Silence on White preferences - Page 2 - Political Forum

Xibit · #11 (**permalink**) 08-05-2007, 04:02 PM

RODOG, since you want some attention...

IT DOESN'T MATTER that AA takes race into account or consideration...
AA is not, never was and never will be "RACE BASED."

Now talk to me about that SCI FI stuff again... and please note....

You can try as hard as you can, come up with as much bs as you must but you simply cannot ball with a brother who can shoot and SLAM DUNK like me.

Xibit · #12 (**permalink**) 08-05-2007, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xibit

My purpose for this thread was to show that there is not (an academic-based) meritocracy and to show how Whites benefit from non-merit based preferences and other considerations. Maybe I edited my post before you saw it but the 3rd quote in my header post gives an example of the other (ostensibly) non-merit considerations.

I posted it in the other thread and reposted it again because it continues to be something people avoid/ignore. Just like in the Hopwood case, because AA is stereotyped as "racial discrimination", people overlook the actual facts.

The AA/college admissions standards debate surrounding the UM case hardly ever spoke to the facts which showed how 46.7% of the students with lower grades and scores who were admitted in the year Jennifer Gratz didn't get admitted were White. No one went after those White students. That, in and of itself, is a White preference - a White privilege.

You don't hear people suggesting that those White students shouldn't have gotten in or any allusions to how they were not "qualified." Apparently their grades/scores didn't "qualify" them... So why the silence?

Posted for all the clarification that needs to be made. Posted in a manner in which nothing can be denied.

But a thread about the Iraq war just can't follow a previous thread about the Iraq war an not contain a different argument or perspective. It just can't happen like that. No. Not a all. Iraq is Iraq, I tell you!!

Xibit · #13 (**permalink**) 08-06-2007, 02:53 AM

What I don't see is you telling Whites:

AA doesn't seem to stop Whites from making more money and graduating from school more often than Blacks...

What seems to be the problem? You're into race-based discrimination now?
You're quick to say it to/for Blacks? Why are you so slow when it comes time to say it to Whites?

The same thing holds true right? Whites make more money and graduate more often than Blacks, right? So what's the problem?

____

What I also don't see is why you connect working, being successful, etc. with a person's or a people's position on AA. But, I guess Colin Powell, MLK and a host of others are miserable failures because of their position on AA type programs. A position you don't share so I guess we'll call you an objective and honest source about what is stopping "Black people" from being "successful."

But I'll play... Here's the CONTEXT you're missing while staying IN THE BOX:

Quote:

"SUCCESS" MAY ONLY BE SKIN-DEEP

Another telling statistic is how much more money a person earns with each additional year of schooling completed, or what sociologists call "returns on education." One of the first in-depth studies that looked at per capita income between Asian Americans and other racial/ethnic groups came from Robert Jiobu and is cited in Asian Americans: An Interpretive History by Sucheng Chan. Using this measure, research consistently shows that for each additional year of education attained, Whites earn another $522.

That is, beyond a high school degree, a White with 4 more years of education (equivalent to a college degree) can expect to earn $2088 per year in salary. In contrast, returns on each additional year of education for a Japanese American is only $438. For a Chinese American, it's $320. For Blacks, it's even worse at only $284. What this means is that basically, a typical Asian American has to get more years of education just to make the same amount of money that a typical White makes with less education.

Asian-Nation : Asian American History, Demographics, & Issues :: The Model Minority Image

Quote:

Not all Asian Americans are as uniformly educated, acculturated, and financially successful as the myth of the "model minority" would suggest. Like other communities, Asian Americans need health and social services for their children's well being. Here are some facts to contradict the myths:

In the United States:

17% of Asian American boys in grades 5 through 12 reported physical abuse, as compared to 8% among white boys, in a survey by the Commonwealth Fund.

30% of Asian American girls in grades 5 through 12 reported depressive symptoms, as compared to white girls (22%), African American girls (17%), or Hispanic girls (27%), in a survey by the Commonwealth Fund.

Asian Americans are twice as likely to be poor as non-Hispanic whites.

The illiteracy rate of Asian Americans is 5.3 times that of non-Hispanic whites.

Asian American women ages 15-24 have a higher rate of suicide than Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics in that age group.

73.3% of Asian Americans speak a language other than English.

14% of Asian Americans live below the poverty line, compared to 13% of the U.S. population.

