BS: Devil Racism Scores Big

Subject: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 01:50 PM

So, with this Supreme court Decision in favor of affirmative action at UofM the left-leaning racists who assume (from their elitist point of view) that minorities who have no means, other than their (the left's) largesse to succeed, have won the day.

But the right-leaning racists just had handed to them a rationale for their irrational hatred.

And the devil walks away laughing.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 03:11 PM

The decision, by the way, was that the point system by which the University of Michigan selects undergraduates (giving all underrepresented minorities 20 extra points, regardless of class standing, income, GPA, etc) was improper, but that the law school's policy of considering race as "a potential plus factor" (and which parallels the Bakke decision of, I think, 1978) was allowable. The law school decision is here and the undergraduate decision is here.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Janice in NJ
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 06:06 PM

I don't get Mr. Hardly's point. Would he please care to elaborate?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 07:01 PM

The cure is worse than the disease.

It is well-meaning to try to "level the playing field" -- but at its core it is a racist notion that a group needs special help to compete in our society. Many minorities have shown that they do not need such help. So we point to the notion that "they" need it because of past wrongs -- but this isn't a program of restitution. Restitution is another matter and is being debated separately.

I can't help but envision the smug, institutional, elite, educational bureuacrats in the same manner that I used to see my mother-in-law when she would proudly show her lack of racism by declaring "they's jis like us" (she was a very rural hoosier whose Chritianity informed her of the evil of racism -- but whose rural, backward upbringing, surrounded by racism, isolated her from the realities of integrated society). The thoughts and hopes of both were possibly good -- but their actions disclosed a clumsy lack of insight into their own prejudices.

And so we enact these racist laws that are inherently unfair -- thereby fueling a fire that should be dead for want of fuel -- the fire of overt racism. Racism is not a rational human behavior.....but it is becoming so. One of the core flaws to racism is the prejudice that believes one can generalize the beliefs of the whole by the few -- sadly, as the African-American community steadfastly gives their individuality over to the whole (as in voting 95% Democrat) the prejudicial belief is reinforced with a reality. When a society believes, as evidenced by its public policy, that a group of people cannot make it without assistance that is not offered to the whole -- it is no longer irrational to believe in the inferiority of that "helped" group.

Did you know that antibiotics are simultaneously creating superviri and weakening natural immune systems?

Did you know that antibacterial cleaners and handsoap are taking away helpful bacteria and creating as big a problem as they are solving?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: SeanM
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 07:46 PM

The problem is that there's plenty of room for debate on what exactly SHOULD be the "cure".

It's a fact that for some considerable time in the US, if one is of non-Caucasian appearance, one faced considerable difficulty doing the basic tasks that a Caucasian would be able to accomplish - going to school, buying a home, finding employment, that sort of thing.

The debate comes in whether this is still necessary, and if so how to address the issue.

I'll make the assumption (given the post's lean) that Mr. Hardy is of the opinion it's either no longer necessary, or drastically overcompensating.

Me? I'm of the opinion that there's too much in the way of politics to see through to the truth. I *know* there is still discrimination out there, as related by friends. But then again, I *know* from personal experience that there's also discrimination from the other side as well.

I suspect that, as with most harshly debated and divided issues, that the truth (and solution) lies somewhere between the poles.

M

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 07:54 PM

The Supreme Court's decision was that it is inappropriate and illegal to give students priority based upon race. John Hardly seems to think that the decision was exactly the opposite.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 08:10 PM

nope. Just the manner in which it was being done. Affirmative action as a practice was upheld.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 08:25 PM

Well, I see this decision as a "make-up call" where the Supremes have tried to throw the less conservatives a bone to make up for the bad call in the '00 elections. They still have their sights on bigger fish, i.s. Roe v. Wade, in which they'll delight their flock, who will sonn forget this decision...

Ahhh, speaking of the decision, sure, if you take it case by case, affirmative action seeems descrimanatory, howver, when taken collectively, the absence of AA is proven to be discriminatory. It ain't perfect but it beats nothing.

And, BTW, how would a John Hardy go about trying to crreate a society taht tries to franchise a minority that has been both disenfranchished and responsible for creating a much greater share of this nations "wealth" than their percentage of the population? Hmmmm? Yeah, would a John Hardy take the position that black folks haven't pulled their wieght in buoilding this nations wealth? I would suggest that a John Hardy might consider the wealth that has been created on the backs and from the labor of black slaves, and underpaid minorities in general.

And it would be well to keep in mind that a dollar never drove a bulldozer or plowed a foeld or picked cotton. And a dollar never build a bridge or harvested crops. No a dollar has never actually done a single thing. Not one single thing. Might af fact, it takes labor to make one of the unproductive things.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Willie-O
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 09:48 PM

Personally I think you should just get over it, John. Your Supreme Court ain't exactly a bunch of dangerous raving liberals. Racism is going to continue to be practiced by racists, using any pretext they can find. And just because you disagree with a legal decision, that does not "justify" racism. It justifies discussion or debate. As for 95% of black Americans voting Democrat (say, do you mark your race on a ballot? how do you know this?) that just shows they're pragmatic, not stupid.         

