(split) Affirmative Action discussion

[AthenaAwakened]

actually AA has changed the culture, making the sight of people of color in positions of authority no longer a scary proposition for an entire generation, possibly even two or three.

Agreed, but not a rebuttal.

Who said I was rebutting anything? Just pointing out a fact.

What you seem to not be able to understand is that AA has good points and bad points.

I understand that, far better than you do. What we disagree on is what those good and bad points are.

The benefits of AA are related to the amount of discrimination that actually causes harm.

And there's the qualifier. How does one determine what causes harm? Who should be the arbiter? That qualifying statement a key to agreeing to the morality of the situation (Yes, we should work to make things better of people and not hold their minority status against them) while dismissing the actual events therein (This circumstance doesn't cause actual harm. And neither do any of the rest, but as soon as an act causes harm, we will get right on it).

The harm is related to how hard we push AA.

We aren't pushing very hard. We aren't breaking a sweat. We aren't even using the palms of our hands, just the finger tips and we are in no danger of breaking a nail.

The former has greatly declined from when AA started, but we push harder and harder because there isn't enough real discrimination to keep the enforcers busy and they need to justify their jobs.

And you know this how? in a nation of 300,000,000 plus souls, you, in Las Vegas, NV know how much discrimination, real or otherwise, is going on in this country how?

Same program, the harm/benefit ratio has changed greatly.

How?

 

[Davka]

Does the fact that today we have a number of successful black doctors, lawyers, professors, and other white-collar professionals help or harm cultural acceptance of black people?

It probably helps to a very slight degree. The fact that there are such characters on popular television shows, on the other hand, helps enormously. People see few real doctors every year - and when they do they aren't particularly good at judging which ones are good. They probably see 100s of fictional ones however, most of whom will be shown to be good at their jobs (but with exciting private lives). Lawyers are an even more extreme example of a type which most people encounter rarely in real life compared to tv.

it helps enormously on the ground here in the USA. And yes, the TV shows help as well. But not nearly as much as walking into a doctor's office and meeting an educated, professional black man or woman with a PhD.

- - - Updated - - -

But you do see black teachers, principals, store managers, police, fire fighters, city council members, business owners, social workers, nurses, etc. All professions that have at one time or another had or still have AA policies in place.

I see more teachers on tv than I see in real life too. So too for policemen (probably - most police I see just in passing, rather than doing anything police-y, so those encounters are not memorable in any way). And firefighters. and social workers. And nurses.

And I don't even watch very much tv. For people who watch more tv than I, the racial mix of the characters they see must be doing more to aid their "cultural acceptance of black people" (if they are the type who lacked that) than the racial mix of the smaller number of people they interact with in real life.

Please stop trying to apply your experiences in the U.K. to the USA. It's apples and volkswagens.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The benefits of AA are related to the amount of discrimination that actually causes harm.

And there's the qualifier. How does one determine what causes harm? Who should be the arbiter? That qualifying statement a key to agreeing to the morality of the situation (Yes, we should work to make things better of people and not hold their minority status against them) while dismissing the actual events therein (This circumstance doesn't cause actual harm. And neither do any of the rest, but as soon as an act causes harm, we will get right on it).

Take my previous example, the real estate agent here that won't show houses to non-Orientals. There are plenty of other houses around, where's the harm??

The harm is related to how hard we push AA.

We aren't pushing very hard. We aren't breaking a sweat. We aren't even using the palms of our hands, just the finger tips and we are in no danger of breaking a nail.

And what's pushing hard--admit/hire no white males for anything?

We already have *MAJOR* discrimination against whites and Asians as shown in the stats that have been posted earlier.

The former has greatly declined from when AA started, but we push harder and harder because there isn't enough real discrimination to keep the enforcers busy and they need to justify their jobs.

And you know this how? in a nation of 300,000,000 plus souls, you, in Las Vegas, NV know how much discrimination, real or otherwise, is going on in this country how?

By the crap cases we hear about.

Same program, the harm/benefit ratio has changed greatly.

How?

You seem to think we live in the Jim Crow era.

 

[rednoise]

non-Orientals.

good lord, Pechtel.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

non-Orientals.

good lord, Pechtel.

I'm using a real-world example. The last time we were house hunting the real estate agent skipped a house because she knew there was no point in trying to see it as soon as she saw the name of the listing agent. It would be by appointment only and she wouldn't show to non-Orientals.

 

[rednoise]

good lord, Pechtel.

[...] non-Orientals.

lol, jesus christ.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

And there's the qualifier. How does one determine what causes harm? Who should be the arbiter? That qualifying statement a key to agreeing to the morality of the situation (Yes, we should work to make things better of people and not hold their minority status against them) while dismissing the actual events therein (This circumstance doesn't cause actual harm. And neither do any of the rest, but as soon as an act causes harm, we will get right on it).

Take my previous example, the real estate agent here that won't show houses to non-Orientals. There are plenty of other houses around, where's the harm??

The harm is related to how hard we push AA.

We aren't pushing very hard. We aren't breaking a sweat. We aren't even using the palms of our hands, just the finger tips and we are in no danger of breaking a nail.

And what's pushing hard--admit/hire no white males for anything?

We already have *MAJOR* discrimination against whites and Asians as shown in the stats that have been posted earlier.

The former has greatly declined from when AA started, but we push harder and harder because there isn't enough real discrimination to keep the enforcers busy and they need to justify their jobs.

And you know this how? in a nation of 300,000,000 plus souls, you, in Las Vegas, NV know how much discrimination, real or otherwise, is going on in this country how?

By the crap cases we hear about.

Same program, the harm/benefit ratio has changed greatly.

How?

You seem to think we live in the Jim Crow era.

Loren,

Rent-A-Negro

Please, for the love of the non existent GOD,

RENT-A-FRIGGIN-NEGRO!!!

 

[Bomb#20]

non-Orientals.

good lord, Pechtel.

I'm using a real-world example. The last time we were house hunting the real estate agent skipped a house because she knew there was no point in trying to see it as soon as she saw the name of the listing agent. It would be by appointment only and she wouldn't show to non-Orientals.

I think rednoise was just shaking his finger at you for using a taboo term for a set of ethnicities, presumably because he thinks you ought to have instead said "non-Asians" and thereby successfully demonstrated your submission to his subculture, at the expense of creating the impression that the real estate agent in question is sufficiently open-minded to show the house to Caucasians provided they're Indian, Afghan, Iranian, etc.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

non-Orientals.

good lord, Pechtel.

I'm using a real-world example. The last time we were house hunting the real estate agent skipped a house because she knew there was no point in trying to see it as soon as she saw the name of the listing agent. It would be by appointment only and she wouldn't show to non-Orientals.

I think rednoise was just shaking his finger at you for using a taboo term for a set of ethnicities, presumably because he thinks you ought to have instead said "non-Asians" and thereby successfully demonstrated your submission to his subculture, at the expense of creating the impression that the real estate agent in question is sufficiently open-minded to show the house to Caucasians provided they're Indian, Afghan, Iranian, etc.

"Asians" wouldn't be the right term here--someone from India is Asian but they're not Oriental.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

My Punjabi Indian workmates remind me of this all the time. Whenever I say "asian" meaning Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc, they like to go "I'm Asian too!"

 

[Tom Sawyer]

My Punjabi Indian workmates remind me of this all the time. Whenever I say "asian" meaning Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc, they like to go "I'm Asian too!"

Politely inform them that they're actually British. They'll be happy and impressed that you've learned the history of their country.