Affirmative Action

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]Donzi wrote:

You are beginning to form a circular argument. Perhaps it would clear up things if you defined ‘race’.[/quote]

Poor logic. Racism, at its core, has little to do with true race and more to do with stereotypes on appearance. What this means is, a black girl who is extremely light skinned and could pass for white would get much less (or none at all) racism thrown her way for being black in public. How is it circular to point out cultural differences?

If I have a patient in my operatory who is a young white kid, but I pick up on the fact that he was raised in a similar cultural environment as I was, then my responses to him, in an effort to treat him better and communicate with him better will not be the same as my responses towards someone of a different cultural (or generational) background.

If I have a young black kid in my operatory who responds as if he was raised in Beverly Hills by rich parents, I will immediately understand on what level I need to keep the conversation. I will probably use little to no “slang terminology” (or base my responses on how he responds to questions) when dealing with him and try to relate to him on that level.

At no time, however, will I be fake as far as who I am. The only thing that will change may be my speech and the psychology used in treatment.

What I wrote above about my patients requesting me again probably comes because I am able to relate to others like that. I was raised around many different cultures. Even the way I am typing this post signifies my perceived audience. You can’t ignore that. It isn’t a circular argument to recognize, acknowledge, tolerate and accept different cultural backgrounds.

Racism is ignorance. That is all it is. Like the lady locking her door upon seeing me, it is an immediate judgement of someone based on color (appearance) with no attempt to notice the person. This is also why I have been asked so many times on this site if that was me in my avatar. Think about it.

One thing we do know, however, is that this form of ignorance had pervaded our society so greatly that nothing was equal 20 years ago whether it be schooling, occupation, or social status. I am very interested in how you all would have handled that much blatant ignorance on a scale that large without Affirmative Action that would have gotten the result that it did. Please, go ahead and explain your option to me. I am dying to hear it. Just remember, providing an option requires you to understand that there was a problem that great to begin with.

82

The problem with Affirmative Action is not in the concept. The concept is that everyone should have all the opportunities to acheive. The playing field should be level. The problem is in the interpretation and execution. It is done by people who have never been on the “other side of the fence” so to speak. When done this way, it becomes a numbers game. This is the wrong way to approach it because someone will inevitably be slighted.

Also, I’ve read responses about other races acheiving goals, however, how many of them would truly have acheived as much as they have without help from the Civil Rights movement? Without that work, all people (not just black) got opportunities that were denied to them. The Civil Right movement was not just black people. Black people were just at the forefront as the ones who were most obviously discriminated against. Think about it.

Additionally, how many other races in this country had their idendity stripped from them and treated less than cattle? None. Say what you want to, but the reason that many of the other races in this country (Asians, Jews, Latinos etc.) can acheive so much is that their cultural heritage is in tact. Having that strong sense of identity and cultural pride is a powerful tool in combating much of the racism in the world. Sadly, most african americans can’t trace their heritage like others in this country and the sense of community is just not there. It is much deeper than people realize.

83

[quote]Croooz wrote:
In a perfect world I believe that’s what should be done is take race, sex, names…anything which could identify a person off of applications for schools and jobs.[/quote]

It’s funny you say this. Employment applications do not request this information or note it as required anywhere on the document. Thus making it VERY hard to fill AA quotas when scheduling your interviews unless the recruiter does some racial profiling based on name/fraternities/sororities/colleges etc that are predominately whatever ethnic group is being targeted for said quotas.

(Keep in mind, most applications could include a request that you “volunteer” this information and rest assured it’s used for EEO reporting issues and AA tracking and efforts.)

84

I’d like to mention a side of this that I haven’t seen referenced in this discussion but is very much connected to many things that were referenced - one, the ability of our educational system to actually a) equally educate people b) grade them according to standards that mean something. Two, the ability of colleges to actually evaluate who are the best candidates, i.e., who are the people that should go to (their) college.

So, one by one:

1.a) - Equal education - Does anyone really believe that every single high school provides the same quality of education? No, because it doesn’t. There are huge differences, and usually you get what you pay for. These days, more than EVER the quality of the education that people get is basically proportional to the amount of money their parents have- How can a kid that was educated in a Public School in the middle of a poor neighborhood ever compete with a kid educated in a top private high school? So you cannot just look at the impact of racism and discrimination on the kids directly, but you have to look at what their parents - and grandparents, and great-grand parents - had to endure and how it affected their income. Very rarely people have huge jumps in income from one generation to the other, within the same country…

How to make up for this disparity? Unless you have a better idea, AA is the only thing I can see.

1.b) Grading. The way high-school students are graded is ridiculous. Our teachers and teaching programs reward people for obedience and hard work - not for intelligence, creativity or leadership. People who show independent thinking are quickly shot down by the school system, by their peers, and sometimes even by their parents. Maybe once upon a time the US needed lots of “worker bees”, people that are disciplined and obedient, but not creative. These days, however, the only way the US is going to survive in the Global Economy is by having the most brilliant and creative leaders. Do naturally brilliant and creative leaders excel in high school? They get by. Do they get the best grades? No.