Bill

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: TIA
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 11:04 PM

It has been shown time and again that students get a better education in a diverse setting. U of M does not select students based solely on race. There are many many factors that go into crafting a student body. Race is one. Musical ability may be another a many schools. Extra curricular interests of some kind are a factor at many. Family connections (legacies) count at many. Second languages may count. Religion may count. Geography often counts. If it is wrong to use race or ethnicity, it is wring to use any of those other factors as well. Should admissions,therefore be based just on SAT's (or GRE's or LSAT's or MCAT's)? But wait, standardized test scores correlate highly with demographics/ethnicity (ever compared a white suburban school's facilities to a largely non-white urban school's?) Base it just on those, and you fall into Jim Crow exactly by trying to avoid it. Jaysus people, it's not as if school admissions policies amount to po' white folk being oppressed. And don't try to pretend that the rest of society is colorblind (remember the recent study where it was shown that a resume with a "black sounding" name was far less likely to get a call-back than an identical resume with a "white-sounding" name?) The disenfranchisement of whites is a vicious ugly lie perpetrated by the thug commentators who cannot mention this subject without using the word "quotas" -- which do not exist, and have nothing to do with this debate.

And in the interest of disclosure, I'm not objective about this. I grew up on a campus, work at a university, and have a multi-colored family.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: artbrooks
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 11:12 PM

Once again, the Court rejected the program used by U of M that gives extra points to minorities. What was upheld was the 1978 Bakke decision.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: TIA
Date: 23 Jun 03 - 11:46 PM

You're right. But they upheld the principle that it is okay to use race at some level.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 12:45 AM

"It's a fact that for some considerable time in the US, if one is of non-Caucasian appearance, one faced considerable difficulty doing the basic tasks that a Caucasian would be able to accomplish - going to school, buying a home, finding employment, that sort of thing."

Actually, I don't accept this premise. Chinese and Japanese are decidely non caucasian and decidedly successful (percentage-wise, I believe even moreso than caucasians). Indians as well.

"And, BTW, how would a John Hardy go about trying to crreate a society taht tries to franchise a minority that has been both disenfranchished and responsible for creating a much greater share of this nations "wealth" than their percentage of the population? Hmmmm? Yeah, would a John Hardy take the position that black folks haven't pulled their wieght in building this nations wealth?"

I already said that restitution is another subject. As to recovery from poverty -- the African American population, everywhere but in the south, was already on the road to success before the government decided they couldn't make it on their own. And, again, they are not deficient. They are capable.

"It has been shown time and again that students get a better education in a diverse setting."

This has certainly been asserted time and again, but "shown"? And certainly testing is bent toward what a culture values, or thinks "works" in a pragmatic way. Of course there are varied types of intelligences and certainly, when we are evaluating whether or not a person would fit into an educational setting it is not an assessment of their worth -- just their capability. Life's like that. I don't have the capacity for many endeavors -- I am of less value to society as regards those endeavors (nobody will be paying to see me sink 18 foot jumpers) -- but I am not of less value to society intrinsically.

If you accept that there are no societal norms that are of value to the society -- or you accept that no culture or subculture can be or is better than another's, then I guess testing to a standard is an excercize in.....what? futility? bigotry?

To make no distinction between acceptance on the basis of race and acceptance on the basis of skill? To an institution whose goal it is to refine skill? hmmmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Wolfgang
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 05:25 AM

Spelling of names

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: TIA
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 06:56 AM

Two things Mr. Hardly

1) It has been shown. I'm not going to bury you with links. If you care to learn, just go to Dogpile or Google and search on diversity +education +benefits, and you will find thousands of listings. Skip the ones that are clearly propaganda pieces, and find the studies (they will typically have multple authors and, more importantly, explicit references). Students (white and non-white) show improved social skills, better GPA's, better postgraduate success blah, blah, blah, when they are educated in a diverse environment.

2) We're not talking about capable or skilled whites versus incapable or unskilled non-whites. They are all capable and skilled. They all meet the academic requirements, now how you gonna choose amongst them? To extend your analogy: they can all sink 18 foot jumpers who's gonna make the team?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 07:41 AM

I will gladly cede your point if we are talking about choosing among equally qualified candidates (and I do believe -- or at least hope -- that this is the part of the undergrad AA program that the court did rule down -- the giving of points to minorities to make up deficiencies). It is still racism -- but it doesn't hold the same double-barrel danger of lending rationality to the irrational overt racism. And, if a cure was the intent -- rather than a misguided sense of restitution -- there would certainly be ways of making colorblind those who decided on student entry.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 08:03 AM

...and here I let myself get sidetracked from my own main point -- that affirmative action is not in the RECIPIENT of affirmative action's best interest.

The conclusion is always jumped to that anyone against AA is racist, and those for it are not. I'm saying that it's just as likely the other way around.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Grab
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 08:31 AM

Not in the US myself, but the Supreme Court seems to have made a sensible decision. Quality of schooling will have an effect on the grades you get. One possible reason for your schooling being worse than another person's would be your social background; another would be discrimination/bullying at school. Both are factors related to race. Universities are entitled to require different students to achieve different points scores, if they think those students will do well at university in spite of their current academic results. Obviously an across-the-board boost on the points of minority students is unrepresentative of this, as there are rich black kids and poor white kids, but allowing per-student exceptions is perfectly reasonable so long as the person doing the selecting can justify their decision.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: TIA
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 10:00 AM

Just to be clear John Hardly - I have not accused you of being, nor assumed that you are, racist.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Amos
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 10:22 AM

Actually, they were seeking to offset the effects of tacit racism, John.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 12:14 PM

Race should be a factor in certain decisions...school admittance, job promotions...etc...but ONLY when all other factors come out nearly even!

To be sure that minorities recieve a fair break, (not a loaded, highly weighted break), it is quite reasonable to break ties and near ties that way. It is not reasonable to give things like the 20 point bonuses mentioned. This logic should also apply to women, veterans, aliens, handicapped, and any other 'minority' you can think of who might need some leverage....and this seems to be approximately what this court decision aims at...as hard as it will be to administer, as as limited as it is. Todays editorial in the Washington Post outlines the good & bad aspects.

