|
| quote: | Originally posted by Renegade
Decades of "oppression" don't just reverse themselves once you give a certain group of people voting rights. The fact that the African-Americans are still the most underprivilaged, poverty-stricken race in the US should be evidence enough for this. It takes initiative - proactive initiative - to restore some balance, and to reduce the income gap. To quote Michael Moore:
Poverty begets poverty. Privilage begets privilage. This is an irreversible cycle without intervening ideas such as "affirmative action" to give the underprivilaged a chance. |
Suppose you had two competing businesses that are nearly identical, but one of the hires the best candidate regardless of race, while the other hires only whites. The country which taps the greater pool for human resources is going to simply outcompete the company that chooses to hire on a discriminatory basis because they are going to have more good employees. The result of this natural process is that today, the only type of racial discrimination left is affirmative action itself.
| quote: |
The underprivileged don't have access to the same standard of education as the wealthy, so they are destined for a lifetime of poorly paying jobs, while giving birth to offspring destined for the same sort of life for exactly the same reasons. |
That doesn't have anything to do with race. Poor inner-city whites don't have access to any better standard of education as poor inner-city blacks. This is not a problem that can be solved with affirmative action, it is a problem that can be solved with educational reforms. Trying to solve it with affirmative action is like trying to put a band-aid on a tumor.
| quote: |
If you oppose affirmative action, then I can only ask if you are concerned about the obvious discrepancies in the level of education/income between the races? If so, how else do propose these discrepancies can be narrowed other than by actions such as these?
|
These discrepancies are the result of a variety of factors, none of which is race. If people whose last names begin with the letter 'A' happened to have a 5% higher income than those whose began with the letter 'Z', should we give people hiring preference for alphabetically late last names?
| quote: |
And, by the way, it's not about placing underqualified people into jobs/college courses that they are obviously not competent enough to be in, |
Whether or not that's what it is about, that is what it does.
| quote: |
There is obviously an issue of "reverse racism", but, so far as I see it, this "reverse racism" is literally the only way to rectify such a long period of actual racism. |
So you're willing to sacrifice principle for expediency? Don't you see that you're only creating greater divisiveness between the races by these policies? If minorities want to be considered equal, they shouldn't go around identifying themselves as a seperate group.
| quote: |
Blacks and hispanics - even where they have credentials equalling those of their white counterparts - are not being given the same opportunities. |
I don't believe that to be the case. The issue in actuality is that rich people have an advantage over poor people. Since a lot of wealthy families trace their wealth back past civil rights, it's no surprise that there are more rich white people at this point in time. But that doesn't mean that discrimination is still taking, place.
| quote: |
If affirmative action is "racist" in any way, then what exactly is a society without affirmative action? |
Not racist. 
| quote: |
More evidence that it's a self perpetuating cycle:
Today, as Francine Blau and John Graham documented in a 1990 article in The Quarterly Journal of Economics, the major source of wealth is inheritance. Although at all income levels, blacks save more of their money than whites do, black families now have comparatively less wealth than whites do, because black parents had less to bestow upon their children. And the children of today's black families will, in turn, have relatively less wealth, because their parents will have less to bestow upon them. |
More evidence that this is a class issue rather than a race issue. According to your recommended policies, poor white people really get the shaft, don't they?
Here's one:
| quote: |
Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and regulations at 45 C.F.R. §§ 80.1 et seq.
Title Vl prohibits race discrimination in any program receiving federal funds. This law applies to both admissions and employees. Violations can result in withdrawal of federal funds or suits by private individuals.
Cases brought under Title Vl, such as University of California Board of Regents v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978), establish that in an affirmative action context, race can be one of several factors used in admissions decisions. |
"race can be one of several factors used in admissiosn decisions" If that isn't racism in its purest form, then racism does not and never has existed.
And another:
| quote: |
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq., and regulations at 34 C.F.R. §§ 106.1 et seq., 45 C.F.R. §§ 86.1 et seq.
Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in all educational institutions that receive federal funding. Title IX's affirmative action provisions apply to both employment and admission of students. Violations can result in withdrawal of federal funds or suits by private individuals. Regulations promulgated under Title IX, 34 C.F.R. § 106.3, authorize affirmative or remedial action in instances in which members of one sex must be treated differently to overcome the specific effects of past discrimination. |
Title IX demands equivalent (not just equal) treatment of men and women. But men and women are not equivalent, so its premise is entirely irrational.
I could continue, but I don't want to belabor the point...
| quote: |
I think this shows that affirmative action is about undoing a long history of racism (and the self-perpetuating income discrepancies that have resulted from it) and implicit racism that undeniably still exists in US society and is not about using "racism" to combat a different type of "racism".
So, any thoughts? |
Here's a thought: "I need to be treated preferentially, so I can be equal" is a self-contradictory statement. Affirmative action is fundamentally a self-contradictory policy.
No amount of rhetoric can erase the simple fact that the fundamental ideology of affirmative action is axiomatically false. To support it, quite simply, is to be irrational.
I could have applied to school as a minority. But I didn't. To do so would have been so incredibly dishonorable that I would never have been able to look myself in the mirror again.
|