I am not saying only the high schools are to blame for this - I have the feeling that in this country for some reason people still prefer discipline, obedience and hard work over leadership, creativity, independent thinking and intelligence. I don’t need to dwell too far (e.g., into politics) to see some examples: how many people in this thread mentioned the Asians’ ability to succeed? Well, Asians succeed because Asian culture is all about discipline, obedience and hard work - but NOT leadership, creativity and intelligence ? or independent thinking. If I look at my workplace, where I have a huge diversity, I can easily see that kind of behavior is very present in my Asian co-workers, much more than in my European, Indian or African ones. On the other hand, none of the leaders and none the creative and intelligent people are Asian ? mostly because their Asian parents did a pretty good job at killing any independent thought or innate creativity or intelligence they might have had (they?ll actually admit to this and are proud of it).

Of course, discipline and hard work are ALSO important - essential even - and SHOULD be part of the things that are given an incentive to, however the way our schools emphasize it OVER other more important traits ? in today?s world - is ridiculous.

Even though most black people I know were hugely punished in high school by the fact that their parents taught them to be creative and independent, I’ll admit AA is not at all what solves this problem. However, I wanted to mention it because I feel that it is a much bigger fish we need to fry before starting to talk about getting rid of AA.

But going back to AA…

  1. The ability of colleges to evaluate their candidates.
    It is proven by several studies that people tend to recruit or better accept other people that have similar backgrounds and culture to their own. For example, people with degrees tend to hire people with degrees, people without degrees will hire people without degrees. White people will always tend to hire white people, black people will tend to hire blacks, and Asians will always hire Asians. Trust me; I’ve seen this in action many times - both in my workplace and in other workplaces.

One blatant case was a Subway restaurant near where I work, where when management changed from a Mexican owner to a Korean, all Mexican employees were fired and replaced with Korean, except for one white guy who stayed.

Most colleges are run by white people. So what do you think happens?

If that doesn’t make a case for AA I don’t know in what planet you guys live in.

(and before somebody wonders but is “afraid” to ask, I’m very much white, and I grew up in an upper middle class, all-white neighborhood. So I’m not trying to defend anything that would have brought me any kind of personal advantage - except that I would have certainly have enjoyed college more if I didn’t have a 98% white and Asian classroom ? it was like going to college with the Borg).

85

[quote]hspder wrote:
I’d like to mention a side of this that I haven’t seen referenced in this discussion but is very much connected to many things that were referenced - one, the ability of our educational system to actually a) equally educate people b) grade them according to standards that mean something. Two, the ability of colleges to actually evaluate who are the best candidates, i.e., who are the people that should go to (their) college.
[/quote]

A couple of issues you mentioned I’d like to address. Didn’t want to just re-quote the whole thing though. Please keep in mind that I am a public high school science teacher, but I attended private schools (despite being close to dirt poor) through highschool and went to both private and state universities.

1)As far as differences in public schools, the way public schools are funded I don’t see why or how some schools are “richer” than others. Property taxes which provide most of public school funding is split evenly throughout the state by number of students in a school regardless of local property taxes. There are occasional county Levy’s but we haven’t had one in my (rich end) district in 6 years, (because it often leads to conservative politicians cutting state funding as a response) (Again I am independent). Teachers get paid slightly more in inner city districts but the main difference between suburban and rural schools is 1) forced bussing that wastes 90 minutes of kids time every day 2) Good teachers refusing to stay in the inner city districts that they lived in and 3) Parents in richer neighborhoods provide kids with educational advantages-computers, internet, books, calculators etc. Changing these 3 things can do 100x more good than AA RIGHT NOW (Although we agree it was a necessity at the time, read the other posts). This is where I differ form Prof X because I think these things will get ignored as long as people think AA is leveling the playing field.

  1. Grading is a big problem in my opinion. I went out on a limb 3 years ago and decided to use proficiency based grading exclusively in my classes. No one else will do it, and there have been roadblocks put in play in my district that make it harder. I start the semester of science by giving the kids a list of about 25 essential learning objectives for the class. Their grade becomes the average of their performance of assessments of these 25 objectives which are each assessed independent of the others. I may give a test covering 5 objectives, but each one gets a seperate score. I tried using a 4 point scale (4=advanced, 3=proficient; 2=minimally passing; 1=not passing) and then converting to a grade, but parents and administators pretended that it was confusing, so I switched to a 10 point scale. I don’t grade homework. I don’t grade learning activities done in class. I want the kids to learn that there’s a damn good reaon why I asked them to do the homework or activity-that its cogent, not just there to keep em “ON TASK!” If a kid can get 9s and 10s on all of her/his objectives by trying the first couple of homework problems, and stopping there, or listening intently but not necessarily TAKING NOTES! then they get an A. Oh… I also allow kids to reassess for objectives provided that they meet my terms until they get to the level they are happy with, but they have to prove to me that they have acquired the knowedge or ability that they wish to improve. I never get to the end of a semester and have kids ask me for EXTRA CREDIT! They are graded on their proficiency-however they got there first try, second try under my terms, but no extra credit. I got higher quality of work on the PREVIOUSLY GRADED classwork than I got when I graded it.