The exception to this would in programs DESIGNED to help minorites master the skills needed to allow them to compete and understand the society and its language, laws and rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 12:39 PM

Sean M - "I suspect that, as with most harshly debated and divided issues, that the truth (and solution) lies somewhere between the poles." Yes; which is where the Court came down, it seems to me.

Um, let me just put in a forlorn word here for the outlandish proposition that the question before the Court was *supposed* to be, as always, NOT whether the challenged law or practice is *good public policy*, but rather whether it is *Constitutionally permitted*. They ARE two different issues. I wish that BOTH sides of the country's Great Ideological Divide would act accordingly. HA!! Fat chance...

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: The Pooka
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 01:22 PM

I agree with the court's decisions. A baby Solomonically well-split.

But I want to conduct a Thought Experiment here. Just theoretical, you understand. :) To wit:

(1) I am white. (2) I am also simplistic (see previous post for proof). (3) Affirmative action, as repeatedly noted above, is not the same thing as restitution, reparations, or societal penance for past sins. (4) Accordingly, on the public-policy question (as distinct from the Constitutional one) I say this: I *support* nonquantified affirmative action programs for the central, perfectly simple, and amply documented reason that the racial groups which they help, **need the help**. (Well Yes but **Why** do they need it, you ask? Nonono, Don't Go There: for on the way you shall stumble over Restitution, which you said is Different...)

Now the Experimental part is, to test the hypothesis that I will be condemned as a racist for favoring affirmative action on the grounds that it is needed -- which hypothesis, if verified, may establish the moral corollary that you can only support it if you simultaneously affirm that it is NOT needed. (Except perhaps by us whites, to ameliorate our multicultural deprivation.)

OK - let's see the Results.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 03:30 PM

Just to be clear John Hardly - I have not accused you of being, nor assumed that you are, racist.
Oh, I never took it that way -- I thought we were having an interesting discussion. I think my point is that, though it is easy to see the overt racism of one side of the debate -- the racism implied in the assumption that there is race that needs more help than other races is, well, racist (but never percieved that way because, well, their intentions are good).

Actually, they were seeking to offset the effects of tacit racism, John.

A

yup. And I'm questioning whether they are making the problem worse in the way they are going about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 03:53 PM

TIA,
I am thick as a brick - denser than uranium. I just now caught (after putting a few hundred pounds of clay through my pug mill) that you were tactfully pointing out that the converse was true. I plead guilty...

.....but, whether right or wrong, I rationalize by my rather large assumption that there is NOBODY on the other (your) side of the debate who would take my assertion about your motivations seriously. How could wanting to help somebody possibly be wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 04:17 PM

Pooka....."..for favoring affirmative action on the grounds that it is needed -"
I see your point in your 'experiment', but it assumes too much.

I submit that "help" may be needed by some groups(or, more carefully phrased, some members of some groups), but that affirmative action may not BE help in many cases, but merely a way to cut into line.

Now, I wonder if **I** may be labeled a racist for suggesting that equal opportunity is the operative term, and that it must be defined narrowly. The point has already been madeby John Hardly that "..Chinese and Japanese are decidely non caucasian and decidedly successful". We need to understand the societal/cultural reasons for this and work to see that ALL cultural groups (I carefully avoid the term 'racial groups', as it clouds the issue) have equal opportunity to their choice of school, employment, housing...etc.

The situation is very delicate....I assume no one would advocate that professional basketball has way too few Caucasians, and there shoud be some sort of 'program' to admit more....those folks pay for athletic skill, and " (most)white boys can't jump". But white boys DO get considered if they CAN jump.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Mark Clark
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 05:24 PM

When it comes to the game of golf, I'm in the Mark Twain camp—a good walk spoiled—but the game does have one very interesting characteristic. Players who for lack of ability or sufficient practice can't compete with the more capable players are given a “handicap,” they are spotted a suitable number of points so their chance of winning is as good as the experienced players.

Any bowlers in the audience? Guess what? In bowling a similar strategy is applied. If one has historically bowled more poorly than others in the same tournament, one is given some “handicap” points to even up the competition. This isn't considerd cheating, it's considered fair play.

I'm guessing that a big percentage of the people who play golf are the same ones who whine loudest about affirmative action. They don't want a fair competition when it comes to socio-economic advantage. They rely on their social status to ensure they don't have to work up a sweat or anything like that. Take that away and they might actually have to compete.

The affirmative action practice in California wasn't criticized by the Court because it's based on economic status, not race. Of course it has the effect of helping minorities more than whites because minorities are more often poor than whites.

I'd rather live in a fair society than one in which each individual is treated exactly the same. I'd also rather live in a society in which no one gets left behind. Maybe I should take up golf.

      - Mark

The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from sleeping under bridges and stealing bread. – Anatole France

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: SINSULL
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 08:11 PM

The only real way to "level the playing field" is to ensure first rate Kindergarten through high school education for all. As it is, schools in poorer districts in NYC do not have adequate classroom space (classes held in bathrooms at times), adequate supplies (teachers have to supply their own chalk or do without), up to date texts, etc. Some Public Schools in Maine offer laptops to students to take home. Some public schools in NYC offer musical instruments for children to use for a semester. Some barely have paper, pens, and the bare necessities. WHY?

Of course, parents have to be involved. Just read about a lawsuit in California where the parents are standing up for their children's rights. They are suing to force the school to give their children high school diplomas despite the fact that these same students each missed 30+ days of school in their last year, did not complete required classwork or pass exams. Giant SIGH!

