Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
Russ Smith
18391 Followers
Neha Dixit
416 Followers
Neha Dixit
416 Followers
Rajasekaran
657 Followers
gizram84Jul 30, 2010
He is right about affirmative action and the like. It is a racist system designed to job give preference to people of color based on nothing but their color. I believe that even Martin Luther King, Jr. would be opposed to a program that throws the content of one's character out the windows and focuses solely on the color of one's skin.
14justiceJul 30, 2010
Content of one's character? According to Snopes.com:
"In 1991 a Boston University investigatory committee concluded that Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized portions of his doctoral dissertation, completed there in the 1950s."
And,
"Martin Luther King engaged in extramarital affairs." ... "We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation."
Millions of Americans have gone through life with plagiarizing a dissertation or committing adultery. Today's overdone popular reverence for Martin Luther King, Jr. -is- based on the color of his skin, of course it is.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 30, 2010
He would also hire White prostitutes, beat them, and scream "I am not a Negro tonight!". Or some crap like that.
MLK Jr. is no hero.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
Lets assume that MLK once said that the sky is blue. Is that no longer true because he did some bad things previously? I don't care whether or not he was perfect. Even flawed people can be right sometimes.
linkwrayJul 31, 2010
Why is this being dugg down? It's true that MLK was a plagiarist and a philanderer. Fact, not opinion.
The good he did far outweighs the man's flaws, however.
But you shouldn't bury the truth just because you don't want to be reminded of it.
14justiceJul 31, 2010
@ namja23: I made a statement of fact and I'm getting Dugg down. You described an imaginary event that never happened and you're getting Dugg up.
Digg is fantasyland...Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
drewfusbJul 31, 2010
you are getting dugg down because you are being a dick about it. the only thing more dickish than someone acting like an obvious dick is the mock surprise they use when people call them on it.
barrimonJul 31, 2010
Funny you talk about MLK and Gandhi's nonviolence.
"Nowadays, it seems that fighting for what you believe in is the only course of action."
Both men were shot and killed.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
arachnivoreJul 31, 2010
@linkwray & 14justice
"The good he did far outweighs the man's flaws, however."
They should not even be weighed against each other. That's the point. When you try to discredit someones rhetoric by attacking their character that's an Ad hominem fallacy.
Weather or not 14justice's claims are true, He's arguing that MLK's contribution to the civil rights movement should be discredited and that his famous speeches are somehow less true because he had character flaws.
gravityplanxJul 31, 2010
@14justice:
are you really trying to say that MLK didn't lead the civil rights movement on the side of peaceful protesting? REALLY???
mrwalshJul 31, 2010
If you give MLK a pass for philandering and plagiarizing you are doing a disservice to all the people that look up to him. Because someday some kid will grow into an adult and say "if MLK did it - and everyone says he's unassailably perfect - it can't be that bad" and be that less likely to cheat on his wife or steal someone else's writing.
Example: wasn't Jessie Jackson one of MLK's aides?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
gravityplanxJul 31, 2010
Who's saying he was perfect? No one's perfect. But he did one hell of a lot for the civil rights movement.
I also might not have the same taste in cheese that he did, but that's also irrelevant. MLK's assets were in civil rights, and that's it. Don't pretend he was perfect in any other regard, and don't pretend that any extraneous flaws negate his wonderfully positive impact.
arachnivoreJul 31, 2010
@mrwalsh
So when people become adults, they're still not able to tell right from wrong?
MLK isn't celebrated for his alleged philandering or plagiarizing. Nobody makes any pretense that those are acceptable acts. You're just trying to hard to make something that is completely irrelevant to the discussion relevant.
andrew1339Aug 1, 2010
So go ahead and judge him by his character. That just reinforces the point! We shouldn't revere him because he was a gentlemen, but he did have a couple good things to say here and there.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
14justiceAug 1, 2010
A most remarkable demonstration of how many Diggers see things in my comment that simply aren't there. Jeeze, y'all need to work on your reading comprehension!
fungowskiAug 1, 2010
As long as you strip him of his doctorate because he plagiarized and not because he was colored, I think Dr. King would think everything was kosher.
smotpokerJul 30, 2010
"It is a racist system designed to job give preference to people of color based on nothing but their color."
Absolutely FALSE. AA helps many minority groups for which race/color is not a relevant factor.
"I believe that even Martin Luther King, Jr. would be opposed to a program that throws the content of one's character out the window and focuses solely on the color of one's skin."
Luckily, AA doesn't typically fall into that category.
You are either ignorant or the subject or parroting what you have been taught completely disingenuously.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
"AA helps many minority groups for which race/color is not a relevant factor."
Helps them how? By getting them into schools or jobs that they otherwise couldn't qualify for? Discrimination is illegal and strictly enforced, so all AA can do now is promote people to positions that are above their ability, based on an idiotic idea that all people are equally capable.
smotpokerJul 31, 2010
"Discrimination is illegal and strictly enforced"
Drug use is illegal and that is strictly enforced but it still happens millions of times every day. Similarly discrimination occurs every day despite restrictions against it. There are tons of studies to prove this. In some cases (such as racial profiling by LEO) it is still even fiercely defended by many people.
"so all AA can do now is promote people to positions that are above their ability, based on an idiotic idea that all people are equally capable."
Completely absurd. In the overwhelming majority of cases, especially in the work force, it only provides an advantage to people who are similarly qualified.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
smotpoker - That assumes that there are more white people applying for the job. I am one of 5 white guys on a team of 10. Of the people I have seen at interviews, they number of applicants are about equal among minorities and whites. If the number of applicants are equal among the races, giving preference to someone based on their ethnicity when all other qualifications are equal is no more right than ruling them out for the same reason.
mcquittyJul 31, 2010
Racial preference is discrimination, regardless of being promoted or demoted. It's a zero sum game, so if you choose one, you didn't choose another. If you chose one to fill a quota, you discriminated against another for a quota. Does that make it any better?
action20Aug 1, 2010
" "It is a racist system designed to job give preference to people of color based on nothing but their color."
Absolutely FALSE. AA helps many minority groups for which race/color is not a relevant factor. "
Where is your proof? You can't expect me or anyone else to believe you based upon you saying something. The laws are put in place to ensure that minorities get a spot regardless of who's better or worse then they might be. How is this not racism? I agree that there is a need to ensure certain groups are hired when racism is a factor, but give me a break; hiring based on minority group is wrong.
smotpokerAug 1, 2010
@scythe
Just curious, but do you have any knowledge of *all* applicants for a given position or only those who make it to the interview phase? I'm sure there are exceptions but I think that in most cases AA in the work force is only used to narrow down potential employees, especially in regards to skilled/upper-level positions, rather than make the final call in who gets hired. Either way, the notion that it frequently puts unskilled people in positions they are not capable of or do not deserve is pretty specious.
@mcquitty
If AA wasn't created and used specifically to offset such discrimination I would be more inclined to agree. However, study after study shows that discrimination does still exist in many business's hiring procedures so AA tries to mitigate the harm caused by that.
If there are 50 positions open, 90 non-minority applicants and 10 minority ones (who are substantially less likely to have a support structure to fall back on), all of whom are equally qualified, is it really so bad if they try to make sure to hire 50% of each candidate pool to fill the positions? Many argue they should hire and even larger % of the minority pool since they tend to face similar odds of getting hired anywhere even if you don't account for intentional discrimination.
@action20
Why exactly do you choose to ask me for proof but not the person I was replying to or provide any yourself? The statement you are quoting is factual because ethnic groups are not the only minorities. In fact, most AA consideration is given based on gender and veteran status. I find it interesting that most people who complain about AA only do so in regards race rather than gender. I guess part of the time they realize gender-based AA contributes to their double-income households and part of the time they are just ignorant of the fact because right-wing indoctrination doesn't mention it.
I agree that hiring based solely on whether someone is a minority is wrong but that is rarely the case with AA policies. As I mentioned above, based on probability alone, there is a much lower possibility that a minority will get hired for a given position even if he is equally qualified even though in many cases they probably had to work harder to even attain equal qualification. Besides this, real discrimination makes them less capable of obtaining non AA jobs and economic disparity makes them a lot more likely to really *need* a given job.
To top it off, without AA there would be a lot fewer employed minorities regardless of their qualifications or even their ability to become qualified, a greater chance that crime rates would start to rise amongst them again and most of the more fervent opposition to AA would *still* be complaining about minorities accusing them of being too lazy, dumb, dishonest, violent, etc and reinforcing negative stereotypes against them any way possible.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
scythefwdAug 5, 2010
smotpoker - for my company, they don't get eliminated until the interview. There is a phone conversation to see if you are even interested and then a technical interview. I do see every applicant on our contract.
Oh, and not just anybody is applying for these jobs. These are technical jobs, if your resume isn't right, you don't even get called. Unless your resume says "I'm white", there is no way of knowing. Matter of fact, it's been that way for the last 3 companies I have worked for. If your resume isn't right, you don't even get looked at. If your resume is right, you run a good chance of an interview. Then it all comes down to who will do the work for the least amount. If two people are qualified and one is only asking 75k while the other is asking 85k, the person asking 75k will get the job unless the guy asking 85k is that much more qualified (say a CCNP with 10 years experience vs. a CCNA with 3 years experience). If racism is even hinted at, there is a full scale investigation by more than 1 person to see if it really is racism or not. Racism is taken very seriously where I work. Any hint of it and you are sent packing, period.
drmangrumJul 30, 2010
It's not just the work place, AA also infects our education system. It's MUCH easier to get a scholarship or grant if you're not white. It can bleed over into grades as well. There was was an ivy league school (I don't remember which one) that was curving admission requires based on the race of the applicant. Where it might take 3.8 GPA for a white person to be considered for admission, a black or latino could get by with a 3.2
seltaeb4Jul 31, 2010
And a legacy student could get in with a 1.0.
aplusjimagesJul 31, 2010
How many white people judge a school based on the black population? The racism is still there on the white side.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
And how many exclusive fraternities are there that exclude white people based on their ethnicity (Omega's anyone???). If a fraternity said only white people could join, there would be a righteous out cry of racism. If a fraternity says only black people can join... there would be to right? Oh, never mind, those fraternities do exist and are accepted for their practices that discriminate on race. I guess it is true, only white people can be racist right?
ryanjmsJul 31, 2010
Yep. I saw this in law school admissions as well. If you were a URM (under-represented minority) then you got a huge bonus to your chance for admission. For instance if a white guy had a gpa/lsat good enough for a Top 50 school, if he were black he'd be getting into Top 20 schools.
jjamminjonJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
adifferentusernJul 31, 2010
So, jjamminjon... are you saying you believe white kids and asian kids are just plain smarter? That other minorities just aren't good enough to do it on their own merit?
barrimonJul 31, 2010
If both of your parents went to college and you lived in a good neighborhood with good schools, you're supposed to get good grades. You're around educated people who read more and know more than most of the country.
A child learns half of their parent's vocabulary. If your dad went to college you have a BIG advantage over a kid who's parents don't speak english. Or some parent from the hood who barely finished school.
gravityplanxJul 31, 2010
@jjamminjon
So... you're saying that asian and white people are smarter than black people? You sound a bit racist to me.
I think that if affirmative action was not in play (and if we kept stringent efforts to eliminate racist disqualifications), then schools would be filled with SMART people. And smart people come in all kinds of packaging.
mrwalshJul 31, 2010
@jjamminjon "If ever this so-called limiting factor of race proportioning was removed it'd be a path down the course of yesteryear."
So the future is regulated racism?
jjamminjonJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
itssteve112Jul 31, 2010
AA in the education system is atrocious. I finally got to see it first hand when applying to college this past year. I thought my 3.8 GPA, 2000+ SAT score, 30+ ACT score, and long list of extracurricular activities (including sports, academic clubs, service clubs) were enough to get me accepted. Guess not. A guy I know that has half my credentials was accepted through EARLY admission while I was deferred from regular admission. I did get accepted after some time, but I was completely appalled that the university would take someone with awful work ethic and grades over me just because of their skin color.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
@itssteve112
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
Quit crying. Nothing happened to you.
spartan777Aug 1, 2010
"A guy I know that has half my credentials was accepted through EARLY admission while I was deferred from regular admission."
Half your credentials? Do you mean she/he got an ACT of 15, SAT of 1000, etc? Those scores would border on the mentally-handicapped. Also, do you mind saying which school you and 'a guy you know' applied to?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
boner11Aug 1, 2010
Only whites can be racist. Ever hear of the term "reverse-racism". Racism is racism, the term "reverse racism" is when someone hates a white person, which in today's society is fine and dandy. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
@barrimon
I agree with that and think our government needs to do a better job with our primary and secondary education system. If you are looking for short term fixes though, shouldn't you say that colleges can look at your parents education and income and make determinations on that? Those are realistic metrics that influence your path in life. If you base it on race, then it is racism plain and simple, because you are implying that one race is superior to the other in educating its youth and preparing them for college.
Just because there is a correlation between race and income and correlation between income and level of education and correlation between level of education and child's preparedness for college does not mean you can instantly make the jump from race to preparedness and imply causality.
navspecwarcomAug 1, 2010
As in Notre Dame? Nah..if they would admit black folk to their "college" they'd finally win some football games. But they rather stay pathetic and white.
lolcoelacanthAug 1, 2010
Let's not forget sexism people, as some colleges are using AA for males because on average females outnumber males in enrolment right now.
atarioJul 31, 2010
I don't suppose it has occurred to you that Affirmative Action was put in place to counteract the "racist system" that systematically kept minorities out of jobs and other positions considered the province of whites? That system that went on for a hundred years after the Civil War ended, showing no sign of abating?
Affirmative Action is there to force the much-needed correction society failed to carry out on its own. That correction has yet to be fully realized to this day, either, as anyone nonwhite can tell you.
It takes a lot of painful pushing for a long time to correct something as deeply ingrained as institutionalized racism. And calling Affirmative Action racism is to disingenuously ignore its context. It's like saying prison sentences are crimes because they restrain someone's freedom against his will. Of course they do, that's the whole point.
slvrbullet87Jul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
mrsteamtankJul 31, 2010
What should happen is programs should target INCOME levels and not the colour of your skin. If black people are poorer on average then it becomes a kind of Affirmative Action without specifically looking at the colour of someone's skin.
8347Jul 31, 2010
Atario: Asians in American on average earn more money than whites and earn higher grades. That ends your idiotic argument!
Anyone who supports Affirmative Action is by definition a "racist"!
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
slvrbullet87 - It already is.
Atario - can you provide examples of that institutionalized racism happening now? AA was a great program, but it very well could have outlived it's purpose.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
eezyvilleJul 31, 2010
I love how you people deny how racism doesn't exist anymore in America.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
Never said it didn't exist. I said it wasn't institutionalized now. There is now, and there always will be racist people. What you won't find is systematic discrimination against people based on their ethnic origin. You will find discrimination based on skill sets and qualifications, but not skin color. A minority might run into racism with a boss, but it won't be supported by the company.
pinkfish411Jul 31, 2010
I agree with MrSteamTank. I read an article a while back talking about how current policies tend to make poor rural whites the most disadvantaged group, and how "white privilege" and "white guilt" are mostly middle- and upper-class white phenomena. If our policies were based more on income than race, we could do more to help the rural poor whites too, who often have a history of being exploited by the powerful just like racial minorities have.
rpgmakrJul 31, 2010
@scythe: Uhm, yeah but what happens when racist people are in charge of the institutions which is something you CAN'T really prove without very circumstantial evidence? There could be many racist people on those positions right now but thanks to the system in place we can't really see it. Which is good.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
Again, this isn't about equality, its about getting handouts purely because you claim to be "oppressed". This isn't the f**king 1950's anymore. I'm so tired of this s**t. Stop acting as if your in the same situation as your ancestors. Trying to abuse what they fought for to get handouts and a legup on everyone else purely because of your skin colour is insulting to both them and the rest of society.
bracomadarJul 31, 2010
I think we can all agree that the goal should be to end racism and the minorities in this country should be treated just as equal as the majority. However, giving people who happen to be in the minority special treatment over those who are in the majority doesn't help bring people together, it just creates anger in the racial majority who feel that they're now being treated unfairly and it continues to keep us split apart as a nation. Affirmative action helps enforce the old, racial, or sexual stereotypes that minorities, or women lack the skills, intelligence, or determination to make it on their own without government help. If you treat one person better than another one just because of their skin color, culture, sex, etc. it's still racism because another person is being treated worse. It doesn't matter if the person who is being treated worse is rich, white, male, and has all the opportunities in the world, it still doesn't make it right. I don't think it's going to matter much to a rich white guy since he still has a lot of opportunities, but I think the people that are getting left out of this the most are poor white people. Because they are poor and not poor and have a minority skin color, they see laws like this and feel that they can't get the same help and are treated worse than a poor black person. These are going to be the ones who are going to feel unequal, are going to be the ones who will turn into the extreme racists, and will take out their anger and frustrations on minority groups.
adifferentusernJul 31, 2010
The president of our country is black, people. A black man holds the highest position in the entire country. Racism exists but it's on an entirely individual, case by case, scenario. Clearly the majority of this country is not racist.
