Bush's hacks
- Thread starter alonzomourning23
- Start date
PittsburghAfterDark
CAGiversary!
Affirmative action is a clear violation of the 14th Ammendment.
Beginning and end of argument.
Beginning and end of argument.
Kayden
Banned
I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.
Blacks Remain an Extreme Minority at UC Campuses
By Associated Press
Sep 12, 2005, 10:00
Blacks Remain an Extreme Minority at UC Campuses
BERKELEY, Calif.
James Marshall didn't expect it would be easy, being one of just a handful of Black students at the University of California, Berkeley's, high-ranking business school.
It wasn't.
But his payoff came at graduation - job interviews with some of the country's most prestigious firms.
``It's about getting that set of rules: OK, this is how you engage an employer; this is how you get this job,'' says Marshall.
This fall, preliminary figures put 129 new Black freshmen at Berkeley out of a class of about 4,000, slightly higher than last year, but still an extreme minority. About 11 percent of the class will be Hispanic, well out of step with a state where Hispanics make up about 30 percent of the population and are projected to be the largest ethnic group by 2011.
For Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, it's a disturbing trend in diverse California.
``There are very talented people out there, I believe, who for a whole variety of reasons end up not coming to Berkeley, or to another of the flagship campuses in the UC system,'' he says.
``Where are the leaders going to come from?'' asks Christopher Edley, dean of UC Berkeley's Boalt law school, where just nine Black students are expected in the incoming class of 268. ``It's been such a short period of time in which our universities have begun producing minority graduates in substantial numbers that to let the door swing shut now would really be a calamity of historic proportions.''
Birgeneau, who took over the top job at Berkeley last year, has been outspoken in his dismay at enrollment figures and the need to change them. He questions whether voters intended these kinds of consequences when they passed Proposition 209, the 1996 ballot measure banning consideration of race in public hiring, contracting and education.
But Ward Connerly, the former UC regent who chaired the Proposition 209 campaign, bristles at the idea that there's a problem with race-blind policies.
``I just don't understand why certain people have gotten themselves all worked up about who gets to go to Berkeley and UCLA as if that's the only path to a successful life in California, because it is not and the evidence is abundant that it is not,'' he said.
Connerly, founder of a management and land-use consulting firm, is a graduate of Sacramento State University, one of the 23 campuses in the California State University system, the state's other four-year university system and the nation's largest, with about 400,000 students.
Black and Hispanic enrollment is higher at CSU - there, Black students comprised about 8 percent of the freshman class last fall.
Still, CSU Chancellor Charles Reed says he'd like to see those numbers increase.
``I go out and visit public schools and talk to people and I figured out just walking around that students, parents and, frankly, a lot of teachers in the public schools really don't know what it takes to go to college,'' says Reed, whose staff has blanketed schools and libraries with a ``How to Get to College'' poster spelling out requirements.
``I ask kids sometimes, `Do you want to be a millionaire?' Everybody wants to be a millionaire. I say, `It's not all that hard. All you have to do is get a college degree. You'll earn a million dollars over your lifetime more than someone who didn't.'''
Even though Blacks, Hispanics and American Indians are underrepresented at Berkeley, the school is far from all-White. The expected freshman class will be about 47 percent Asian-American (a huge category encompassing ethnicities from Samoa to India) and 31 percent White.
``We should all be extraordinarily proud of the achievement of Asian-Americans,'' says Birgeneau, ``and we need to learn how to propagate that to other groups.''
Sharon Browne, principal attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, which has defended Proposition 209, says race-blind policies are working. She counters that students now are admitted into universities where they can compete effectively and says the old system papered over public school inequality.
After Proposition 209, UC poured millions into outreach programs, partnering with high schools to help students prepare for college.
``I'm seeing what's happening as a result of Proposition 209 as a positive improvement,'' says Browne. ``It starts at the lower grades, but it has that cascading effect and eventually, when these students who are really being well-grounded in K-12 start applying to the UCs, I think we're going to see that, yes, race does not matter in California at all.''
