Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - hammer101

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 52
Black Law Students / Re: Missing BLACK Woman
« on: August 10, 2005, 03:06:08 PM »
Don't worry Made4Law Nancy Grace has the Holloway story covered.

And it seems Greta Van Susteren has relocated to Aruba. So ridiculous, considering Americans disappear in the Caribbean all the time....

Even Joe Scarborough has gotten caught up in the Holloway garbage. Whether you agree with him or not, at least he used to discuss real issues... :-\

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 02:25:13 PM »
They went into Congress and started shooting up the members, how is that not bad?

Domestic terror? You want modern-day examples, yet again I cite the Puerto Rican groups that are always bombing things, have I not made myself clear yet?

I thought you were saying that Europe has faced terror longer because they are older or something like that. Clarify!

No one here has said Europe has more experience with terror because it has a longer history. Rather, we were arguing that many European countries have dealt with virulent modern terror much longer than our own country has. Big difference. Re-read the thread.

Sure, Puerto Ricans shooting people is bad, but does it really compare to some of the examples we've cited in earlier threads? Compared to the Basques, Algerians and radical groups affiliated with the IRA, the Puerto Rican separatists look pretty tame.

Actually, instead of "permanent" I should have used the word "fixed." That's what I mean by stratification -- i.e., that AA is helping ensure class positions in minority communities become fixed and is basically creating an AA aristocracy. A permanent minority upper middle class is a great thing, but a modern day aristocracy? Not so much...

I reach this conclusion for (mostly) 2 reasons:

1) The standard of living for poorer minorities is getting worse, not better, making it that much more difficult for them to move up in the world;

2) AA makes no pretention of even reaching out to disadvantaged minorities. As you said, it helps elite minorites become a part of elite white institutions.

But how is AA assuring that class distinctions in minority communities become fixed? It seems to me like the "fixed-ness" of class distinctions (i.e., lack of mobility) has nothing to do with AA and everything to do with the education/environment in poor communities (of all races) and in middle class communities of color. AA doesn't really affect this, since it is a policy that generally aids the elite minorities.

It seems to me like the lack of mobility in the US is a problem facing all kids who grow up poor, and AA doesn't affect it much at all. People often say that there should be a better system in place for bringing educational opportunities to poor kids. I agree. But AA isn't the reason that such a system doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because the majority of voters aren't in favor of programs that would shift resources from the wealthy to poor communities or poor people.

Certainly the lack of mobility is caused primarily by other factors, but since AA in no way helps less well-off minorities, I think it further augments this lack of mobility by failing to offer poorer minorities avenues of success (if they don't have a way out of their situation, how can they possibly esccape it?). Maybe I'm viewing it as a sort of zero-sum game (i.e., if it doesn't help poor minorities it hurts them). I don't think that AA has caused social stratification, but one long term effect I think it will have is further social stratification (i.e., ensuring the elites remain where they are and, by implication, also ensuring the poor and middle class do the same).

I think it's a shame though, because the program was designed to correct years of racism and help those most harmed by it. Well, those living in areas most impacted by racism (inner cities and some poor rural communities) aren't getting a boost from AA. Instead, those equipped with the power to fight any discrimination they might face in their lives benefit from the program.

The solution (to which you alluded), is of course much more painful. We desperately need something new in place though...otherwise we'll never see the sort of racial equality those who enacted AA programs into law envisioned.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 01:24:35 PM »
Puerto Ricans shooting up Congress!

Also, all the stuff that happened while we were trying to get our independence from Britain.

many more examples where that came from, unless you don't even believe me there?

We were discussing modern terror, so I'm not sure why you're using the American Revolution as an example to support your claim. I could go back to the Reign of Terror but it wouldn't really prove much in the context of this discussion. And the Puerto Rican example you cited is hardly on the scale of the European terror attacks we discussed earlier in that thread.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 01:09:28 PM »
Ahh how soon you forget, America was endangered by terrorism for just aslong as our European counterparts, just because American did not have the same name at that time means nothing.

How so? Please provide examples of domestic terror (other than Oklahoma City...I am excluding it from the discussion because it was relatively recent).

Interesting that this came from the BLS, an agency which historically has had a very liberal reputation.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 12:28:01 PM »
Let's not forget Italy and the Red Brigades back in the 1970s.  hey actually succeeded in assassinating the Italian premier, Aldo Moro (I think I have the name right).

Oh good point, I forgot about Moro. Wasn't an Italian PM also kidnapped at some point (maybe it was Moro?) -- or am I thinking of something else?

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 12:23:48 PM »
How long are you saying that this domestic terrorism has gone back in Europe, that it has been longer than the US?

Well, the British had to contend w/ the IRA for well over a quarter century, and at one point they even tried to blow up Margaret Thatcher (can you IMAGINE someone trying to kill our president and the level of fear that would create?), and the French endured many terrorist attacks throughout the long war for Algerian independence. Also, the Spanish have had ETA and the Basque seperatists on their hands for the better part of 40 years.

So yes, Europeans have dealt with terrorism for much longer than Americans.

General Off-Topic Board / Re: Is Terrorism Politically Sanctioned?
« on: August 10, 2005, 11:35:42 AM »
easy there vinny.  almost every article you post comes from some obviously right-wing rag.  that's why this article is typical.

and if you understood the idea of constructive debate and disagreement, you'd know i have no problem accepting other people's opinions.  ask phan, pres or dodger.

you really remind me of this poster (hilljack) who used to raise similarly inane points with the gusto of OJ proclaiming his innocence.  now, that's sad.

At least hilljack was reasonably coherent....

No, I actually think nothing is better than AA, really. AA needs to go, it is something that is making racism continue in our society and more and more people are getting outraged that people that are less qualified, in some instances, are getting in on little than their skin color. now THAT is the not fair part of it.

Vinny, with all due respect - I think youíre full of it. Why? I don't know if AA needs to go or stay and I don't have the answers to all the paradoxes of this world or of this issue. However, I do know that AA is NOT responsible in anyway for racism. In my experiences I have found that White people feel entitled to things, and in my experiences, many feel that they are better then black people and MANY are racist and don't even realize it.

 Racism is a major disease in our society that permeates every level of society including its laws. AA is not responsible for that, America is. I don't know if AA is the solution to racism but I do know that its not the cause of it and I don't really think it fuels or creates new racism in our society. I think it gives people with existing prejudices a pretext and a cause to express their negative feelings towards minorities.

AA isn't perfect, but people like Vinny aren't giving any other alternative or suggestions for trying to correct over four hundred years of oppression and racial injustice. I have a white friend who argues that AA is wrong but is a strong advocate for reparations. He says when reparations come, AA will go. Well, I respect that - at least he is being constructive. So címon, lets say it like its, keep it real.

I agree. Even though I oppose AA I'll readily concede the reverse racism argument is a canard (and for reasons you elucidated pretty well so I won't repeat). The solution is so much tougher, but at a minimum, we must begin by providing poorer minorities more educational opportunities -- they need better schools, teachers and most importantly, a home environment conducive to learning (this last element is the biggest challenge. It's more of a class issue than a racial one though. I'm from a small, predominantly blue-collar town and many bright people I knew in school didn't succeed because their family lives were a mess).

If we can implement the above, we'll be on our way...but, of course, that's much easier said than done. It's much easier to paper over the problem with AA than implement real change.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 52