I do, but only really on a single generation basis. The children of people who were alive during Jim Crow have virtually all been affected by what happened to their parents. Their own kids, maybe not.
Well, obviously he’d only rate a part-time slot.
And the lawsuit uses the term “dumb down enough for the minorities”?
What is the absolute phobia in the US of using the term “class”?
Well that’s not totally true - discrimination works on multiple levels, and while much can be addressed with class-based affirmative action, not all does. As long as there is still pure race based discrimination (as shown by the identical resumes with different names example earlier) there is a good argument for race based AA running alongside class based AA.
Hey, Apartheid was a government program to start out with - so it is the government fixing the government’s mess. That’s not hall monitoring, that’s responsibility, that is. Cleaning up after other people’s fuckups.
And the majority of the people must want affirmative action, or at least not oppose it that much, or why would they keep voting in the same government?
Like I said before, it is not just about helping the unfortunate. There’s a larger social engineering goal as well.
Just a nit but I think there are probably more “Confucian” cultures than you think. For example, I think Vietnamese culture has a strong confucian influence. They adopted an imperial exam just like Korea, Japan and China but the 20th century was not very kind to Vietnam and a century of subjugation is not good for any country.
I think you can Further argue that any advantages even these “Confucian Americans” have over the general population is largely illusory when you correct for local wage levels. i.e. Confucian Americans tend to live in high wage high cost of living areas so the college educated Asian tends to make more than their white counterparts but if you compare college educated Asian American compensation in NYC with the compensation for similarly situated whites, the gap gets really small or actually reverses itself.
Well they gave a BUNCH of JApanese Americans free room and bvoard during WWII. FREE!!!
Universities already dsicrimiante against Asians in an effort to promote diversity (oddly enough being a white male provides a small advantage in the pursuit of diversity because of the crowding out effect of white females and Asians).
So you are saying that rough jsutice is better than no justice at all. I don’t want to turn this into a general education thread but its not simply race and economics. There are cultural issues in inner city communities that do not exist elsewhere. You ever wonder why inner city girls do so much better than inner city boys?
I’ve always wondered why some venture capitalist hasn’t started to fund minority owned enterprises to take advantage of this preference.
I don’t support AA as implemented, although it’s not too bad compared to doing nothing. The original concept was to allow discrimination in hiring and contracting to counteract prior discrimination. It eventually turned into something like a quota system.
Fair enough, I stand corrected (I had Vietnam down as largely Buddhist), not that I mind, it strengthens my point - looks like even such narrower “broad” classification doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
Are you serious? of course it doesn’t use those terms. The lawsuit by the DOJ won’t even address the test directly. The assumption is that if there aren’t enough passing minorities then the test is discriminatory.
Nobody here includinglocal civic groups and minority applicantswant the tests dumbed down which is what the city is doing. I’m not sure what other word to use then dumbed down when the previous requirements to pass were 66% and 72% which the DOJ approved to be lowered to 58% and 63% for the respective parts of the test (cite). There is a link at the bottom of that cite that links to correspondence relating to the subject.
My city has bent over backwards to accommodate the DOJ and all we’ve gotten in return is fines that come at taxpayer expense.
Off course I wasn’t serious. Just wanting to see if you even realized how much you were poisoning the well.
How have I poisoned the well? Clearly the test is being dumbed down.
Because you say so? Because obviously “minorities” couldn’t pass a test tough enough for whites? :rolleyes: You may very well be correct in your assessment – I know when Duke Power was first dealing with equal opportunity promotions, they ran into issues owing to the disparity in schooling for pre-Brown v. Board of Education Blacks vs. comparable-seniority whites. It was not a characteristic of the race but of the systemic discrimination against the race that meant they could not devise academic tests that would allow for equal competition.
What I’m saying, Magiver, is that you’re sounding like an unReconstructed racist bastard. Since I doubt that’s what you actually meant, I’m challenging you to rethink, rephrase, and say what you actually did mean in a manner that doesn’t produce the “them minorities is sure stupid, ain’t they, Jim Bob?” tone.
Simple solution: collect all the babies born in a given year, throw them in a big pile, shuffle, then hand them back at random.
Which hundred years were those?
The idea of righting past wrongs through AA is ludicrous, as it helps those who weren’t directly affected by past wrongs at the expense of those who didn’t perpetrate those wrongs. It’s basically an exercise in masturbation - trying to feel good about being so non-biased (while, by definition, being biased).
I had a young lady start screaming at me a few years back about how I was a racist because I didn’t watch Will & Grace (I’m simplifying, but that was the basic argument). She asked if I supported AA and I responded that I didn’t know enough about it to speak intelligently on the subject, but that I was against racial quotas. She proceeded to tell me that “black people” are poor, uneducated, and unable to fend for themselves, and that if I didn’t agree I was racist. Yes, this person was real. She went on to say that she was from a wealthy area and felt bad that “blacks are poor” and felt the need to make it up to them. And I’ll reiterate - she saw nothing wrong with this line of thinking.
I guess my point is that you can’t make things equal by practicing inequality, and that if you think any minority is too stupid to get by on their own, you’re hurting things more than helping. Oh, and one more thing - pay for your guilt on your own, not with government programs.
Once again, and I’m getting sick of repeating this - AA isn’t *just *about helping disadvantaged individuals, it’s about changing the structure of society.
And those at whose “expense” it happens are the recipients of the benefits of wrongs even if they didn’t “perpetrate” them (and merely complacently collaborating in a biased system is itself a form of wrongdoing).
IOW: Check your privilege.
…is not an argument any AA proponents here are making. It’s just a strawman.
I phrased it accurately. I cited what I said from the perspective of those involved and those who the law was suppose to represent.
So far you’ve put words in my mouth and tried to call me names in a manner that you think puts you under the debate rules radar. That’s your prerogative and I think less of you now but it changes nothing of what I said.
My city and the DOJ agreed to lower the test standards in an attempt to gain more minority employees. They are doing this against the wishes of the minorities involved because they don’t suffer from political correctness over a word. They get it that it’s demeaning to do this. Call it whatever you want.