Looking at UC systemwide, admissions are up slightly for Black students since 1997, with fewer black students going to Berkeley and UCLA and more going to newer branches of the 10-campus system.
No single factor affects UC enrollment - for one thing fees have soared. At Boalt, for instance, Edley is looking into restructuring financial aid packages to offset hikes.
But one obstacle is ``the absence of a community of learners who share their commitment to excellence, who look like them, who can encourage them not to give up when the going gets tough,'' says Winston Doby, UC's vice president for student affairs.
For Marshall, being one of about a half-dozen Blacks enrolled at Berkeley's Haas School of Business in 2002 was ``quite intimidating.''
His journey there wasn't easy, either - his father had died when he was a toddler, and he eventually dropped out of Oakland schools. He found work, but realized he needed some credentials. So, he took the high school equivalency exam, went to community college and transferred to Haas.
Quite the success story, although fellow students may not have seen it that way. Marshall recalls being part of one team where his suggestions were ignored until another student repeated them. He still wonders exactly what was going on, but he's got his suspicions - ``When you're an African-American student, people are suspect of your abilities.''
>From an administrative point of view, Haas Acting Dean Richard Lyons says having so few Black students shortchanges everyone - and puts Haas at a competitive disadvantage in a diverse marketplace. The school's doing what it can to change that, he says, but Proposition 209 is a constraint.
Marshall, 25, is among those trying to make a difference.
After graduation, he worked at a top accounting firm for a while but returned to work in Birgeneau's office on underrepresented minority issues. In his free time he has volunteered at Stiles Hall, a private organization not bound by the affirmative action law, that is trying to boost Black enrollment at Berkeley by a number of means, including strengthening community ties.
This fall, Marshall headed to Columbia University to study for a master's in education policy. After that, he hopes to enter Harvard's law school, another challenge, another opportunity.
- Associated Press
? Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
By Associated Press
Sep 12, 2005, 10:00
Blacks Remain an Extreme Minority at UC Campuses
BERKELEY, Calif.
James Marshall didn't expect it would be easy, being one of just a handful of Black students at the University of California, Berkeley's, high-ranking business school.
It wasn't.
But his payoff came at graduation - job interviews with some of the country's most prestigious firms.
``It's about getting that set of rules: OK, this is how you engage an employer; this is how you get this job,'' says Marshall.
This fall, preliminary figures put 129 new Black freshmen at Berkeley out of a class of about 4,000, slightly higher than last year, but still an extreme minority. About 11 percent of the class will be Hispanic, well out of step with a state where Hispanics make up about 30 percent of the population and are projected to be the largest ethnic group by 2011.
For Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau, it's a disturbing trend in diverse California.
``There are very talented people out there, I believe, who for a whole variety of reasons end up not coming to Berkeley, or to another of the flagship campuses in the UC system,'' he says.
``Where are the leaders going to come from?'' asks Christopher Edley, dean of UC Berkeley's Boalt law school, where just nine Black students are expected in the incoming class of 268. ``It's been such a short period of time in which our universities have begun producing minority graduates in substantial numbers that to let the door swing shut now would really be a calamity of historic proportions.''
Birgeneau, who took over the top job at Berkeley last year, has been outspoken in his dismay at enrollment figures and the need to change them. He questions whether voters intended these kinds of consequences when they passed Proposition 209, the 1996 ballot measure banning consideration of race in public hiring, contracting and education.
But Ward Connerly, the former UC regent who chaired the Proposition 209 campaign, bristles at the idea that there's a problem with race-blind policies.
``I just don't understand why certain people have gotten themselves all worked up about who gets to go to Berkeley and UCLA as if that's the only path to a successful life in California, because it is not and the evidence is abundant that it is not,'' he said.
Connerly, founder of a management and land-use consulting firm, is a graduate of Sacramento State University, one of the 23 campuses in the California State University system, the state's other four-year university system and the nation's largest, with about 400,000 students.