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 08:31 PM

yeah SINSULL,

And the mystery correlation between money spent on education and its return in successful schools is still baffling.

Our school district has 7 elementary schools. They want to close and tear down the most run-down school in the district - a terrible facility by modern standards -- and put those children in a brand-spankin' facility with just a thousand or so of their contemporaries.....

.....but here's the rub. This rundown school house is in the top five elementary schools in the State in testing results *AND* it is populated with children from the second poorest part of the school district. hmmmmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Jun 03 - 11:31 PM

Mark...I'm not sure if your comments are a direct reaction to my post or not, but I do have some observations....(I hope I am not totally missing the relevance of your post)

In competitive sports, which is not crucial to one's livlihood, various methods are used to approximate a 'level playing field'. As you say, golf & bowling use a handicap system...other sports use leagues: Majors & minors, etc., so that those of approximately equal ability play against each other. Sometimes, in sports like surfing or skiing or golf, there is simply a qualification minimum to be allowed to compete.

Some people take all this VERY seriously, but I would argue that the point is that handicapping in sports is not easily applied to the workplace or to admission to prestigious colleges. One can either do the work or not, and just as employers need a secretary who can type "X" well and answer the phone efficiently, so universities need to not have students who cannot cope with the curriculum. I was once 'invited' to apply to Harvard, but was NOT accepted, and it is well I wasn't, as I did not have the drive, background and skills to function at the pace required. I did just fine in a state school, and never considered that it was not 'fair'.

I DID, however, consider it UNfair that a woman I knew with a 3.7 grade point was being hassled about her scholarship because she was taking a reduced load (12 hrs) one semester, while the star football player was receiving a gentle warning that he 'might' need to improve his 1.6 average in order to get his FULL football 'scholarship'.

A few years later, I worked an aircraft plant...at a dock where deliveries were made. One electrical supply house commonly hired pretty young women to drive pickup trucks. One day there was a heavy spool of wire to be unloaded from one of these trucks, and the young lady asked me to help. I jumped in to help, when the foreman walked up and told me to cease.....it was the rule that drivers MUST do the unloading, and if she could not do it, she should not be doing that job. It seemed like a petty thing at the time, but I have since seen the point. There are all sorts of reasons why someone can not cope with job, situation, or school "X", but it is not **fair** to everyone else if they GET the position and slow down the rest!

Now...it IS fair to allow ANYONE to apply for a job delivering electrical supplies, and if some female, or other minority who is able to DO the job applies, they should be given totally equal consideration....even to the point of a random drawing if there are 6 other qualified applicants!

I will defend with vigor (and have) the rights of everyone to not be discriminated against because of their color, sex...etc....but I will not willingly live in a society which uses a quota system, no matter what the qualifications are.

Yeah, I know...it is usually not an easy line to draw, and this court decision is already getting criticism for leaving too much ambiguity...but the effort must be made to use reason, not political correctness or wishful thinking, to make society run sanely.

Lordy, I wish I could type 100 WPM and had all day to condense 40 years of dealing with this issue into a few succinct paragraphs! I am never satisfied with my own remarks in a forum like this...there is always more to say and finer points to be made.....and maybe no one will read them anyway...*wry grin*...but typing it helps ME refine what I belive...and sometimes I learn something new.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Mark Clark
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 12:10 AM

No, Bill, I wasn't directly responding to your post. I too believe one must be competent to perform a job and find it natural that people compete in school and in the workplace for the top slots. I just find it odd that some people are fair minded only when the outcome doesn't really matter as with golf and bowling.

When society reaches the point where every individual starts at the same point in the race with an equal chance to win, I'll start supporting the application of the same rules for everyone. Until that time, and to help hasten the day, I'd rather give disadvantaged and disenfranchised people a leg up so they can at least get into the game.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 12:54 AM

Well, I would submit that if UM was proactively being conscientious about their admission policies, they should be allowed to do so. I self-imposed method is far better than a legislated method of acheiving justive in process, any day.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: catspaw49
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 05:06 AM

A great discussion folks. Probably the most important aspect of this subject is that while we all debate the problem, we all can understand John's real point here. As soon as anyone becomes defensive any real solution, if there is in fact a real solution, goes right out the window. And that is the reason we're unlikely to see a debate at legislative levels where anything is accomplished.

These are interesting times and only through cutting through the crap and seeing past the band-aid non-solutions will we ever hope to make progress. I doubt it to be possible past the level we deal at here where we can each admit our own failings and get on with some creative thinking.

And for those not believing these are interesting times or feeling that we don't see things through a racial/cultural perspective, consider that (arguably) the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup ...............................

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Blues=Life
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 09:40 AM

I always have problems with this issue, and was hesitant to jump in. However, here is my story, and why it gives me difficulties.

The problem is big picture/little picture. On the big picture side, AA seems, if fairly implemented, to be a reasonably good idea. On the little picture side, it sucks when it impacts you personally.

I used to teach philosophy. Went to graduate school, won an "Excellence in Teaching" award, and all I wanted was a good community college gig, and I would be happy. Started applying in 1990, when I was 30 years old.

Most schools were going through the retirement of the professors from the 1960's, almost all white men. To keep federal funding, there was a big drive to promote diversity in the faculty. I think this is a fine ideal. However, I think some of the beaurocrats put diversity before quality.