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
"Racism exists but it's on an entirely individual, case by case, scenario."
That's complete bulls**t. Ask any disadvantaged black. Institutional racism exists in the US- the entire prison system is a testament to this. Black and white people use illegal drugs at the exact same rates, but the people who are thrown in jail for drug-related offenses are *overwhelmingly* blacks and other minorities. Prisons in general have disproportionately high amounts of minorities. On top of that, white people statistically serve shorter sentences for the exact same crimes black people commit. Judges and juries may not be confederate-flag-waving racists, they are subconsciously racist. At the same time, laws are written and enforced in such a way that they disproportionately target minorities. No legislator or police officer may be racist on purpose- its the nature of our racist system.
hillsfarJul 31, 2010
Affirmative action should be based on income so the son of a Black doctor or sports star doesn't get better treatment than the daughter of a White construction worker.
socrates114Jul 31, 2010
I dont know how to feel about this. I am a minority and I got into my college based on my merit. At least I hope so. I haven't really experienced any racism or at least overt racism. Who knows though. Maybe I will later.
parallacksJul 31, 2010
If you are african american in this country you are much more likely to be born into poverty (obviously this is not the case with asians). The POINT of affirmative action is to balance the economic divide and make it so that all people have equal OPPORTUNITY regardless of ethnicity/race.
for some reason, opponents of aff. action always cite the numbers of poor, rural whites. yes of course there are lots of poor white people. it's still a mostly white country! and yes, some white people get passed over because of aff. action, but they're overly represented in positions of high-income and high-power. that's the problem that is trying to be fixed. and it could be argued that the problem would be even worse if aff. action had not been in place. as we are seeing, the gap between rich and poor in this country has been steadily increasing for quite a while
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
The reason AA is stupid is because it still distinguishes skincolours. You don't counter racism and discrimination with counter-racism and AA. Why should a purple guy born in poverty has to get more help than an orange guy, born in the same poverty? AA should be based on income-level of parents, not on race.
@rpgmakr: Do as in France. Al final exams are send anonymously to another place that will correct it (and grade it), whithout them knowing a single detail about who did that test (not even a name, just a code).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
auzziediggerAug 1, 2010
If you believe in affirmative action, why does it have to be based on race?
For example we know attractive women fare far better in life than ugly women, so should there be special admission and hiring criteria for ugly women?
We know the majority of CEO's are over 6 feet tall. Should there be some sort of special program to increase the number of short CEO's?
Of course not; it's ridiculous. So are government programs based on race.
atarioAug 1, 2010
"Atario: Asians in American on average earn more money than whites and earn higher grades."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081112101339.htm
"That ends your idiotic argument!"
O RLY?
pinkfish411Aug 1, 2010
@Parallacks
Poor, rural whites aren't overrepresented in positions of power and influence. The higher-class urban whites who are strongly represented in positions of power often had almost nothing in common with poor, rural whites other than the color of their skin. In fact, in a lot of poor rural communities, the whites have far more in common with their poor black neighbors, both culturally and in terms of the opportunities available to them, than they do with wealthier whites.
The point is that simply judging people's advantages and disadvantages based on skin color alone is hopelessly shortsighted. Our concern should be with giving everyone access to the resources needed for productivity and prosperity. Many whites were historically just as deprived of those opportunities as blacks were, especially back in the age not too long ago when "white" wasn't yet a catch-all race for everybody with pale skin. My Hungarian immigrant grandparents, for example, faced just as much discrimination because of their race as blacks do today, and the only possibility they had to overcome it was to change their names and abandon everything about their culture so that they could become "white" like everybody else. "White privilege" my ass.
acqua206Jul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
ripleyisdeadJul 31, 2010
How about some affirmative action love for ugly people.
14justiceJul 31, 2010
I think a good case could be made that "ugly" is a disablity, hence coverage under the American's with Disabilities Act is appropriate. Anything to make more people beholden to the government.
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
"based on nothing but their color"
Then you don't understand the fundamental basis of Affirmative Action. AA is to choose minorities over white people when both people are otherwise equally qualified.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
aheinzmAug 1, 2010
so the fundamental basis is to legally require race be a factor.
when individuals do so voluntarily we call that racism. When governments do it we call it social justice.
14justiceAug 1, 2010
Yes, spartan777, and when done by any government agency, it's clearly unconstitutional on it's face --- a violation of the "equal protection" clause.
But no branch of government pays attention to the Constitution these days.
bene0019Aug 1, 2010
fundamental basis aside, I live in the real world where "otherwise equally qualified" is bulls**t.
spartan777Aug 1, 2010
Minorities are disadvantaged to begin with coming from poor schools. I suppose the fact that minorities have underfunded and poor schools is "unconstitutional" too then. AA simply tries to level the slanted playing field. You can only think that AA is "racist" if you assume that all ethnic/racial groups get the same quality of opportunities- which is absurd.
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
That isn't even true anyways. Some college admission processes assess point values to applicants to determine eligibility and give the equal points to minority status as they do high GPA.
aheinzmAug 1, 2010
so then if being required to hire someone because they are black is not racist, then being prohibited from hiring someone because they are black is also not racist. Would Jim Crow laws not be considered racist if they would have been stated as a positive ("We only server whites") vs as a negative ("We don't serve blacks")?
any legal enforcement that gives x race an advantage over y race by definition is putting a disadvantage on y race. Regardless of whether you believe we should use federal policy to disadvantage one race so that they aren't starting with an advantage over another race, the policies to achieve that are discriminatory based on race, or racist. If those policies are racist and you support those policies, you are then supporting racist policies regardless of what you wish to achieve as a result of those policies.
samkityoungJul 31, 2010
Spoken like someone who knows virtually nothing about affirmative action. Preference-based policies are illegal unless they are court-ordered or the company can show a convincing argument that they are needed to fix past racial injustices (things are slightly different (read the scholarly paper by Kravitz (2008) entitled "The diversity – validity dilemma: Beyond selection – the role of affirmative action." or Pyburn et al (2010) entitled "The diversity–validity dilemma: Overview and legal context" to learn about that). The only "preference" 99% of AA programs use is when a protected class (i.e., race, gender, Vietnam vet, age, disabled) is a "plus factor" that allows an employer to choose based on the protected class if all other things are equal.
Most affirmative action programs are not about preferences but about policies and practices to ensure discrimination doesn't occur. If you're interested the "fairness" of no AA policies vs. the equal opportunity that AA policies bring then read the article by Crosby et al. (2003) entitled "Affirmative action: Psychological data and the policy debates." Or you can keep perpetuating myths and falsehoods.
drunktomatoAug 1, 2010
THANK you. Absolutely correct. Those of us that study law, history, and societies are given much more information into how pervasive institutionalized racism truly is in the United States. Affirmative Action will never be a racist policy against whites- those who can't see this have decades of actual scientific data to go through to see how much of a positive AA is.
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
Odd, i distinctively remember reading about it when it was first proposed. It's innately racist in that it forces a choice to be regulated by color of skin, or ethnic background rather than pure qualification.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
samkityoungAug 1, 2010
@NidStyles - you obviously didn't actually read about it because what you appear to think AA entails in completely incorrect. I provided the references for you - you can either educate yourself, continue spewing lies and deceptions, or shut up.
phoenixrider04Aug 1, 2010
you have done your research and i give you credit. I agree many people do not actually know how AA works and who it affects. may AA affect white women more then minority racial groups but many don't know that. I too have studied the law and the constitutional restrictions on AA and the level of scrutiny that must be satisfied in order to allow AA. it is a strict scrutiny standard that must be a compelling interest on the government that is narrowly tailored, furthers the restriction and the least restrictive means. they have to show there is a past discrimination in the area. I do not think people have a proper view of the AA system.
jfts09Aug 1, 2010
When P. Diddy can give his son a 300,000 maybach, I call bulls**t
spartan777Aug 1, 2010
The privilege of one black person erases the disadvantages of all the other 35 million black people in this country?
I hope you are joking.
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
I will be taking advantage of Affirmative Action to get myself into graduate school. I think Affirmative Action is necessary to more quickly "spread the knowledge" and improve the general education level of the population.
kasha34Aug 1, 2010
Cool. So what if you pushed out some damn white kid or some damn Vietnamese kid whose parents came here 20 years ago with $3. So what if they studied all night and you didn't?
Oh, you did study all night? And they still got better marks than you? So what? Push them under anyway.
So what if we've had Affirmative Action for thirty years already. It should go on forever, shouldn't it?
jjamminjonAug 3, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
blqysmgJul 30, 2010
Wow! I had no idea there was anyone in the Senate that had a brain! This guy is exactly on target. The idea that being white is helping any of the millions of poor white people is ludicrous but when asked, every black person I know will tell you that white privilege exists and is there to keep the black man down.
I'v got news for you: privilege does exist, and those in privilege are generally white; however, the idea that all white people are privileged is incorrect. In fact, 95% of the white population does NOT get anything from being white other than being hated by blacks.
Look at it this way, the top 1% of Americans control 85% of the wealth. The top 5% control about 95% of it, I think (I could be wrong on that one.) The bottom 60% of Americans only control about one percent of the wealth and power in this country. Blacks make up about 12% to 15% of the population. Who the hell do you think makes up the rest of the poor? There are three or four poor white people to every poor black person out there. If we were "privileged" wouldn't we change that?
So, hate the privileged class if you must, but understand that most of us make do with what we can scratch out on our own. Want to succeed in life? GREAT! Come join in the game. Standing on the sidelines and bitching that you can't play because you don't have the right color uniform is stupid and defeatist.
We need to learn to get along and recognize that we have more in common than we have differences. I have no illusions that any race is superior to any other. We have differences, true, but most of those are cultural and learned. They can be unlearned. By working together, we can grab a larger share of the pie. If we stay at each others throats, those 5% will continue to keep us at the bottom.
The difference is clear: some people (5%) have many millions invested in businesses and property, others live from paycheck to paycheck (95%.) They WANT us fighting each other rather than climbing out of poverty. That way, they get to keep the fruits of our labor. It's not white vs black. It's the rich vs everyone else. Remember that.
trollbaneJul 30, 2010
You're correct in principle, there is a disparity in wealth great enough so that there must be poor white people in America, but it's not quite as large. As of 2007 (admittedly a little outdated), the top 1% owns about 34% of all private wealth, and the top 20% about 85% of wealth.
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
shigJul 30, 2010
The idea that 1% of the population must, by some hitherto unknown law of economics, generate an equal 1% share of the wealth is an obvious falsehood. The rich people that want us to fight each other so they can extract our wealth are nothing but the specters in your irrational minds.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
atarioJul 31, 2010
You are right about the real fight being the rich vs. everyone else, but there is certainly a racial disparity as well. Your own assessment backs this up:
"Blacks make up about 12% to 15% of the population. Who the hell do you think makes up the rest of the poor? There are three or four poor white people to every poor black person out there."
According to Wikipedia, the actual number as of 2008 is 12.4%. For whites, 75.0%. That means there's about six whites to every black. If there are indeed only four poor whites to every poor black, that's a disadvantage for blacks, and conversely an advantage -- or privilege, one might couch it as -- for whites.
Don't dismiss one wrong because another is bigger at the moment...
mikepictorJul 31, 2010
Privilege comes in many forms, and many degrees, but yes, all white people have certain privileges in NOrth american culture, just by being white. Is it enough to guarantee wealth fame and fortune, of course not, but take 2 identical people in skill, intelligence, wealth, personality etc..., where the only difference is their skin colour, and the white person will already have certain subtle advantages over the black person. This is purely because of our culture's default reaction to him.
You can't take it to an extreme, but you can't dismiss it either.
ninjaofpatienceJul 31, 2010
" 95% of the white population does NOT get anything from being white other than being hated by blacks."
I don't even know where to start. I've lived in integrated cities, gone to integrated schools, worked in integrated offices and factories. I've met people of every creed and color, but I've never met anyone who hated me just for being white.
eezyvilleJul 31, 2010
I've been around blacks all my life (because I'm black) and I've been around whites most of my life in high school and college. I've never understood why whites think blacks hate them. There will always be the few whites or few blacks who hate because of skin color but the majority of blacks don't give a f**k about white people. We mostly want yall to f**k off and leave us alone with this race s**t.
stickwstJul 31, 2010
I've definitely experienced it, but like most issues like these, its mostly due to economic and other situational variables rather than PURE UNADULTERATED HATE.
I live in a suburb of Minneapolis, it's very close to the "bad part" of Minneapolis. Of course, the suburb was once almost completely white. Eventually, real estate savvy people started buying nice town homes, and renting them out cheaply to low income families. This immediately introduced a large black population very suddenly (suddenly in terms of population increase of course).
Not because of race, but because of low income, the wave of poor families brought with it lots of violent crime. So of course the established white population is like "wtf!?" and the newer black/hmong/latino population, raised to not trust "the man" is predisposed to racism against whites.
I went to a junior high where, as a white person, I was a minority. I was harassed pretty frequently, by the hmong, latino and black kids there. s**tty. But it still happens, even in Minnesota.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"We mostly want yall to f**k off and leave us alone with this race s**t. " Your the ones constantly bringing it up. Again, getting free handouts because your black (or any other race for that matter) is the problem here. Lets see some of that equality you guys have been "fighting" for, for so long spread about ALL race, not just the minorities. Only then can it be called equality.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
barrimonJul 31, 2010
@Galgori
Please stop whining. Race ONLY matters when money is involved. There's is no discrimination or imperialism that didn't benefit one group enormously over the other (e.g. apartheid, jim crow, redlining, slavery, work discrimination).
Affirmative action is pennies in comparison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY
kevin108Jul 31, 2010
I agree with most of what you've said except for this:
"The difference is clear: some people (5%) have many millions invested in businesses and property, others live from paycheck to paycheck (95%.) They WANT us fighting each other rather than climbing out of poverty."
Everyone that I've ever met from the upper-tier of income earnings was friendly and encouraged the idea that if they could make it, anyone could. So no, I don't believe the successful people that promote the class envy that envelops much of the bottom 5%. I believe that malice is fostered by the government and by the icons of minority groups.
barrimonJul 31, 2010
@Kevin
I don't believe they want us fighting each other either, but your evidence is anecdotal.
The powers that be in America have kept wages stagnant for nearly a decade. The middle class is shrinking drastically. Wages are taxed higher than investment income and income inequality is reaching historic heights (which makes rich people richer by comparison).
Maybe you met friendly people. Or maybe what they say is not what they do, or maybe it's only the ultra rich who have control. It's called capitalism, not job-ism so maybe they're just better at making money than workers, but the deck is definitely stacked against wage workers.
wavengerAug 1, 2010
"Making it" is a game that is based on merit, but it's fundamentally rigged in favor of the upper-middle and upper classes. Sure, there are some people who pull themselves up by the bootstraps out of nothing, but the majority of "successful" people had significant advantages not related to their individual merit.
Think about it: who's more likely to pass Differential Equations: someone with an IQ of 160 who works 30 hours a week and takes public transportation, or someone with an IQ of 130 who has a private tutor and daddy's Lexus? The game is rigged and all of the metrics - from grades to how much time you can spend making nothing as an intern - are geared towards allowing kids with trust funds to surpass not only their peers, but also more deserving people born to modest circumstances.
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
Kevin, you're probably right about everyone you've met. Most people who we would consider "successful" are that way. These are people who, by and large, have worked for everything they have, just like me. They have just managed to achieve more.
The ones that I'm talking about are the old money types. The ones who's parents went to "the right" prep schools and were introduced to the Captains of Industry at a young age, attended just the right schools, joined all of the right clubs, etc. The "blue bloods." We may not have royalty here in the US, but we do have ruling families. They're the ones that own everything. Don't believe me? Look who's on the board of directors of all the major media outlets. Then look to see who's on the board of directors at the 6 major banks, insurance firms, stock brokerage houses, etc. It's all the same people.
barrimonJul 31, 2010
Examples of when race matters:
Identical resumes - obviously white name vs obviously black name
Interviews - Sometimes being potentially the only black person in an all white office. There's a kinda test to see if people will be comfortable with you. More-so than just to see if you're a jerk or not.
Renting a house/apt - calling or seeing a house in person
Pulled over by a cop - getting searched or records run for no reason
At work - Not listening to the same music/ watching same shows (seeming too different culturally).
Almost any situation where one group is looking to pick a few (qualified) people who they 'like' to fill a position, do a project, fit into a group.
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
The problem is there are plenty of examples where business owners might be MORE likely to hire someone because they are a minority. I think the number of racist assh**es in this country is probably equalled out by the number of white-guilt progressives that subconsciously are trying to redeem the white race by hiring minorities as well as people like me that understand the value of having a diverse set of employees.