Black and Hispanic enrollment is higher at CSU - there, Black students comprised about 8 percent of the freshman class last fall.
Still, CSU Chancellor Charles Reed says he'd like to see those numbers increase.
``I go out and visit public schools and talk to people and I figured out just walking around that students, parents and, frankly, a lot of teachers in the public schools really don't know what it takes to go to college,'' says Reed, whose staff has blanketed schools and libraries with a ``How to Get to College'' poster spelling out requirements.
``I ask kids sometimes, `Do you want to be a millionaire?' Everybody wants to be a millionaire. I say, `It's not all that hard. All you have to do is get a college degree. You'll earn a million dollars over your lifetime more than someone who didn't.'''
Even though Blacks, Hispanics and American Indians are underrepresented at Berkeley, the school is far from all-White. The expected freshman class will be about 47 percent Asian-American (a huge category encompassing ethnicities from Samoa to India) and 31 percent White.
``We should all be extraordinarily proud of the achievement of Asian-Americans,'' says Birgeneau, ``and we need to learn how to propagate that to other groups.''
Sharon Browne, principal attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, which has defended Proposition 209, says race-blind policies are working. She counters that students now are admitted into universities where they can compete effectively and says the old system papered over public school inequality.
After Proposition 209, UC poured millions into outreach programs, partnering with high schools to help students prepare for college.
``I'm seeing what's happening as a result of Proposition 209 as a positive improvement,'' says Browne. ``It starts at the lower grades, but it has that cascading effect and eventually, when these students who are really being well-grounded in K-12 start applying to the UCs, I think we're going to see that, yes, race does not matter in California at all.''
Looking at UC systemwide, admissions are up slightly for Black students since 1997, with fewer black students going to Berkeley and UCLA and more going to newer branches of the 10-campus system.
No single factor affects UC enrollment - for one thing fees have soared. At Boalt, for instance, Edley is looking into restructuring financial aid packages to offset hikes.
But one obstacle is ``the absence of a community of learners who share their commitment to excellence, who look like them, who can encourage them not to give up when the going gets tough,'' says Winston Doby, UC's vice president for student affairs.
For Marshall, being one of about a half-dozen Blacks enrolled at Berkeley's Haas School of Business in 2002 was ``quite intimidating.''
His journey there wasn't easy, either - his father had died when he was a toddler, and he eventually dropped out of Oakland schools. He found work, but realized he needed some credentials. So, he took the high school equivalency exam, went to community college and transferred to Haas.
Quite the success story, although fellow students may not have seen it that way. Marshall recalls being part of one team where his suggestions were ignored until another student repeated them. He still wonders exactly what was going on, but he's got his suspicions - ``When you're an African-American student, people are suspect of your abilities.''
>From an administrative point of view, Haas Acting Dean Richard Lyons says having so few Black students shortchanges everyone - and puts Haas at a competitive disadvantage in a diverse marketplace. The school's doing what it can to change that, he says, but Proposition 209 is a constraint.
Marshall, 25, is among those trying to make a difference.
After graduation, he worked at a top accounting firm for a while but returned to work in Birgeneau's office on underrepresented minority issues. In his free time he has volunteered at Stiles Hall, a private organization not bound by the affirmative action law, that is trying to boost Black enrollment at Berkeley by a number of means, including strengthening community ties.
This fall, Marshall headed to Columbia University to study for a master's in education policy. After that, he hopes to enter Harvard's law school, another challenge, another opportunity.
- Associated Press
? Copyright 2005 by DiverseEducation.com
alonzomourning23
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
[quote name='Kayden']I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
Quotas are only one form, and outright quotas are rare, and point based systems (like what was at the university of michigan) are unconstitutional. Most affirmative action results in, when the candidates are equal or relatively equal, the one that is underrepresented being chosen.
But, this article is not a serious look at affirmative action, especially in the traditional sense.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
Quotas are only one form, and outright quotas are rare, and point based systems (like what was at the university of michigan) are unconstitutional. Most affirmative action results in, when the candidates are equal or relatively equal, the one that is underrepresented being chosen.
But, this article is not a serious look at affirmative action, especially in the traditional sense.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='Kayden']I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to understand AA laws. It's not as if people are doling out jobs to people with Michael Brown-esque qualifications. AA provides an "edge" to the minority in situations where two candidates are equally qualified. This "edge" is the ability to sue the employer for discrimination (which is interesting itself, if the candidates are indeed "equal.")
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you cracker
s ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
You don't seem to understand AA laws. It's not as if people are doling out jobs to people with Michael Brown-esque qualifications. AA provides an "edge" to the minority in situations where two candidates are equally qualified. This "edge" is the ability to sue the employer for discrimination (which is interesting itself, if the candidates are indeed "equal.")
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you cracker
s ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.
sgs89
CAGiversary!
[quote name='mykevermin']You don't seem to understand AA laws. It's not as if people are doling out jobs to people with Michael Brown-esque qualifications. AA provides an "edge" to the minority in situations where two candidates are equally qualified. This "edge" is the ability to sue the employer for discrimination (which is interesting itself, if the candidates are indeed "equal.")
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you crackers ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.[/QUOTE]
"Cracker"?
Come on, Professor Murder, that is pretty weak.
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you cracker
s ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.[/QUOTE]"Cracker"?
Come on, Professor Murder, that is pretty weak.
alonzomourning23
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']You don't seem to understand AA laws. It's not as if people are doling out jobs to people with Michael Brown-esque qualifications. AA provides an "edge" to the minority in situations where two candidates are equally qualified. This "edge" is the ability to sue the employer for discrimination (which is interesting itself, if the candidates are indeed "equal.")
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you crackers ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.[/QUOTE]
Heh, I think I got denied an apartment cause I'm american once. Called some guy about an apartment and had a time and everything to check it out, I forgot what caused it, but I mentioned I was american. Suddenly the guy remembered he couldn't meet me and was not available to let me check out the apartment anytime soon. I'm not sure if the issue was he didn't want to deal with foreigners, which means he'd have no recourse if I screwed up the place and just left the country, or it was specifically because I was american.
You don't need to look far to find numerous studies exploring the sever degree of discrimination in jobs and housing. Howard Dean used to cite a study by Devah Pager that showed white males with felon records had more job offers than black males with no criminal record (this is ceteris paribus; folks, if you don't know what that means, you can not criticize the study). Pager sure isn't alone, but I don't feel like citing a dozen studies none of you will read.
The point of the OP, and one those opposed to AA seem to be missing, is that cronyism and nepotism are various forms of preferential treatment, and thus as deplorable as Affirmative Action. Like any of you cracker
s ever were denied for a job because of a minority (in this country, anyway). Give me a in' break.[/QUOTE]Heh, I think I got denied an apartment cause I'm american once. Called some guy about an apartment and had a time and everything to check it out, I forgot what caused it, but I mentioned I was american. Suddenly the guy remembered he couldn't meet me and was not available to let me check out the apartment anytime soon. I'm not sure if the issue was he didn't want to deal with foreigners, which means he'd have no recourse if I screwed up the place and just left the country, or it was specifically because I was american.
zionoverfire
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 133 (100%)
[quote name='Kayden']I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
[/QUOTE]
And oddly enough I agree with both of you, reverse discrimination is still discrimination.
[/QUOTE]
And oddly enough I agree with both of you, reverse discrimination is still discrimination.
sblymnlcrymnl
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 95 (99%)
[quote name='zionoverfire']And oddly enough I agree with both of you, reverse discrimination is still discrimination.[/QUOTE].
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='sgs89']"Cracker"?
Come on, Professor Murder, that is pretty weak.[/QUOTE]
Just so you know, there are other people that participate in the versus forums. It's not just you and I, so when you want to play "Mr. Condescending," keep in mind there are roughly a dozen or so other people who post here regularly, none of whom you've singled out, and all of whom make similarly slanderous remarks.
In short, play fair.