Problems: 1 teacher trying to do this. I’ve had kids in 9th grade who I got to work under this system, who by the time I had them in 11th grade chemistry had been steered back to the “accumulation of points” model. When face with the choice of doing homework in my class that would help them learn an objective for 2 weeks down the line, and completing all 50 math problems for 25 POINTS in a math class, they put my homework assignments at the bottom of the stack or even figured they could leave 1 more book at school that night. Problem 2: I had parents come in to conferences, and I showed them their kids proficiency score on the objectives of the class. The questions I always got were: Where’s the homework points? don’t you give participation points? You mean you grade students solely on their objective level of proficiency on the curricular objectives of the science class??? I’ll have to talk to the principal about that. Johnny’s always gotten As through middle school. If he tries his hardest shouldn’t he get an A? Where’s the extra credit? Teachers are often lazy and want to be able to use the threat of points to keep kids behaving. Or at least their too lazy to consider the options. Down with the NEA!

86

Having apparently spent more time living and working in the hood than anyone in this discussion so far, let me tell you what I used to tell my students who can handle it: Eventually, you have to reach the point where you say, So what? If some idiot won’t hire me or whatever because of my skin color, I’ll start my own goddamned business, work my nuts off, and buy the other guy out and give him the boot. If you spend all your time complaining about being a victim, then you will live like a victim.

You can’t have this attitude if you think like a liberal however – “there is only so much wealth out there, so someone can deny me access to it.” Bullshit. People CREATE wealth all the time in this country with good ideas and hard work. The overwhelming majority of consumers don’t know or care if your name is Kwondarius or Elmer – show me the goddamned money!

Here’s the perfect example of how the perpetually poor mindset works. In one of the urban areas that I taught in for years (almost completely black), there was a huge tension with the local African immigrant community. Why? Ethiopians moving to the area were doing so damn well, and it really pissed off the liberal black leadership. How could you convince people that all white people were out to get them because of their skin color when the blackest people on the planet were flourishing within two generations? College- educated children, business ownership, colorful and thriving neigborhoods. From nothing.

So I got to view the results close-up in the classroom. American black kids calling 1st generation, iridescent-purple-black Africans “white”. In case any of you haven’s spent much time in poor inner city America, being “white” is kind of like being called a “cocksucker” or a “traitor” or something similarly nasty. A kid who is acting “white” is someone who studies, does their homework, and tries to speak well. Please note that these things are held in absolute contempt by the kids that are saying this.

The Powell family, Condoleeza Rice, etc. are the ultimate whites. However, there are millions of blacks who could fall into the “white” category. They are simply not as newsworthy or interesting, I guess(?) as the black leadership that complains bitterly. You never hear Jesse Jackson wailing about them, of course, because these people are usually disinclined to listen to him.

One of the Ethiopian parents came to me in frustration. “Why are these people so bitter?” He was unable to bridge the cultural gulf that existed between African Americans and American blacks. Where they saw oppression, he saw almost unbelieveable opportunity. He lived in the basement of his boss’s house when he immigrated, had almost nothing to his name but a very rudimentary grasp of English. Within a decade, he had moved his family over, put himself through college, and was working on buying a new house.

So does racism exist? Surely. Some whites sometimes are racist towards blacks. They in turn are sometimes reviled, and their skin color used as an epithet. Internet tough guys make racist comments like “There is nothing white people fear more than a big black guy laughing,” while of course those white people wonder whether they are supposed to be paying the “big” guy the high dollar to be laughing at his own cleverness on the Internet. Some Indians, probably the most racist culture on the planet, abhor Indians from other parts of the subcontinent and all non-Indians. Ask a South Korean about a North Korean, or Chinese or Japanese about Koreans. Some Puerto Ricans wouldn’t cross the street to piss on a Haitian that was on fire. Some Hatians, in turn, would rather have their throats slit than talk to an “outsider”. Anti-semitism is alive and well. Some European Jews frown on Semitic Jews. Some Italians dislike their Sicilian brethren. Certainly, many Czechs breathed a sigh of relief to be separated from their “country bumpkin” Slovak neighbors. Want to offend a Cuban? Call him a Dominican. And on and on and on and on…

Idiots will always look for excuses to do badly. So here’s your solution POX. How about income-based affirmative action? I would guess that a poor white kid from a broken home and a culture that does not value education would have more to overcome than a middle class black kid from a good, hard-working family. Class-based affirmative action would still include poor black kids without causing stupid divisions along arbitrary lines like their skin color. Plus your son wouldn’t someday have to wonder about how many of his accomplishments were his own.

87

Look ProfX hit the nail on the head. The problem here is that opponents of AA (typically white males) need to be constantly reminded that RACISM EXISTS IN AMERICA TODAY. Until that sinks in there is no point going forward with this discussion.