My point here is that at what point is it all just equal enough that we can move beyond discussing inequities and finally push towards not even caring about race.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
I'm sure there are sporadic business owners that exist a real an appreciation for diversity, but I've never seen any studies that show on average that it evens out. I think strong employer demand for skills (sales, engineers, developers) trumps racism. But that's true for all high demand positions.
I'm sure when people can cite statistics that show a growing middle class or studies that show comparable poverty percentages there will be a strong case against AA. Generations will of older folks will probably have to pass away though. Kids have much better views on race.
eddieb33Jul 31, 2010
Every black person you know would tell you that privilege exists? Have you ever met a black person? I live in a predominantly black neighborhood; try telling my neighbors that it doesn't exist. While I feel that every person is responsible the outcome of their own lives, these people are starting from such a low position in society that it is next to impossible to climb out. It is easy for a millionaire senator to look at programs like affirmative action and say that they unfairly hinder whites, but anyone who has actually dealt with diversity will tell you that these programs are needed. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
putz85erAug 1, 2010
I am a poor white person. What advantage do i have over your black neighbors? f**king moron. You can't seem to understand that just because most rich people are white doesn't mean it is because of the color of their skin. What advantage do i have over a black person who is just as poor? Do i get a special white financial aid? No. Do I get into colleges easier because im white? No. Do i make more money because im white? NO. SO f**k off with this white privilege bulls**t.
yeegngoAug 1, 2010
If you're poor then you should get financial aid regardless of your skin color. Just saying.
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
EddieB33, my Grandfather was a sharecropper, farming someone else's land for him. His children worked in the cotton fields or at the saw mill. My father was literally born in a barn. I remember when they put indoor plumbing into the house.
The community where I grew up was over 50% black, so yes, I've met a black person. Their homes were as nice as mine, sometimes nicer. When my father had trouble keeping jobs, we moved from place to place several times a year for quite a while. So, yes, I know what it means to start with next to nothing.
The first place Iived on my own was a one-bedroom, non-air-conditioned flat right next to the railroad tracks just outside of Atlanta. I think the complex was about 85% black. We walked to the bus stop together, shopped for food together, met at each other's places for beer, etc. I had friends there. Most people are just that, people. Some people don't even notice racial differences. Others are not the same. My girlfriend was subjected to quite a bit of pressure by her neighbors to stop dating me because I was white and she wasn't. She eventually left, moving back to Chicago, to be near relatives there. I drove the moving van for her, then drove it back empty.
I escaped the life of poverty through hard work. I had NO help from being white. When I went to college, I did so on Pell grant, Student loans and the GI bill. My first job out of school was working for a black man, Henry. He's still one of my favorite people in the world. I've never been able to see any white privilege in my life. If you know somethign about my life that I don't, please be my guest to point it out.
lordbeefJul 31, 2010
Actually being white in America gets you quite a bit compared to being black
You get called back for interviews 50% more often just for having a white name:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873
Have a felony on your record? Don't worry, you'll still get more callbacks and job offers than a black person who has a clean record:
http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/race_at_work.pdf
You also won't be referred to by Wells Fargo as "mud people" and steered into a lower quality housing loan:
http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2009/06/08/systemic-racism-banking-wells-fargo/
Having a white name also gets you 60% more responses when you inquire about a rental property:
http://www.dailyestimate.com/article.asp?id=3708
But the asians have it better than you right? Because they're so hard working? Actually they earn less than you despite having more education on average:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081112101339.htm
Being white also means you're likely to get better medical care if you go to a doctor:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/07/23/doctors.attitude.race.weight/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
But other than that I guess yeah being white doesn't get you much.
eezyvilleJul 31, 2010
No dude. Its "White people being oppressed hour" so you gotta let them bitch. No facts allowed.
drunktomatoAug 1, 2010
digging down facts is awesome!!! YE-HAW IM SOO OPPRESSED
barasawaAug 1, 2010
White name? What the hell is a "white name"?
As to the blacks and whites I've known, they usually have the same set of non-specific names. In other words, John Smith and George Parle are just another set of names that give no indication of their possible ethnicity. (Other than not sounding Asian or Hispanic.) Which is white, which is black, if any. You can't tell.
Yes, I know that there are "white" names that are generally recognized of being of a specific ethnic descent. For example, Mac<something> is thought to be Scottish, and Rosen<something> or <something>burg are thought to be Jewish. But most of the names I'm familiar with don't have any obvious ethnicity attached. So do you mean Scotts are taking more jobs because their names are identifiably "white"?
(It's been my experience that people with an ethnically identifiable name are more likely to be discriminated against no matter what ethnicity it's from.)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
Interesting studies. I remember reading about the "white name" thing a while ago. I'm not sure if "white name" is accurate, since I believe that foreign sounding names are just as likely to get you overlooked as "black sounding" names are. When tested against "John" and "Bill" and "Susan" I'd think that many middle Americans would be more comfortable with those names than "Kanisha" or "Jadranko" or "Nikola." The last two are "white" names by the way.
As a personal aside, my last name is highly associated with a black family from the Midwest. There are a few of us southern whites, but the majority of those who share my name are northern blacks. So much for having a "white name."
crharrisonAug 1, 2010
You really didn't bother thinking before spouting off about the rich versus the poor did you? Obviously if the black population is only 12.4% of the total population there will be more poor white, there will also be more rich white people, this is what happens when there are more of one group. The disparity (potentially due to privilege) is when one group of people is overrepresented in a specific category. So here's where facts come in handy: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104552.html
According to the 2006 US Census we can see that of the households with lower income, from less than $5,000 to $49,999 a year, there is a the percentage of black households in those ranges is greater than the percentage of white households. Once we get above $50,000 a year, then the percentage of white households exceeds the percentage of black households at each income level. What this means is that if you are white there is a better chance that your household income is greater than $50,000. If there was no racial disparity the percentage of white households at all income levels should be equal to the percentage of black households at each income level, as the table shows the percentage breakdown of each race; each column totals 100% of that population.
So there is a disparity, even if in absolute numbers there are more whites in every income level. Get your facts straight before going on a rant. I don't know if affirmative action is a solution or not so I'm not going to say much about it, but if you look at the stats there seems to have been a mild shift towards higher incomes for black households, but it looks like little change has occurred at the lowest income levels.
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
So, crharrison, what you are saying is that if there are more white people (higher percentage) than black people at above $50,000, then there MUST be some sort of secret conspiracy that gives white people an unfair advantage? The only way for there NOT to be an unfair advantage is if, suddenly, blacks start making more than whites in every single social-economic category?
How about this? what is the education level difference between blacks and whites in the $50,000 to $100,000 dollar a year income range?
There is a report that posits that home ownership may be the key difference here. I believe it's education, but they make a good point that owning a home may influence the educational achievement of one's children. I wouldn't know, my parents never were able to own their own home, and I had to pay for my education completely by myself.
Look at this article.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15704759/
Also look at the census on where black populations are concentrated, then look at what the education levels are in those areas. It seems to me that the best thing someone can do to break the cycle of poverty is to get out of the areas where education is poor.
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
Also, here's one that shows what's being done to help
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/06/11/covenant/
blqysmgAug 1, 2010
By the way, I never said there was no disparity. I said there is no "white privilege." There is no secret advantage a poor white person gets over a poor black one. Or, maybe there is. I was not a party to it, nor do I feel there was ever a hand held out to me because of race. It was certainly never said to me. It WAS said to me that I didn't deserve to get a job if an equally qualified black person wanted it. Is that what you mean by white privilege? We are privileged to watch good jobs go to other people because of their race?
By the way, where I live there is an equal number of white and black people. I have just as much a chance of being interviewed for a job by a black person as I do the other way around. I've worked for blacks as often as whites in my career. Are the black people ALSO extending white privilege?
crharrisonAug 1, 2010
blqysmg, actually I didn't say a thing about the causes or reasons for the inequality in income levels. What I was commenting on, and in retrospect I should have quoted you in my original reply was the following statement: "Blacks make up about 12% to 15% of the population. Who the hell do you think makes up the rest of the poor? There are three or four poor white people to every poor black person out there. If we were "privileged" wouldn't we change that?"
See the problem is that yes, there are more white households than black ones, at roughly 6.6 white households for every one black household. Yet, if you look at the lowest income level there are only about 2.5 white households for every black household at that level. This shows that there is a disparity in wealth and on the surface one could argue (but I am not) that white privilege has changed the balance. My argument was with the things I understand and that you miss represented, the numbers. I do not know what the causes or remedies for this disparity are so I'm not commenting on that.
thizzlbafoolAug 1, 2010
"every black person I know will tell you that white privilege exists and is there to keep the black man down. "
sounds like you need to meet more black people
pipskweekAug 1, 2010
"95% of the white population does NOT get anything from being white other than being hated by blacks"
What exactly did black people do to make you believe they hate whites?
namja23Jul 30, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY&feature=PlayList&p=9D5D98CDCEE13982&playnext=1&index=24
mikepictorJul 31, 2010
absolutely brilliant
ldrummeraxJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
With regards to Louis CK: In the past its been brilliant to be white. But thats the past. s**t today isn't like that at all (thank god). What i don't agree with is being forced to pay for the mistakes of other people in the past. people need to get over it all already.
It's like when a black person chooses to be "african" even though their origins are from jamaica. Or vice versa depending on what the flavour of the month is. Stop acting as if YOUR being oppressed, since your not. your ancerstors were, but not you. And trying to guilt trip society to give you a handouts because of it is insulting to both your ancestors and mine.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
sacrilegeJul 31, 2010
Buried for YOUR.
clemenzaJul 31, 2010
Buried for typical resentment sentiment re: blacks complaining about slavery etc. We're not talking about the past, but "people need to get over it" is a crock. There is plenty of racism still today.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
c0reyAug 1, 2010
Came for this video, left happy
hyperianAug 1, 2010
i knew this would be linked the second i read the title
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
I remember that. And people think he was being ironic.
knoxiouseduJul 30, 2010
No.
oxidaneJul 31, 2010
Sure is a myth when any nice thing you say about Whites is perceived as racist, and you're automatically a Nazi.
audiomodderJul 31, 2010
Agreed. I clicked every "supporting" link in this article trying to get some actual facts behind this viewpoint, and everything that wasn't historical fact (Dred Scott case? Sherod? why are these even linked? it's not useful). The only one that seemed like it would have some facts linked to an op-ed piece from the Journal that started with this line: "The NAACP believes the tea party is racist"....an op-ed from the same guy. Does anybody have some hard evidence (read: a study, not "this black guy got a job instead of a white guy")? I'd like to see it, because the opposing side kind of has a mound of evidence.
rehasher01Jul 31, 2010
My brother outscored his African American friend in GPA and MCAT at Wayne State University, and was not accepted to their med school while his friend was. A Professor told him he has "White Male Syndrom"Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rehasher01Jul 31, 2010
Dugg down? That isn't evidence?
BanachSpacedJul 31, 2010
GPA and MCAT are probably the last two measures used to evaluate incoming students, so I wouldn't assume it's due to race, especially if the scores were fairly close..
audiomodderAug 1, 2010
@Rehasher...let me say that again...
"a study, not 'this black guy got a job instead of a white guy' "
howcleverJul 31, 2010
The myth is that every white person enjoys privilege.
It would be far better to base affirmative action decisions at colleges on family wealth, instead of assuming (and reinforcing) the stereotype that caucasians are privileged and minorities are not.
davidnivenJul 30, 2010
Yes. It's a myth. When we all pay the same taxes, work for a living, and can become president...yes, it's a myth.
It's a myth perpetuated by race-mongers who would use division and strife to accumulate their own power and money and give themselves a reason to exist. Just ask Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton...or the NAACP.
BanachSpacedJul 31, 2010
"When we all pay the same taxes, work for a living, and can become president ..."
You don't even know what white privilege is, do you?
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
Why should he? The vast majority of whites have never experienced it.
What those like myself HAVE experienced, is fellow students in college getting special scholarship and other privileges just for not being white.
We've watched as friends get Novell CNE and Microsoft MCSE training for free - paid for by the government - because they're non-white.
We've been excluded from the jobs with the best pay and benefits - government ones - because we're white. "No, there's no ban on hiring white people. But we're only accepting resumes from visible minorities! And we won't hire you unless your resume is on file."
We've experienced the same thing in large private corporations.
Enlighten us. What is this white privilege of which you speak? And no, an "old boy's network" of seniors doesn't count. Where is it for anyone under 40?
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
Just for the record, I DO approve of some affirmitive action.
But while this "white privilege" claim had some truth generations ago, now it's as as mythical and racist as any minority stereotype.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
BanachSpacedJul 31, 2010
"Why should he?"
It's helpful to know what you're talking about when claiming something doesn't exist.
"The vast majority of whites have never experienced it."
Just because you can't see it, doesn't mean you haven't experienced it. That's pretty much the whole point, so thank you for making it for me.
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
Nice cop-out.
aplusjimagesJul 31, 2010
White privilege to me is the ability to walk into a place and only be prejudged by my demeanor. Can't say non-whites get that advantage in the US. My black friend was at a wedding and every where he went he was asked to get drinks from the other white guest. He was there as a guest of the bride and dressed nothing like the servers there. That's white privilege.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
BanachSpaced - What privilege did I experience? An increased competition to get into college? A better education (I went to the lowest rated elementary, middle, and high school in my city)? Maybe it was the privilege of being jumped because my ancestors may have owned slaves 200 years ago. Please, tell me what privileges I have received. I know, it was improved promotion opportunities right? The only promotions I've gotten involved an interview and leaving my team for a different slot I was qualified for.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
aplusjimages - no, assuming someone is hired help based on color isn't privilege, that is racism.
BanachSpacedJul 31, 2010
"assuming someone is hired help based on color isn't privilege, that is racism."
Has it ever happened to you? I wonder why that is... I'm sure it's just a coincidence. Your victim complex makes it difficult to see how lucky you really are.
ironmindAug 1, 2010
I'm white and I've had people at wal-mart assume i worked there. More than once. You're an ignorant fool, BanachSpaced. This s**t has happened to everyone at one time or another. Retreating to the color of your skin for a pity party is about the most asinine thing anyone can do.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
BanachSpacedAug 1, 2010
@ironmind: You're right. We're all on a level playing field now. Businesses even say so: they're all equal opportunity employers. Glad there's no more racial injustice left to worry about.
ironmindAug 2, 2010
Businesses would rather hire minorities for ratios and to avoid lawsuits. When you take life experiences that occur to everyone and insert a racial bias into it, like you do, it only serves to extend and prolong perceived racial injustice. But you'd like that, wouldn't you? Nothing will be fair until white men are whipped while picking cotton, will it?
trexorJul 31, 2010
You are blind then, I have worked for ALRO Steel and DART. Both of those places rarely hired minorities, and if they did they were given jobs that were considered unfavorable. Not to mention their pay along with that of female workers was considerably less. Racism is still alive and well. Affirmitve Action does not work, it merely provides the illusion of equality, while pushing racism below the radar.
barasawaAug 1, 2010
Both of those you mentioned have sound rather racist the last several times I've heard them. I think M.L.K. would have been very disappointed in those two.
wrath017Aug 1, 2010
DavidNiven says it's a myth. That means it's not a myth.
moonkeeperJul 30, 2010
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
Jordan117Jul 31, 2010
"I am a pathologically self-absorbed sociopath who thinks altruism is morally wrong." - Ayn Rand
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"I am a pathological sociopath who believes we can create utopia through collectivism where none has existed nor ever could..."
-Libtards
libertarianslolJul 31, 2010
lul
metaliqAug 1, 2010
@johnny2time
lol @ u
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
"When you cannot attack the argument, attack the man."
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
Ayn Rand was honest about herself, that's the difference. She didn't try to hide behind some altruism BS like Marx. Please do argue with me, I will quote specifically every remark Marx made to defame his detractor's by sating that he was merely a victim of circumstance, even though clearly he was hiding behind his theories of Socialism.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
basalcellbosskJul 31, 2010
Ayn Rand was wrong. She claimed, among other things, that emotions are not a cognitive process. This betrays the purest ignorance of human cognition. A person making such statements simply doesn't have any credibility. Her economic concepts are laughable.
diggerlaterJul 31, 2010
Yer stupid, stupid.
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
Emotion's are not cognitive, they are part of the base instinct's from the primitive portion of the mind.
Your entire argument on that basis is wrong.
brian1625Jul 31, 2010
She has said wrong things, she has said right things.
I will use your logic to continue from here.
What you said was wrong. The credibility in your statement means that you will be wrong forever.
isuzu14bJul 31, 2010
Wow. I actually find myself in complete agreement with Rand on this quote. Not a common occurrence.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
While she was a heartless bitch at times, I do try to take into account that her rights and property were stripped from her in the early days of the Soviet Union. In other words, I take her writing with a grain of salt.
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
She was honest, that's a credit to her. Where as her main opponent in Social Theory did nothing but hide behind his developed ideal's.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
Rationalized selfishness
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
It's called being realistic. Would you sacrifice yourself so another person who is incapable of surviving on their own can live another day, or would you make the rational choice and leave the other person behind so that you, who is capable of survival on your own, can continue?
barrimonAug 1, 2010
Don't be so dramatic. You can help someone without sacrificing yourself. We're not being attacked by zombies.