At that time, every job posting said, "Women and Minorities encouraged to apply." No problem. I still remember Tacoma Community College which said, "Women and Minorities, Disabled and/or VietNam Veterans, People with Disabilities, or People over 40 encouraged to apply." I was a white, healthy, 30-year-old, I didn't even bother with Tacoma. *g*

But here I was, a qualifed, awarded, excellent teacher. I knew this leveled the playing ground, but I also knew I was one of the best players out there. So into the job pool I leaped.

In two separate instances, I lost the job to "an Affirmative Action candidate" who was a foreign national. One was Korean, one was from Africa. In each case, a member of the interview committee apoligized to me later, saying, "You were our first choice, but the administration needed an AA employee."

The funny thing is, being a logician, is that applying the law to a foreign national is ludicrous. How can a Korean, who is a citizen of Korea, be considered a Minority? Doesn't matter, I don't get the job.

I finally realized that I had wasted 5 years of my life, because at that time and place, I was not hireable DUE TO MY RACE. I left Philosophy, and found a new career to feed my kids.

The funny part of this story? Both foreign nationals lasted less than 2 years in the job. Each was let go, because the students couldn't understand them, due to poor English skills. I'd would probably still be at the school, doing a job I loved.

So, what's the point? I don't know. Life ain't fair, folks, and you can't totally legislate it to be fair. Establishing a level playing field is great, but in the end, the focus should be on the individual. Going with a second-rate applicant, or with someone who can't do the work, in the interest of being "fair", probably isn't fair.

Blues

(final note, in a Life's Little Ironies way. Today, I'd be very hireable. I'm 43, and I have a permament, partial disablilty in my ankle, forcing me to occasionally use a cane. Due to these facts, today I would be an ideal candidate. Does any one else see a problem with these two factors, since neither one of them has anything to do with ability?)

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 11:03 AM

amazing....Blues, you have just posted a prime example of the problem. I couldn't have invented a story which says it better. (I, too, was a philosopher, but in Metaphysics/Phenomenology which was not in high demand when I was finishing ...never tried serious competition)

At least, under the tenure system, those schools had the option of deciding that teachers who could NOT communicate well in English had to be dismissed. In a major metropolitan area like Greater Washington DC, I see every day many people who also cannot handle English, but seemingly cannot be dismissed either. (I even get telemarketing calls from people trying to sell me cable TV who I can barely understand!)...

Many years ago, I had a temporary position in the EPA, and had 2 different regions (Denver & San Francisco) trying to hire me, but I 'only' could score 96.5 on the entrance exam. It seems there were just too many veterans walking around with 10 point bonuses, and anyone with a score of 87 would beat me. I was told that IF I could go back and get a pure score of 98, they could apply for an exception for me!

It is fine to give veterans, women, minorities...whatever...the decision when other factors are nearly equal, but it is very strange to compromise 10 points on a 100 point scale....or give the 20 point bonus referred to at U. of M. Decisions like that are NOT going to give you good employees....they will only provide you check marks in a silly quota system.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bobert
Date: 25 Jun 03 - 10:38 PM

John Hardy:

I still await your plan for un-doing three century's of racsim, much of it under a system of slavery.

And I also await you thoughts on how a society, whose "wealth" has been disporportionately created on the backs of slaves, goeas about righting those terrible wrongs.

Yes, you are quick to throw out the "r" word when it meets your *little white needs* but I dohn't think you have a clue about how black folks feel about *your little white world*.

No, I am not black. I have spent most of my life in the company of black folks and am proud to have many black friends who, when the hair is let down, call me "nigga". But this shouldn't matter. The questions still remain and I'm real curious how you feel about repairations and leveling the playing field...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 26 Jun 03 - 08:07 AM

Bobert,
Implied in your (rather snide) question, besides missing the point of my thread here, is the assumption that government, by policy or law, can un-do what men feel in their fearful, petty little hearts.

Implied in my statements is that government, when led by the guilt of folks like you who wish to assume the guilt of racist intent of a whole populace (a contiention I don't believe to be true, as I was certainly not raised that way), actually (and perhaps counterintuitive to its well-meaning intent) keeps that racism alive -- even inflames it.

Government, by it's policy and law can, at most, curb people acting out on their anti-social beliefs. It cannot change those beliefs. But, interestingly, though it cannot make people NOT think in a racist manner, it can, and does institute policy that lends rationale to the irrational fears that cause those beliefs in the first place -- therby reinforcing their beliefs.

You seem to assume an awful lot about me. For instance, you see me as having "little white needs". I'm not sure what needs I have that are common only to white folk. I don't have any problem with my whiteness. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of it. It's just what I am. I am proud or ashamed of my BEHAVIOR and I suspect that society would be better off if that were the rule of thumb -- said another way "I have a dream....of men measured by the content of their character, not the color of their skin".

And you seem to imply in the same statement that I am deficient in my understanding of how blacks feel about whites. I couldn't say. But I haven't spoken for them either.

Could I presume to solve the problem of restitution? I doubt it. I do know that the problem isn't as static as you propose it. For instance:
1. There is no hard and fast "We" who gained at the suffering of the "Them". The number of slave owners relative to the general population is pretty small, I believe -- as well as regionally limited.
2. There is no hard and fast "Them" who suffered. All along there have been free blacks.
3. Our population is not static. For instance, on my Mom's side I go back to the Mayflower (who doesn't? ;^) ) and so "I" was around to have owned slaves ....... of course, trouble is, for the last 150 years that family has been Quaker -- do you really want to ask what the Quakers owe in the equation? On my Dad's side of the family "I" have only been around since about 1900 -- and never south of Buffalo NY.....and German. No slaves there.
4. There is no hard and fast "We" who gained from the oppression of slaves. We are a free, capitalist economy. We own property endividually. We did not collectively own slaves and we did not collectively gain from slaves -- not in the 1 for 1 type of equation inherent in your question. We owned them collectively as a society that sanctioned slavery -- against the wishes of a good many in our society (a number who finally WON that'n).....and we gained collectively on the portion of and weath created and collected as taxation -- but clearly that was a very small amount by today's standard -- and it wasn't very FEDERAL. Remember that most of the States were far more highly individuated at the time of the change in policy. In fact, it may be said that -- at the point in time that we finally made the jump toward a greater federalization, toward our current system that marries Federal Socialism with the Capitalism with which we started, the shift in slave policy was concurrent.

