everyone of you that if installed correctly it will control the slaves for at least 300 years. My method is simple. Any member of your family or your overseer can use it.

I have outlined a number of differences among the slaves: and I take these differences and make them bigger. I use fear, distrust, and envy for control purposes. These methods have worked on my modest plantation in the West Indies and it will work throughout the South. Take this simple little list of differences, and think about them. On top of my list is "Age", but it there only because it starts with an "A": the second is "Color" or shade, there is intelligence, size, sex, size of plantations, status on plantation, attitude of owners, whether the slave live in the valley, on the hill, East, West, North, South, have fine hair, coarse hair, or is tall or short. Now that you have a list of

supreme vision, differences I shall give you an outline of action-but before that I shall assure you that distrust is stronger than trust and envy is stronger than adulation, respect, or admiration.

The Black slave after receiving this indoctrination shall carry on and will become self refueling and self generating for hundreds of years, maybe thousands. Don't forget you must pitch the old Black male vs. the young Black male, and the young Black male against the old Black male. You must use the dark skin slaves vs. the light skin slaves and the light skin slaves vs. the dark skin slaves. You must use the female vs. the male, and the male vs. the female. You must also have your white servants and overseers distrust all Blacks, but it is necessary that your slaves trust and depend on us. They must love, respect and trust only us. Gentlemen, these kits are your keys to control. Use them. Have your wives and children use them, never miss an opportunity. If used intensely for one year, the slaves themselves will remain perpetually distrustful. Thank you, gentlemen."

The word 'lynching' is derived from Lynch's name. Indeed he was a man with a supreme vision.

I find it amazing that we as a race are still plagued with this doctrine. And it is the whole race that suffers. The notable exception that comes to mind is the Haitians. Probably because they were able to defeat their slave owners and gain independence before any other black people. To some extent the Maroons of Jamaica also are free of the brain washing.

What is the solution? I wish I had an easy and quick answer. One thing is clear we must learn to work together. Not in the sense that we seek to promote racism, but only that we seek to help in the economic empowerment of the black people.

Former basketball great Ervin 'Magic' Johnson has understood this, and has built an empire on supplying the inner city. The Chinese who migrate here and in other countries have also clearly understood this as well, as the majority of their businesses can always be found in the inner cities. It is only us as black people who fail to develop our

own inner cities, and when some of the brave souls make an attempt their businesses are shunned or robbed far too often. The same thing with riots; remember Los Angles after the Rodney King verdict, the black people destroyed their own, not Rodeo Drive or Beverly Hills but South Central.

The other day I was speaking to some corner dwellers, the young men who hang out on the corner all day long rather than work, and I was told by them that they rather sell drugs because they will make more money that way, or rob, as there was profit in it.

The stark truth is that they are correct. Our educational system has let them graduate or at least leave school with the expectation that they could do a job when in reality they could barely read and write. The only jobs available will be of the minimum wage variety and that would not do when they have grown up with the drug dealer as their model. So that young soul who wants all the fine things in life without any of the requisite sacrifices will resort to what he knows, a life of sloth, crime, imprisonment and possibly an early death.

One solution is that we must not be afraid to disappoint the youth. In that way they will learn that nothing is easy. Schools must not be afraid to make a student repeat even if that person does not leave until 25. Positive examples must be portrayed at every opportunity, therefore the struggles of the black Bahamian, along with other Black giants such as Marcus Garvey, Nelson Mandela, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to name but a few, must become a part of the core curriculum. Inappropriate behavior should be dealt with at an early age; if it is allowed to fester it will lead to an even greater problem in the future.

Most importantly the idea that we as Black people, regardless of where we come from Lyford Cay or the ghetto, are worthless or second class must end. Replaced with the notion that we can achieve anything we want if we are prepared to work for it. And of equal importance we must not teach the black youth to fear or hate White people.

dc_dux · 11-30-2008, 12:23 PM

Another example from last year's Bush State Department report to the UN CERD.

While the report righfully touts much progress in confronting discrimination in all areas and at the same time, IMO, sugar coats the administrations enforcement effort in ending discrimination, this section on housing discrimination shouldnt be overlooked.:

Quote:

HUD’s Office of Policy Development and Research has published several volumes estimating the national level of racial and ethnic housing discrimination against African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. In addition, statewide estimates were drawn up for Native Americans and Alaska Natives in three states. The methodology involved matched pairs of testers who sought housing in the sales or rental market; one tester was a non-Hispanic White, and the second was of a minority race or ethnicity. The reports showed that discrimination in the sales market had declined significantly in the decade prior to the report’s issuance. However, the decline was more modest in the rental market for African Americans, and there was no change at all for Hispanics. The findings also generally indicated that the treatment shown to the non-Hispanic White tester remained more favorable than that shown to the minority tester, further indicting that the problem of housing discrimination persists in many parts of the nation.

Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) Report

-----Added 30/11/2008 at 03 : 26 : 43-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

How is it that immigrants learn how to game the system AS IT IS? They too many know know the bow of the ship, but they LEARN what the requirements are and learn how to participate within those confines. Yet, the black community continues to decry being educated as being a bad thing.

Now this article by a gentleman from Nassau writes it up better than I can. Why can't the group take care of themselves as others have?

No other immigrant group was brought here by force and lived through 200 years of institutional racism that still persists in many areas.

Damn...why is that so fucking hard to understand?

You just dont want to acknowledge that white high school kids have an advantage in college admission testing.....you dont want to acknowledge that white small business owners have an advantage in access to lending....you dont want to acknowledge that white defendants are likely to fare better in the criminal justice system....you dont want to acknowledge that housing discrimination based on race still exists.

I give up!

SecretMethod70 · 11-30-2008, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

No other immigrant group was brought here by force and lived through 200 years of institutional racism that still persists in many areas.

This is the crux of the issue right here. Sadly, the US as a whole is so dysfunctionally obsessed with rugged individualism that it's impossible for many to comprehend that what was done to parents and grandparents, and even great grandparents, has an effect on the upbringing, opportunities, and life of the child. We're even seeing this on the biological level as we continue to learn more about epigenetics. It shouldn't be hard to recognize that it also exists culturally.

tisonlyi · 11-30-2008, 02:00 PM

AA will no longer be necessary when the dumb son of a black president is elected president in turn.

Twice.

Cynthetiq · 11-30-2008, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Another example from last year's Bush State Department report to the UN CERD.

While the report righfully touts much progress in confronting discrimination in all areas and at the same time, IMO, sugar coats the administrations enforcement effort in ending discrimination, this section on housing discrimination shouldnt be overlooked.:

-----Added 30/11/2008 at 03 : 26 : 43-----

No other immigrant group was brought here by force and lived through 200 years of institutional racism that still persists in many areas.

Damn...why is that so fucking hard to understand?

You just dont want to acknowledge that white high school kids have an advantage in college admission testing.....you dont want to acknowledge that white small business owners have an advantage in access to lending....you dont want to acknowledge that white defendants are likely to fare better in the criminal justice system....you dont want to acknowledge that housing discrimination based on race still exists.