Again... rationalized selfishness.
ronintetsuroAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
Randian principles are more in line with the constitution than most anything any politician has ever spouted.
Do you honestly believe that people who belive in hard work and individual rights are "everything that's wrong with America?"
ronintetsuroAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
spartan777Aug 1, 2010
As long as "Objectivism" and Ayn Rand's philosophy suits the interests of similarly sociopathic corporations and ultra-rich bankers, we will have to keep hearing from Ayn Rand devotees.
@Mariokartfever; If you look at the implications of Objectivism, it rewards nothing but elitism, slavery, hierarchy and the degradation of those without the gift of wealth.
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
Individuals working hard to create goods and services that can be traded with other hard working individuals who do the same is called economics and it's the source of any and all global prosperity wherever it is found.
crunchydeluxeAug 1, 2010
@ronintetsuro:
So being a hard working person who expects compensation for his work is somehow a bad thing?
nidstylesAug 1, 2010
I think the problem with the US, is the ignorance and the intolerance.
Rand was honest, Marx was a coward, and preferred to live off the back's of other's while spouting his own idealistic dream. I do not devalue you for your opinion. I do, however, not value your opinion. That's the difference.
isuzu14bAug 1, 2010
@johnny2time. I know a lot of hard working Americans who don't get paid jack s**t. And i am confident that a grand majority of the hardest working people in the world (think sweat-shops) get paid less than a dollar a day.
Hmmm... maybe your model is missing something.... just a thought.
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
It's not a model it's the truth, because some are born into wealth doesn't negate the way economics works.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
Some of you need to learn to think for yourselves.
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
She said the smallest group on earth is a person. If individuals make up a group, it's a group that consists of everyone. How can that group be a minority? Isn't she just bastardizing words?
The Oxford Dictionary definition of minority:
--a relatively small group of people
http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1268204#m_en_us1268204
How can a person be an individual and a group? Individual means "indivisible." Unlike groups which can be split up.
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=individual
Besides, it would be almost impossible for an individual to have no common interests with any other individual alive. If he/she does, they are unofficially part of a group. And if they don't care to share any common interests with 6.8 billion other living people, why exactly would they need to be defended?
This is metaphysics for people who want to see themselves as victims.
Some people enjoy growing up in a civilization they took no part in creating (running water, electricity, defense), but don't want to contribute anything at all to the future of it.
If there were only a 1000+ page book I could read that would make me feel better about being a selfish prick?
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
"If there were only a 1000+ page book I could read that would make me feel better about being a selfish prick?"
What a juvenile interpretation of Rand. The teachings of Marx have murdered over 100 million but who cares...at least he wasn't selfish! What a joke.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
I'm such an ignoramus. I couldn't possibly understand the towering genius of Ayn Rand. It doesn't take 1000+ pages to make a point. Ask Nietzsche.
I'm sure Marx intended for Communism to turn out exactly the way it did. /s
I wasn't even arguing the catastrophic effects of her ideology. I was just talking about the wordplay she passes off as philosophy.
I notice you never even touched any of the points I made, but I answered yours.
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
You would rather damn everyone to collective slavery than let individuals pursue their individual dreams...nothing is more selfish than that.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
What I'm trying to say is that its WAY TOO DRAMATIC. Helping other people doesn't make you slave. It's not a life or death situation. Even paying really high taxes doesn't severely limit your ability to enjoy life. I'm a capitalist. I'm not pro-taxation.
I'm a big fan of Emerson and Thoreau, but at least they stated openly that sometimes its better to be a prick if that's really what you believe. They didn't spend a lot of time rationalizing it as if you were doing the right thing for everyone.
ronintetsuroAug 4, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountAug 4, 2010
What's with libtards and Star Trek?
Fact: The global population will max out at 12 billion by the year 2100. History shows us across all time periods, geographies, and cultures that free markets are intrinsically more efficient than centrally planned ones. Look no further than the great famines and food shortages experienced by ALL communist nations.
If we were to use up all petroleum on the planet (which will not happen) there are numerous alternatives and while your central planners would spend decades trying to solve the problem, industrious entrepreneurs would be on to the next problem.
Your entire thesis hinges on a false assumption.
cristinamkJul 30, 2010
I am a legal immigrant from Eastern Europe. I moved to USA two years ago. My english was very bad, and i had a very hard time finding a job. Before i moved here i didn't know very much about USA population. But i did watch South Park and Family Guy, and i though "damn, americans are racist, and they treat minorities very bad and make fun of them". I was wrong. Americans are great. They make me fee very welcome.
So here i am working as a cashier at a fast food place. Other that general manager, i was the only white (and legal) one. I never, ever felt so much hostility and bad looks in my life, and that's from other immigrants. There were people who came here 8-10 years ago and they speak zero english. And they have no wish to learn it or to integrate in this community.
I still struggle with my english, but i understand it better that i spell. Because i'm here legally, i can go to college and apply for financial aid. In my home country i was one year short from getting my degree in marketing and logistics. I want to finish my education here, and be a productive member of this society. There are so many scholarships for everybody (jews, latinos, african americans). There are not much options for me. If i wont qualify for financial aid or i cant borrow money for tuition i'll have to work at macy's (if i'm lucky), even if i was better in school than someone who gets a scholarship just because of their race.
All minorities leaders say that we should overcome racial barriers and be all equal. But how the f**k we'll make that happen when they pull racial card everywhere? How about we give same opportunities to all people despite their race? I know, shocking suggestion.
smacksawJul 31, 2010
When I was starting college, my white American maleness wanted to either do nursing, be a paramedic or police. I wanted to be a public servant. After being turned down for a lot of spots in different programs, I found myself really getting annoyed. The breaking point was an LAPD hiring fair and after a perfect score on my exam, they did a process of elimination where the only people left were black women who scored a 70/100 on the test. Basically, I didn't even need to go there. They just gave me the opportunity for show.
At that point affirmative action pissed me off and I was sick of the reverse discrimination. But instead of saying "Hey, we need to get rid of affirmative action", I said to myself "We need to get rid of racism and discrimination so this kind of s**t isn't needed."
The facts is, you act bad, you get punished and the person you harmed gets restitution. Affirmative action is our punishment for being racist dickbags and this ridiculous "time out for white males" is how we pay it back.
What's interesting to me is how you talk about the Latinos at your work. That's pretty much why we have a problem. You can't say to them "You're just like everyone else, get the f**k over yourself" when they form a group based upon the fact we treat them like s**t...so we say "f**k Latinos for doing that" except they're doing it because we're being asses about it. The cycle repeats and then we need affirmative action.
What they really need is for us to say "f**k your La Raza, f**k your victim complex, you're just like me and we're going to treat you RIGHT!" If we treat them wrong, they're not like us and we divide yet again. And think of Arizona 1070. This is what they see. It doesn't matter if we should hire *ME*, the best person for the job any more than you get the moral superiority of saying "You are criminals for illegally immigrating." We have just as much fault in the victim complex as they do.
If you want to give everyone the same opportunities, like the ones I missed out on, you need to say people are different in a good way and then say we're all different in a good way and we're all the same. You must elevate. Affirmative action sucks, but it's the lesser of two evils. And yeah, these people are hostile, but you have to ask yourself if it's because we've given up on them and they think "why bother" or if they're just inherently evil...which is silly.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
"Affirmative action is our punishment for being racist dickbags and this ridiculous "time out for white males" is how we pay it back."
So the sins of the father are paid for by the son? I thought AA was supposed to help minorities, now you tell me its purpose is to punish whites? With this logic, we should never allow any British people in our country because of what King George III did. And we should never allow Japanese people in our country for what happened in WW II. Go ahead and punish people for illegally discriminating, but don't punish a whole category of people just because SOME were bad once. AA is bad policy, it doesn't help anyone and it hurts a lot of minorities as well as whites.
atarioJul 31, 2010
That was one of the most cogent things I've ever heard you say. +1.
smacksawJul 31, 2010
@Atario - Thanks. I try to be cogent every once in a while.
@immelman42 - Look at it two ways. One. Let's say you owe someone restitution...like Union Carbide in India. We all know that one. Or how about BP? Where do you draw the line? When the debt is paid to the victim's satisfaction or after a period of time. Because I think BP is gonna stall...
Two. This isn't like a past crime. That was my point in responding to cristinamk to begin with. So the Latinos at his job fit a negative stereotype. Why? Maybe it's because we haven't stopped messing with them. Do I like it that some Latinos come to the US and won't even make an effort to speak English? f**k NO. But I know where it's coming from, and it's that we have given up on them and expect nothing from them, so what are they going to prove?
People that have little, what do they take pride in? If all you have left is your language or your blood, there you go. But if you say "Check it out, I know you may not have a great education, but you're a bright guy. I want your kids to have a better life than you've had. I am going to give you a chance with this job and you need to make the most of it because there were other more qualified people I could have chosen, but I know helping you means that your entire family will be kicking ass as Americans in 20 years.", you get it right.
The fact any of us need the government to tell us to do it? Pathetic. But that's what it's for. The last resort when we can't sort it out on our own.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cysailorJul 31, 2010
"The facts is, you act bad, you get punished and the person you harmed gets restitution. Affirmative action is our punishment for being racist dickbags and this ridiculous "time out for white males" is how we pay it back."
My parents are legal immigrants (One frm Russia, one from Mexico). I look white, but had nothing to do with being a racist dickbag to black. Nor has anyone in my families history on either side. Why am I paying back?
xdreJul 31, 2010
Because if you look white, you're already starting out with an advantage that minorities don't have. And believe it or not, that "payback" is microscopic by comparison.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
m1ntb3rrycrunch Jul 31, 2010
"Because if you look white, you're already starting out with an advantage that minorities don't have."
What advantage is that?
jgzmanJul 31, 2010
immelman: The sins of our fathers are still harming the sons of their fathers. (if you follow my meaning)
I don't like affirmative action either. I think it may be necessary, but it may also be counterproductive. Special treatment always leads to problems, Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
eezyvilleJul 31, 2010
@scottpigeon
You get to avoid a lot of negative stereotypes for one. You're not seen as a thug, gang banger, or single mother. Try to prove yourself with those stereotypes following you. White men are not portrayed in that manner. When you see white men in the media they are mostly wearing business suits and looking successfully. Even if you feel thats not true you certainly get the benefits of that image. I'm sorry you feel disadvantaged but think about how disadvantaged blacks really were 40-50 years ago. You don't have it nearly as bad. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
pinkfish411Jul 31, 2010
@Eezyville
One of the best ways to not be seen as a thug or gang banger is to learn not to dress and speak like thugs and gang bangers do. If I see a well-dressed, articulate black man, I don't think of him any differently than I think of anyone else. If I see a grown man with his pants around his thighs speaking a slang-filled dialect that's incomprehensible to native English speakers, I'm inclined to look down on him, no matter what his race is. If I dressed and acted like that, I can guarantee you I wouldn't be as successful as I am today, because no one with any power to help me become successful would have taken me seriously.
smacksawJul 31, 2010
@CySailor
We're "paying it back" in the sense that if we have total opportunity and others only have partial opportunity due to idiotic s**t like racially-based discrimination, we're not really equal. Not everyone is born identical, but we should all have identical opportunities. If we have a better shot due to some of us being racist dickbags, we're cheating. We're cheating ourselves as well. Just as affirmative action is reverse discrimination where minorities who aren't qualified might get an opportunity, a system of racism that keeps a certain class on top is no different. There are plenty of my fellow white brethren who got more opportunity because of that as well.
That's what we as whites don't get. It's hypocrisy. If you're white, all you see is "affirmative action gives minorities more opportunities" and if you're a minority you think "social customs give whites more opportunities."
The worst part is that the minorities see our side and their side. They see both. We only see our side...most of us, anyway. Hypocrisy begets more hypocrisy. We would not have affirmative action if we didn't have de facto white affirmative action to begin with.
When you think about it from both sides, you can't escape the truth of the hypocrisy of both sides.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mrsteamtankJul 31, 2010
I'm a Latino. But I don't get any sort of Affirmative Action assistance because I'm too white(I'm serious) and my English is too good so it's even worse than that. Every time they(for scholarships and government jobs) ask me my race they only care if I'm a visible minority and since I'm as white as snow they don't care.
jeremyz0rJul 31, 2010
So all you had to do- to get a free tuition/job.
1) Get a tan
2) Speak broken/bad English (hard be can't derp)
How did you f**k that up?
wtheonewAug 1, 2010
On the other hand, I know many people that are ~1/10 non-Caucasian that are getting minority scholarships left and right. You're not doing something right.
atarioAug 1, 2010
It's the visible appearance that gets you discriminated against, so that's what the anti-discrimination measures focus on. How is it that I have to explain this?
jagedlionAug 1, 2010
I know a Jewish ginger Mexican. Definitely qualifies as Mexican, but doesn't look a lick latino (his sisters do, its really the gingerness that does him in). And he did qualify for minority status.
In fact... I think usually scholarships are awarded before you even see the people working at the school. I think that you did something wrong during applications.
Remember, most people only care about their diversity on paper.
dzhuo04Jul 31, 2010
You poor white people... You know that Asians are discriminated MORE than white people, not only do we not have your institutional connections, but we are also considered "white" when you talk about race for applications. For college admissions as an Asian you have to be in the top 10-50 depending on how competitive your school is. Whereas if your white if your in the top 20% you can make it at any school without having to work as hard or as much as your asian counterparts. Why is that fair? It's not, but do you see Asians bitching? No we just know that we have to be at the top 1% to cut it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
diggerlaterJul 31, 2010
So you are outraged about ethnic profiling, and your solution is to blame "white people". Maybe you can't get in to college because you are stupid.
dzhuo04Jul 31, 2010
Na, I graduated already. Just saying it's harder for Asians to get into better schools. I was ranked 26th in my graduating class, scored a 1540 on SATs scored a 33 on ACTs played football and still had trouble getting into a private school in the top 20, but because this kid at my school was part native american and black he got into harvard, one of my good friends who was like probably top 30% ish like 140ish got into harvard because his sister is an alum. I'm just pointing out that Affirmative action is still better for whites than it is for asians.
dzhuo04Jul 31, 2010
I'm pretty sure that you, DiggerLater, have never stepped foot on a college campus. Oh well, whatever, keep denying that there are inequities in the system. It's no longer race based and instead it's shifted to socioeconomic factors. With the growing amount of "poor" of course the poor white feel like the system is against them, but to say once affirmative action is gone the system will be fine, is just wishful thinking at best. I mean having alumni connections and knowing the right people really do help your chances into the "best" colleges/universities. Also not all school districts are created equal, some have more resources then others, I mean who wouldn't want to attend a school that can afford to offer 32 AP courses, yet the neighboring school can only offer 4. There really is nothing for me to prove to you, an internet troll, but I think at least a relatively honest look at the system is important.
libertarianslolJul 31, 2010
Actually what you're talking about is exactly what the topic is about.
Whites, asians, and indians (asian ones) are discriminated against when applying to college. When institutions talk about "diversity" what they really mean is "blacks and hispanics." This is because asians are the most successful people in America on average. They are the richest and have the highest degrees.
"Why is that fair? It's not, but do you see Asians bitching? No we just know that we have to be at the top 1% to cut it."
You should be bitching. It's racism.
socrates114Jul 31, 2010
Aren't you guys overrepresented? Im not saying its justified but when your population is low but a higher ratio(?) of your kids go to college than other races isnt their going to be competition? I know that would be saying they look and different races and let quotas in. I dunno maybe they just dont want to allow a big portion of one race in? hopefully I make sense.
libertarianslolJul 31, 2010
That is the reason socrates. It's not a problem except to those who are racist and are willing to crush the aspirations of others just so that they can see the token black or hispanic walking around campus.
isenborgJul 31, 2010
Bravo brother [cristinamk}. Welcome to America. With legal, responsible immigrants like you, we become a better nation. I wish you great success and riches in your future. Your story really picked up my spirits. Thanks.
volacideAug 1, 2010
Hahah, I couldn't help but think of this.
http://comedymeltdown.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/borat_great_success-450x337.jpg
But that really is a cool story cristinamk, provided it's true.
alexm451Aug 1, 2010
I'm pretty certain cristinamk is a girl.
nitrokidAug 1, 2010
Only if you really believe that story is true.
heymbitJul 31, 2010
cristinamk, first off, you wrote an incredibly well written piece for someone learning English, bravo.
My dad is an immigrant, ESL, and after decades of trying to understand English even he couldn't have written something better.
As for what you said, that is exactly how I feel. Here's Affirmative Action in a nutshell: If you're born in America, and not white, then you can never be as good as a white person, so we need to give you extra stuff to make up for your lack of talent. Personally, I find that incredibly racist and depressing.
