Affirmative Action
POSTED BY: deepgirl187
UPDATED: Thursday, November 9, 2006 23:36
VIEWED: 3834
PAGE 2 of 3
I don't agree with Affirmative Action.
Why should I (being white... true enough) be punished (by giving minorities preferred treatment)?
Let's say that my ancestors (hypothetically) suppressed a race of purple beagles. Why should I be punished for it? I am not doing it, in fact I quite like purple beagles.
The suppression is over, basic education (which tends to be the standard for all further opportunities) is freely available to the public (no discrimination) and further education is based on merit without regard to whether you are me or a purple beagle!
Any further action is basically implying that purple beagles are stupid! Then you bring up the point that my ancestors stole some of the purple beagles land... well I don't own it anymore. In fact, most of it has changed hands so many times it's hard to tell who owns it and if we can it probably is owned by a business or corporation.
Well there is no response in this case... what am I supposed to do: give the purple beagles all the land (which can be considered the moral thing) but by doing so displace countless others who are then forced to live in the sky (which cannot be considered moral)?
Affirmative Action is nice in theory, flawed in the thesis, and in reality becomes a hypocirsy by supressing others, who will then require affirmative action is carried out to its conclusion... and so on...
Life goes on, stop the discrimination, and move on...
And if someday on some little piss-ant moon/My hand is a little too slow, or my aim a little bit off/At least I’ll go down fighting, not lying abed surrounded by quacks - "Sir Warrick" by Geezer
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
People have different skills, educations, interests, and motivations. People should never be viewed as equals when it comes to employment and education.. Some will try harder than others. And should be rewarded for it. Hard work can not be legislated. The American dream should be based on merit.
AA. had it's place in history. It was needed. It no longer is.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I'm not as sure that the system is self-balancing, although I really love that concept. I think (simplistically) that the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer."
AA. is not about poor and rich. There are more white Americans living in poverty than blacks or Latinos. AA does not help them at all. It would be wrong if it were there just to balance the social classes. It is even worse that it is mostly about skin color.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Here's a radical idea, if, for instance, black people have access to a lower standard of education why don't we improve their standard of education"
Here in the N.E. more money is spent on urban schools(per student) than in other systems, the teachers are paid more, but the students do much worse than the others. Why? Is the standard of education any less? Is it more? Let's face it Urban people(White, black, Latino) don't push their children as hard. Bill Cosby was right.....
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll second Kaneman's statements.
And if someday on some little piss-ant moon/My hand is a little too slow, or my aim a little bit off/At least I’ll go down fighting, not lying abed surrounded by quacks - "Sir Warrick" by Geezer
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TPage:
The suppression is over ...
This is the main sticking point in this debate and it's the reason that many liberals are as uncomfortable with affirmative action as are conservatives.
In my mind it all comes down to this basic point: if you think that what happened as a result of the civil rights movement wiped out a couple of centuries of institutional prejudice and bigotry taught from parent to child then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think we could spend the rest of our lives working to counter that negative inertia and still have decades of work ahead of us.
If you think racism is only of the overt kind (burning crosses and lynching people) then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think of racism as any word or decision that is influenced by learned bigotry.
If you think that every American child that is born starts out with the same advantages and disadvantages then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think that millions of Americans are born at a disadvantage simply because of who they were born to.
Can you honestly answer the question, "I would have more opportunity in this country if I was born black," in the affirmative? I can't.
The best decision you as an American can make to ensure your success in life is to choose to be born rich, white, male and heterosexual. There is inherited privilege built into the system for each of those groups. If you're not even aware of the privileges you enjoy then any attempt to lessen their strength will be seen as discrimination against you.
* edit to add: TPage, I'm not directing my comments at you (I realize you're from Canada). I'm just using your post as a springboard.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Can you honestly answer the question, "I would have more opportunity in this country if I was born black," in the affirmative? I can't.
I believe your question is flawed, I believe it should read "I would have the SAME opportunity..."