Those of you who are braying "reverse discrimination" are falling into the precise falsehood that alonzo highlighted (in radiant purple, no less) in the first post. It was a quote of Colin Powell's. The entirety of the article was just this: those of you so fixated on eliminating "reverse discrimination" (which, if you consider the legal application of AA, it is more a discriminatory corrective, rather than discrimination itself) are completely ignoring the fact that discrimination is going on that benefits white males.
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.
Come on, Professor Murder, that is pretty weak.[/QUOTE]
Just so you know, there are other people that participate in the versus forums. It's not just you and I, so when you want to play "Mr. Condescending," keep in mind there are roughly a dozen or so other people who post here regularly, none of whom you've singled out, and all of whom make similarly slanderous remarks.
In short, play fair.
Those of you who are braying "reverse discrimination" are falling into the precise falsehood that alonzo highlighted (in radiant purple, no less) in the first post. It was a quote of Colin Powell's. The entirety of the article was just this: those of you so fixated on eliminating "reverse discrimination" (which, if you consider the legal application of AA, it is more a discriminatory corrective, rather than discrimination itself) are completely ignoring the fact that discrimination is going on that benefits white males.
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.
sgs89
CAGiversary!
[quote name='mykevermin']Just so you know, there are other people that participate in the versus forums. It's not just you and I, so when you want to play "Mr. Condescending," keep in mind there are roughly a dozen or so other people who post here regularly, none of whom you've singled out, and all of whom make similarly slanderous remarks.
In short, play fair.
Those of you who are braying "reverse discrimination" are falling into the precise falsehood that alonzo highlighted (in radiant purple, no less) in the first post. It was a quote of Colin Powell's. The entirety of the article was just this: those of you so fixated on eliminating "reverse discrimination" (which, if you consider the legal application of AA, it is more a discriminatory corrective, rather than discrimination itself) are completely ignoring the fact that discrimination is going on that benefits white males.
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.[/QUOTE]
Ah, the "everyone else is doing it" defense. The last refuge of the desperate. I single you out because you appear, at least, to be one of the more intelligent posters, but I could be wrong.
On your other point, race is different. So, while I agree that people get advantages "due to privilege," that does not justify reverse discrimination on the basis of race.
In short, play fair.
Those of you who are braying "reverse discrimination" are falling into the precise falsehood that alonzo highlighted (in radiant purple, no less) in the first post. It was a quote of Colin Powell's. The entirety of the article was just this: those of you so fixated on eliminating "reverse discrimination" (which, if you consider the legal application of AA, it is more a discriminatory corrective, rather than discrimination itself) are completely ignoring the fact that discrimination is going on that benefits white males.
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.[/QUOTE]
Ah, the "everyone else is doing it" defense. The last refuge of the desperate. I single you out because you appear, at least, to be one of the more intelligent posters, but I could be wrong.
On your other point, race is different. So, while I agree that people get advantages "due to privilege," that does not justify reverse discrimination on the basis of race.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='sgs89']Ah, the "everyone else is doing it" defense. The last refuge of the desperate. I single you out because you appear, at least, to be one of the more intelligent posters, but I could be wrong.[/quote]
You could be. You could not be. At least there's no latin in that there post.
You seem to be the resident legal expert, so you should have some idea of the (state variant, assuredly) legal applications of AA, and how it isn't exactly discrimination.
You could be. You could not be. At least there's no latin in that there post.
You seem to be the resident legal expert, so you should have some idea of the (state variant, assuredly) legal applications of AA, and how it isn't exactly discrimination.
alonzomourning23
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
I think the whole race issue is that affirmative action is a relatively minor form of discrimination than the form that could, and would in many cases, be practiced otherwise. It also allows more minorites the opportunity to improve their lives. Personally, I think it should focus on the poor, with emphasis on minorities, but overal it should focus on the poor. I think it should be reformed in some ways, but, at the same time, what we have is better than nothing. Though, it also helps stop discrimination against minorities, particularly in education and government.
