Look.....color blind policies do no work in this society for one simple reason........this society is not color blind. That's what they were inferring when they discussed this particular myth.
1 - Society is not 100% more color blind but that doesn't mean color blind polices don't work. They help us to become more color blind and they are simply more just.
2 - They didn't show that society is not color blind. They implied that when you measure the statistical overall average black people might start out in a less advantageous position. That doesn't mean society is not color blind, although I will agree with you (and probably with them) that it is not 100% color blind.
3 - The argument was not "color blind policies will not work". But that color blind polices give white people an advantage.
If you want to say that color blind policies do not erase preexisting advantages then I would agree, but they do not give anyone an advantage.
Its too small to make a significant difference if their SAT scores are bad and/or their hi school record is poor.
If they have poor grades and SAT scores then they are less qualifed, atleast by the measures that we currently have available.
Its only a real
advantage when all things are equal.
An advantage is an advantage. Even if someone else has other advantages which are bigger.
Because in this particular case, you have to go backwards before you can go forward. You wipe away nearly 250 years of racial history by wishing it away. That history has created an inequity between the white and non white races that can not be erased by simply creating new laws on the books.
I don't wish anything away. If I could make it disapear then it would be a good thing but I know that I can't wish racism or the history of racism away. What I want to do know is just sent racism on its path to fadeing away. That will probably also send the inequalities on thier path to an end as well but if racism truly ended and there were still statisical inequalities I don't think it would be a horrible injustice. My aim is to treat people fairly and justly now, not to try to make up for circumstances caused by past mistreatment. If your aim is to give people at a disadvantage a shot then AA should be aimed at poorer people or people with certain negative things in their background. The sons and daughters of rich powerful black men start off with more advantages then disadvantages. And there are white people who start off in very difficult circumstances. I don't think we should try to make up for the circumstances of birth but if we were to do that we should focus on the circumstances not the skin color.
I don't know why you refer to liberals as power hungry...
I don't think, nor did I say that I think all or most of them are. I said that I could understand why I think power hungry liberals feel a particular way and that I can't understand why non-power hungry liberals would feel that way. Such a statement says nothing a bout the percentage of liberals that are power hungry.
as opposed to what......power hungry conservatives?
Certainly some of them are as well.
Until all races are generally and truly equal in this country.....in law, in economics, in
social behavior, in where they reside etc.
Different groups, racial or otherwise will never be equal by all measures. Even if the idea of racism had never existed there would be statisitcal differences between people with different ancestry and backgrounds and/or subcultures. As long as individuals are being treated fairly now I don't have a problem that they don't all end up at the same place. When we can identify areas where people are being unjustly discriminated now then I think we should make an effort to eliminate such treatment but not to make up for injustices commited against someone's ancestors.
If in most industries in this country, black representation was as profound as it is in the NBA, then I would say yes you should get those points.
I of course disagree.
What if in most areas there was no history of discrimination and no obvious current racial discrimination? But the NBA was like it is now?
And the NBA and other sports entities have
developed into the very thing you want........an institution with a color blind policy.
A good thing. Black people are not held back artifically just because they are already a larger percentage of the NBA.
Like I said above, long ago, whites forfeited their positioning in sports.
They didn't foreit their position. They where beaten out for many of the spots by more qualifed aplicants.
Whites are not more powerful. Specific people are more powerful. Many of those people are white but being white doesn't give you power or special advantage.
Yes, it does, because white males are the entrenched power elite.
BS. I get no special power from being white.
It doesn't seem that way to you but it does in practice make a difference. When you were a kid, you knew that it was possible you could grow up to be president. A Latino kid doesn't know if that future is possible for him.
A Latino or black kid who is the child of a rich, powerful well educated parent has a lot more chance to be president then a white kid living in a slum or a destitute rural area with one drug addicted parent. Blacks and Latinos statistically have a disadvantage because a larger percentage of them come from poor backgrounds, but black and Latino kids born today do have a shot at becomeing president.
"White people are not a group. Something that helps some other white person doesn't help me or hurt black people in general. White people, black people, whatever, we are all individuals."
You say that as if it were true but it isn't.
The core point of our disagreement. Everything else is just dancing around this point.
People are individuals. I don't have any special white clubs or white power structure that I can report to, to collect my advantages. I have advantages over many people, but I am less wealthy and powerful then many others, including many non-white people.
Treat people as individuals and you can hope to make racism disapear even if it takes a century. Treat people as members of racial groups and racism will never go away even if you wait a thousand years.
How can you say that? The GOP fought implementation of the 1964 Civil Rts Act well into the '80's.
No it didn't. Not as a party. Perhaps some individual members did but it wasn't a plank of the parties platform, or a policy of any GOP president (Nixon even pushed AA, which in a certain odd way could be considered fighting the 1964 Civil rights law because AA is against the stipulations of that law but I know you don't see it that way). Fighting the 1964 Civil rights law wasn't the parties policy.
But other reasons are, affirmitive action laws that don't include AA,
Look at this statement you made...."AA laws that don't include AA". That's exactly right.....without AA laws, there is no AA.
Correction - Civil rights laws that don't include AA.
"...the work of black people to better themselves and the work of all people to combat discrimination. For that matter there would be many indirect factors that would help determine the absolute or realtive wealth and power of different races."
Slowly, that's happening under AA.
Just as it was happening slowly before AA or to a lesser extent even before the civil rights movement.
"No it began in the 1800s."
What? When they freed the slaves.......even you can't believe that.
Yes exactly that. They gained their freedom. And very slowly gained more. The typical black American in 1950 was a lot wealthier and more educated then the typical black American in 1866. Of course that is an absolute measure but its also true that relative to the average American, or the average White American, that there was a lot of progress even before Black people enjoyed full equality under the law and equal oportunity laws.
You just explained the need for AA. As a business owner, you would want to hire someone you liked and felt comfortable with.....a friend. And since the races tend to stick together even at this late date, that friend would mostly likely be white......a minority would not stand a chance.
Even if this is true it would not be racism which was my point. Also most hires at least at large and for the most part medium sized companies are not previous acquaintances of the hiring manager. It may be a big factor for small companies but the very small companies are exempt from a lot of civil rights reporting requirements.
Tim |