If I answered my version of the question... I might say no. But here in Canada I know many non-white people who are have the same opportunities. It just happens that as the white population makes the majority of the population they appear to be represented better.
And yes, certain races do not have the same opportunities but it is not because of government or even cultural policies or norms. Canada has many immigrants, and they do not arrive with the same level of education, or what not.
Canada has been number 2 on the U.N. list of places for live for a number of years now for a reason. Am I to be put to a disadvantage because an immigrant argues he doesn't have the same opportunities? That is apples and oranges; you are comparing Canada with the immigrant's country.
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
In my mind it all comes down to this basic point: if you think that what happened as a result of the civil rights movement wiped out a couple of centuries of institutional prejudice and bigotry taught from parent to child then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think we could spend the rest of our lives working to counter that negative inertia and still have decades of work ahead of us.
If you think racism is only of the overt kind (burning crosses and lynching people) then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think of racism as any word or decision that is influenced by learned bigotry.
If you think that every American child that is born starts out with the same advantages and disadvantages then affirmative action does not make sense. I, on the other hand, think that millions of Americans are born at a disadvantage simply because of who they were born to.
Here I do not know exactly what you are referring to. However an easy example is terms such as negro. While I agree negro should not be used, at the same time why should I (a white male) be suppressed from using it when a black male can say it whenever he wants. Does it stop being derogatory simply depending on which race says it?
My counter example involves the word Cowboy. Cowboy was originally a derogatory term for ranch hands that stole cattle from other ranchers. Should we enact legislation that states anyone using the term Cowboy without referring to someone stealing Cattle is a criminal?
And if someday on some little piss-ant moon/My hand is a little too slow, or my aim a little bit off/At least I’ll go down fighting, not lying abed surrounded by quacks - "Sir Warrick" by Geezer
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
* edit to add: TPage, I'm not directing my comments at you (I realize you're from Canada). I'm just using your post as a springboard.
None taken, as long as there ain't no direct jabs... then I might have to kill ya!
And I figured you knew I was Canadian, what with my big banner and all!
And if someday on some little piss-ant moon/My hand is a little too slow, or my aim a little bit off/At least I’ll go down fighting, not lying abed surrounded by quacks - "Sir Warrick" by Geezer
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
TPage,
The reason I phrased the question the way I did is because one of the strongest arguments against affirmative action is that it unfairly discriminates in an effort to combat previous discrimination. Or, to say it another way, that those who benefit from affirmative action have more of an advantage than those who do not benefit from affirmative action. For this to be logical, at least to me, then it should follow that it would be better to be born to a group that benefits from affirmative action.
I have to beg ignorance in terms of what is going on in Canada. I do think that there are fundamental historical differences between our two countries. The institution of slavery really did serious damage to our national psyche that is still present. Generations of Americans were taught that blacks were sub-human and deserving of their slave status. That didn't just go away with the end of the Civil War. Many institutional measures were put in place before and after the Civil War that had a dramatically negative impact on African Americans. Some of that was done away with because of the civil rights movement but the underlying belief system that allowed those regressive policies to last so long was not dealt with. I'm not sure if Canada had something similar in its history.
As far as your last point, here is an example of where I'm coming from: it has been shown time and time again that African American homebuyers are shown different properties than white homebuyers. Many times this is intentional on the part of the realtor. But not every realtor is out there making conscious decisions on this. There are just some automatic assumptions that kick in that result in different actions depending on the ethnic background of the homebuyer.
We could do something similar with respect to women's salaries. Women make less money than men for the same job. Pretty much across the board. It's not that anyone is actually thinking, "I'm going to pay this person less money because they are a women." It's a lot more subtle than that.
Neither of these two example have relevance for affirmative action directly. But they get at an underlying belief system that is unquestioned and does relate to the mindset that highlights a need for something like affirmative action.
Hope that clarifies things.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by deepgirl187:
So in the interest of rational, intelligent discussion (emphasis on intelligent), I thought I would ask everyone's opinion on the subject.
I think that the Constitution requires you to make room for the irrational opinions, even if some of the rational ones must be excluded.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME