Why I support Affirmative Action..

[Letsgo]

A lot. 

Where do you meet them?  They would have to be over 140 to have experienced slavery, and I doubt many have experienced lynchings.  Even those that that can really remember Jim Crow are a relatively small minority, and I don't really see how being segregated with other blacks compares to the first two, or merits reparations.

Do you think that the second the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 was signed everything changed?  I mean look around man.  You have to be ignorant to think the two races are treated the same.  If Katrina happened in a rich white neighborhood, do you think the government response would have been as slow as it was? 

Um, Katrina did happen in a "rich white neighborhood."  All of New Orleans (and the entire Gulf Coast) was affected, including millions of prosperous whites.  Blacks just happened to be around for it more, partly due to an incompetent local government.  

Open up Time Magazine and you'll see the infant mortality rate for black babies in Alabama is 3 times as high as it is for white babies. 

Is this because blacks are treated differently, though, or maybe for other cultural reasons, like the ones that produce infant mortality in Africa as well?

Read McLesky v. Kemp and you see the death penalty is much more likely to be applied to a black murderer than a white murderer.  New Jersey just had huge racial profiling issues.  You probably feel comfortable everywhere you go, because everyone is white.  Imagine being the only black person in a class full of white people.  Can you even imagine how uncomfortable that would feel? 

Yes, because I've been in all-black contexts.  You really think whites feel comfortable in all-black neighborhoods?

You feel the way you do because you're white.

Maybe (if you consider everyone who's non-black white).  And maybe blacks feel the way they do because they're black. Who's to say who has a more accurate vision?  Aren't both claims equally presumptuous?

How can you conclude that there is not white privilege if you haven't experienced the other side. 

See above.  How can anyone claim there IS white privilege if they haven't experienced the other side?

How can you possibly know what it is like to be black in this country? 

I don't, but again, I don't think blacks should make assumptions about what it's like to be "white" until they've also tried it.  From what I've seen, most white people bust their ass for everything they have, and earn everything they have.  (This coming from a first-generation immigrant-family urm.)

I'm not asking you to agree with me, but just to realize that there is another side that you have not experienced. 

That's all I'm saying -- this is true of everyone, and we should stop making goofy assumptions about sides we haven't experienced.

How can you understand what it is like not knowing your ancestry

Most people don't know their ancestry.  I only know about 100 years back.

and that your relatives were forcefully taken from their homeland and given European names.  How disgusting.   

Slavery was in fact disgusting.  What's even more disgusting is that it was practiced in Africa for thousands of years, and continues to to be practiced there today.  It's also disgusting that most slaves were in fact enslaved by other Africans.  (I'm not sure, however, how being given an european name is such a burden.)  However, I don't see many blacks clamoring to go back to Africa today.  

The truth is that no one living today actually experienced slavery, which makes reparations an inherently flawed concept.  I would, however, support free passage back to Africa for anyone who desires it -- to the extent any descendant has a desire to return to their ancestral homeland, that would appear an appropriate remedy.

K.

[Lindbergh]

I'm confused, though.  How many black people do you know who actually experienced slavery, lyinchings, and Jim Crow? 

Wasn't Jim Crow a relatively recent phenomenon?  As for lynchings, well I haven't talked to anyone lately who's been lynched.  But that's not saying a whole lot is it now? 

If you consider 40+ years ago recent, I guess. 

It would obviously be difficult for you to speak to someone after they'd been lynched, but that wasn't the question.

[Lindbergh]

I'm confused, though.  How many black people do you know who actually experienced slavery, lyinchings, and Jim Crow? 

Wasn't Jim Crow a relatively recent phenomenon?  As for lynchings, well I haven't talked to anyone lately who's been lynched.  But that's not saying a whole lot is it now? 

Lynched? Not necessarily. Dragged to death behind a pickup? Absolutely.

You knew that person?

Quick question -- do you think there's been more blacks killed by whites in the last 50 years, or more whites killed by blacks? 

Seems to me that racial violence goes in both directions these days, and, if anything, goes against whites far more often than the reverse.

[1654134681665465]

Can you even imagine how uncomfortable that would feel? 

I've been in places where I was the only white person and I didn't feel uncomfortable at all.  When I've been places where almost everyone is white and there are a few blacks, Latinos, or Asians present I didn't hear any white people whisper racial comments or giving them dirty looks or treating them differently than I was being treated.  I'm not saying that it doesn't happen at all, but when it does happen it goes both ways. 

As for lynchings, well I haven't talked to anyone lately who's been lynched.  But that's not saying a whole lot is it now? 

Neither have I, but I have talked with people who were shot up in convenience store robbery.  Again. 

Oh, and what was the ratio of black people to white people who were shot by the DC sniper? 

When New Orleans goes under water (because the city and state government had been using Federal money for the repair and maintenance of the levies for other things for over 30 years) everyone says that white people are trying to kill black people. 

When the World Trade Center towers get hit on 9/11, how white people died compared to other ethnicities? How do we know that this wasn't a conspiracy by blacks to kill whites? 

My point, is that there is racism in America but not to the extent that people make it up to be.  And what racism there is goes both ways.  A lot of the problems that black America has is related to poverty (which are the same problems that other poor ethnic groups have as well). Slavery and racism undoubtedly led to poverty among blacks several decades ago, however not so much anymore.  Evidence?

Immigrants from Asia have gone from lower class and speaking no English, to upper class, highly educated, and completely  fluent in English within a generation or two (this includes internment camps and such).  So don't say that poverty is STILL the result of racism. 