I think that current notions of "diversity" are very harmful toward the final disolution of racism. In its current state it celebrates difference for the sake of nothing more than difference -- and asserts that it is unwise (and immoral) to make a value judgement that would claim one cultural behavior superior to another.

i think that the natural intermixing of race that was occurring as I was growing up in Indianapolis in the 60's was a very good step in the right direction.

There was an interesting article/documentary going around earlier this year. I belive it was a National Geographic thingy that was actually produced last year. Its contention was that there is no such thing as race.

It disturbed me to the extent that it was junk science used (in the same manner again of good intent that will eventually backfire) used as propaganda -- its flaw was that its stated thesis was "There is no such thing as "race"" but what it was really pointing out is that "race is not the same thing as species" -- a point I don't think ANYONE doesn't already know.

But the good in the story was that it did point out that we are stronger (genetically) when blended.

I've typed too long and gotta go......maybe more later.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Grab
Date: 26 Jun 03 - 08:31 AM

Bobert, where does "reparations" come into this?

Sure, levelling the playing field is crucial, but the key point is *equal* opportunities, that a black person or a white person is judged on their abilities and not on their race. Given inequalities of education, ability does not always equal academic achievement, so on a case-by-case basis the points score may well need some adjustment, but that's as true for white inner-city students as for black. The race issue only comes into it bcos black students are more likely to be attending poorer inner-city schools and/or living in neighbourhoods with social problems which make education difficult.

"Reparations" should not enter the equation. It is not the purpose of a university to favour one group over another to try and right past wrongs. Should there also be points bonuses for Chinese-American students, to make up for the Chinese labourers who were the backbone of the railway-building workforce? Or for Japanese-American students, to make up for the internment and confiscation of property from Japanese-Americans during WW2? Or should black people also pay lower taxes to make up for the money lost by their X-great-grandparents during slavery? By considering "reparation" in the equation, you're explicitly refusing to allow equality to people in the student body, workforce or society *today*. Either you have reparation or you have equality. It is not possible to have both. Me, I'd rather have equality; history shows that anything else is a recipe for disaster.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Jun 03 - 12:51 PM

John Hardly make a very good point about "diversity" being touted when it is simply 'difference for differences sake' that is being accomplished in many cases.

In any case, it is not some sort of "universal truth" that diversity is always a desired value. Yes, in this global society, we MUST learn to cope with and interact with people who are quite 'different', in culture, language, appearance..etc., but there is not universal agreement about the degree & circumstances for this interaction. Some cultures, notably the French (including those in Quebec)and Japanese, wish to keep certain aspects of their society/culture/language homogenous.

We already see, in the USA and Germany and Great Britain, among others, the conflicts which arise from having large communities of ethnic/cultural minorities competing for land, jobs, TV time, political clout...etc. Are the benefits of 'diversity' outweighed by the struggle to constantly adjust the rules and systems for making a heterogeneous society work? It just depends of who you ask!...and maybe on what time of day..*wry smile*

We in the USA have little choice now...we ARE a society which has built itself on immigration and diversity, and 'race' is NOT the issue, 'culture' is. We were just informed that Latinos now outnumber African-Americans as the largest minority, but various Asian groups (and sub-groups) are also quite visable, especially in larger metropolitan areas. It sure is an interesting thing to consider what will happen if the Caucasian (or whatever you want to call the current 'majority') ever becomes de facto minority.....

I do NOT have the answer to these questions, but I am seriously concerned that the issues are being sidestepped every day, as they are just too awkward and sensitive to confront directly for most politicians.

(BTW...yesterdays editorial page in the Wash Post had this opinion ny Michael Kinsley on the Supreme Court decision....it makes me think)

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jun 03 - 09:40 PM

Graham, John, et al:

One may feel that given the choice, that white males (who run the country) will make the correct choices. Wrong. They are a self serving paranoid group who will pretty much always make self serving and paranoid choices. Why? A team of sociologist and psycholgists would have a field day with this one.

I mean, just look at all the recently found corruption and at its base: white guys.

John says, "Well, my grand daddy didn't own no slaves and I'm a "Quaker", so I'm, righteous and good."

Problem is, that when it comes to white guys, you gotta beat 'em with a stich to make 'em do right. And even when you do they either buy good lawyers or good politicans. That's the way it is.

Now, as fir black folks. Can anyone argue that the infastructure created by black folks led to the initial wealth of the US. And, that wealth has been carried forth from generation to generation on the backs of poor black and white laborers?

So, now it comes to trying to bring up the rear of the flock. Why? Because it's the right thing to do. Because it shows appreciaytion for the labor of black folks in creating this country. It shows an appreciation for just how badly the deck is stacked against black folk in the US. And it's way past0 time to do it.

And if the governemnt has to be at the controls of this social engineering, then so be it. It won't get done with John's good intentions.