There's also the issue of trying to reverse the centures of discrimination, particularly among blacks, that the majority has inflicted. There are long term effects of the history of race relations that are often ignored.
There's also the issue of trying to reverse the centures of discrimination, particularly among blacks, that the majority has inflicted. There are long term effects of the history of race relations that are often ignored.
sgs89
CAGiversary!
[quote name='mykevermin']You seem to be the resident legal expert, so you should have some idea of the (state variant, assuredly) legal applications of AA, and how it isn't exactly discrimination.[/QUOTE]
You are wrong -- it is discrimination, but it can be justified (at least under the current interpretation of the Constitution) in certain circumstances. But, rest assured that it is discrimination.
You are wrong -- it is discrimination, but it can be justified (at least under the current interpretation of the Constitution) in certain circumstances. But, rest assured that it is discrimination.
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']Affirmative action is a clear violation of the 14th Ammendment.
Beginning and end of argument.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Kayden']I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
I really agree with you guys. The only thing is, rascism is so bad in some places that people honestly wouldn't give minorities job unless they were required to. And of course, the only people to suffer from this ignorance are the people who could give a about race. I hate IGNORANT people.
edit-- I am a biology major and this is where this comes from. Think about Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. This doesn't just apply in the jungle. It applies in all of human's cultural facets as well. AA essentially has cheated people out of natural selection. Say a guy with crappy office skills gets a job at an office because he is a minority. He didn't get the job because he was the most qualified. He got it because someone not in the system (office) said that he was more fit for the job. Point-> the qualifications themselves should be the determining factor in whether a person gets a job because they are what helps the person "survive" in the office environment. This scenario would be like a environmentalist going into a jungle and killing all the competitors of his favorite animal so that his favorite could have all the prey for himself. And if you know anything about ecosystem then you know that the balance in that ecosystem would be destroy thus causing catastrophic death within the system. Similarly, AA is doing the same thing to white collar America.
^- You may think that is a horrible analogy and may also disagree with darwinism but that is the way I see it. Go ahead and fire away.
Oh, and one last thing. I am in my 5th year of college and I am going to get my degree because I couldn't get in to pharmacy school because of my GPA (and its aing 3.0). Anyways, I don't expect anyone to hand me shit, I didn't make the grade and its no ones fault but mine. I just hate how minorities have the oppurtunity for a fallback plan that is not available to myself.
Beginning and end of argument.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Kayden']I'm with PAD. All AA does is either weaken peoples abilities to get jobs themselves or costs better qualified people their job because they aren't a minority.
Racial quotas are still racism. All they do is further try to point out a difference or "inequity" in the races. (Someone could argue blacks must be inferior, because they need AA to be on the same level. I'm not, but someone could) Furthermore, they actually perpetuate hatred because people see it as losing a job to a black guy that got it just for being black. Would you like to miss out on a job you were perfectly qualified for because they hired someone much less qualified only because the rules said they needed a 5% black staff.[/QUOTE]
I really agree with you guys. The only thing is, rascism is so bad in some places that people honestly wouldn't give minorities job unless they were required to. And of course, the only people to suffer from this ignorance are the people who could give a
about race. I hate IGNORANT people.edit-- I am a biology major and this is where this comes from. Think about Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. This doesn't just apply in the jungle. It applies in all of human's cultural facets as well. AA essentially has cheated people out of natural selection. Say a guy with crappy office skills gets a job at an office because he is a minority. He didn't get the job because he was the most qualified. He got it because someone not in the system (office) said that he was more fit for the job. Point-> the qualifications themselves should be the determining factor in whether a person gets a job because they are what helps the person "survive" in the office environment. This scenario would be like a environmentalist going into a jungle and killing all the competitors of his favorite animal so that his favorite could have all the prey for himself. And if you know anything about ecosystem then you know that the balance in that ecosystem would be destroy thus causing catastrophic death within the system. Similarly, AA is doing the same thing to white collar America.
^- You may think that is a horrible analogy and may also disagree with darwinism but that is the way I see it. Go ahead and fire away.