I give up!

You don't want to understand that it's not IMPOSSIBLE for a black kid to succeed. I'm stating that while there are still problems, I don't beleive that it requires construction of OTHER INSTUTIONAL RAICST mechanics and mechanisms that are an AFFRONT to other races.

and if your statement is IN MANY AREAS then those areas should be targets SOLELY and dealt with individually.

A blanket mechanical system isn't to the benefit of those of other races that aren't in the black/white situation.

You don't want to understand that I was discrimated against because a BLACK person was picked someone who earned it fair and square. There are people who today are being discrimated against in NEW racist practices built on by AA and diversity programs.

timalkin · 11-30-2008, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

You just dont want to acknowledge that white high school kids have an advantage in college admission testing.....you dont want to acknowledge that white small business owners have an advantage in access to lending....you dont want to acknowledge that white defendants are likely to fare better in the criminal justice system....you dont want to acknowledge that housing discrimination based on race still exists.

You don't want to acknowledge that institutional racism, if it exists, has less of an impact on a black person that actually cares about making their life better. You can only blame the system up to a certain point. After that, personal responsibility should kick in.

It's easy to blame the system. It's hard to actually take responsibility for your own actions and actually do something with your life.

dc_dux · 11-30-2008, 03:07 PM

Several years ago, I had the good fortune to serve on the DC mayor's citizens commission on community and race relations.

It was a diverse group with diverse points of view, but there was general agreement that complex problems arent solved with unilaterally solutions like "take more personal responsibility" and a general recognition that institutional issues had to be addressed as well.

We made numerous recommendations and many were adopted and small steps taken since then to improve race relations. Serving on the commission was time well spent.

Here....I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall.

If you think AA is a racist solution rather than a necessary remedy (albeit perhaps overdue now for rethinking and revision), there is nothing more for us to discuss.

If you think its simply.."Obama succeeded despite the barriers, so why cant the rest of them", there is nothing more for us to discuss.

Fuck it....its just not worth it. I'll save for where it might make a difference.

timalkin · 11-30-2008, 03:29 PM

I think these race relation commissions are a waste of time and nothing more than a feel good measure. Any person of any race on such a commission can't say what they really feel if they're against something like affirmative action.

Just look at some of the responses in this thread that imply that I am a racist. That kind of attitude makes a lot of people shy away from speaking their mind for fear of being incorrectly labeled as a racist. When someone calls you a racist, what can you say? "I have a lot of black friends?" That line always goes over real well.

We have to eventually face facts as a nation if we want workable solutions. The biggest thing holding a lot of black people down is themselves. Some aspects of popular black culture are detrimental to success in the United States, unless you consider success to mean selling the most drugs and having killed the most rival gang members. White people can't change this culture.

Cynthetiq · 11-30-2008, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Several years ago, I had the good fortune to serve on the DC mayor's citizens commission on community and race relations.

It was a diverse group with diverse points of view, but there was general agreement that complex problems arent solved with unilaterally solutions like "take more personal responsibility" and a general recognition that institutional issues had to be addressed as well.

We made numerous recommendations and many were adopted and small steps taken since then to improve race relations. Serving on the commission was time well spent.

Here....I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall.

If you think AA is a racist solution rather than a necessary remedy (albeit perhaps overdue now for rethinking and revision), there is nothing more for us to discuss.

If you think its simply.."Obama succeeded despite the barriers, so why cant the rest of them", there is nothing more for us to discuss.

Fuck it....its just not worth it. I'll save for where it might make a difference.

racist definition | Dictionary.com

Quote:

rac⋅ism /ˈreɪsɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

I prefer the American Heritage dictionary myself:

Quote:

rac·ism (rā'sĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n.
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
rac'ist adj. & n.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Cite This Source

dc....how do you define racist? the dictionary I'm using affirmative action applies, since it discriminates against other races.

If you can explain how further discrimination against OTHERS who weren't part of the white/black sitaution and how they should feel when finite resources are given to someone because they are a different race is does not further and perpetuate racist beliefs and discrimination... because so far, all you're saying is that AA doesn't do those things.

I'm telling you that it does, and there's an Asian person who is suing because of it.

smooth · 12-01-2008, 09:45 AM

What is this case of an Asian person suing over an affirmative action policy?
My guess is it's bullshit like your anecdote about not being accepted into a UC because a black kid was accepted with lower scores.

I call your story bullshit because there is no possible way for you to know why your application was rejected...review boards don't release that information. Furthermore, it's against the law to release another student's application data. So unless someone personally called you up, you couldn't even say what you wrote in the above post. But IF someone did bother to call you up and say things to you like you relayed into this thread about some lower achieving black person taking "your" admission slot, I'd suspect it's someone like timalkin who wanted to pass bullshit information to you due to his own personal agenda.

In all honesty, the reason your app was rejected was more likely due to a failure to demonstrate abstract analyses, which is required above the Master's degree. If you only needed a Master's, you are better served by the Cal State system. If you were applying to a Bach's degree at the UC level, I'm not aware of an actual admission's board but I won't say that there isn't one. There are a few ways to guarantee admission into a UC from high school or a community college in California, being black is not one of them. Your writing samples and statement of intent have more weight than test scores since they demonstrate the levels of analyses a candidate is demonstrating at the time of submission. SAT and GRE scores are correlated with one's success in regards to completion, but they do not indicate goodness of fit with a given program. Hence, they are used as a floor, but not a ceiling. That is, test scores get you in the door, but they are never the reason a candidate is rejected or accepted into a program.

In the UC system, once a candidate meets the objective requirements for consideration, the subjective portions are compared for merit. If you have a 4.0 and a 1600 GRE score, and I've got a 3.6 with a 1380 GRE score, so long as the minimum reqs are 3.0 and 1300, our applications have equal standing in the admission pool at the graduate level. The choices are made based on the subjective portions of the tests and applications. If it wasn't at the graduate level, then it's done by the numbers. AFAIK, there isn't a feasible way to personally vet 20,000 incoming freshman, so I'm fairly confident it's an impersonal process where if you have the minimum scores and there's room, you're admitted. I'm not even sure anyone is even turned away, I'd have to ask some of my undergrads...given that some of my students have not been able to register for classes they need I suspect it's open admission and the registration per classes per quarter are on a rolling admission basis (registration windows open depending on seniority).

Why do you consistently misuse the term "institutional" when discussing racism? It's not an action, or a set of policies. I already outlined it in a thread a few hops down. I don't know why you don't or can't get the understanding of it correct, but the way you are describing it is not reflecting that you have an accurate understanding of the concept.

This thread is exactly what I predicted would happen...the same people who posted in the other thread would rehash it in this one without any indication that anything written in the other thread was even considered. I am surprised it happened this fast as the other thread is only a few posts down. People usually wait a few months so the memory of what has already been discussed fades a bit...so in this sense it's odd.