Welcome to America
atarioAug 1, 2010
"Here's Affirmative Action in a nutshell: If you're born in America, and not white, then you can never be as good as a white person, so we need to give you extra stuff to make up for your lack of talent."
Wow. Talk about projecting your own racism, massively.
The point of Affirmative Action is to force society to start accepting nonwhites into positions they have been shut out of forever. This is about telling something to the people in power -- the hiring managers, CEOs, etc. -- not the people trying to get jobs and what-have-you.
heymbitAug 1, 2010
Atario:
That was it's main purpose, 45 years ago. If it's taken this long, either it just doesn't work, or non-whites are using it to get a better job than someone more qualified, which is just as racist as someone saying: I'm entitled because I'm (INSERT RACE/RELIGION/GENDER).
What job, exactly, has a minority never had? The Vice-Presidency of the US is the only job to have only been held by a white man (and you can thank every President in US History for that). Other than that, no job is without a minority, in regards to race, religion, or gender. So your argument is wrong, you anti-white loser (racist trash).
aronononoAug 7, 2010
" then you can never be as good as a white person, so we need to give you extra stuff to make up for your lack of talent. Personally, I find that incredibly racist and depressing. "
How can you believe that is the reason AA is used?? cmon
liuiteJul 31, 2010
Why just affirmative action for race, why not for those who are socially challenged. so many people get ahead based on social network or who they know. Asians are discriminated against all the time despite higher education. I often see whiteys get on the fast track right out of college and even many asian college grads had to struggle to find work outside of the technology sector.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
zizar3Jul 31, 2010
What country in Eastern Europe are you from?
golgothaAug 1, 2010
She is from Moldova
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
I wish you the best cristinamk, and i hope you finish your degree :)
kooftJul 31, 2010
Depending on the school you apply to you may be eligible for a minority scholarship. At NC A&T they still offer, I believe, minority scholarships to Caucasians, Latinos, etc, because it's a primarily black school (90%).
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
"If i wont qualify for financial aid (that's fine, i dont feel entitled to nothing) or i cant borrow money for tuition i'll have to work at macy's"
I am white, upper-middle class and male. I GOT FINANCIAL AID. there's no f**king way you won't get financial aid, and it is *impossible* not to get loans. Also, there *are* scholarships for people of every ethnicity, including Europeans. Maybe you just didn't look, or lied that there are none when you wrote the comment to strengthen your political argument.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
drewski813Jul 31, 2010
spartan... he is talking about scholarships and grants... i went to college but had to stop because my loans were getting insane. I couldn't even qualify for subsidized loans... i had to get unsubsidized. meaning i still had to pay on the interest while i was a full-time student... so i had to get a job... and i still couldn't keep the interest from capitalizing.
but as far as financial aid goes, the racial factor is just one card... the other is that if you are under 24, not married, not in the military, or do not have children, then you have to put your parents tax information on your application. so their financial situation screws you over too even if they can't help you pay for school.
so the message i immediately got at 18 years of age was, "man i should have knocked some girl up in high school so that i could qualify for some grants." and "I wonder if someone would marry me just so i can get through college".
Im happy for you being able to finish college on loans and find a decent enough job to pay them off but all of us don't have that privilege.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
Scholarships for Jews? Ha! I've only ever seen 1 scholarship meant for Jews and it was for taking Jewish studies not regular classes.
jadrianAug 1, 2010
First, generally speaking I definitely find americans welcoming, not racist at all. That said, the best way to test for racism is definitely not by the experiences of cute eastern european girls in their early twenties abroad. Not in the US nor anywhere in the world. Come on were you really afraid they weren't going to be nice to you? I think you can relax girl.
artsiiAug 1, 2010
amen on the scholarship comment. i can never find any money for college because im white, parents make too much money [but have way too many kids so that is moot] and only have great, not fantastic, grades. don't average people deserve a higher education too?
stonedslackersAug 1, 2010
Cousin Nico!
deadquakerAug 1, 2010
you are the American Dream. I am glad to know you are still possible
phyreeAug 1, 2010
I logged into my account for the first time in months to digg you cristinamk. you are inspiring in spirit and story.
anklebiterAug 1, 2010
I wish I could digg you more than once. You're the kind of immigrant that makes the United States a better place.
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
Translation: "I'm a white guy from Eastern Europe and I thought I would have a hard time but s**t's been pretty easy for me. Guess racism doesn't exist."
No one else has even blinked at this?
trollbaneJul 30, 2010
Race is only an issue if you make it an issue. If there is an advantage for white people, it's only because for them, race isn't a big deal any more. Most white people don't judge on race, and they don't regularly feel judged on their race.
Now I understand for black people or other minorities it's more likely that they are going to feel judged on their race, but a lot of the time it's in their heads. Say you're black and get pulled over and the cop gives you a ticket. It could be because you're black, but it's far more likely in today's society that he was going to give you one regardless of your skin colour. No white person's ever gotten a ticket and thought "damn, that guy was racist." (Although they might have well thought he was a dick)
The problem is sometimes people can perceive racism when it's not really there. A lot of the time, cops or other figures of authority come down harder on black people because of the attitude they display, where this attitude is mainly due to their perception that they're going to be discriminated against.
Now I'm not naive enough to believe that there aren't racist people out there today, but they are a minority. Furthermore, they tend not to be the types of people who get fair in life themselves, so as you become more successful and interact with likewise people in the workplace, you're less likely to come across that state of mind anyway. There's no reason why an intelligent and hard working black person living in America today would be unable to succeed in life to the same extent as a white man.
rotundoJul 31, 2010
Just an anecdote: I'm white, and when I was dating a black girl last year it was nearly impossible for me not to wonder if we were being singled out racially -- every time someone stared at us or every time we got mediocre service at a restaurant, the idea that it was happening to us because she was black (or because we were a mixed couple) kept popping in my head. Of course I've been stared at before and I've received mediocre service at a restaurant, just as my white self -- stepping back I can't see any real evidence of racism, but in the moment it always popped into my head. I don't know how often black people feel that, but t was an interesting little taste for me.
On another angle, I was married to a Korean girl for many years. Never worried much about racism because, you know, most people like Asians. We did encounter overt racism twice, though -- once in France and once in Arizona. It is amazing how one racist idiot can completely ruin your day. I don't imagine it takes too many experiences like that to harden someone and make them feel oppressed.
socrates114Jul 31, 2010
What happened on both those occasions if you dont mind?
rotundoAug 1, 2010
Sure: In France we were inside a restaurant near the front window. A guy came in off the street and up to our table. He had what I think were two twigs or something in his hand, and he was holding them like chopsticks. He said in French "would you like some baguette" and then started laughing. It was so unexpected and weird that we didn't understand what was going on at first and he repeated his "joke" and the laugh and then the maitre'd came over and whisked him back outside and apologized to us. This was in 1992.
Just this past spring driving in Prescott, AZ, we were at a stop light. A truck pulled up next to us and the driver looked over and shouted "Oh God! What is that smell?" then he held his nose with a big smile, pointed at my wife, and then drove away saying "Ugh! It stinks!".
Racists seem to find themselves very amusing. In both cases I felt like s**t for hours afterwards, partly because someone had amused themselves by disrespecting my wife and partly because I didn't realize what was going on fast enough to break the guy's nose or something. My wife never made a big deal out of it, but it was quite a mood killer.
lordbeefJul 31, 2010
Actually if you look at the statistics, after being pulled over, blacks are nearly four times as likely to have their car searched even though whites are four times as likely to have illegal substances.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpp02.pdf
Some blacks have an attitude that they're going to be discriminated against because hey, they probably will be.
asforonedayJul 31, 2010
The definition of white privilege is not having to wonder whether you were pulled over because of your race. Because, like you said, racists still exist, despite being rarer than they used to be.
nitrokidAug 1, 2010
They're not as rare. They are now coming out in the open again still saying stupid things on TV, radio and Politics. Just pay attention and you'll see not everything is as rosy as many lead you to believe.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
@Trollbane
I have zero record and clean plates and I've been pulled over multiple times by cops without getting a ticket. I didn't get tickets because I hadn't done anything wrong.
They ask me if I'm on parole (because it allows them to search my vehicle) and I've been patted down... for nothing!
Give me a justification for that.
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
A black person with no criminal record is just as likely to get hired for a job as a white person with a felony record. Translation, for hiring purposes being black is equivalent to being a felon.
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/09/study-black-man-and-white-felon-same-chances-for-hire/
Racism exists. Affirmative action is necessary. End of discussion. Shut the f**k up, Jim Webb.
insightfulJul 30, 2010
I like how conservatives phrase things they believe to be true but want to sound that they might be open minded: "Is Obama destroying America?"
So is white privilege a myth?
Did Glenn Beck rape and murder a girl in 1990?
Furthermore, I'd love the conservatives' bats**t ballsiness, which Democrats and most sane people lack, which is to have a bunch of white people calling blacks and Hispanics racists and insist that Dr. King would have agreed with them calling minorities racists.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
itsrattlesnakeJul 30, 2010
"This is a debate we should have, but can we?"
Probably not. I bet the threads on this Digg will be a pretty good indication as to why, too.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
The 'threads?'
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
There are more white people than minorities on Digg. There are less people who care to do research on subjects than people who have opinions. Any discussion on Digg will be dominated more by opinions than researched facts. Any discussion on Digg will be dominated more by whites than minorities. And in a democratic system like Digg, it will be quite easy to bury any facts that contradict your opinions or any minority perspective that contradicts a prevailing white perspective.
Can you have a debate on Digg? Sure. Will that debate disappear beneath a sea of buries because some people don't want to deal with facts that contradict their strongly-held opinions? Likely. If that debate is on race, will it quickly get buried beneath a lot of self-adulating back rubbing and head patting at how progressive Digg is for seeing beyond race while completely ignoring the overt ignorance shouted in its echo room? Of course. That's unavoidable in a system like this.
White people will never be able to define a racial debate for nonwhites, but they can effectively end, initiate, and ignore it.
Anyway, Jim Webb's a f**king idiot who has no idea what he's talking about. Employment in this country is demonstrably racist.
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/09/study-black-man-and-white-felon-same-chances-for-hire/.
He's basing his opinions on a CONCEPT, not on the reality of the subject he is addressing. In his mind, poor white people suffer. Except there are a disproportionate number of poor minorities of ALL races than whites. He ignores why this is (the lack of employment opportunities that studies show go to barely qualified whites over over-qualified minorities) and then says it's not about race.
I repeat. Jim Webb is a f**king idiot.
ascadianJul 30, 2010
This goes to show that people have still not gotten the concept of taking race or skin color out of the equation. People shouldn't get... or not get something because of a skin color.
BanachSpacedJul 31, 2010
http://imgur.com/FUhi4.jpg
It's not as simple as you'd like.
shnowdoggieJul 31, 2010
That is good. But if you believe that it is true then you are at least prejudice, possible racist. In my experience there is a higher percentage of black people who are prejudice than white. The interesting thing is that prejudice seems to be directed at black people as much as white people from both black people and white people. And that is an issue.
Go Jim Webb.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
lnlogaugeJul 31, 2010
That might apply, if this were 1910. Ive never owned a slave, and I don't know anyone who's been a slave. move on already.
jtotheoeAug 1, 2010
this link is the only good thing in the entire comments section. it being dugg up restored some of my faith in diggers, but on the whole im pretty f**king disappointed right now.
johnfluxAug 1, 2010
BanachSpaced,
I think the way to do it is to simply say "Anyone that needs a hand up, should get it".
If it happens to be that black people need that more than white, on average, then so be it. But it means that white in the same economic state as a black person should receive the same amount of support.
bxrwxrJul 30, 2010
Yeah, but that whole "slavery" thing still sticks in people's craw.
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
You can stick it somewhere else then. No-one here had slaves. No-one here was in any way responsible for slavery.
For the vast majority you woudn't be able to find any way that they benefitted from slavery - unless you count some vague way that applies to every other skin color too.
digg2point0Jul 31, 2010
No one here killed Jews, but we all trip over ourselves to appease Israel.
cysailorJul 31, 2010
More blacks were enslaved, and still are in fact enslaved, in Africa than anywhere else in the world.
mattbdJul 31, 2010
And largely they were enslaved by other black people.
scythefwdJul 31, 2010
And since I have no relatives in Africa, nor have I ever been to Africa, I should be responsible for the ongoing enslavement of people by their own race?
clemenzaJul 31, 2010
Ok, fine. Congratulations slavery wasn't your fault. Forget the past. It doesn't change the fact that racism is alive and well in the modern world and if you are poor, uneducated and white you still have a significant advantage over someone who is poor, uneducated and black.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
Those days are gone.
Now if you're poor, uneducated and white, you have significant DISadvantages over the poor, uneducated and non-white. You become a second-class citizen when it comes to scholarships and other education perks, government-paid training, government hiring and hiring in larger companies.
pakobedejoJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
badgerbusJul 31, 2010
In the days of slavery some of my ancestors were suffering at the hands of their British colonizers; more recently my Grandfather and his family had to leave everything they owned behind and come here after the Nazis rose to power. Other members of my family came here penniless and without speaking the language, escaping other things I don't even know about.
No member of my family owned a slave in the United States.
Despite the fact that my family has faced adversities on par with just about everything, my skin is white, and I'm a male, so I'm not able to sign up for the types of programs meant for families just like mine, that have gone through hell and back and now need a little help getting up to speed with the rest of the middle class.
Personally, I think fighting makes me stronger, no one has given me anything. I put myself through college by working, the first in my family to graduate, or even attend. You know what else? This is the most I've talked about what my family has gone though in years. For me, it's not a factor, my life is my responsibility and people who keep up with the "but my ancestors were enslaved" bulls**t need to grow up and learn to make their life their own.
Every person on Earth can lay claim to some atrocity their people/ancestors/religion/whatever have suffered at some point in history. Get over it and make your own destiny, don't let your people's history dictate your future.
hetmanJul 30, 2010
I agree we need to change affirmative action laws. However do not act like being white is some type of hinderence on you. The majorty of wealth, assets and political power still recedes with white people. Yea there are lots of things we could change. However I do not pull the whites have become opressed card on me. It is simple not true.
pakobedejoJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
prettygreenAug 1, 2010
And I'd like to take this opportunity to note that those few whites who do get all the money are perfectly happy to do business with the few people of all different colours who have all the money in their respective countries.
turstJul 31, 2010
They are oppressed if a disproportionate amount of scholarship money goes to minorities.
rotundoJul 31, 2010
No they're not. They're only oppressed if the sum of social pressures make their life harder than average.
I honestly don't know if AA helps or hinders. I think it's a complex topic. But the idea that whites are oppressed is just stupid. Really, really stupid.
I know there's no magic potion that makes life easy for whites, and generally speaking they face nearly all the same challenges as anyone else. But they don't have to deal with people in power questioning their abilities because of race, and if you don't think this still comes into play in hiring decisions, then you are woefully ignorant. It's not as bad as it was. It's getting better (under AA, of all things! Look at that!). And at some point AA should be put aside. But again, saying whites are oppressed under the current system is really, really stupid.
turstJul 31, 2010
No, you are stupid. Oppression comes in many forms other than social. You just fail to realize that my example is a form of oppression. If blacks were purposefully excluded from the majority of scholarships you would say that they are being oppressed in that manner.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rotundoAug 1, 2010
Of course oppression comes in many forms -- the phrase I used was "sum of social pressures" and that includes your example. When I say "social" I'm talking about the entirety of what our society does.
My point is that you can't pick and choose, you have to look at all the various forms of oppression (including the example you give), and determine if they add up to an unfair situation. What if minorities got a disproportionate amount of scholarships but were also capped at minimum wage once they entered the workforce -- only a fool would say that whites were the ones being oppressed.
In other words, look at the big picture and stop cherry picking facts to support your bias.
turstAug 1, 2010
I'm not cherry picking. I am saying that it is a form of oppression and therefore it should be fixed just as the oppression against minorities. I don't see many schools turning away minorities. Schools are probably the last places to turn them down.
hatmadderJul 31, 2010
When someone doesn't obtain what they rightfully deserve, then it's oppression. When a Latino or a black person is given a scholarship/job simply because of their race, when the white individual is more qualified for it, then it's oppression. When a group of people are hated by another for any reason, it's oppression. Is it an outright, violent oppression? No. But it exists. The only reason it's not more prominent is because white people don't let it stop them. They find ways to succeed despite the disproportionate favor given to minorities. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rotundoJul 31, 2010
Do you think there's any chance that without AA blacks or Latinos might sometimes be denied a scholarship or job because of their race?
Because, you know, that's what was happening, quite demonstrably, until AA.
Do you think that it is okay to have allowed that oppression to continue? Or can you think of another way to reduce that oppression without AA? If so, I'm all ears.
AA will one day be more hinderance than help. But it sure as hell helped a lot so far. I am not sure exactly when we should phase it out, but reading the whining on this thread, I'd be shocked if there weren't people still making racially motivated decisions against minorities.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
a minority of rich white people does not equal a majority of rich white people. Being white doesn't give you a f**king thing. On that note, point me to evidence of your "oppression". When did you last hear about a case about someone being fired/not hired for being a different race? Exactly. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rotundoJul 31, 2010
Being white does give you one f**king thing: race is largely not an issue in a white persons' life. I know this because I'm white, and it basically never matters.