Oh, and one last thing. I am in my 5th year of college and I am going to get my degree because I couldn't get in to pharmacy school because of my GPA (and its a
ing 3.0). Anyways, I don't expect anyone to hand me shit, I didn't make the grade and its no ones fault but mine. I just hate how minorities have the oppurtunity for a fallback plan that is not available to myself.
alonzomourning23
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 26 (100%)
[quote name='jughead']I really agree with you guys. The only thing is, rascism is so bad in some places that people honestly wouldn't give minorities job unless they were required to. And of course, the only people to suffer from this ignorance are the people who could give a about race. I hate IGNORANT people.[/QUOTE]
Just to back up this claim:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/07/alabama.interracial/
Symbolic more than anything, but the fact the 41% voted no shows why laws need to be in place to stop discrimination.
about race. I hate IGNORANT people.[/QUOTE]Just to back up this claim:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/07/alabama.interracial/
Symbolic more than anything, but the fact the 41% voted no shows why laws need to be in place to stop discrimination.
elprincipe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 60 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']Those of you who are braying "reverse discrimination" are falling into the precise falsehood that alonzo highlighted (in radiant purple, no less) in the first post. It was a quote of Colin Powell's. The entirety of the article was just this: those of you so fixated on eliminating "reverse discrimination" (which, if you consider the legal application of AA, it is more a discriminatory corrective, rather than discrimination itself) are completely ignoring the fact that discrimination is going on that benefits white males.
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.[/QUOTE]
So your position is "two wrongs make a right"? Or is it "the ends justify the means"? Obviously, I can't agree either way, although I do sympathize with your complaints about cronyism/nepotism (alive and prospering in our political branches, believe you me).
In other words, you are focused on making sure that THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GETTING JOBS AREN'T GETTING JOBS, meanwhile THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING JOBS DUE TO PRIVELEGE ARE GETTING NO ATTENTION FROM YOU WHATSOEVER.
Your existence is redundant, in other words.[/QUOTE]
So your position is "two wrongs make a right"? Or is it "the ends justify the means"? Obviously, I can't agree either way, although I do sympathize with your complaints about cronyism/nepotism (alive and prospering in our political branches, believe you me).
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='elprincipe']So your position is "two wrongs make a right"? Or is it "the ends justify the means"? Obviously, I can't agree either way, although I do sympathize with your complaints about cronyism/nepotism (alive and prospering in our political branches, believe you me).[/QUOTE]
I don't see how providing employment to those who deserve it yet don't get it is discrimination.
I don't see how providing employment to those who deserve it yet don't get it is discrimination.
mykevermin
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (97%)
[quote name='sgs89']You are wrong -- it is discrimination, but it can be justified (at least under the current interpretation of the Constitution) in certain circumstances. But, rest assured that it is discrimination.[/QUOTE]
Details, legal eagle. Details!
Details, legal eagle. Details!
elprincipe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 60 (100%)
[quote name='mykevermin']I don't see how providing employment to those who deserve it yet don't get it is discrimination.[/QUOTE]
Then what you're talking about is not "affirmative action." As someone who's made repeated hiring decisions, I can tell you that no two candidates are equally qualified. There is always someone who is better than someone else for the job due to education/skills/experience/personality/etc. "Affirmative action" makes race a factor in these decisions when implemented. It results in someone who is a minority (strangely, this also tends to include women, who are a majority) who wouldn't be hired because a white male was slightly more qualified be hired instead of the more-qualified person. I believe that is racist and wrong.
Then what you're talking about is not "affirmative action." As someone who's made repeated hiring decisions, I can tell you that no two candidates are equally qualified. There is always someone who is better than someone else for the job due to education/skills/experience/personality/etc. "Affirmative action" makes race a factor in these decisions when implemented. It results in someone who is a minority (strangely, this also tends to include women, who are a majority) who wouldn't be hired because a white male was slightly more qualified be hired instead of the more-qualified person. I believe that is racist and wrong.
bread's done