Let me pose a question here that I asked of another group: How many of you believe that, across the board, a white student and a black student who do EQUAL work through all grades including high school will have EQUAL grades and an equal resume to show for it? How many of you believe that a white person and a black person that present IDENTICAL resumes will get the same number of job offers?

Now let’s assume I could show you documents that suggest those statements are NOT true, do you still think we as a society should allow those things to continue?

I love how the opposition to AA always works under the silent assumption that people who benefit from AA are somehow “lesser” and being given what they don’t deserve. Until some of you come to terms with that fact that EQUAL or BETTER candidates are given lower grades or fewer offers solely because of their race you will NEVER understand why affirmative action is necessary. In that case it may just be easier to think that “black people waste their money on rims”, or “what happened 150 years ago means nothing”, or some other nonsense. I want to live in the world where the civil rights movement happened 150 years ago and it abolished all racism from this country.

88

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Poor logic.[/quote]

Logic can’t be poor, it’s a binary concept. Something is either logical or it is not. Illogical, no, its not illogical because I used the qualifier forming.

[quote]
Racism, at its core, has little to do with true race and more to do with stereotypes on appearance. [/quote]

I have to assume that by true race you mean presence of color in your heritage. And by appearance you mean whether your dark or light skinned. And additionally as displaying stereotypical behaviour and dress.

[quote]
What this means is, a black girl who is extremely light skinned and could pass for white would get much less (or none at all) racism thrown her way for being black in public. [/quote]

Please clarify what you mean by being black in public.

[quote]
How is it circular to point out cultural differences?[/quote]
I never said your argument WAS circular, I said you were forming a circular argument. I am referring to the sum of your statements in this thread. Every sentence is a variable and just like algebra, there are laws that dictate validity. You stated previously that you would not hire someone you couldn’t relate to. That might not be a problem for you since you were raised in many different situations, however, if you follow that line of reasoning, it results in a circular argument. In other words, you can’t pick and choose your discrimination if you adopt a stance that condemns rascism. Either you condone rascism or you don’t. If you don’t condone rascism then you can’t logically argue that you are within your logical bounds by not hiring someone on the grounds of not being able to relate. Because inherent in being able to relate is the very essence of what makes someone a member of said race. You are mixing terms in an attempt to point out the big picture. It is a very good way to keep things collective and evaluate objectivally, it is also completely inconsistant with logical argument progression and can not result in a valid and sound conclusion.

[quote]
If I have a patient in my operatory who is a young white kid, but I pick up on the fact that he was raised in a similar cultural environment as I was, then my responses to him, in an effort to treat him better and communicate with him better will not be the same as my responses towards someone of a different cultural (or generational)background.

If I have a young black kid in my operatory who responds as if he was raised in Beverely Hills, I will immediately understand on what level I need to keep the conversation. I will probably use little to no “slang terminology” when dealing with him and try to relate to him on that level.

At no time, however, will I be fake as far as who I am. The only thing that will change may be my speech and the psychology used in treatment.

What I wrote above about my patients requesting me again probably comes because I am able to relate to others like that. I was raised around many different cultures. Even the way I am typing this post signifies my perceived audience. You can’t ignore that. It isn’t a circular argument to recognize, acknowledge, tolerate and accept different cultural backgrounds.[/quote]

Your examples are simply your facts but not consistant with the types of situations in which affirmative action is applied. Many jobs have ZERO flexibility for usage of slang and other cultural, racial, gender specific action without the risk of offending those not able to relate. I only used relate because you made it a variable in your argument, hence my response.

[quote]
Racism is ignorance. That is all it is. Like the lady locking her door upon seeing me, it is an immediate judgement of someone based on color (appearance) with no attempt to notice the person. This is also why I have been asked so many times on this site if that was me in avatar. Think about it.[/quote]

Your interpretation of rascism is not true rascism. Your have expanded your grievances to those actions that are the result of previous experiences without input of the present situation. You don’t know if the lady that locked her door was just raped a week ago by a similar looking man in a similar situation in which she chose not to lock her door. In fact, you are just as guilty of your rascism because you used previous experiences and the knowledge of your race and hers as a gauge of the present situation without any additional input. Did you ask her if she was locking her door because you are black? Sounds ridiculous right, well if you just assume you know what went down cause you just know those kinds of people then your merely complimenting the behaviour.

[quote]
One thing we do know, however, is that this form of ignorance had pervaded our society so greatly that nothing was equal 20 years ago whether it be schooling, occupation, or social status. I am very interested in how you all would have handled that much blatant ignorance on a scale that large without Affirmative Action that would have gotten the result that it did. Please, go ahead and explain your option to me. I am dying to hear it. Just remember, providing an option requires you to understand that there was a problem that great to begin with.[/quote]

Any attempt to help others get somewhere they don’t care and aren’t ready to go is futile. The best measure of advancement you can provide a man is to give him the opportunity to make his own life using his own strength. I think that poor black america is given too much. And honestly, they are not poor compared to Africa, they are LAZY. Why is the hood a dangerous place? Why is it dirty, why is their so much drugs and violence? Why would they procreate haphazardly and leave their kids to sell drugs? How can any of that be blamed on others?