If you think that any black person can say the same thing, then you don't know what the f**k your'e talking about. No matter their station in life, being black will come up often and have some impact on the situation. I'm sure most of them wish the issue would just go away, but it hasn't. It's easy to underestimate the effect over time.
Do people get fired/not hired for being black? Of course not, because it's illegal. Does it happen anyway under different guises? Absolutely. Do you really think the average white business owner, faced with two identical candidates, one white and one black, is going to flip a coin? It may be a tiny edge, but the white candidate has it.
I do think racially motivated hiring decisions have become pretty rare these days, thanks to the forced integration of AA. At some point it won't be needed. Not sure if we're there yet or not, honestly. But to claim being white doesn't give you a f**king thing just means you don't know much about the world.
turstJul 31, 2010
race is still an issue for white people too. you go into a black neighborhood and see how you feel.
there was a fight outside of the black fraternity next door to mine and we went out to see what was going on. I got punched in the face for being a white guy. f**k YOU.
rotundoAug 1, 2010
Having worked for a couple years in a black neighborhood in Dorchester Mass and more recently having spent four months living in rural South Africa, I know very well about being the only white guy around. Sorry you got punched in the face for being white, that's terrible.
Still, you say to me "go into a black neighborhood and see how you feel". The assumption being that as a white american, I very well may have never had to deal with going into a black neighborhood. Probably a fair assumption. The fact that you can make such an assumption proves my point: generally whites don't have to deal with blacks unless they want to -- blacks don't get to make that choice. Most whites do not deal with racial issues regularly (even you) -- blacks do.
ronintetsuroAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
gurugangstaJul 30, 2010
Not sure what it's like in America, but I know many teachers colleges and medical schools and the like up here in Canada have reserved spots for 'visible minorities', such as blacks and Natives. I think it's bulls**t. If I go to my doctor, I should be able to fully trust him or her, knowing that they're in that position because they beat out everyone else, not because they happen to a minority. Only the best should be accepted to med school. Whether they're white, black, hispanic or whatever, shouldn't factor into the decision at all.
atarioJul 31, 2010
Except that, in the absence of something forcing the issue, their races do factor into the decision -- by the ones in power, doing the hiring, and that's historically been a lot of racist whites for a long time. This cannot be denied.
mrsteamtankJul 31, 2010
That's because Canada(and the US as well) have a system that encourages nepotism to the max. Many other countries for most public positions(and many private as well) have something called a "competition" where you present yourself via a number so nobody knows who you are(or the colour of your skin). You do well in the entrance exam and you are hired for the position.
dzhuo04Jul 31, 2010
That's not really true, yes in America there is a lot of institutional nepotism, via alum, but in places like china there are also ways to game the system, instead of who you know, it's who you bribe. If your son doesn't place well, a new car to the right local official will still get him into the school he wants. Your uncle is the provincial officer? At the family dinner make sure he knows that his nephew needs to get into Beijing University. I guess it's a little better in China because as long as your the best or at the top, you won't get screwed but the corrupt system in china punishes those on the cusp, and since exams are once a year, a bad test day can hurt even more. Overall these systems fail because of the loop holes, much like taxes. If everyone isn't playing by the rules then there really is no point for the rules.
smacksawJul 31, 2010
I'll tell you a little secret: if the training is good, anyone can do that job.
Doctors? We have millions of them. Einsteins? Only one of those.
I've taught in the classroom for many years and I've learned a lot of things. One of them is that aptitude is driven by desire.
You could give me 10 of the most qualified people with natural talent and a sense of entitlement and I promise you that their results would be less than a group of 10 people with a desire to improve, even though they happen to be lacking some skills.
Think of it like the NFL Draft. We can put these players through the combine and measure every tangible skill except for one: desire.
Tom Brady was a 6th round pick. The 6th round of the NFL is affirmative action for skinny white guys, ok? The 6th round is not where you find talent, it's where you fill out your practice squad. It's giving people who don't have the talent to deserve a chance a chance to show up at camp anyway. Understand? Tom Brady is one of the best NFL QBs of all-time and he came off of the scrap heap.
What is the best? How do admissions work? Because from a pedagogical standpoint, when you make 5 slots for Inuit students and you get 50 applicants, you're going to pick the person with the right combination of desire and suitability.
Have some faith in people to choose. By your logic, the NFL Draft should be 1 round and that's it.
gurugangstaJul 31, 2010
NFL =/= Medical school
marx2kJul 31, 2010
Going by that logic, how can you ever trust your doctor? After all, you never know if they're a doctor because they're white.
barrimonJul 31, 2010
Being a good doctor is more than just understanding the science.
Part of it is getting people to open up to you and not having prejudices that prevent you from performing a good job.
People from poor and rural neighborhoods become doctors and move back to those poor and rural neighborhoods. How many doctors of any color (given the choice) are going to move back to into an Inuit community?
Isn't racist to assume a person of color is unqualified? How big of a difference do you think there is between people who have been accepted to medical school? You think they're letting F's in?
gurugangstaJul 31, 2010
I never said or even remotely implied that a person of colour is unqualified. There are plenty of people of all ethnicities who are capable of becoming doctors. I just don't think that their gender, race, religion, etc., should come into play one way or the other when deciding whether or not to accept them. Sure, tests can't test everything, which is why most medical schools also have several interviews that potential students must go through, interviews which look at more than just their understanding of the science.
If people from poor and rural neighbourhoods want to become doctors, more power to them. But they should be admitted under the same standards as everyone else.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
"If I go to my doctor, I should be able to fully trust him or her, knowing that they're in that position because they beat out everyone else, not because they happen to a minority." Why wouldn't you be able to fully trust him or her if they have a doctor's license?
In America, that's what medical board tests are for. Doctors get tested so much they're sick of tests. If you believe in tests so much then have faith in the medical license. If they weren't good enough, they wouldn't make it out of school.
thedude1373Jul 31, 2010
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Supreme Court's decision in the UC Davis v. Bakke case from '78. It upheld that race can be used as a factor in admissions to college, but there cannot be a quota for minorities. I'm not entirely sure how this affects businesses' hiring processes though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of_the_University_of_California_v._Bakke
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
Like my father always says, "What do you call a guy that graduated LAST in medical school?......Doctor."
Or as George Carlin said "Some where out there is the WORST doctor....and somebody has an appointment with him tomorrow!"
Maybe that explains why doctors and lawyers are always "practicing."
lordskywalkerJul 30, 2010
Louis C.K. has some pithy comments on white privilege. http://youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY
namja23Jul 30, 2010
Yeah, I already posted that.
wonderchemistJul 30, 2010
No, but there is a privilege to being well rich and well connected. George W. Bush when to Harvard and Yale. Do you really think he qualified based on his educational merits alone?
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
If not for political connections, George W. Bush might just be one more name on the Vietnam memorial wall.
prolianceJul 31, 2010
Funny how Bush has been out of office for two years and the Libs still bring him up. Changing the subject to cover the current president's failures? Bush was a mediocre student and had no problem releasing his transcripts.
Where are Obama's grades from Columbia? He won't release them, but we know he didn't graduate with honors, so it was between 2.0 and 3.3.
Why aren't you asking why this admitted college dope head with mediocre grades got into Harvard? How did he pay for his expensive Harvard education? The records are sealed and he still refuses to open them. Obama played the game used his minority status and applied as an international student. He gamed the system and used money that should have gone to better qualified students.
Open your eyes. The President of the US called a white Cambridge cop stupid and had to back off, then recently had a black woman fired for alleged racism, and blamed Fox News who never did a story until after she was fired.
This country is never going to take a step toward being color blind while we have a person like this as President.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
archangelzltJul 31, 2010
Last time I checked, Barack Obama graduated Harvard Law School magna cum laude.
But don't let facts like that get in the way of your neocon rantings.
prolianceAug 1, 2010
@archangelZLT: The discussion is how he got into Harvard, not what happened once he was already there.
But just like the spin I was originally replying to, you had to change the subject also. First explain how your messiah got into Harvard and why he's hiding his admission details, then you can throw out your red herrings.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
What you say about GW is true. But using Obama's definition for wealthy (>$250k income), there are a lot of wealthy people that actually earned their wealth and the 'privilege' is part of their reward. You don't hear about most of them because all you see and hear about in the media are celebrities which didn't earn their wealth.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
808atheistJul 31, 2010
Do you think Obama got elected because he is the absolute smartest guy in our country, or because he went to rich schools and made the right kind of friends.
azuvectorAug 1, 2010
He was smarter than the other pair of chuckleheads who were running against him. And smarter than the last guy. Sad but true.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You'd have to change it to White, Chinese, and Indian Privileged. People who work hard and don't complain seem to succeed rather nicely.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
yeah, be quite. We can't have you showing off the Asians. Who also come here from poor nations and excel without democrats "help"
50 years of Democrats "help" and look at the state of the black community.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
xdreJul 31, 2010
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Model_minority
reposadoAug 1, 2010
Not sure why your being dugg down.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You can't get rid of the Affirmative Action programs. Why do you think they're there in the first place?
Read "The Bell Curve" by Richard J. Herrnstein, Ph.D. Psychology, Harvard University, and Charles Murray, Ph.D. Political Science, M.I.T. and you'll see why.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
So why is it more important to have black people regardless of their ability, than to have the most able regardless? Does their skin color add value to academics or to certain jobs?
One reason that blacks are under represented is that their culture values education differently. If a large percentage of blacks view higher education as "acting white", then would it not be reasonable to expect fewer blacks would follow that path? Note the lack of white people in this social dynamic. If a smaller percentage of black people choose to skip higher education, then they should not complain that they are under represented
xdreJul 31, 2010
"So why is it more important to have black people regardless of their ability, than to have the most able regardless?"
Black people are less likely to be hired based on their ability than white people. It's a proven fact. Identical resumes, one white name, one black, guess who gets called with significant more frequency?
"One reason that blacks are under represented is that their culture values education differently."
It would be a good reason, if it weren't one of the worst myths foisted onto black people in modern times. It's simply not true.
"If a large percentage of blacks view higher education as "acting white", then would it not be reasonable to expect fewer blacks would follow that path?"
I'm sure it's more comforting to think that than to realize that lousy inner-city schools, crime-riddled neighborhoods, significant poverty rates and yes, latent racism might be the actual cause.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
timdiggJul 31, 2010
As a black person I completely disagree with the statement that "Black culture doesn't value education"
The real secret of black society is that black women do not sexually reward educated black men. Think of how really smart white men wind up dating asian women...but a MUCH MORE extreme version of that.
Many black people see guys like me who "did the right thing"...and went on to get my master's....
...never get laid...
...work 90 a hours a week in a small cubicle...
...work a high powered job and not get high powered pay....
...work for stupid white people who use my ideas for their own gain...
at the end of the day...many black like me kinda regret their lives in general...on the other hand you have white people who refuse to admit that the corporate world is more of a social/dominance game than it is a "merit/hard work/intelligence" driven game...
at the end of the day I'm TOTALLY against affirmative action because it gives women bogus jobs...so they can claim guys like me aren't "fun enough"...and chase the bad boys anyways...
all that has happened black society is coming to white society soon enough...which is why you're seeing the drop out rate go up, the illegitimacy rate go up...the divorce rate go up(as women switch up their educated husbands for alimony payments and sex in the city lifestyles)
In conclusion, when a people's women value sexuality over security....you live in the ghetto. White people don't quite understand this issue completely...but its coming to a theatre near you....
What white people miss is that the VAST MAJORITY of affirmative action goes to the white women....Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dephextwinJul 31, 2010
"Many black people see guys like me who "did the right thing"...and went on to get my master's....
...never get laid...
...work 90 a hours a week in a small cubicle...
...work a high powered job and not get high powered pay....
...work for stupid white people who use my ideas for their own gain..."
That's not a black thing, that's a Digg thing.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"Black people are less likely to be hired based on their ability than white people. It's a proven fact. Identical resumes, one white name, one black, guess who gets called with significant more frequency?" And your evidence for this is where exactly? And i'm not talking about some case in the 1970's. Today is so much more progressive. Its never been this good for minorities and anything even slightly regarded as politcally incorrect.
jayobearJul 31, 2010
@Galgori, any Social Psychologist can tell you that there is still much evidence today that shows the racial bias (experimental studies show this time and time again). The experiments that showed the hiring bias are replicated yearly, and more than once, and they're still proving it to be true. Racial Bias can be seen from as early as infancy (own-race preference), which makes a lot of sense seeing as babies have a concept of themselves early on.
Last year, as part of my undergraduate independent study in child psychology, I did a semester-long experiment on 3rd graders, to test their racial bias and whether or not they were even capable of (a primitive form of) racial profiling. I saw an overwhelming evidence for white children having more positive views of white people, and negative views of non-white people. In fact, the darker the color of someone's skin, the more negative their views became.
Before you bury me, my experiment had both sufficient validity and reliability. My sample size was huge, I counterbalanced for a ridiculous number of factors, and my experiment went through an institutional review board before I could actually do it.
This whole comment section reeks of inexperience and personal account. The only true way to see if white privelege exists is through social sciences. Everyone speaks from personal experience, which is fine, but it's not scientific, so it has severe biases. It's like a conservative Christian saying evolution is false because they don't see it happening and that their experience of nature differs.
xdreAug 1, 2010
@Galgori, and anyone else:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_2_48/ai_97873146/
It's from 2003. Minorities have it good these days? Sure. But still not as good as white people have it.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
Yeah, well freedom is a bitch isn't it.
6502samJul 31, 2010
"The Bell Curve"
The book basically said that Blacks, as a group, were of inferior intelligence and that Asians were of superior intelligence.
So, you're saying that we need Affirmative Action because Blacks are too stupid to get ahead on their own merits?
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
That's exactly what affirmative action is telling blacks. And that's exactly why it needs to be stopped.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"The book basically said that Blacks, as a group, were of inferior intelligence and that Asians were of superior intelligence."
I don't think the average person needs a book to tell them that dude. Just look at the accomplishments of Asia...now compare that to the accomplishments of Africa.
....duhComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jjamminjonJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
socrates114Jul 31, 2010
Read Guns Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. They are no smarter than us and we are no smarter than them. I read somewhere that African Britons do better than most minorities here. So can the racist s**t they are inferior
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
Yea...
.....because the mountains of statistical evidence presented by the two dounces, Richard J. Herrnstein, Ph.D. Psychology, Harvard University, and Charles Murray, Ph.D. Political Science, M.I.T., pale in comparison to your insight...is that it Sparky? lol
Dude...you have zero common sense.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
cysailorJul 31, 2010
Much easier to give visable minorities positions to fill out a bell chart than based on the content of their character, that's for sure.
mrsteamtankJul 31, 2010
We should be using INCOME level to determine scholarships as well. This would end up being affirmative action by default since black people are poorer on average as well. And this would give people we often racistly call rednecks and white trash a chance as well.
v1kk1Jul 31, 2010
Having struggled to finance college and later graduate school, I couldn't agree more.
yaksukturboJul 31, 2010
race in america is a economic issue, simple as that
yaksukturboJul 31, 2010
if you compare the average black kid with no father to the average white kid with no father, they are equally Fked for life
THE reason why blacks have not narrowed the education/wage gap is because they are much less likely to have a stable family situation, all of the other problems facing the black community are results of this problems
the color of someones skin needs to be a non-factor for government programs
barrimonAug 1, 2010
Does anyone here use any theories about black circumstances that don't come from the racist 'colorblind society' 90s or that crappy and outdated Moynihan paper from the 60s?
diggimatorJul 31, 2010
Governments should not tell universities to accept under-qualified applicants over qualified ones.
Instead, I would support subsidizing the mandatory K-12 education for children of poor families, so they would have a fairer chance of meeting the academic qualifications by the time they submit their university applications. It is not the child's fault if their parents can't live in a more affluent neighborhood.
Why are the public policies that seem obvious to me never made into law?
dysfunctionJul 31, 2010
Huh? This already exists! K-12 education for children of ALL families is mandatory and subsidized; it's called the public school system. You could nitpick and point out that it's only mandatory to the age of 16, but even then that's K-10 or -11 (sometimes -12) depending on month of birth. What the heck are you talking about?
jgzmanJul 31, 2010
Most school systems are funded by local property taxes. This causes rich neighborhoods to have well funded schools, and poor neighborhoods to have very poorly funded schools.
diggimatorJul 31, 2010
It is mandatory, but poorer families get crap for education. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Inequalities (This is a pre-GWB book, however.)
kasha34Aug 7, 2010
@diggimator
Kozol is nuts. We spend tremendous sums on education.