Cynthetiq · 12-01-2008, 10:11 AM

Found in this post

Quote:

Jian Li does not intend to. Li, a permanent U.S. resident, immigrated to America from China at the age of 4. He graduated at the top 1 percent of his high school class. On his SATs, he received a perfect 2400, and totaled 2390 (10 points less than perfection) on his SAT II subject tests in math and science. Yet Li received rejections from Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, the University of Pennsylvania and MIT. Li is not alone. Attorney Don Joe from Asian-American Politics, an enrollment-tracking Internet site — says he receives complaints "from Asian-American parents about how their children have excellent grades and scores but are being rejected by the most selective colleges. It appears to be an open secret."

Li filed a complaint with the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, with the matter currently under review. On his college applications, Li left blank his country of origin and his race, although he did put down his citizenship and listed Chinese as his first language spoken and the language spoken at home. Inquires about his race, said Li, "[S]eemed very irrelevant to me, if not offensive."

Why did he sue? Li said he wants to "send a message to the admissions committee to be more cognizant of possible bias, and that the way they're conducting admissions is not equitable."

smooth, again, you'd like to make it equitable by putting races at seats of the table so that each table can be equally represented, and each race has to struggle within their own ranks to get those "saved seats".

I don't believe such a thing. Ever.

ScottKuma · 12-01-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

Question: If an HR person gets two identical resumes, one from James Bradshaw and one from D'Andre Jackson, which is he more likely to call first?

That may depend on multiple factors:

Alphabetical order (last name): James Bradshaw
Alphabetical order (first name): D'Andre Jackson
First received: indeterminate
What order they are on the stack: indeterminate

You're putting up an argument for which there are insufficient facts on which to form a conclusion.

Furthermore, your argument is inherently sexist, and probably racist as well (it assumes explicitly that the HR person is a man, and implies that he's a white man). However...

What if the HR person is black?
What if he's Chinese, Japanese, or Latino.
What if the HR person is a woman?

My point is this: You're ASSUMING that a bias exists for any HR person, but your argument makes other assumptions that may or may not exist.

Cynthetiq · 12-01-2008, 10:32 AM

smooth, this better explains why I believe that the best of the best should be allowed to bubble up to the top, and why I don't agree with AA. If I was still a voter in CA I would have voted for 209 to pass as it has.

Based on our conversations here, do you feel that 209 should not been passed?

Quote:

View: Joe Dimaggio and Affirmative Action
Source: Larryelder
posted with the TFP thread generator

Joe Dimaggio and Affirmative Action
Joe Dimaggio and Affirmative Action
by Larry Elder

What do Joe DiMaggio and the new California affirmative action plan for colleges and universities have in common?

Before and after Joe DiMaggio’s recent death, many called him the greatest ballplayer who ever lived. I dissent. No disrespect intended, for one can scarcely overstate DiMaggio’s style, grace, elegance, and accomplishment.

But greatest living ballplayer? And I don’t mean what about a Babe Ruth or a Rogers Hornsby or a Ty Cobb.

Here’s the problem. These guys did not play against the best. Until 1947, the modern major leagues barred talented blacks and Latins from competing. But black stars existed. They played, often under miserable field, hotel, and travel conditions. For reasons having nothing whatever to do with their character or ability, "major league" baseball stopped them from displaying their talents before the widest possible audience and on the most important stage.

According to the Ken Burns PBS documentary on baseball, all-star players from the Negro leagues and from the major leagues played each other during so-called "barn-storming" tours. While records are sketchy, many say the Negro players more often than not bested their white counterparts.

The modern major league shut-out of talented black and Latin ballplayers not only harmed the excluded players. This shut-out hurt everybody—the excluded, the included, and the fans—all of us.

Why shouldn’t baseball place an asterisk next to Babe Ruth’s 714 home runs? He never faced Satchel Paige, who, at an age well past his prime, finally got a shot at the major leagues. Paige pitched effectively, helping the 1948 Cleveland Indians to the World Series.

Until Rickey Henderson and Maury Wills came along, many consider Ty Cobb the best base stealer, having amassed 892 over a career that spanned 24 years. But tell me, was Ty Cobb the only fleet-footed ballplayer of his era? How many records would a latter-day Lou Brock or Tim Raines steal against pitching devoid of black and Latin arms?

Which brings us to California Governor Gray Davis’ plan to admit the top 4% of grads at every state high school to one of the University of California’s campuses. Diversity, you know.

What about merit? What about the unfairness of punishing a sub-top-4% kid at an academically rigorous high school in favor of a top-4%-er at a school with lousy standards? Where is the pressure on the lousy school to improve if, irrespective of how badly teachers teach, how poorly administrators administer, and how indifferently parents parent, the top 4% get a pass?

But we all pay for this. Corporations pay billions of dollars in remedial training expenses, making up for under-performing K-through-12 schools. Davis’ 4% plan removes yet another incentive on the part of these schools to clean up their act.

And of the kid who comes from a highly competitive academic school with high standards and exacting classes, California Governor Davis effectively says, "Too bad." Years ago the National Collegiate Athletic Association instituted minimum SAT test scores. A court recently overturned the NCAA’s minimum standard rule, but black athletes did meet the standard. The decimation of the black collegiate athlete never occurred. The kids knew what they had to do, and, surprise, surprise, did it.

Defenders of the governor’s plan say that the plan helps poor whites, too. Oh. Guess it’s O.K. for merit meltdown if white sub-performers benefit along with minority ones.

The laugher, at least in California, is that Asian students take the biggest hit through affirmative action. Asians outperform whites on standardized tests, and hold huge pluralities at the leading California campuses.

Laws and policies that punish merit, however well-intended, ultimately hurt everybody. When you walk on a 747 and notice a female pilot, do you want someone who represents company diversity or a lady who aced the flight academy? When your mother has a heart attack and they wheel her on a gurney into the OR, do you want a "diverse" group of doctors, nurses, and other para-professionals, or do you want the best and most competent you can afford?

When Clinton assumed office, he said he wanted a cabinet that looked like America. Does the physics faculty at MIT look like America? Does the roster of the New York Knicks look like America? Do the leading players in the fashion business look like America? What does that mean? As long as the competition is fair and open, we all lose when we try to control the result.

Here’s a better policy. How about a Clinton cabinet that represents the best and brightest in America? Then, the Prez could say about his cabinet, as many have said about the great Joe DiMaggio, here, truly, was the best. No asterisk necessary.

smooth · 12-01-2008, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

Found in this post

How does what you posted in that blurb support your claim that:

Quote:

If you can explain how further discrimination against OTHERS who weren't part of the white/black sitaution and how they should feel when finite resources are given to someone because they are a different race is does not further and perpetuate racist beliefs and discrimination... because so far, all you're saying is that AA doesn't do those things.

I'm telling you that it does, and there's an Asian person who is suing because of it.

The "because of it" implies that the student is suing because he was denied acceptance based on the fact that he is not black, according to the substance of your paragraph. I don't see anything like that in the chunk you quoted. I don't even see any evidence that he was rejected based on race at all. Is there any?