I think people should be left alone to make their own bed. No denegration and no unnecessary encouragement. My grand father emmigrated form Ireland and couldn’t go to college, he didn’t end up using drugs, and poor, he got a job doing what he could so that he could send his kids to good schools and give them a chance. Poor black america has to earn their bones through hard work and not focus on what they can’t do but rather what they can. They will end up much better people with a greater wealth than any rich white racist could ever possess or leave as scraps.

Every race has experienced slavery and denegration throughout history. Its what you do in the face of adversity that defines your destiny. I don’t think it is right to deny any man that which he is capable of, I also don’t believe in advancement based on color, creed, sex or otherise…and there no better country to start off poor than the good ole USA, rascism or no.

89

[quote]Cream wrote:
Having apparently spent more time living and working in the hood than anyone in this discussion so far,[/quote]

Excuse me? Where did you think I grew up? We are going by “time spent in the hood”? How many years were you in “the hood” and what does that have to do with this discussion? Many others have presented their point of view without doing that.

Riiight. So, if a student isn’t accepted into medical school, dental school, vet school or the like, they should just start cutting people open in the streets and charge cash only?

[quote]
You can’t have this attitude if you think like a liberal however – “there is only so much wealth out there, so someone can deny me access to it.” Bullshit. [/quote]

First off, I am not liberal. Secondly, when it comes to specific jobs, as I pointed out above, you can not always go and start your own PSYCHIATRIC CLINIC. What “hood” did you grow up in again?

[quote]
So I got to view the results close-up in the classroom. American black kids calling 1st generation, iridescent-purple-black Africans “white”. In case any of you haven’s spent much time in poor inner city America, being “white” is kind of like being called a “cocksucker” or a “traitor” or something similarly nasty. A kid who is acting “white” is someone who studies, does their homework, and tries to speak well. Please note that these things are held in absolute contempt by the kids that are saying this.

The Powell family, Condoleeza Rice, etc. are the ultimate whites. [/quote]

You clearly don’t know much about what you speak of but have assumed much from a few comments. In truth, Powell is probably one of the most respected black men in the black community. If you wanted a black man in the white house, all you would have to do is run him for the position. Your “perception” of what goes on in black culture is severely lacking regardless of how long you think you spent in the “hood”. Wow. A kid telling another kid he talks white is not that degree of an insult. I already wrote that I had that thrown at me growing up every once in a while. It was NOT like “cocksucker” or anything else you connected it with.

[quote]
One of the Ethiopian parents came to me in frustration. “Why are these people so bitter?” He was unable to bridge the cultural gulf that existed between African Americans and American blacks. Where they saw oppression, he saw almost unbelieveable opportunity. He lived in the basement of his boss’s house when he immigrated, had almost nothing to his name but a very rudimentary grasp of English. Within a decade, he had moved his family over, put himself through college, and was working on buying a new house. [/quote]

Do you just completely refuse to accept that nearly any difference will be ranked on by kids? That goes for the kids in glasses, the skinny ones, the fat ones, the ones with big heads, and the ones with big feet. They all get picked on to some degree. That does not always correlate directly with SOCIAL racism outside of school. You were a teacher thinking like this?

[quote]
So does racism exist? Surely. Some whites sometimes are racist towards blacks. They in turn are sometimes reviled, and their skin color used as an epithet. Internet tough guys make racist comments like “There is nothing white people fear more than a big black guy laughing,” while of course those white people wonder whether they are supposed to be paying the “big” guy the high dollar to be laughing at his own cleverness on the Internet. [/quote]

You have an enormous chip on your shoulder and I would bet that only a small minority took me saying “there is nothing white people fear more than a loud big black guy” out of context and would try to say that was a racist comment. Hell, it is actually coming from truth. I simply made light of it and used it as a joke. You are saying it isn’t true at all? Internet tough guy? I write like I think. If you think that is “tough”, then I guess I am doing something right. I don’t have to think hard about the words I throw up on screen. This is me. Deal with it or quit reading my posts.

[quote]
Idiots will always look for excuses to do badly. So here’s your solution POX. How about income-based affirmative action? I would guess that a poor white kid from a broken home and a culture that does not value education would have more to overcome than a middle class black kid from a good, hard-working family. Class-based affirmative action would still include poor black kids without causing stupid divisions along arbitrary lines like their skin color. Plus your son wouldn’t someday have to wonder about how many of his accomplishments were his own.[/quote]

Have you missed this entire thread just so you could focus in on me? That is what this discussion is about. Why even put my name in with your “recommendation”? You just showed that you have a few issues. My only hope is that you didn’t screw up any kids along the way during your extensive trip through “the hood”.

90

[quote]Donzi wrote:
Professor X wrote:

Poor logic.

Logic can’t be poor, it’s a binary concept. Something is either logical or it is not. Illogical, no, its not illogical because I used the qualifier forming.[/quote]

From this statement forward you continued to type irrelevant nonsense. I don’t think anything I have typed is that hard to understand.