[The F-cktard Express]

b]My point, is that there is racism in America but not to the extent that people make it up to be.[/b]  And what racism there is goes both ways.  A lot of the problems that black America has is related to poverty (which are the same problems that other poor ethnic groups have as well). Slavery and racism undoubtedly led to poverty among blacks several decades ago, however not so much anymore.  Evidence?

And you know this how?

Are you a white man?

Immigrants from Asia have gone from lower class and speaking no English, to upper class, highly educated, and completely  fluent in English within a generation or two (this includes internment camps and such).  So don't say that poverty is STILL the result of racism. 

A entirely different ball of wax, dear.

Looking a racism in such a holistic way is surely the mark of a tool and a douchesack. What applies for one group doesn't apply for another. Even what applies within one group doesn't apply universally to everyone in it.

The elephant in the room that no one is addressing is that you're all guessing as to what affirmative action entails. You're all thinking in simplistic terms: black = 10 point boost on LSAT, gets into top 10 school.

I doubt it's that simple, and that admissions counselors treat is so. A black person, irrespective of her economic situation, may get a bump in admissions because of her simply being black - because there are special circumstances that a black person faces (directly or indirectly) simply because their skin is black. But I'm sure that bump is no more significant than the one a poor ass white boy might get. Surely the poor ass black kid probably gets the biggest bump, but again, this is all speculation on my (and your) part.

Is this really that big of a deal. I mean, do the 10 black kids that are in my 1L class really represent that much of a threat to you all? You'd think that law schools across the country were being infested with black kids - black kids here, black kids there, every-f-ing-where I turn all I see is a black kid. It's like Invasion of the Body Snatchers Black Affirmative Action Charity Case.

Yeah, not quite.

Your conservative, middle class white way of life is not quite in the danger it's being made out to be.

[1654134681665465]

  Your conservative, middle class white way of life is not quite in the danger it's being made out to be.

Oh, great-you nailed it on the head.  All white people are against AA because it is a threat to our way of life.  You are so angry and so wrong.  Stop blaming other people for what you don't like about your life. 

[Lindbergh]

Even what applies within one group doesn't apply universally to everyone in it.

Now we're getting somewhere.

The elephant in the room that no one is addressing is that you're all guessing as to what affirmative action entails. You're all thinking in simplistic terms: black = 10 point boost on LSAT, gets into top 10 school.

But I'm sure that bump is no more significant than the one a poor ass white boy might get.

Any evidence for this?  I hope you're right.

I agree the poor black kid should get the the biggest bump.  I just don't think a rich minority should get a bigger bump than a poor white kid.  In fact, I think it should probably be less.  To the extent minorities should get preferences, it should be with regard to similarly-situated whites -- not whites/asians that have far worse circumstances.  

Is this really that big of a deal. I mean, do the 10 black kids that are in my 1L class really represent that much of a threat to you all? You'd think that law schools across the country were being infested with black kids - black kids here, black kids there, every-f-ing-where I turn all I see is a black kid. It's like Invasion of the Body Snatchers Black Affirmative Action Charity Case.

I don't think the problem lies in actual damages to rich or middle-class whites.  They'll do fine, and I think this is why most privileged whites actually support AA -- it's a cheap and easy way to feel like they're doing something positive, especially since it doesn't generally impact them.

It is more of a problem for poor and working-class white/asians, who have to scrap much harder for those same slots.  And whatever the degree of actual harm, the resentment such policies foster is real, undeniable, and ultimately harmful to minorities.

Honestly, I'm not really that troubled by the impact of AA on the white community overall.  I am, however, troubled by the individual injustices that occur under the present system, and I'm primarily troubled by the impact such policies ultimately have on minorities and race relations generally.  

[Lindbergh]

I'm confused, though.  How many black people do you know who actually experienced slavery, lyinchings, and Jim Crow? 

Wasn't Jim Crow a relatively recent phenomenon?  As for lynchings, well I haven't talked to anyone lately who's been lynched.  But that's not saying a whole lot is it now? 

If you consider 40+ years ago recent, I guess. 

You were talking about whether or not there are people around who have actually experienced these things.  There are plenty.  Is all. 

Well, there's actually no one around who's experienced all of "those things."  There are a few who may have (indirectly) experienced lynchings, but racial violence, as noted, has clearly gone at least evenly in both directions since the '50's. 

I'll give you Jim Crow, at least among some older folks (though you probably don't know them).  But that's the most innocuous element presented, and no one has established how experiencing this as a kid directly impacts people today.

[Lindbergh]

I'll give you Jim Crow, at least among some older folks (though you probably don't know them).  But that's the most innocuous element presented, and no one has established how experiencing this as a kid directly impacts people today.

What?   Something that directly affected my parents couldn't possibly affect me?  Or, something that directly affected my grandparents couldn't possibly affect me through my parents?

huh?

If you can show how it affected you, and how that affect is meaningful enough to justify reparations, go for it.

Otherwise, it would seem that accounting for educational opportunity would address any lingering effects of such historical treatment.

[Lindbergh]

I'll give you Jim Crow, at least among some older folks (though you probably don't know them).  But that's the most innocuous element presented, and no one has established how experiencing this as a kid directly impacts people today.

What?   Something that directly affected my parents couldn't possibly affect me?  Or, something that directly affected my grandparents couldn't possibly affect me through my parents?

huh?

You're not going far enough in your analysis.  I'd suggest that even if you had been directly impacted by Jim Crow laws or lynchings or even slavery, you're not directly affected if it's not happening to you at this very moment.  Once the moment where you're being discriminated against passes, you're no longer affected in any way whatsoever. 

TITCR.  FINALLY we're getting some clear thinking here.