And what did I say that leads you to claim this:

Quote:

smooth, again, you'd like to make it equitable by putting races at seats of the table so that each table can be equally represented, and each race has to struggle within their own ranks to get those "saved seats".

I'm at a loss as to the basis of your conclusions in both of those instances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

smooth, this better explains why I believe that the best of the best should be allowed to bubble up to the top, and why I don't agree with AA.

As written, the bolded portion is a non-sequitur. Would you fill in the premises that link affirmative action with not alllowing the best of the best to bubble up?

Cynthetiq · 12-01-2008, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

How does what you posted in that blurb support your claim that:

The "because of it" implies that the student is suing because he was denied acceptance based on the fact that he is not black, according to the substance of your paragraph. I don't see anything like that in the chunk you quoted. I don't even see any evidence that he was rejected based on race at all. Is there any?

And what did I say that leads you to claim this:

I'm at a loss as to the basis of your conclusions in both of those instances.

As written, the bolded portion is a non-sequitur. Would you fill in the premises that link affirmative action with not alllowing the best of the best to bubble up?

So long as there are mechanisms that are in place that allow for people to be given an opportunity to advance because of race, or given exception because of race, then some people will always SUSPECT position/achievement/ to have come from such mechanism.

So perfect SAT and 1% yet still doesn't make the cut? Not necessarily black, but not one of the "required" diversity.... in other words, maybe they had too many Asians already?

If AA requires that the candidates be from diverse pools as opposed to the best of the best, then how is it that they will be allowed to succeed when someone who has earned a spot but is given a denial because the spot needs to go to someone more diverse, allowing the best of the best to be represented?

In regards to the race for Mr. Li here's an article from NJ.com.

Quote:

View: Princeton is accused of anti-Asian biases
Source: NJ
posted with the TFP thread generator

Princeton is accused of anti-Asian biases
Princeton is accused of anti-Asian biases
by Ana M. Alaya/The Star-Ledger
Sunday July 13, 2008, 8:35 AM
For decades, critics of affirmative action have contended elite colleges, in their zeal to form racially diverse student bodies, have discriminated against top white applicants.

In a twist on that long-running feud, federal authorities are investigating an allegation that Princeton University discriminates against Asian-American applicants by accepting black and Hispanic students with lower entrance scores.

At the heart of both arguments lies the question of whether and how colleges should consider race when choosing a class. The Supreme Court has ruled race can be a factor in the process, though racial quotas have long been declared unconstitutional.

Critics say admission quotas remain a dirty little secret in academia.

"There is almost no other area that colleges consistently lie about," said Russell Nieli, a professor in Princeton's department of politics, who recently published an essay titled "Is there an Asian Ceiling?"

Princeton, for its part, denies using quotas. The university declined, however, to release admissions data broken down by race and test scores, spokeswoman Cass Cliatt said, "because we don't want anyone to make the mistake that we make admissions decisions by category."

The federal review at Princeton -- which adamantly denies it discriminates against Asians -- was sparked by a complaint filed in 2006 by Livingston High School graduate and Asian immigrant Jian Li. He claims he was rejected by Princeton and other elite universities despite graduating in the top 1 percent of his high school class, earning various honors outside the classroom and nailing perfect SAT scores.

Nieli said Li's complaint, because it was made by an Asian-American, may carry more weight with proponents of racial preferences.

"The people making these decisions are post-'60s guilty white limousine liberals," Nieli said. "They don't take a protest by a white person as seriously as one by a Chinese or Japanese or Korean student."

Others argue Asian students are wrongfully being used as racial mascots in the battle against affirmative action. Advocates claim affirmative action policies can help Asian students, because diverse classes help dispel lingering biases against minority groups.

"I have a hard time buying the argument that this particular student suffered serious harm," said Vincent Pan, a Millburn native who now heads Chinese for Affirmative Action in San Francisco. "There is a need to balance the private interest and the public interest, and in this case I think affirmative action does that well."

Li, who could not be reached for comment, went to Yale and transferred to Harvard, according to other published reports.

In January, the U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights expanded its review beyond Li's case to include all admissions policies for Asian-American students for the Class of 2010 at Princeton.

In his complaint, Li accused the Ivy League institutions of a "historical and ongoing" use of racial preferences for admissions, including bias against Jews at Princeton in the early 1900s.

He also cited a 2005 study by two Princeton researchers who found eliminating racial considerations at three unnamed elite universities would increase the admission rate for Asian Americans, while that of African-Americans and Hispanics would plummet.

At Princeton, race is one factor, including socioeconomic background, extracurricular talents and academic record, considered during the admissions process, Cliatt said. Building a diverse class is like forming an "orchestra," that may need different talents from year to year, she added. About half the applicants with perfect SAT scores were admitted to the class Li applied to; 14 percent of that class is Asian. Almost half of Princeton's incoming class this year are students of color.

A commitment to "acting affirmatively to ensure diversity," Cliatt said, is not the same as discriminating.

Li's complaint has been closely watched by the Ivy League schools, in part, because he asked for a suspension of federal funding to the university until it eliminates not only racial preferences, but also athletic preferences and legacy preferences, which universities historically give to children of alumni.

Ward Connerly, a former member of the University of California Board of Regents, and the architect of anti-affirmative action initiatives in California, Washington and Michigan, said the federal investigation is going to force "a very exacting examination of what Princeton is doing." He said it will get the attention of universities nationwide, contending discrimination against Asian-Americans is widespread.

Still, proving discrimination at Princeton or any college may be difficult, because colleges don't use a specific formula for admissions, according to David Hawkins, director of public policy and research at the National Association for College Admission Counseling.

Roughly 30 to 40 percent of colleges consider race in admissions, according to the association, and some 70 percent of institutions have a stated commitment to diversity.

Seaver · 12-01-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Question: If an HR person gets two identical resumes, one from James Bradshaw and one from D'Andre Jackson, which is he more likely to call first?

Right. Completely ignore the rest of the resume....

I've interviewed two dozen applicants for a job recently in Sales. Two dozen more never even got an interview because their resume was mis-spelled, poorly written, or all-caps (my personal favorite). I never even bothered looking at the names until I was dialing their phone numbers to schedule the face-to-face interview.

Nice job at calling us, but not really calling us, racist.

roachboy · 12-01-2008, 03:10 PM

cyn--admissions to princeton etc is not simply a matter of grades and sat scores.
there's alot of emphasis placed on recommendation letters and personal experiences/abilities as well. and that's not a bad thing---in my travels through schools like that, i found that being able to do well and being interesting in the classroom are not necessarily the same thing. i doubt seriously that mister li's suit will end up winning.

but if you want to be snippy about ivy league admissions policies, try taking a look at legacies. the kids of alumnii, particularly alumnii who give money to the universities, are not the same as for other people. it's an example of class discrimination, but because it requires actually addressing class, there aren't a whole lot of lawsuits that get press, and still fewer that get press which includes commentary from that nitwit ward connerly...

Derwood · 12-01-2008, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

Right. Completely ignore the rest of the resume....

I've interviewed two dozen applicants for a job recently in Sales. Two dozen more never even got an interview because their resume was mis-spelled, poorly written, or all-caps (my personal favorite). I never even bothered looking at the names until I was dialing their phone numbers to schedule the face-to-face interview.

Nice job at calling us, but not really calling us, racist.

let's try again

Quote:

Question: If an HR person gets TWO IDENTICAL resumes, one from James Bradshaw and one from D'Andre Jackson, which is he more likely to call first?

Frosstbyte · 12-01-2008, 05:00 PM

Your question is a strawman and an appeal to emotion.

You want the answer "James Bradshaw, because who the fuck would hire a person named a ghetto black guy named D'Andre Jackson when I could have safe, suburban whitebread Jimmy?" As others have pointed out, the answer of who he calls first (or hires) may or may not have anything to do with race. Certainly for some individuals, they might be wary of hiring a D'Andre Jackson because they harbor some prejudice or because they're just straight up racist, but there's no good answer to the question that makes any difference in this conversation.

Cynthetiq · 12-01-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

cyn--admissions to princeton etc is not simply a matter of grades and sat scores.
there's alot of emphasis placed on recommendation letters and personal experiences/abilities as well. and that's not a bad thing---in my travels through schools like that, i found that being able to do well and being interesting in the classroom are not necessarily the same thing. i doubt seriously that mister li's suit will end up winning.

but if you want to be snippy about ivy league admissions policies, try taking a look at legacies. the kids of alumnii, particularly alumnii who give money to the universities, are not the same as for other people. it's an example of class discrimination, but because it requires actually addressing class, there aren't a whole lot of lawsuits that get press, and still fewer that get press which includes commentary from that nitwit ward connerly...

I don't doubt the legacy items as I could have easily gone to Notre Dame University on that kind of ticket and I chose not to, too cold I thought when I was still living in sunny So. Cal.

I imagine that going to Yale and then transferring to Harvard is just as much the same as going through those hoops you speak of. Yet couldn't make the mark at Princeton? I think there's a little more to it than you or I care to understand, I can agree with you on that.

Derwood · 12-01-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

Your question is a strawman and an appeal to emotion.

You want the answer "James Bradshaw, because who the fuck would hire a person named a ghetto black guy named D'Andre Jackson when I could have safe, suburban whitebread Jimmy?" As others have pointed out, the answer of who he calls first (or hires) may or may not have anything to do with race. Certainly for some individuals, they might be wary of hiring a D'Andre Jackson because they harbor some prejudice or because they're just straight up racist, but there's no good answer to the question that makes any difference in this conversation.

I'm not saying every HR person would do that (most wouldn't), but to think that Obama as President means no one ever will again is naive.

Frosstbyte · 12-01-2008, 09:00 PM

As is it naive to think that AA has any effect other than to reinforce making choices based on race.

AA is a clumsy band-aid to the serious problem of cyclic poverty and lack of education in poor neighborhoods among certain minorities. The problem is lack of funding to public schools. The problem is a lack of cohesive family structures among minority populations. The problem is poverty severe enough that the opportunity cost of an education is outweighed by the "ease" of either working a menial job to pay the bills or a life in a gang or in the world of selling drugs. AA does not and never will address those problems in any way-it simply punishes some people for being of one race (gender) and rewards other people for being of one race (gender). That's an intellectually bankrupt system if you're trying to solve the problem of people making decisions based on race.

TheNasty · 12-01-2008, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Putting test question bias aside, might test results be influenced by the fact that middle and upper class white kids are more likely to afford to have access to pre-test tutorials, with sample math/science questions from previous tests, than inner city black kids?

Bias assumes equal ability. The vast majority of differentiation on tests scores can be correlated to difference in ability.

Quote:

And this doesnt even take into consideration the fact that there are significant disparities in K-12 education....a far higher student/teacher ratio in inner cities school and a far lower student/computer ratio in those schools than in predominately white suburban schools...an issue that has been addressed in other threads.

I wonder why school systems have a problem getting teachers to teach in poor, urban schools populated by mostly black students. Hint, it has nothing to do with racism.

Frosstbyte · 12-01-2008, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNasty

I wonder why school systems have a problem getting teachers to teach in poor, urban schools populated by mostly black students. Hint, it has nothing to do with racism.

The response to this, of course, is that it's not specific, individual oriented racism in the hatred of other sense of the word but rather the systemic, structural racism that's omnipresent in our society (I say that with as little value judgment attached to it as possible). That's more the problem I noted in my previous post, and, unfortunately, it's one that's a motherfucker to solve. So instead of trying to solve it, we gave up and said "we'll just compensate for lower scores/grades/aptitude by giving them a handicap." It works ok in golf. It doesn't do a good job of helping groups of people improve their situation.

SecretMethod70 · 12-01-2008, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosstbyte

As is it naive to think that AA has any effect other than to reinforce making choices based on race.

AA is a clumsy band-aid to the serious problem of cyclic poverty and lack of education in poor neighborhoods among certain minorities. The problem is lack of funding to public schools. The problem is a lack of cohesive family structures among minority populations. The problem is poverty severe enough that the opportunity cost of an education is outweighed by the "ease" of either working a menial job to pay the bills or a life in a gang or in the world of selling drugs. AA does not and never will address those problems in any way-it simply punishes some people for being of one race (gender) and rewards other people for being of one race (gender). That's an intellectually bankrupt system if you're trying to solve the problem of people making decisions based on race.

So I take it you'd support a renewal and modernization of Johnson's Great Society/War on Poverty? Because if that's the case, then I'm all for it.

Unfortunately, the people who are vehemently against affirmative action are often the same people who are against many of the other things we can do to combat poverty. If we're going to be serious about tackling this issue, we need to take a multi-pronged approach, combining affirmative action - which works to help the current generation make up for a weak foundation - with a full-scale War on Poverty that strengthens the foundations for future generations.

You're right: affirmative action is just a band-aid, but I don't see many people supporting the overhaul that it would take to truly address these problems.

Frosstbyte · 12-02-2008, 01:14 AM

I really have no interest in affirmative action as a concept or any part of any plan to combat anything. It's a bad solution, and a solution which, in my opinion, does as much harm as it does good.

I think poverty as an endemic problem with a capitalist system, so I don't know that a "War on Poverty" would do any more than a "War on Drugs" does. There are always going to be lazy people, unlucky people, stupid people and incapable people. And those people are going to be poor. Without turning this into a giant discussion about the virtues of capitalism, I think what we need to figure out how to fix are why specific communities of people find themselves trapped in a pattern which makes it substantially harder for them to achieve than others.

Anecdotes being what they are, my family is Jewish and my great grandfather immigrated here with the clothes on his back from Ukraine just before WWI. Four generations later, his progeny are almost without fail all professionals. My wife's family is Chinese and immigrated here with nothing after the CCP literally stole all their assets and they had to flee the country in the wake of the revolution. Two generations later, they're all going to college.

So here's what I'm saying. Slavery is not all that far past, and laws upholding race-based discrimination are even more recent. Depending on how you want to count, we have at most three generations (probably two, though arguably one) since Brown and separate is not equal. I would not claim even in the slightest that racism is "gone" or dead, but there's something...bigger...going on than simply racism. It's a convenient scapegoat, because it looks ugly, and it is ugly, but it's not the only cause.

People need to be willing to help themselves, even as we build social programs to help them. There is an unquestionable glamorization of the thug lifestyle-bling, bitches, cars, power, respect-and being a traditionally well-educated and productive member of society doesn't fit anywhere in it. That leads to kids without fathers or families. It leads to cyclical violence. It leads to substance abuse. It leads to a lack of positive role models that people can relate to. I honestly don't know if a kid from inner city Detroit can relate to Barack Obama as being someone he could aspire to be. I feel like I know a lot of pretty WASP-y kids who seem to me to have a pretty similar life history to Obama.

I think the solution would take an enormous amount of local, community energy and support in the context of a larger framework. And if we could make it happen, I would happily support it, but a lot of people-and not just white bigots-need to change their attitudes to make that a reality. In my opinion, all affirmative action does is reinforce the concept of us and them and reinforce race as being an appropriate way to sort people. When they came up with it, I can see how it was necessary, but I think it has run its course.

And, as an aside, I don't think the election of Barack Obama has the slightest bit to do with why AA needs to go away. The fact that a half black man was elected president is certainly historically and symbolically important, but it doesn't mean anything. AA was bad before, and it's still bad and it will continue to be bad, because it lets people feel like we're doing something about the problem, when we're not, and we're hurting people who have worked hard and have achieved simply because they have the wrong chromosomes or skin color.

SecretMethod70 · 12-02-2008, 02:57 AM

Anyone who claims there aren't a multitude of factors at play here is either ignorant or disingenuous. But I'm not a black parent raising a kid in the inner city, so it's not worth my time to concentrate on what that person should be doing. More focus on our own part of the puzzle and less on how we think other people should live their lives would benefit us all. Not to mention, it's a bit of a chicken/egg scenario: it's easy to glamourize the thug life when you feel your society doesn't care about you, and it's easy not to care about people who glamourize the thug life.

So, how about focusing on the things we can implement as a society, because that's something we as voters can have a direct impact on?

We have an unfortunately small window through which to look with regard to the War on Poverty, but it does appear to have been headed for some degree of success. When Johnson introduced the Economic Opportunity Act in 1964, 23% of children (below 18) lived under the poverty threshold. By 1969, that number had dropped nearly 10 points to 14%. Unfortunately, that's also when Nixon took office and the War on Poverty began to be dismantled. By 1983, the child poverty rate had risen back to 22.3%, and in 1993 it was 22.7%. Thankfully we've improved some and the child poverty rate was "only" 18% in 2007.

Of course, Johnson's plans for a Great Society weren't perfect, and we know much more now than we did then. That doesn't help much if we treat our current knowledge the same way we've treated uncomfortable revelations in the past. Carter tried to warn us about our energy policy 30 years ago. In 1972 a study was released showing limits to growth that could lead to global economic collapse mid-21st century if we don't create a more sustainable lifestyle. It was ignored and panned and people preferred to feel happy and hopeful about the future... and now it is being shown that we are still on the trajectory that the study predicted. The point is, we can fight these problems - poverty, energy, climate change, food - if we have the courage to accept that they exist and that they require comprehensive attention. Fluttering between having a War on Poverty for 5 years and then having Reaganomics 10 years later, or between having solar panels on the White House roof and then seeing them as useless, does none of us any good. These problems haven't gone away, and they're not going to.

The War on Poverty is a start, but we have over 40 years of new experience and technology at our disposal to make it even more effective. There's no reason why we can't or shouldn't see this issue as one of the top challenges we face. We always should have.

Idealistically, I absolutely dislike the idea of affirmative action, but until we have a real, comprehensive initiative to fight poverty, I'd rather have a faulty band-aid than nothing at all. I think we agree far more than we disagree.

Anyway, Christian Science Monitor has a pretty decent article on the subject as well: Affirmative action's evolution | csmonitor.com

(And sorry if this post is somewhat incoherent - it is 4 am after all!)

kutulu · 12-02-2008, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timalkin

When drugs, guns, and "pimpin" make up a huge part of the popular culture worshipped by young people, it's small wonder that academics are not a top priority.

Fixed that for you. It isn't just young black people that look up to musicians and athletes.

Nice one there. You're following the pattern of a racist. Start with white guilt questions and then blame their social status on the myth that the hip hop subculture (whose following is just as white as black).

roachboy · 12-02-2008, 12:28 PM

i think the premise of the thread is absurd.

the counter-argument would point to institutionalized or structural features of racism---the last few posts outline the case for this pretty well (frosstbyte, smeth & kutulu)...so i figure at this point, it's incumbent on the timalkin to make a coherent argument that structural racism does not exist.

failing in that, there's nothing left to talk about so the game is over.

Frosstbyte · 12-02-2008, 12:31 PM

Yes, SM, I think we do largely agree, AA just leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth conceptually.

I think you're being somewhat disingenuous, kutulu. Even though timalkin is oversimplifying the problem, there remains a not insignificant problem that the hip hop subculture is idolized in a lot of the same neighborhoods who would also be prime locations for people to benefit from an affirmative action program. And that image does not promote education or mutual respect or helping your community. Those musicians and athletes are role models and their attitudes and actions are emulated. Certainly it is not the only reason why inner cities have problems getting kids to go to school, to stay in school and to be motivated to succeed in school where they can be competitive in applying for colleges without affirmative action. But it is a factor and it does contribute to an impression that education is not the way to survive and get respect from your peers.

This is a complex problem and it needs a complex solution and denying that the hip hop subculture contributes to the problem simply because suburban white kids like it too or because it's just a symptom of the problem isn't going to get us anywhere.