And get little for it.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
Success in school depends a lot on support at home. Poor and unskilled people have a hard time helping their kids through school. I also suspect that they don't believe education has value. So regardless of current laws, those kids are unlikely to do well in school. But unless we want the government to be responsible for raising children, they only hope is to educate the parents and start making them see value in education for their kids.
Oh, and why should Universities not accept over qualified students? How does one become overqualified for school?
diggimatorJul 31, 2010
The three causes for poor academic performance that people give are genetics, family values, and underfunded schools. Some strongly believe that poor people will never have the genes or family values that successful people have, and that any funding to the poor for K-12 education is funding wasted.
Nevertheless, we should fix dysfunctional schools in poor neighborhoods that rich people don't know exists, to give children a fairer start in their lives. There's nothing wrong with this picture in terms of funding going to a good cause and giving a fairer opportunity, as opposed to the status quo: a racial quota system which takes a finite resource (university enrollment) and distributes it to neglected children who are less prepared at the cost of turning down those who are better prepared to take advantage of what the institution has to offer. Fudging the enrollment numbers might look great on paper but has nothing to do with solving the underlying problems.
barrimonAug 1, 2010
@diggimator
Even though you said it in a nice way, that was the most overtly racist post I've ever read.
diggimatorAug 1, 2010
@barrimon
Actually, I am arguing AGAINST racism. I am in favor of funding schools adequately. The opponents are the ones that are saying such funding would be money wasted.
kasha34Aug 7, 2010
Oh puh-lease. We spent a mint on schools, at least in New York state. And we pay teachers a lot. My wife is a nurse in a nearby ghetto school in upstate NY that spends an average of $14,000/student. The high school and middle school are chaotic, yet teachers there earn up to $120,000/yr. The district gets all kinds of money from the Feds and the state. And STILL the system only graduates 100 students out of 400 who start as freshmen.
Two miles away, is a Catholic school that spends $4,000/student. Same "population". The Catholic school graduates almost everyone who starts as a freshmen. And the hallways are calm and civilized.
It's not the money.
pakobedejoJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
spartan777Aug 1, 2010
"those parents ...often work a lot of hours or multiple jobs."
"Education must begin in the home, not the government."
These are contradictory points. How can we reduce work hours and increase pay? Ask Walmart pretty please? The government needs to start defending people's right to organize, and over time unions will force wages up and work-hours down. People work a month's worth of work-hours more *today* than they did in the 50's, despite the fact that workers are several times more productive. What changed between today and the 50's? Unions came under attack, and the number of union-workers today is a fraction of what it was.
That may have seemed like off-topic, but you really have to get to the root of the problem to fix it, and worker's getting over-worked is just one of many different reasons why kids- especially poor kids- don't do well in school.
pakobedejoAug 1, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
kasha34Aug 7, 2010
I don't agree that the parents need to participate that much.
My grandparents never learned English. Certainly they couldn't help my father and his siblings with their schoolwork. Or even monitor it.
The difference was, I think, that back then the schools were permitted to keep order. Disruptive students could be ejected.
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
stickwstJul 31, 2010
The attitude low income blacks have adopted (in my experience) is responsible for them seemingly being stuck in that state.
I went to elementary school with an black dude, we were both in the Talented and Gifted program. No that's not a special education class with a sugar coated name haha. He was very intelligent and charismatic. I didn't hear from him for 4-5 years, and the first time I hear his name again, is hearing that he shot up a house down the road from me. He's now a Crip, commits violent crime against innocent bystanders and man, not to judge, but he isn't going anywhere.
Not because he's stupid, because he's black, or because the white man did it to him. Because the culture of young, low in come blacks around here is one that promotes egocentric and ignorant lifestyles.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
I'm a white republican rabble, rabble, rabble, and blacks are privileged, rabble, rabble, rabble, they get this and that, rabble, rabble, rabble, the white man is the endangered species and they get the shaft, rabble, rabble, rabble...
Just thought I'd save everyone the trouble of reading all the above comments.
Blinker is known for his extremist r-tard following. It's like the plague.
Bury away, boys. But you can't bury the truth.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
immelman42Jul 31, 2010
I'm a lib dem rabble rabble rabble, republicans are stupid rabble rabble GEORGE BUSH was the worst rabble rabble rabble I can't bother to actually think about what conservatives say rabble rabble they only repeat talking points rabble rabble
Funny, but not helpful. You might learn something by paying attention to what conservatives actually say, rather than blindly projecting your stereotypes on them. I promise to listen to the opposition, if you will too.
clemenzaJul 31, 2010
No actually that sounds exactly like what most conservatives say. I try to listen but it usually is just talking points.
Sen. Webb is Democrat by the way.
novenatorAug 1, 2010
IIRC he used to be GOP, but switched parties when the Republicans kept getting deeper into right wing extremism.
brezzzJul 31, 2010
Go to popeyes and ask for a three piece meal, and then say "white" and wink. Special white man's meal that has all the good meat. Never saw a black man getting this meal, they always get thighs and drumsticks. Myth? I don't think so. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rogerstrongJul 31, 2010
You're proof that for every racist, there's an opposite and equal racist.
brezzzJul 31, 2010
Find an F=ma for racism and i'll be impressed.
6502samJul 31, 2010
I prefer the thighs and drumsticks - and I'm white!
zbeastJul 31, 2010
Affirmative action is for those who can't pay there way though school.
Take sarah palin for example, dumb as a box of rocks. her parents could afford to send her to five
different colleges before she graduated.
Smart inter-city minority's, would not have the opportunity to go to even a single college if it were not for programs like Affirmative action.
spypiratesJul 31, 2010
My support of phasing out of most affirmative action programs is my only deviation from my "far left" political views, but with bat s**t stupid arguments like "white privilege is a myth" it makes it very hard to continue to hold this view.
Blacks and minorities are not victims of overt prejudice in this day and age, but they are undeniably victims of "structural" prejudice, which basically means they are inadvertently discriminated against. An example is in the housing industry- when blacks move into a neighborhood, whites move out. Not necessarily because they are racist, but because they know people move out of neighborhoods when blacks move in, and therefore home values will fall, so they want to move out before the home values fall too far. The result is that blacks lose a lot of equity on their house.
I don't expect 100% proven factual evidence to sway any rock-headed conservatives, so I'm just going to continue my argument.
From "blacks are still being subtlety discriminated against," it does not follow that the answer is to give them a bunch of money or to prefer them in application processes. What should be done, in my view, is to throw the money into fixing these subtle processes that are wronging them. Metaphorically speaking, we should seal the leak, not mop up the water.
Admittedly, throwing money at a social problem is not a foolproof solution (but again, neither is throwing money at a race of people). However, society is already moving (slowly, but steadily) toward correcting its wrongs when it comes to racial discrimination. In a span of a lifetime, we have gone from signs banning blacks from eating at most restaurants to including minorities in almost every institution in existence. I believe the youngest generation that is growing up now is the most racially-accepting generation in the history of the world. It is hard to argue that the plight of blacks and other minorities will not be short-lived looking forward.
dysfunctionJul 31, 2010
Thank you, thank you, thank you. Affirmative action is untenable under the 14th amendment, but the idea that white privilege is a myth is beyond ignorant: it's ludicrous.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
I still remember my race and politics class.
Blacks are most comfortable in neighborhoods up until they are only 50% of the population. Whites are most comfortable in neighborhoods up until they are only 80% of the population.
That means as soon as the white population reaches about 79% whites feel they are getting outnumbered and white flight kicks in. And it has nothing to do with a particular race, they just don't like being around nonwhites.
It's funny to say that this isn't overt racism when housing values are determined by people, not computers. That's racism. It's overt. It's systemic as well. And it's structural. An individual within that neighborhood watching their housing value drop may not be racist himself, but the housing values are determined by people who are concerned with race.
And since minorities are more comfortable around other minorities and whites than white people are around any minorities, then it's white peoples' racial comfort levels determining the housing values and, consequently, race being the determinant factor.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"An example is in the housing industry- when blacks move into a neighborhood, whites move out."
Two words VIOLENT CRIME
Yes, white people should be forced to live in neighborhoods with high crime rates. Maybe black people should stop committing so many GD violent crimes and white people would't mind living next to them.
My family is latino and white and we moved out of a black neighborhood into a Latino neighborhood because of the crime.
You can say whatever the hell you want, but I'm not living around people who rob and kill. You take your family and move into a black neighborhood.
Hell even the good black families are trying to leave.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
hipmanJul 31, 2010
I wouldn't be so quick to judge if I were you...that neighborhood was still safer than your native country.
jtotheoeAug 1, 2010
," said one racist to the other.
spypiratesAug 1, 2010
lol I'm pretty sure that if you adjust for the fact that blacks live in crowded, impoverished neighborhoods, the violent crime rate between the races is going to disappear.
pakobedejoJul 31, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
Exactly, go to a trailer park in rural America and you'll see the same crime and lack of respect for neighbors that you see in some urban neighborhoods.
My family will move where people respect us and our property. Call it white flight if you want. But my wife has darker skin than most blacks I know and she doesn't want to be robbed any more than I do.
sugarazorJul 31, 2010
"my wife has darker skin than most blacks"
Just because you married a Boehner, it doesn't mean she's non-white.
jtotheoeAug 1, 2010
maybe if you didnt have so much obvious contempt for people and cultures that you see as below you, "black OR white," as you put it, they wouldn't hate you back.
spypiratesAug 1, 2010
I think you're missing the point of what white flight is. What you are saying is that blatant racism is causing white flight. This is a misrepresentation.
White flight occurs because other families know about white flight, so they want to move out before all the other whites do. The simple perception that people will leave neighborhoods and home prices will go down because a black family has moved in is enough to cause this phenomenon.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
You even said yourself you have no evidence. So your talking out of your ass based on sitcom drama's you probably watch on TV right? Unless i get evidence i'm taking this as bulls**t.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
spypiratesAug 1, 2010
a) I didnt say that any where.
b) I learned it at the University of Texas @ Austin.
Try educating yourself. You sound like a complete moron right now. You don't have to pay the money for a formal education, but obviously you are aware that a load of information is available on the internet. Try looking around before making pig-headed comments such as that one.
rogorJul 31, 2010
The Asian community is kicking ass in America.
sndreamJul 31, 2010
And getting mugged by N_ggers.
giantbirdcrapAug 1, 2010
I love those white robes you're wearing! Where'd you get them?
lordbeefJul 31, 2010
It appears that way because asians are largely concentrated in high income areas like california and new york, but when you compare them to whites in the same cities, the asian poverty rate is double that of whites
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-05-19/news/mn-59619_1_asian-americans
And when you compare asians to whites with similar education levels, whites earn 14-28% more
http://www.aast.umd.edu/snapshotofportrait.pdf
sinauraAug 1, 2010
The studies show that SE Asian Americans account for 87% of Asians on welfare, but only taking up 13% of the total Asian American population. It's quite understandable, considering that the majority of SE Asian Americans are first or second generation Americans (refugees from the Vietnam War, etc) who have only been in the country for a few decades. It's clearly understood that success in a new country takes some time, seeing as how these early generations are the ones that have the responsibility of making their "American History" for the later, more successful generations.
(First generation American-born ethnic SE Asian right here, with refugee parents. Senior year in Electrical Engineering. If my kids don't become more successful than me than I fail as a father and role model.)
yeegngoAug 1, 2010
This is the truth I don't understand how this got dugg down. Back up!
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
Correction: White people are kicking ass in America, but not as much ass as they would be kicking if they could get rid of Asians.
atarioAug 1, 2010
They trying, but the structural racism still shuts them out.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081112101339.htm
nismos14270rJul 31, 2010
I think you missed the point...
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
will somebody please think about the white people?!
does white privilege exist? sure it does. if you're white you're less likely to get the death penalty or get stopped by the cops, more likely to get a job interview, get a taxi, a loan, blah blah f**king blah. and whether current generations like it or not, the effects of racism still affect life today through racist public policies (zoning, division of public services, etc.). can minorities be racist to whites? sure, but does that racism have broad, institutionalized consequences?
in any case, a lot of these issues will become moot when america becomes more and more multicultural and mixed up. of course that's why you see these articles pop up: the fear of loss of white privilege and preeminence in american life. that's why you see tea partiers foaming in the mouth about wanting 'my america back.'
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"you're less likely to get the death penalty or get stopped by the cops, more likely to get a job interview, get a taxi, a loan, blah blah f**king blah"
Again, i'd like to see proof of this. It seems most people opinions on here are based on comedy shows like Chris Rock or Louis CK (which has already been quoted a few times). It's so much easier to throw the race card, which is why this discussion should take place. To simply ignore it outright shows YOUR ignorance and your acceptance that minorities should get handouts and that being white should be penalized. So f**k you tbh.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
speedsteamboatJul 31, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege#White_privilege_in_the_United_States
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
the only one making assumptions here is you. educate yourself instead of saying 'f**k you.'
if you want proof look for it, a google search will help:
http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=54
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/15/nyregion/15subprime.html
http://www.thehousingcenter.org/All-News/Racial-Ethnic-Disparities-Remain-in-Ohio-Mortgage-Lending.html
http://washingtonindependent.com/80845/survey-finds-racial-disparities-under-white-house-anti-foreclosure-program
http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1059&context=lawfaculty
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3495/is_2_48/ai_97873146/
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/05/26/283518.aspx
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/local/investigates-dc-taxicab-discrimination-112309
i can keep going.
this is where i get to say f**k you, dummy!
jayobearJul 31, 2010
Galgori, did you actually take the time to research the claims you're disputing? Because your insistence on nulling people's comments like this is really getting irritating. It's like a conservative christian claiming evolution doesn't exist because their own experience differs, and they won't listen to evidence or look for themselves. This is digg, no one cites references.
I can't link you to the social psychology articles that I've been researching for 3 semesters as a Psych major because I use a database of psych articles to access them, but I can link you to reputable news reports and things I find on the internet.
Evidence for racial profiling of minorities being stopped (look closely at the heading about Statistical evidence, it shows recent studies):
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/racial_profiling/
A recent literature review on racial profiling:
http://nicolapersico.com/files/ARoEPersico27.pdf
An abstract for a literature review that comprehensively lists all the studies that modern racial profiling notions are based, citing the studies themselves:
http://pqx.sagepub.com/content/5/3/272.short
An article in the NY times discussing the disproportionate prosecuting of non-white drug users compared with white drug users:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/nyregion/21about.html?_r=1
[I was looking for a study that Barney Frank I think cited last week, "76 percent of marijuana users are white. 73 percent serving time for it are non white." but I can't find it]
A CNN newsreport about a study that found their to be subconscious racist attitudes in a group of 120 non-black participants:
http://www.3333333.net/2009/HEALTH/01/07/racism.study/index.html
The Wikipedia entry on White Privelege, at the bottom has many links for evidence of modern white privelege:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
An article in Newsweek that outlines a comprehensive study showing the roots of racism in white children, and how (THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT) raising your children color blind can lead to your children harboring discriminatory or racist attitudes [instead you should be openly talking to your kids about race, even at a young age]:
http://www.newsweek.com/2009/09/04/see-baby-discriminate.html
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
DATAGASM!!!!! FLAWLESS VICTORY!
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
If you believe all tea partiers are racists, then there is a s**t load of racism still in this country considering the size of that movement.
grammerpantsJul 31, 2010
I was born in the 80's and grew up in the 90's, why would I support AA when K through grade 12 has taught me that everyone is equal and anyone can do anything that they put their mind to. AA had it's place, but not anymore, the system will correct its self over time now as the "younger" generations take over.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
AA is bulls**t. Hire only the most qualified people for your jobs. If that means your entire workforce is all whites, blacks, hispanics, or checkerboarded striped people then so be it. The system is broken when you apply for a job and a colored women gets 15 extra points because of her race. Qualifications only. If you do not qualify then BETTER YOURSELF! DO not rely on the government to give you extra help just because of your damn race.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
This is because everything is so f**king politcally correct. You can't say a thing without it either being sexist, racist or some other s**t ending is "ist" trying to sue people out of their money. The american president is black for f**k sake, don't try and tell me things aren't at their best for minorities. I totally agree with ozyborn, you can be every godamn colour of the rainbow, if your more qualified than me i expect you to be hired over me.
Would you rather have some hispanic doctor that got through based on gender pity operating on you, or the white guy that had to work twice as hard simply cause his white?
cwm9Jul 31, 2010
The real problem is that white privilege simultaneously exists and doesn't exist.
What do I mean by that?
The younger generations and those in newer states like Hawaii do not see white privilege because they grew up integrated, grew up with race friendly messages everywhere. That's not true of all younger Americans, but it's true of most of them.
The older generations and those in certain older states do see white privilege. That's not true of all older Americans, but it's true of some of them. There aren't many older wealthy blacks because sixty years ago there weren't many opportunities for them.
Those of us in the middle (I'm 37 and am on the leading edge of the "younger" group while Obama is on the trailing edge of the "older" group), have seen both sides of the coin.
We will have to live with affirmative action until the older generations are dead, or at least until they no longer control the bulk of the economy. Those of us in the younger generations see it as pointless, and soon it will be.