It comes down to the question of fairness. And appreciation. And looking at ourselves and our history. It comes down to not bullsh*ting ourselves with the lame "But I didn'd have no slaves nor did my daddy". Yes, you can hide behind that crap only so long. But you know in your heart that a lot of funky sh*t has goneown on black folks, and continues to go down. Yeah, you can run, but you cannot hide...

A discussion about slavery is way past due and remedies for its effects even longer past due...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: NicoleC
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 12:47 AM

John, I'm afraid that you can't discuss this topic rationally with Bobert. He feels that all white people are evil and lazy and all black people are poor, hardworking and hated. It's a variation of the "noble savage" theme, and I'm afraid it shows more bias than Bobert would like to admit.

Of course the issue of reparations is complex and deserves discussion, but I've yet to find anyone who can have a rational discussion about it or has any ideas beyond a mass communist-inspired redistribution of wealth, which would harm a lot of innocent people on the fiction that black people are the only ones who ever did any work in this country and white people are the only ones who ever benefitted.

They don't have any functional ideas because there isn't a remotely fair way to do it. The government doesn't have any money to give away, it all comes from taxes. I find it ironic that certain activists (with whom I agree) who bitterly complain about the regressive nature of our tax system, which disproportionately impacts poorer people, should then suggest a huge tax increase to spread around the same money in the middle and lower classes without affecting the richer tax brackets much at all -- which defeats the whole redistribution of wealth scheme.

But like affirmative action, certain groups don't care who else might be trampled upon (usually equally poor members of other ethinicities), as long as their particular group gets preference, be it women or blacks or hispanics, or whichever is the cause nearest and dearest their heart. All rhetoric aside, what the Supreme Court did was insist that colleges must review all applicants individually, and can use judgement for creating an effective freshman body, but can't arbitraily show preference based on skin color of any shade. That's good news for everyone except admissions counselors, because it moves away from blind scores and quotas and statistics and judge candidates on the relative merit of their achievements vs. their background. Halleleuia!

Hey, I have some black slave ancestors, can I claim that big theorectical reparations check? Is it "one drop" and you're a 'negro'? (Oh yeah, that's a step forward.) Or shall we just assume that this pale skin is white enough, and measure darkness of skin tone? Who decides how dark? Who measures it to prove the claims? (I'm sorry, you aren't dark enough to qualify!) Or do you have to prove your ancestors were slaves? Hmmm... what about those white slaves some of us are descended from? And who do we collect the taxes from for these reparations -- only white people? What about poor white people -- do we take their money away and give it to equally poor black people? Do we tax rich black people, too? What about hispanic and asian immigrants, and those of their descent? If a black person has white blood in them, does that disqualify them from both the tax and the payment? Or does it just even out?

Damn this is complicated. But I keep seeing all these ficticious numbers like $40,000 per black person will fix everything!

Hey, WAIT! I want reparations for being female! After all, I have far more centuries of oppression and repression behind me -- even black people got the vote in the US first. Let's tax all the evil male descendants of ancestors who oppressed all the innocent women in history and give the money to women like me.

So let's say we citizens cough up $40,000 per black person based on some sort of set of undetermined criteria, and in the process nearly bankrupt local economic systems because of the debt load incurred by those undetermined people who are taxed to provide this benefit -- including schools, emergency services, local arts program, etc. Is that going to "fix" the problem? Will that make racism go away? Or will another generation come along and still insist things are the way they want them, and they want another round of reparations?

I'll be damned if I can come up with any functional ideas for reparations either. Everything I can think of is stuff I think we should do anyway because it's the right thing to do NOW -- and that's almost as insulting as suggesting that a fat check will make the suffering of generations of slaves conveniently go away.

{rant off}

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Grab
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 07:57 AM

Problem is, that when it comes to white guys, you gotta beat 'em with a stich to make 'em do right.

If any of us said that about blacks, we'd be drummed out of the Cat...

As for the infrastructure of the US, that only holds true for the South where cotton-picking was the major industry. In mining areas (ie. mostly the central/northern US) white and Chinese/Asian workers were the majority, and the Chinese immigrants were treated very badly. The foundation for America's current wealth (in the same way as Britain's wealth extending into this century, and Germany's wealth today) is its mineral deposits and thence the technical innovation springing from having quantities of cheap metal available for engineering, so it certainly is possible to argue that you're wrong.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 08:52 AM

Now, now, Nicole. I did, in my defense include appreaciation for both black and "white" poor laborers that built the infastructure if the US.

And as for reparations, who says it has to be in the form of a "check" that comes in the mail. I didn't. AA is a type of reparations in my book. And, no, reparartions don't have to target just black folks but should be aimed at poor whites, Orientals and women and anyone else whose labor has been *stolen*.

Now as fir miners, Graham, there were plenty of black miners. And since the skills in mining were similar to tunneling there were also a disporportionate number of blacks digging tunnels for lousy wages.

And lastly, when I drive thru inner cities here on the east coast and see vast neighborhoods populted by black folks in massive housing projects and read of their school's in disrepair, and then drive thru Loudoun County, Va. with its gleaming mansions and schools, I have to wonder "How did things get this way". And when I ride thruareas of my own state where mountain folks worked in mines for lousy wages, and now have black lung I wonder the same thing. Yeah, I know that everything ain't fair but it ain't exactly communism for wealth to be spread out a little fairer and based more on labor and less on being born with money...

And that's about all I'm gonna say on the subject, Nicole, 'cause I hate being on the outher side of the fence from you 'cause you can wear out this ol' hillbilly with one hand tied behind yer back...