Take this statement for example. To even continue discussing this with someone who takes what I said, acts as if they are so incapable of understanding that statement that they need to retype it, would be a waste of time.

[quote]
What this means is, a black girl who is extremely light skinned and could pass for white would get much less (or none at all) racism thrown her way for being black in public.

Please clarify what you mean by being black in public. [/quote]

So I will look at this statement and end it here. If you have further arguments, be specific. What do you think I mean by being “black in public”? If a girl LOOKS white but IS black, she will not be treated with racism like a BLACK girl who LOOKS BLACK. Do I really need to clarify that? That wasn’t clear enough, right? Maybe you need visual aids.

Who is more likely to get treated with racism based on race against blacks? Someone who looks like Wesley Snipes, or someone who looks like Mariah Carey? We are speaking terms of skin tone. Why don’t you clarify why this was so unclear that you needed clarification. Please, let me know.

91

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Donzi wrote:
Professor X wrote:

Poor logic.

Logic can’t be poor, it’s a binary concept. Something is either logical or it is not. Illogical, no, its not illogical because I used the qualifier forming.

From this statement forward you continued to type irrelevant nonsense. I don’t think anything I have typed is that hard to understand.

I have to assume that by true race you mean presence of color in your heritage. And by appearance you mean whether your dark or light skinned. And additionally as displaying stereotypical behaviour and dress.

Take this statement for example. To even continue discussing this with someone who takes what I said, acts as if they are so incapable of understanding that statement that they need to retype it, would be a waste of time.

What this means is, a black girl who is extremely light skinned and could pass for white would get much less (or none at all) racism thrown her way for being black in public.

Please clarify what you mean by being black in public.

So I will look at this statement and end it here. If you have further arguments, be specific. What do you think I mean by being “black in public”? If a girl LOOKS white but IS black, she will not be treated with racism like a BLACK girl who LOOKS BLACK. Do I really need to clarify that? That wasn’t clear enough, right? Maybe you need visual aids.

Who is more likely to get treated with racism based on race against blacks? Someone who looks like Wesley Snipes, or someone who looks like Mariah Carey? We are speaking terms of skin tone. Why don’t you clarify why this was so unclear that you needed clarification. Please, let me know.[/quote]

Did you even read my post? I don’t just spit crap out and hope it lands where it should. I prefaced my statements with my opening remarks to show where I was going. But if it doesn’t make sense to you then your right, I can’t possibly add anything to this discussion. Words have many meaning and implications. It is not until you analyze exactly what you are saying and all of the implications of those statements that you can truly evaluate the validity of your argument. Its called symbolic logic. But you can get by without it, just keep throwing out a few clever phrases and dismiss what you don’t comprehend and 99% of those listening won’t be the wiser. It is what most people do on a daily basis.

Lastly, why do you insist on denegrating those with whom you disagree? Do you think it adds validity to your statements? It doesn’t matter how ademant and passionate you are about something, if your wrong, your wrong. But the sad thing is that you will never know if you are standing on solid logical ground because you fail to recognize its importance.

92

ProfX,

You would get better results squeezing coal to get diamonds than you would helping many of these people understand what it is like being black in America and dealing with institutionalized racism. I grew up in the hood as well, and I have been through a great deal of shit from both white racist establishments and my own people in the hood as well. Until they all wake up one day black like “The Watermelon Man”, they will still be standing on the sideline, scratching their heads and wondering “why do we need affirmative action?”

93

[quote]Cream wrote:
So I got to view the results close-up in the classroom. American black kids calling 1st generation, iridescent-purple-black Africans “white”. In case any of you haven’s spent much time in poor inner city America, being “white” is kind of like being called a “cocksucker” or a “traitor” or something similarly nasty. A kid who is acting “white” is someone who studies, does their homework, and tries to speak well. Please note that these things are held in absolute contempt by the kids that are saying this.
[/quote]

I think you just made my point. In contrast with mertdawg, who clearly shows he not only tried his best to educate his students to be intelligent and creative, he is a creative and intelligent person himself, you are showing with your post that you simply decided to go with the flow and get yourself Borgified.

Why would the black kids want to be like the Ethiopians? Would we want them to be like the Ethiopians?

First-generation immigrants who come from piss-poor countries have a completely different attitude and objectives because they a) have no sense of entitlement and actually feel that they OWE something to the US to let them come here and b) are willing to do ANYTHING and work jobs that no-one else wants.

I respect first-generation immigrants and I even think our immigration laws are too strict and stupid. After all, this is a country of immigrants and the way we’re stopping people from entering it legally but allowing them to enter it illegally is hyprocritical and morally corrupt.

However, we cannot expect everybody to be the same, and it is short-sighted and downright stupid to just label as “lazy” anyone who doesn’t behave like the Ethiopians. There are people that are brilliant and can become great scientists, engineers or even doctors but just don’t have the environment or sense of “debt to the country” that those ethiopians have.

Actually, remember that most great inventions and technological advances in History - a lot of which from the US - came out of “laziness”: of the desire to decrease the amount of manual work needed to do something.