I'm half Chinese and was born in the US, but managed to grow up without ever being exposed to racism as a child. When I entered the adult world, I found older Americans weren't as welcoming as younger Americans.
I am luckier than my Father, whose marriage to my mother would have been illegal in certain states just 10 years earlier, and my son will be luckier than me, as by the time he is 18 there won't be many people left who are racist.
mattbdJul 31, 2010
Surely the logical thing to do is for recruitment and other opportunities to be as blind as possible to factors that would make people discriminate against candidates?
cryodinJul 31, 2010
If you are white, a worker, don't have any physical disabilities, you have nothing to get from the government
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
don't forget being male. If your a woman you can atleast sue for sexual harassment and be taken seriously.
tr3mulantJul 31, 2010
Well yeah, usually when a person is doing well there is no need to take care of them. Is this somehow an injustice?
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
"you have nothing to get from the government"
Have you ever driven on a road, or gone to the library, or gone to a public park or....
speedsteamboatJul 31, 2010
Except a police force, fire department, military, public water/electric/sewer, school system, protection from harmful ingredients in food, drugs or other products via the FDA, protection from unfair business practices via the FTC, assurance that any home or building you purchase was constructed properly and safe to occupy, radio and and television networks that work properly, safe electronics that won't burn your house down, knowledge that your beer or liquor wasn't brewed in a bathtub, assurance that your local restaurants are operated in a sanitary way, unemployment insurance, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and a hell of a lot more but those are just off the top of my head.
But, yeah, I get how you could say that white people derive no advantage from having a government. /s
8347Jul 31, 2010
Anyone who supports Affirmative Action is a racist! Sorry I know that sounds harsh but it's 100% true. You can't say you want to give special privileges to people based on their skin color and claim you are not racist. Besides, how bigoted and ignorant is it to say "you are white so you are going to have to pay for something some white people did 100 years ago". Even though you had NOTHING to do with it and your family may not have even lived in America then. Also what about all the whites that died in the civil war or white soldiers who died fighting to help the lives of people who are not white (Vietnam, Iraq, Phillipenes). You are spitting on their graves by creating programs like Affirmative Action.
rumblepak1Aug 1, 2010
You know nothing about history talking about "white soldiers who died fighting to help the lives of people who are not white". Vietnam was a clusterf**k, and historians are still challenged to even figure out why we were even involved in the first place. Iraq is still up in the air. And the Philippines? They might've helped kick the spanish out during the Spanish-American War, but what did the americans do? The Americans agreed to leave and they ended up staying anyway. It was American Imperialism at its absolute worst. And don't even get me started on World War II. They only now, 60 years after the war is over, have gotten around to finally paying Filipino veterans whom they promised to take care of...after most of the veterans have already died.
I agree that Affirmative Action has no place these days, but to call people who support it "racist" is stupid.
8347Aug 4, 2010
A racist is someone who treats people differently because of their race. Affirmative Action is a program that treats people differently because of their race. Therefore anyone who supports Affirmative Action is a racist!!! No matter how you try to play with words and butcher the English language with propaganda it's still racism pure and simple!
oxidaneJul 31, 2010
There is no White privilege because Whites don't look at themselves as a race, the way other races do. In America there is no such thing as a "European American", but there are "African American" and "Hispanic/Latino Americans", "Native Americans", etc.
Even the term "White" is so broad that often times we don't know who is even White or not, for example Middle Eastern folks, many of whom have lighter skin than Southern Europeans. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
In the US, white's have hegemonic power and control over society and culture, therefore white is seen as the "default." However, there still is individual and institutional racism.
oxidaneJul 31, 2010
People say that as if it's a fault that needs correcting. Whites are the majority in the US, it's no wonder that they have the most power. In African countries blacks have more power.
spartan777Jul 31, 2010
Hegemonic domination of culture and society is a problem, since if nothing else, it leads directly to racism. Many people in the US are subconsciously racist because of this phenomenon.
You are right, in other countries like Russia, native Russians dominate culture and society. However, this leads directly to more open racism (Russia isn't as civilized as the US. In the US, racism has to be hidden). Fascist street gangs in Moscow regularly assault and often murder blacks, Uzbeks and Kazaks (who are blamed for the exact same things people blame Hispanics for in the US).
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
It comes down to a very basic question. As a result of Affirmative Action, which is greater.
A) Quantity of unqualified minorities getting hired due to Affirmative Action programs
B) Quantity of qualified non-minorities not getting hired due to Affirmative Action programs
Does anyone know of a study that has tried to look at these numbers?
oxidaneJul 31, 2010
Such a study would surely be deemed as racist. Even if not, getting unbiased answers would be next to impossible, with organizations representing each race giving different numbers, then accusing the other of lying.
It's a good idea though, I'll give that...
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
But regardless of whether A or B is greater, shouldn't the argument be that it is hypocritical to teach racial equality while simultaneously having a policy that rewards one race over another?
I am all for racism being illegal, but that is a completely separate issue from Affirmative Action, which is a system that ignores the morality of what we teach our children in an attempt to right the wrongs of the past. An analogy would be saying that tobacco kills people and that is evil, so we should go kill the tobacco executives to prevent them from making the product.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
osarusanJul 31, 2010
Is racism over? Have we finally achieved social equality? One only need to look at some of the Tea Party rallies and what they say to know the answer to that. And then look at the complete lack of outrage from the Republican Party among others when blatant hate crimes and acts of racism are committed against minorities.
I'm white and healthy and get nothing from the government, and I get the anger at Affirmative Action, though I don't believe I've ever been directly affected my it myself. But even while I can understand the complaints against it, I can see that the alternative is far worse. Before we can end Affirmative Action we need to end the reason we started it in the first place.
oxidaneJul 31, 2010
Lack of qualifications? I'm pretty sure that's one thing that started it...
jayobearJul 31, 2010
It's scientifically proven that, in cases where two individuals (one black, one white) have identical qualifications, people are more likely to hire the white individual. Stop denying science.
It's statistically proven that this happens regularly. Stop denying statistics, too.
aheinzmAug 1, 2010
how do you define qualifications and how do you prove that the hiring entity defines qualifications the same way and how do you prove that the hiring entity only hires based on qualifications?
I think you need to go back and reread what science is and what the scientific method requires.
A business seeks profit. So wouldn't you think they would want to hire the person who maximizes their profits? If society is racist against blacks then hiring the white applicant would potentially be more profitable. This wouldn't mean business is being racist, but rather is catering to the consumer. If the consumer is racist then why do you put these regulations on the business and not make it illegal for consumers to disproportionately transact with white businesses?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountAug 1, 2010
Why is it the governments job to force discrimination against one person for the betterment of another?
In your quest for equality, you eliminate the possibility of equality.
oxidaneAug 1, 2010
jayobear, the majority of people in the US are white, is it racist for them to hire a white person if both have equal qualifications? What do you think would happen in africa if the same two people were to apply for a job? Show me your evidence, I'm curious about all this proof you have.
xdreAug 2, 2010
oxidane, you've just explained white privilege in a nutshell. If white people only hire white people, how do minorities find jobs? If a minority *does* find a job, how is he/she going to get promoted? It's a vicious cycle.
oxidaneAug 2, 2010
So I guess we should also complain about black privilige in Nigeria? You know, since they'd hire a black person there first...
Priviliges will always exist as long as people have their own preferences. Imagine a redhead and a brunette applying for the same job, and have the same qualifications, but the manager has a thing for redheads. That's redhead privilige, should we ban that as well?
xdreAug 2, 2010
How are either of those examples even remotely relevant? Do you live in Nigeria? Do you have studies that show that "redhead privilege" is a real problem?
Because basically, your argument boils down to "f**k 'em if they're not born white." That's real constructive.
oxidaneAug 2, 2010
No, I'm comparing white privilege to other possible privileges. No, I don't live in Nigeria, but the point is that the black privilege occurs there is the same damn thing as the white privilege that occurs in the US, except that no one complains when blacks do it. the redhead situation was an example, that was obvious. The point there was, again, and I'll probably have to say this once more, that as long as people have preferences, there will always be a kind of privilege. maybe I should have used blond women as a better example. There's an article somewhere on digg that even shows that blond women get paid more than brunettes, and redheads get paid less.
link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/7552146/Blondes-paid-more-than-other-women.html
but if we went out and protested against this "blonde privilege" then everyone would think we're idiots. it's the same. damn. thing. skin color being a factor in "white privilege" and hair color being a factor in "blonde privilege", yet no one gets crap for its except whites.
xdreAug 2, 2010
"No, I don't live in Nigeria, but the point is that the black privilege occurs there is the same damn thing as the white privilege that occurs in the US, except that no one complains when blacks do it."
Nigeria. The United States.
Yeah, I can see how that's the same thing. Oh, wait.
"The point there was, again, and I'll probably have to say this once more, that as long as people have preferences, there will always be a kind of privilege."
And we should do nothing about this because...?
"but if we went out and protested against this "blonde privilege" then everyone would think we're idiots."
Have blondes had a history of oppressing brunettes and redheads, because of hair color? Your equivalence is still failing miserably.
"yet no one gets crap for its except whites."
You truly don't see the problem, do you? What group holds the political, economic and social power in this country? How are minorities as a group supposed to dig themselves out of poverty in this country if it's OK for whites to ignore them during the hiring process?
Do you not understand how damn close you are to saying "Go back to Africa if you don't like it"?
oxidaneAug 2, 2010
How are brunettes supposed get equal pay in this country if it's OK for managers to pay them less than blondes? All I did was replace a few words from your second-to-last sentence. And I don't care how politically incorrect it sounds, if you want to accuse me of telling africans to go back to africa, it won't affect me. I'm not joining this whole "white guilt" trend.
You're trying to make this a race issue. Why does everything have to be about race in america? It seems like you want a kind of system where people only do things for minorities because they're minorities. How is that going to solve anything? Will people start to like minorities simply because the law forces them to be nice to them?
How about finding a way to help minorities WITHOUT bringing down others? asians are the most successful of ANY group in the US, and most of them came dirt poor with loads of debt. They don't cry about their situation and victimize themselves, and yet they're more successful than whites, including jews.
Oh, but please, bring on the excuses. Since hundreds of years ago, blacks were enslaved, that means that they are completely unable to be like asians. You think people aren't racist against asians? Sure they are, but they prove their abilities, and nowadays corporations are looking for more and more employees of asian backgrounds.
Also, don't come telling me about how you're asian and that I have no what it's like blah blah blah.
oxidaneAug 2, 2010
The topic is whether white privilege exists or not, and whether or not affirmative action should be used to try and balance things out. If is were my choice, I would refrain from using color to describe people altogether. But hey, everything is about race, isn't it? If I buy vanilla pudding instead of chocolate then it's means I'm a KKK member. If I buy a white car instead of a black car, it means I support genocide against blacks. f**king god bless america.
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
Racism isn't over, but I believe it is equal now. The same proportion of whites that are racists is the same as blacks which is the same as hispanics. It is now just a byproduct of hateful, ignorance rather than of societal viewpoints.
You are always going to have bad people.
miffelplixJul 31, 2010
Let's do away with affirmative action. But let's also make sure that all children regardless of color receive at first rate education, not just those who live in the white suburbs.
delihoundAug 1, 2010
I wish I could digg you up 50 more time.
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
And let's make sure that all businesses who discriminate based on race are fined. Heavily. And get rid of face-to-face interviews...
Oh, and let's make sure we reinstate maximum sentencing guidelines. And put cameras on all police cars. And in all interrogation rooms. And make sure juries can't see the criminals they are judging and can never see the race of the...yadda yadda yadda.
isenborgJul 31, 2010
It's a choice. Do we want to leave racism on the dung heap of history. Or do we crave to hold onto it as a political weapon and bargaining chip. As long as we allow racism to be a tool of the political system, it will never go away. It is much too valuable to political parasites. Yes Jesse Jackson, I'm referring to your ilk.
"I want to "cut his [Barack Obama's] nuts out"- Jesse Jackson
6thaccountJul 31, 2010
I want to talk about white women. I think white women are sexy; asian, black, latino women are not. I am not even attracted to them.
shnowdoggieJul 31, 2010
troll
macliberalJul 31, 2010
White Privilege is not a myth, it is a fact. It's amazing that someone who was so right on Iraq could talk like a repug on race. You just know that racists like Beck and Limboob are going to jump on this.
inhalerJul 31, 2010
How does white privilege work in a database? Over e-mail? On a telephone?
Assume that there is some level of institutionalized discrimination: when I apply for a job through a website, won't I, with an unusual sounding Eastern European last name, be overlooked or ignored compared to say, someone with a more English last name, like Walker, Greene, Smith, McMillian, etc even if they're non-white? Unless there is a box where you consciously check race, I'm at a disadvantage.
marx2kJul 31, 2010
"How does white privilege work in a database? Over e-mail?"
Darnell Watkins vs Joe Walker.
"On a telephone?"
SO... am I the only one who can tell when someone on the phone is black or not black? There are very subtle nuances in speech that make it apparent most of the time. And I'm not talking about the stereotypical type s**t either.
inhalerJul 31, 2010
I'm glad that my statement is falsifiable.
Just as there are Darnells, there are plenty of Anthonys, Michaels, Aarons, Brians, etc. Brian Watkins looks more like a legal immigrant than Taras Somethingotherczyk, / -ski.
I can understand your point regarding the telephone, although diction plays a huge role. Take another example a Susan Lee. A surname like Lee could be English, Korean, Chinese, etc. Explain to me how you can discern their ethnicity over the phone without any obvious ancient determining English / East Asian origin.
The problem with the concept of White privileged is that it's arbitrary and nebulous. In a world that's trending towards depersonalization, it's harder to say the effects are obvious.
marx2kJul 31, 2010
Agreed.
marx2kJul 31, 2010
Huh... The majority of these comments don't suck. I'm genuinely impressed.
marogerJul 31, 2010
Dugg for attempting the conversation at all.
My 2¢... as a white male, I've had a lifetime of white privilege and have been lucky enough to have experienced it where I could identify it. I think that's what's fallen short in the comments I've read thus far. It's very possible that most are insulated from seeing the results first hand. I was hired to manage a small business that was minority owned where the clients were almost 100% white. Although I detected a sense of intrigue by these clients towards the minorities in the background, given equal access, they always trusted me over my coworkers. I was proficient in my job, yes, but I know that several of my coworkers were just as, if not more. I was highly rewarded for my performance but my coworkers never rose in salary to more than half of what I was paid. I know that it was the perceived advantage I had as a white male in a white male dominated field that gave me that advantage.
Closed AccountJul 31, 2010
"as a white male, I've had a lifetime of white privilege" Your talking about the past. Things aren't the way they were 10 years ago. This isn't about what DID happen but the state of this whole race war as it stands today. The american president is black for godsake, if that isn't a sign of complete progress of racial equality i don't know what is. Don't let the younger generations suffer for what happened in the past.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
abxbxJul 31, 2010
@maroger
You're correct. There is still racism and the need for Affirmative Action, though I'd like to see Affirmative Action for economic reasons as well.
If you've ever worked in a mostly minority business, you - as the white person will be trusted more than the minorities. That's the 'white privilege' everyone's talking about. People perceive you as being better or more honest, just because you're white. You get more advantages because of it.
People trust you more.
Hell, lots of neocons (who are racist as f**k) trust/like Bush even though he's getting their kids sent to die for nothing. But Obama - they demand to see the birth certificate, he's an 'other', anything he does - no matter how good it is - they don't like it, they don't trust him.
magnumxAug 1, 2010
Wow, pretty much nailed that in one example, nice abxbx...
hivoltage815Aug 1, 2010
But to counter your example, I can tell you my dad worked for the IRS for 10 years and just could not get promoted because he was white and male. People who underperformed (according to objective metrics) and had less managerial potential (which is subjective, but my dad is a great manager, I know) were advanced because they were women or hispanic.
Eventually he had to get out of there because of this and returned to the military where he has been promoted as fast as possible and is a Lt. Col now. The military doesn't mess around with affirmative action because of the importance of competency in what they do.
What am I supposed to think about AA after seeing this play out like a science experiment?
zenmojoAug 1, 2010
That's funny. My mom works for the IRS in the Federal Building in DC and they don't have a single minority as a GS-15. They offered her a temporary job as a step promotion until they could find someone from OUTSIDE the department to replace her, so she told them to go f**k themselves.
hivoltage815Aug 2, 2010
GS-15 is the very top of the totum pole; nobody becomes CEO of a company due to affirmative action. I was talking about lower GS-11 positions in a field office 15 years ago.
I think it is tragic if someone is blocked from advancement because of their race, whether because of racism on the part of the hiring party or racism on the part of affirmative actions rules. I just have trouble seeing the difference. Why should I have to pay for the sins of my great great great grandfather? I am 100% for helping different communities get on their feet, but that doesn't mean we should advanced less competent people in important positions.
They should be provided the education and training necessary to become competent, and if they still aren't, then obviously race isn't the issue.