To: TimF who wrote (159713 ) 2/2/2003 2:33:23 PM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to But it isn't faulty. They didn't even make a real explination of how color blind policies put some people at a disadvantage. They didn't even try to do that. They showed how other factors may put some people at a disadvantage. For example if someone receives poor education in elementary school and high school they will be less able to meet the requirements of a good paying job or a top flight university. But it it the lack of educational oportunities at a lower level that put them at that disadvantge not AA or the lack thereof. The claim in the article that you posted would be like saying that the standards of the NBA put me at a disadvantage, but their standards are fair. I am at a disadvantage because I am only average height, I am overweight, not very fast, and have no expierence playing orginized basketball since before High School. But you miss the point completely.........since whites have been the dominant race for all of this country's history, whites dominant everything including seniority. Racism is not having more or less people of one race in a particular position then their % in the population or the % of applicants. Racism in hireing and admissions consists of treating people unfairly based on race. Its hard to eliminate totally because people can be subtly racist in their own minds but we can eliminate any racist rules that keep people out and insist that no rule forces someone of one race to be accepted over someone of another race based on their skin color or ancestry. Over time if just about all such rules are eliminated it will help to reduce racism in peoples "hearts and minds". No one said to lower the bar.. It lets less qualifed people in because of an advantage they have been given based on their skin color. Also if the bar is lowered enough for admissions it can put pressure on lowering the bar for perfromance after admissions. Equal oportunity laws and anti-discrimination laws where the main legal methods of people being treated justly and fairly. Affirmitive action did not become wide spread until after these laws where in effect. They are mostly responsible for the increase in fairness and justice. The evidence that AA is working is that for the first time women and minorities are closing the income gap with their white and Asian counterparts. If it is because of AA then AA would have had to have given them a major advantage. If it gave them a major advantage then it gave someone else a major disadvantage. What are you talking about? In the 60's they were still trying to integrate the coffee shops. This is impossible.......the good ole boy network was the very empitome of racism and discrimination. It isn't racism because it isn't based on race. It can be and in many cases was combined with racism, and even if it wasn't it could have a negative impact on people of one race (if people hire people they know it may not include anybody of one particular race even if the person making the decision is not racist), but the practice itself is not based on race so it is not racism in and of itself. Affirmitive action is directly discrimination based on race. Its by definition treating people differently based on their skin color or ancestry. That is precisly what racism is. I don't want to go backwards even if you do.