Basically what I am trying to say is that the fact that there are people that fit very well into the “establishment” - generally, asians and first-generation immigrants - doesn’t mean that the “establishment” is the “right” one, and that whoever doesn’t fit is simply lazy, stupid or both.

If we need to change something, it is the establishment. Until then, AA will at least allow us to get some kind of cultural diversity and independent thinking into our colleges, before our country just becomes a gigantic market for stuff made in China and services from India - instead of a source of creativity and leadership.

94

BUT Cream is right about one thing.

Getting kids to attribute their potential for success to their choices and their efforts is what works. AA helped accomplish this. It may still have a little potential for this that can get milked out of it, (by getting kids to think twice and see themselves in certain positions) but it also eventually stunts this (AA got me into college!/It’s not my efforts its the system). Sometimes you have to convince kids to put their nuts/female equivalent on the line!

He obviously has read very little of our posts, and that may be natural. I’m sure a lot of you won’t get this far in my post. I would like to know which city he’s from because living in the “hood” in for example KC and Denver are vastly different. The only reason I didn’t live in a bullet flyin “hood” for 15 years was because after we moved there, my mom spent hundreds of hours writing MILLIONS of dollars worth of grant applications that completely changed the neighborhood from 2-3 kids shot each year to 1 in the last 17. THAT got kids into college.

95

Oh, almost forgot.

If calling someone white was comparable to “cocksucker” Whence be the origin of the pseudonym Cream?

96

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
ProfX,

You would get better results squeezing coal to get diamonds than you would helping many of these people understand what it is like being black in America and dealing with institutionalized racism. I grew up in the hood as well, and I have been through a great deal of shit from both white racist establishments and my own people in the hood as well. Until they all wake up one day black like “The Watermelon Man”, they will still be standing on the sideline, scratching their heads and wondering “why do we need affirmative action?”[/quote]

The truth is, I don’t even expect them to “get it”. It seems to be a characteristic of many in this society to look down on all others who AIN’T them. I can also tell by how some of the later responses began to focus on me instead of the topic that my posts were beginning to piss people off…probably for no other reason than the majority of the words were spelled correctly.

97

[quote]Cream wrote:
Having apparently spent more time living and working in the hood than anyone in this discussion so far…[/quote]

Ding, ding, ding! What did he win Johnny? Well, for contestant Cream he gets the “Idiot of the year award”. Take heart Cream the year is still young.

Haven’t spent anytime in the hood??? You are without a doubt the most assuming moron who’s posted so far.

Your post has helped to convince me that idiocy knows no bounds and continuing to explain why the need for AA is pointless.

Prof X, it just ain’t worth it. Not telling you what to do, it’s just I’ve had enough. “Having spent more time living and working in the hood…” I just can’t compete with this level of self-sacrifice and hood “experience”.

98

Sounds like you all are making an important assumption about me and my perspective – that I’m white. Unlike so many of you well-meaning and “understanding” folks when dealing with this issue, I grew up in the middle of this, work in the middle of this, go home to this, live this.

We won’t make any progress until we are willing to admit that there are problems in the poor black community. Black on black crime, a culture that doesn’t value education, upwards of 70% illegitimate child birth, drugs, etc. We would, as a community, be a mess even without the Billy Joe Jim Bobs of the world.

We need to build our own identity, find our own pride in our ACCOMPLISHMENTS. We had our heritage stolen, and that is a tragedy, but at some point we have to get past that. Yes, slavers were atrocious goat-fuckers. Yes, it is a travesty that the government of the Declaration of Independence allowed the horrors of slavery. Yes, it would be nice to dig those slave-owners up and kill them again. Yes, southern Georgia sheriffs are still to this day the stuff of nightmares.

My point is – in the end, all the finger pointing and race-baiting won’t get a goddamn thing done except to make some fruity, guilty whites feel good and give a lot of kids more excuses to fail. Oh, and inflame a lot of good folks of all colors for no real reason. I for one would rather my kids knew that they earned their accomplishments by achieving them rather than by the accident of their birth.

99

Wow, this thread grew quickly. I tried to absorb everything that was written, but I apologize if I miss a point in writing this post.

First point, relating to education, is that, irrespective of how bad high-school grades are by themselves as an indice of success in college, and irrespective of how bad SAT scores are in and of themselves as indices of success in college, the combination of high-school grades and SAT scores actually do a very good job of correlating with success in college. Someone with good grades and high SATs will have a much greater probability of success in college than someone with low grades and SATs.

Of the two, high-school grades are the more subjective measure, because they do not compare precisely against the grades someone else earns at another high school. High-school grades basically measure how hard you work or how smart you are, or both, in relation to the other people in your particular high school. This is why the SAT was originally introduced by the College Board – because colleges up to that point looked at high school grades as subjective. They weighted highly grades from prestigious private schools that they recognized, and discounted all others. Colleges gave their own admissions tests, but they weren’t offered nationwide and the time it would take to actually take them severely limited the number of schools to which a student could apply.