Commie Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: artbrooks
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 09:08 AM

Let's see...my 1/4 German ancestry pays reparations to my probable-but-unproveable 1/32 former slave ancestry...no, wait, that's not fair because the Germans didn't get here until the 1890s...maybe my 1/8 French should pay off the 1/8 Irish? After all, the Irish suffered worse than any other "white" immigrants, didn't they? Ask any American Irishman! And nobody likes the French. I know!! The micro-share that represents the English ancestors that came over in the 1740s should pay off everyone else...hang on, aren't those the same ones that fought to create this country in the 1770s and to free the slaves in the 1860s...and wasn't there a g-g-g-great granduncle that didn't survive the Civil War?

Maybe we should stick to leveling the playing field as best we can right now, and not dwell on what has gone before?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Mark Clark
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 02:33 PM

Our local PBS affiliate just ran the Nova episode “RACE: THE POWER OF AN ILLUSION - The Difference Between Us.”

“The first episode examines several discoveries that illustrate why humans cannot be subdivided into races, and reveals that there are no characteristics, no traits - not even one gene - that distinguish all members of one "race" from all members of another.”

I thought it was fascinating to learn that the idea of race has no basis in science and is really just a socio-economic fiction to identify and control imagined “groups” of people.

Since our differences are really cultural and economic rather than genetic, how important is it that we maintain one culture or another as separate from others? The dominant culture in the U.S. is decidedly Western European. I, for one, have every confidence that Western Europe is quite capable of maintaining its own culture and doesn't need the U.S. to do it for them. I love to see the cultural elements of other groups being incorporated into the dominant culture here. I also love to see regional customs and variations. If “regional” turns out to mean urban vs. suburban vs. rural, that's okay too as long each “region”is equally advantaged.

In my 61 years, I've seen no evidence that one cultural or socio-economic group is more noble, hard-working, trustworthy, larcenous or despicable than any other. No evidence that an eight-tone scale is better or worse than a five-tone or that bright colors are any better or worse than subdued tones. The idea that we can work to put each socio-economic cultural group on the same footing as the dominant one seems like a great idea to me. Let's do it.

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Bill D
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 07:41 PM

if we are gonna talk reparations and justice, we might as well just give the USA back to the Indians Native Americans...(and there are lawsuits that pop up occasionally asking for big chunks!).

fairness must start NOW..with awards of cash or land ONLY to those who were specifically and personally cheated, swindled and driven from what was rightfully theirs...As Nicole so eloquently points out, there just is NO formula available which would redress all the injuries fairly...and/or sanely! Human history is full of arguments over "who was here first" and "who abused whom first"...

When we get the Blacks properly compensated, perhaps we can head off to the middle-east and draw some nice lines in the sand that will satisfy the Jews & Arabs, hmmm??....and then there are some areas in the Balkans that REALLY need a nice new map drawn....and India and Pakistan will be waiting in the wings. *sigh*.....

wow...this could take MONTHS!

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 08:08 PM

Mark, that was the documentary to which I referred in my earlier post. I gotta admit, I came away from it shaking my head -- I mean, I musta misunderstood it because it seemed like, when all was said and done,it was merely a semantic discussion about what "race" means.

I never thought that "race" used in the context that would differentiate me from, say, a black man, or and oriental, contatined any thought whatsoever of "species". But that was the thrust of the entire documentary -- that we were all the same species.

Again, I didn't get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: Mark Clark
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 09:50 PM

Reparations made sense for the Japanese-Americans who were imprisoned in camps during WWII but I don't think reparations are in order for wrongs committed generations ago. What we must do now is try to ensure that current generations aren't disadvantaged on merely historical grounds.

John, It wasn't an exercise in semantics. The scientists are saying that that there is nothing in our genes that supports the idea of race. A white male of European descent may be genetically closer to a female of African descent than two African females may be to each other.

The early homonids who migrated from Africa all died out. Another species, homo sapiens, arose to take their place and eventually migrated out of Africa as well. The origin of homo sapiens was much too recent for evolution to have resulted in genetically distinct races. Surface differences in groups of modern homo sapiens exist only because of group isolation and the random tendency of certain genes to become dominant. All possible human genes are found in each and every human group. As the promo blurb points out “…there are no characteristics, no traits - not even one gene - that distinguish all members of one ‘race’ from all members of another.”

      - Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: John Hardly
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 10:08 PM

So, again, it changes nothing in our current understanding of the word "race". I don't believe I ever thought anything other than the concept illustrated by your pulled quote.

My dictionary merely says: A group of persons connected by common descent, blood, or heredity.   Nothing about that is any different in light of your documentary.

Nobody I know EVER thought that the current races couldn't mix into oblivion of distinction within a few short generations. Nobody I know EVER thought that "race" was the same thing as "species" -- but that is clearly the implication of the documentary.

When something so clearly that misrepresents the reality of current understanding, one kinda wonders.....why?

Subject: RE: BS: Devil Racism Scores Big
From: NicoleC
Date: 27 Jun 03 - 10:49 PM

John, you don't have to go very far back to find all kinds of "scientific" reasoning for explaining why certain races were so much inferior to whites. It was "proven" in the 60's that blacks were of an entirely different evolution. Ironic, since even the most far-right Christian bigot can't deny the Bible claims all races are descended from Noah.

And you don't have to go far to find the same crap today.

In truth, though, the point that race was a social construct and not a genetic one can only be proved with the recent mapping of the genetic code. While the choice of skin color is about as relevant as the choice of refrigerator color is to the inner functions, a lot of people somehow think that the mild differences in general physical aspects equals some sort of deeper difference.