Xibit · #14 (**permalink**) 08-06-2007, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xibit

What did I misconstrue re: "Dramedy"

Once again, AA is not based on race. Race is not "THE" principal, defining characteristic of AA. This is born out by the fact that WHITE WOMEN [are the "PRINCIPAL" beneficiaries, as the 1st Quote here in this thread demonstrates rather easily:

AA BENEFICIARIES (from 1st Quote)

60% - White women
21% - POC (people of color)
19% - White men (disabled, Vietnam vets, disabled vets)

Now, I see your definitions and only need to raise you one:

3 a : the fundamental part of something : GROUNDWORK, BASIS
2 : the principal component of something

"PRINCIPAL" ___ most important, consequential, or influential : chief
<the principal ingredient> <the region's principal city> (Webster's on-line)

Hmmm.... With well over 70% of the beneficiaries in the Wash. St. case receiving non-race related benefits, it is completely contrary to the facts, all common-sense and reality to say that AA IS RACE-BASED.

Again, if you're trying to make the argument that you believe that racial discrimination occurs as a result of AA, make that argument but recognize that it is not the same thing as saying what the FUNDAMENTAL, PRINCIPAL and MOST CONSEQUENTIAL aspect of AA is. With the FACTS above, it is GENDER not RACE that is the most consequential. So, if anything, AA is GENDER BASED.

But that's not my position. AA is as I said:
AA is based on the concept of supplying opportunities for people who fit into a category of the historically excluded (and therefore underserved) or those who are current[ly] underrepresented.

The facts here won't move, RODOG...

*

Tokenconservative · #15 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 12:42 PM

The three largest school districts where I live simply don't hire white staff and faculty unless they need a teacher in higher math and science.

Tokie

perdidochas · #16 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tokenconservative

The three largest school districts where I live simply don't hire white staff and faculty unless they need a teacher in higher math and science.

Tokie

As a white man, I once got a teaching job over qualified black applicants due to my race. The district (in central Georgia) was under court order that the teacher population exactly match the county population in black/white ratio. The school district was short on white people.... That said, it was not a good experience. Being hired for that reason caused a lot of resentment with the black teachers on staff who had friends that applied for my job. Affirmative action is essentially sayign that blacks aren't good enough to earn the job on their own.

Xibit · #17 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perdidochas

Affirmative action is essentially sayign that blacks aren't good enough to earn the job on their own.

So was that your experience? Were you presumed "un(der)qualified" because you benefitted from AA? Was the court order saying that YOU weren't "good enough?"

Your A doesn't connect with your B.

Tokenconservative · #18 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by perdidochas

As a white man, I once got a teaching job over qualified black applicants due to my race. The district (in central Georgia) was under court order that the teacher population exactly match the county population in black/white ratio. The school district was short on white people.... That said, it was not a good experience. Being hired for that reason caused a lot of resentment with the black teachers on staff who had friends that applied for my job. Affirmative action is essentially sayign that blacks aren't good enough to earn the job on their own.

Quotas damage everyone.

AA had its use and justifications "back in the day." Like slavery, it's outlived its usefulness and any justification it might've had by about 1990.

Are their individual cases of discrimination?

You bet.

In all directions.

But racism as an INSTITUTION in US commerce and government is a thing very much of the past.

The non-hiring of whites here is not a quota thing. They'd probably actually hire a white person who was fluent in Spanish. But they are desperate to make the schools "lool like" the neighborhood. They did the same thing with fire dept. Two of their AA hires had gang-related criminal pasts that became public knowledge when these two were tried for looting homes they were fighting fires in.

So they are willing to hire sub-par teachers, so long as they speak Spanish and/or are not white.

Tokie

perdidochas · #19 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xibit

So was that your experience? Were you presumed "un(der)qualified" because you benefitted from AA? Was the court order saying that YOU weren't "good enough?"

Your A doesn't connect with your B.

The black competitors for the job were more qualified for the job than I was. I was presumed that I just got the job because I was white. It made the work environment much thornier than it should be. The point is that racial quotas for jobs do not help the minority (which is what I was).

iTaliAN_ICe · #20 (**permalink**) 08-07-2007, 05:27 PM

This thread is merely a continuation of a thread that's already been closed. Xibit supports racist/sexist legislation and almost everyone else is against it. No one's going to change their mind.