SATs were actually a great equalizer, because the SAT is basically an IQ test (see the discussion on the “Political Map of America” thread) – at least it was before they added this ridiculous and subjective writing requirement and canned the verbal analogies section. They took the power from the elite private schools and made it easier for colleges to recognize students who would be able to succeed in college but came from unknown schools.

SATs did a good job of measuring what they were intended to measure (the thinking skills that would help one achieve success in a rigorous academic environment), but the result has not been politically correct so the test was attacked. Someone who is behind on vocab would have a harder time in a class in which big words were used often, irrespective of whether you think that measure is “biased.”

SATs aren’t the problem. Fixing the education system is the problem. We can argue more about solutions, but the fact that people in poor and/or dangerous school districts are largely undereducated is the problem.

Next, I want to return to my point above, which I don’t think anyone addressed. What if Affirmative Action is actually having a net negative effect on its intended beneficiaries? Basically, the argument is that by elevating students who are less prepared to a higher level of competition, you minimize the “finishing position” (in terms of graduating with honors or the pursuit of degrees in more competitive majors, which tend to be the majors that lead to higher-paying careers).

Please see my post above, which links to a paper that shows, by its measures, that black law students are worse off because of affirmative action.

The paper shows that black students drop out at a higher rate than other students, and pass the bar exam at a lower rate than other students. The paper doesn’t show, but I know from experience, that black students at elite law schools rarely make law review or graduate with honors. Harvard recently had a debate (actually, it’s recurring) on whether to institute affirmative action on law review, because black students almost never qualify (FYI, at most schools law review membership is based upon a combination of 1st-year grades and a blind-graded writing competition). The same debate occurred at Vanderbilt when I was there.

The thesis of the paper on the negative affect on blacks of affirmative action in law school is that because they are mismatched against the competition – the other students who were admitted via regular, non Affirmative Action criteria. The author argues that students who have a good chance to succeed if they were matched against students with similar scores are instead matched against students with stellar scores, and thus they don’t learn as much or achieve to as high a level - or even graduate with the same frequency.

And that effect trickles down through the system. Students whose numbers would make them competitive at “2nd tier” schools are all placed in “1st tier” competitive environments. Yet the 2nd tier schools still need to fill their quotas, so they go out and get students whose marks would make them competitive at 3rd tier schools, and so on down through the tiers.

While the paper on the effects from law school is new, I remember reading a similar contention concerning a smaller study of UC Berkeley undergraduates that came out right before the debates in California on Prop 209 back in the 1990s.

Given everything, it seems to me that affirmative action is an attempt to fix results that ends up causing a permanent problem. It takes the focus off of its proper area, which is a failing education system and culturally based disincentives to achievement (they are inter-related), and it creates an overall negative effect on the community it claims to help.

And this doesn’t even begin to examine the disincentivizing effect that the knowledge that he is being held to a lower standard can have on a student’s efforts.

100

Actually, as long as I’m on the subject of negative effects of affirmative action for its intended beneficiaries, let’s examine the effect it has on the perceptions other people form concerning the achievements of those who benefit from affirmative action.

A little anecdote. When I moved to the DC area this summer, I needed to find a new doctor. I asked one of the guys with whom I work if he could recommend a doctor. He said his doc wasn’t taking new patients, but that I should do the normal thing. I asked him what that “normal thing” was. He said something to the effect of, “You know, look through the PPO provider book and pick the person with the most Jewish- or Asian-sounding name – you know you won’t be getting anyone who got any breaks that way.”

Your first reaction might be “Racist!” - but it really shouldn’t be. It’s a rational discounting process. In that situation, the only information you generally have is the school and year of graduation. If you wanted to dig deeper you could (I think) find out if a particular doctor had been subject to disciplinary procedures, but it would take a huge effort to even attempt to find out how many times a particular doctor has been sued for negligence or malpractice, and even then you wouldn’t have access to the specific information.

A person who wanted to make a rational decision without digging for extra information would not be remiss in using that criterion, though he should also account for the academic reputation of the school. It would make no sense to use that criterion if you had access to the doctor’s numbers, but you don’t – and unless you get a recommendation from someone, you don’t have any reputational evidence either.

People have to make decisions all the time with very little information (and in situations in which they do not thing the effort or cost of gathering extra information is worth it), and lacking specific information, it makes sense to use general information.

That, my friends, is not a “racism” problem. It is an affirmative action problem. If Jewish people were the beneficiaries of lower standards, the criteria would be to screen out Jewish-sounding names. To the extent it is “racist,” is it only racist because affirmative action is race-based – make no mistake though: the cause is lowered standards from affirmative action (combined with lack of specific information).

This sort of decision is repeated often in “hiring” situations like that. It is also an initial impression in informal settings, which will be adjusted as the person gains more specific information.

I wouldn’t fault people on the receiving end of such appraisments techniques for blaming “racism,” – especially as accounting for affirmative action would directly and, one would think, perfectly, correlate to race – but they should realize that the racism they should be faulting is in the affirmative action policies themselves.