11-30-2008, 05:35 AM	#42 (permalink)
timalkin Addict Location: watching from the treeline	Please point out where I said that ALL black people are like X. I'm specifically talking about the inner city black youths that were previously mentioned. I don't think anybody would say that white people are not guilty of the same things. The difference is that a white person can be a huge fuck up and sit around doing drugs, drinking, and committing crimes and not claim that "the man" is holding him down. Describe a black person with those terms, and it's a racist viewpoint with the institutional racism holding him down. There is a huge double standard between the two, and they are both equally worthless regardless of the color of their skin. Frankly, I don't want my taxpayer dollars propping up welfare queens and other non-contributors whose full-time job consists of figuring out ways to scam the government at every opportunity without having to work a day in their lives, no matter what color they are. We are in the 21st Century. Time to get off your ass, get a job, take care of the kids you created, and stop blaming faceless white people for everything that sucks about your life. As an aside, if anyone knows of any lending institution that discriminates against minorities, please report them to the authorities. There are federal laws against such things that are taken very seriously. __________________ Trinity: "What do you need?" Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns." -The Matrix

11-30-2008, 02:00 PM	#54 (permalink)
tisonlyi Nothing	AA will no longer be necessary when the dumb son of a black president is elected president in turn. Twice. __________________ "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." - Winston Churchill, 1937 --{ORLY?}--

11-30-2008, 03:07 PM	#57 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Several years ago, I had the good fortune to serve on the DC mayor's citizens commission on community and race relations. It was a diverse group with diverse points of view, but there was general agreement that complex problems arent solved with unilaterally solutions like "take more personal responsibility" and a general recognition that institutional issues had to be addressed as well. We made numerous recommendations and many were adopted and small steps taken since then to improve race relations. Serving on the commission was time well spent. Here....I feel like I'm just banging my head against the wall. If you think AA is a racist solution rather than a necessary remedy (albeit perhaps overdue now for rethinking and revision), there is nothing more for us to discuss. If you think its simply.."Obama succeeded despite the barriers, so why cant the rest of them", there is nothing more for us to discuss. Fuck it....its just not worth it. I'll save for where it might make a difference. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 11-30-2008 at 03:13 PM..

11-30-2008, 03:29 PM	#58 (permalink)
timalkin Addict Location: watching from the treeline	I think these race relation commissions are a waste of time and nothing more than a feel good measure. Any person of any race on such a commission can't say what they really feel if they're against something like affirmative action. Just look at some of the responses in this thread that imply that I am a racist. That kind of attitude makes a lot of people shy away from speaking their mind for fear of being incorrectly labeled as a racist. When someone calls you a racist, what can you say? "I have a lot of black friends?" That line always goes over real well. We have to eventually face facts as a nation if we want workable solutions. The biggest thing holding a lot of black people down is themselves. Some aspects of popular black culture are detrimental to success in the United States, unless you consider success to mean selling the most drugs and having killed the most rival gang members. White people can't change this culture. __________________ Trinity: "What do you need?" Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns." -The Matrix

12-01-2008, 09:45 AM	#60 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	What is this case of an Asian person suing over an affirmative action policy? My guess is it's bullshit like your anecdote about not being accepted into a UC because a black kid was accepted with lower scores. I call your story bullshit because there is no possible way for you to know why your application was rejected...review boards don't release that information. Furthermore, it's against the law to release another student's application data. So unless someone personally called you up, you couldn't even say what you wrote in the above post. But IF someone did bother to call you up and say things to you like you relayed into this thread about some lower achieving black person taking "your" admission slot, I'd suspect it's someone like timalkin who wanted to pass bullshit information to you due to his own personal agenda. In all honesty, the reason your app was rejected was more likely due to a failure to demonstrate abstract analyses, which is required above the Master's degree. If you only needed a Master's, you are better served by the Cal State system. If you were applying to a Bach's degree at the UC level, I'm not aware of an actual admission's board but I won't say that there isn't one. There are a few ways to guarantee admission into a UC from high school or a community college in California, being black is not one of them. Your writing samples and statement of intent have more weight than test scores since they demonstrate the levels of analyses a candidate is demonstrating at the time of submission. SAT and GRE scores are correlated with one's success in regards to completion, but they do not indicate goodness of fit with a given program. Hence, they are used as a floor, but not a ceiling. That is, test scores get you in the door, but they are never the reason a candidate is rejected or accepted into a program. In the UC system, once a candidate meets the objective requirements for consideration, the subjective portions are compared for merit. If you have a 4.0 and a 1600 GRE score, and I've got a 3.6 with a 1380 GRE score, so long as the minimum reqs are 3.0 and 1300, our applications have equal standing in the admission pool at the graduate level. The choices are made based on the subjective portions of the tests and applications. If it wasn't at the graduate level, then it's done by the numbers. AFAIK, there isn't a feasible way to personally vet 20,000 incoming freshman, so I'm fairly confident it's an impersonal process where if you have the minimum scores and there's room, you're admitted. I'm not even sure anyone is even turned away, I'd have to ask some of my undergrads...given that some of my students have not been able to register for classes they need I suspect it's open admission and the registration per classes per quarter are on a rolling admission basis (registration windows open depending on seniority). Why do you consistently misuse the term "institutional" when discussing racism? It's not an action, or a set of policies. I already outlined it in a thread a few hops down. I don't know why you don't or can't get the understanding of it correct, but the way you are describing it is not reflecting that you have an accurate understanding of the concept. This thread is exactly what I predicted would happen...the same people who posted in the other thread would rehash it in this one without any indication that anything written in the other thread was even considered. I am surprised it happened this fast as the other thread is only a few posts down. People usually wait a few months so the memory of what has already been discussed fades a bit...so in this sense it's odd. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

11-30-2008, 07:42 AM	#45 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	What do you think happens more often: 1) A black guy is picked over a white guy because of AA. 2) A white guy is picked over a black guy because of racism. I don't know which happens more but i'm sure they both happen. The AA system is no where near close to perfect but at least it is trying to solve a real problem. I personally think AA needs to focus more on social programs and education. But that would be crazy socialism and the right would say the world is coming to an end.

11-30-2008, 09:54 AM	#48 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	There are human beings who like to work as little as possible and blame their lack of success on an oppressive force bigger than them. So far in this thread, I'm not convinced that there's anything racial about that. But go on, timalkin. Convince me. Your whole argument rests on that being a "black thing". You know, like fried chicken and hip hop. You understand The Blacks so well, please, explain it to me.

12-01-2008, 03:10 PM	#67 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	cyn--admissions to princeton etc is not simply a matter of grades and sat scores. there's alot of emphasis placed on recommendation letters and personal experiences/abilities as well. and that's not a bad thing---in my travels through schools like that, i found that being able to do well and being interesting in the classroom are not necessarily the same thing. i doubt seriously that mister li's suit will end up winning. but if you want to be snippy about ivy league admissions policies, try taking a look at legacies. the kids of alumnii, particularly alumnii who give money to the universities, are not the same as for other people. it's an example of class discrimination, but because it requires actually addressing class, there aren't a whole lot of lawsuits that get press, and still fewer that get press which includes commentary from that nitwit ward connerly... __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-01-2008, 05:00 PM	#69 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	Your question is a strawman and an appeal to emotion. You want the answer "James Bradshaw, because who the fuck would hire a person named a ghetto black guy named D'Andre Jackson when I could have safe, suburban whitebread Jimmy?" As others have pointed out, the answer of who he calls first (or hires) may or may not have anything to do with race. Certainly for some individuals, they might be wary of hiring a D'Andre Jackson because they harbor some prejudice or because they're just straight up racist, but there's no good answer to the question that makes any difference in this conversation.

12-01-2008, 09:00 PM	#72 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	As is it naive to think that AA has any effect other than to reinforce making choices based on race. AA is a clumsy band-aid to the serious problem of cyclic poverty and lack of education in poor neighborhoods among certain minorities. The problem is lack of funding to public schools. The problem is a lack of cohesive family structures among minority populations. The problem is poverty severe enough that the opportunity cost of an education is outweighed by the "ease" of either working a menial job to pay the bills or a life in a gang or in the world of selling drugs. AA does not and never will address those problems in any way-it simply punishes some people for being of one race (gender) and rewards other people for being of one race (gender). That's an intellectually bankrupt system if you're trying to solve the problem of people making decisions based on race.

12-02-2008, 01:14 AM	#76 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	I really have no interest in affirmative action as a concept or any part of any plan to combat anything. It's a bad solution, and a solution which, in my opinion, does as much harm as it does good. I think poverty as an endemic problem with a capitalist system, so I don't know that a "War on Poverty" would do any more than a "War on Drugs" does. There are always going to be lazy people, unlucky people, stupid people and incapable people. And those people are going to be poor. Without turning this into a giant discussion about the virtues of capitalism, I think what we need to figure out how to fix are why specific communities of people find themselves trapped in a pattern which makes it substantially harder for them to achieve than others. Anecdotes being what they are, my family is Jewish and my great grandfather immigrated here with the clothes on his back from Ukraine just before WWI. Four generations later, his progeny are almost without fail all professionals. My wife's family is Chinese and immigrated here with nothing after the CCP literally stole all their assets and they had to flee the country in the wake of the revolution. Two generations later, they're all going to college. So here's what I'm saying. Slavery is not all that far past, and laws upholding race-based discrimination are even more recent. Depending on how you want to count, we have at most three generations (probably two, though arguably one) since Brown and separate is not equal. I would not claim even in the slightest that racism is "gone" or dead, but there's something...bigger...going on than simply racism. It's a convenient scapegoat, because it looks ugly, and it is ugly, but it's not the only cause. People need to be willing to help themselves, even as we build social programs to help them. There is an unquestionable glamorization of the thug lifestyle-bling, bitches, cars, power, respect-and being a traditionally well-educated and productive member of society doesn't fit anywhere in it. That leads to kids without fathers or families. It leads to cyclical violence. It leads to substance abuse. It leads to a lack of positive role models that people can relate to. I honestly don't know if a kid from inner city Detroit can relate to Barack Obama as being someone he could aspire to be. I feel like I know a lot of pretty WASP-y kids who seem to me to have a pretty similar life history to Obama. I think the solution would take an enormous amount of local, community energy and support in the context of a larger framework. And if we could make it happen, I would happily support it, but a lot of people-and not just white bigots-need to change their attitudes to make that a reality. In my opinion, all affirmative action does is reinforce the concept of us and them and reinforce race as being an appropriate way to sort people. When they came up with it, I can see how it was necessary, but I think it has run its course. And, as an aside, I don't think the election of Barack Obama has the slightest bit to do with why AA needs to go away. The fact that a half black man was elected president is certainly historically and symbolically important, but it doesn't mean anything. AA was bad before, and it's still bad and it will continue to be bad, because it lets people feel like we're doing something about the problem, when we're not, and we're hurting people who have worked hard and have achieved simply because they have the wrong chromosomes or skin color. Last edited by Frosstbyte; 12-02-2008 at 01:19 AM..

12-02-2008, 02:57 AM	#77 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Anyone who claims there aren't a multitude of factors at play here is either ignorant or disingenuous. But I'm not a black parent raising a kid in the inner city, so it's not worth my time to concentrate on what that person should be doing. More focus on our own part of the puzzle and less on how we think other people should live their lives would benefit us all. Not to mention, it's a bit of a chicken/egg scenario: it's easy to glamourize the thug life when you feel your society doesn't care about you, and it's easy not to care about people who glamourize the thug life. So, how about focusing on the things we can implement as a society, because that's something we as voters can have a direct impact on? We have an unfortunately small window through which to look with regard to the War on Poverty, but it does appear to have been headed for some degree of success. When Johnson introduced the Economic Opportunity Act in 1964, 23% of children (below 18) lived under the poverty threshold. By 1969, that number had dropped nearly 10 points to 14%. Unfortunately, that's also when Nixon took office and the War on Poverty began to be dismantled. By 1983, the child poverty rate had risen back to 22.3%, and in 1993 it was 22.7%. Thankfully we've improved some and the child poverty rate was "only" 18% in 2007. Of course, Johnson's plans for a Great Society weren't perfect, and we know much more now than we did then. That doesn't help much if we treat our current knowledge the same way we've treated uncomfortable revelations in the past. Carter tried to warn us about our energy policy 30 years ago. In 1972 a study was released showing limits to growth that could lead to global economic collapse mid-21st century if we don't create a more sustainable lifestyle. It was ignored and panned and people preferred to feel happy and hopeful about the future... and now it is being shown that we are still on the trajectory that the study predicted. The point is, we can fight these problems - poverty, energy, climate change, food - if we have the courage to accept that they exist and that they require comprehensive attention. Fluttering between having a War on Poverty for 5 years and then having Reaganomics 10 years later, or between having solar panels on the White House roof and then seeing them as useless, does none of us any good. These problems haven't gone away, and they're not going to. The War on Poverty is a start, but we have over 40 years of new experience and technology at our disposal to make it even more effective. There's no reason why we can't or shouldn't see this issue as one of the top challenges we face. We always should have. Idealistically, I absolutely dislike the idea of affirmative action, but until we have a real, comprehensive initiative to fight poverty, I'd rather have a faulty band-aid than nothing at all. I think we agree far more than we disagree. Anyway, Christian Science Monitor has a pretty decent article on the subject as well: Affirmative action's evolution \| csmonitor.com (And sorry if this post is somewhat incoherent - it is 4 am after all!) __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 12-02-2008 at 01:18 PM..

12-02-2008, 12:28 PM	#79 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i think the premise of the thread is absurd. the counter-argument would point to institutionalized or structural features of racism---the last few posts outline the case for this pretty well (frosstbyte, smeth & kutulu)...so i figure at this point, it's incumbent on the timalkin to make a coherent argument that structural racism does not exist. failing in that, there's nothing left to talk about so the game is over. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

12-02-2008, 12:31 PM	#80 (permalink)
Frosstbyte Winter is Coming Location: The North	Yes, SM, I think we do largely agree, AA just leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth conceptually. I think you're being somewhat disingenuous, kutulu. Even though timalkin is oversimplifying the problem, there remains a not insignificant problem that the hip hop subculture is idolized in a lot of the same neighborhoods who would also be prime locations for people to benefit from an affirmative action program. And that image does not promote education or mutual respect or helping your community. Those musicians and athletes are role models and their attitudes and actions are emulated. Certainly it is not the only reason why inner cities have problems getting kids to go to school, to stay in school and to be motivated to succeed in school where they can be competitive in applying for colleges without affirmative action. But it is a factor and it does contribute to an impression that education is not the way to survive and get respect from your peers. This is a complex problem and it needs a complex solution and denying that the hip hop subculture contributes to the problem simply because suburban white kids like it too or because it's just a symptom of the problem isn't going to get us anywhere.