Law School Discussion

[Some] minorities [agree]....Class based AA.

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - smileyill4663
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - smileyill
    • View Profile
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #130 on: September 14, 2007, 11:26:31 AM »
This doesn't surprise me.  White people love to find ways to convince themselves that they too are underprivileged while discounting their own advantages.  Freak, you've got a compelling story there, but as it has been pointed out, you do benefit from white privilege and from male privilege, which you seem to ignore.  Anyone can convince themselves that they've had it tough and some indeed have.  Ignoring your own privilege and denying the right of those who are disadvantaged to fight for equality is indefensible.  It's not hard to deny group membership and focus on what you think makes you unique (the ability to do so is frequently denied to minorities).

As I've said before:




TITCR

TINTCR

Hint: the person on the top in the first few panels is now dead.  So is the person on the bottom in the past few panels. 


Ah but to the contrary, the person on top and the person on bottom may have died, but their descendants have not.  Guess where the person on top's descendants are born?  You got it - on top.  And likewise for the person on the bottom.  But more importantly are the institutions that stemmed from this move off of the back of the person on bottom - it still is in existence today, but because the new person on top was born there (as you pointed out) they don't see any problem because they are not the ones who literally climbed up.

The state of affairs in America did not start with you or me.  This nation's problems have been going on before you or I were born of course. So it is no defense to say, I (subjectively speaking) have nothing to do with it because I was born up here and you were born down there.  We have to connect the dots to see the whole story when we're talking about policies that attempt to level the playing field.

In other words, the problem involves more than just our generation.


Applying that logic, everybody from a 3rd world former colony deserves immigration rights, yes? Further, by that logic, criminals' children should pay for the incarceration of their parents. Actually, that idea makes more sense than having a great-great-grandchild pay for his ancestors' malfeasance. Especially when nobody has proven that that particular grandchild's ancestors did stand on slave shoulders (I've never even seen proof that slavery benefited whites as a whole & given the civil war I don't think it did). Additionally, I know no blacks who like being stereotyped, why stereotype all whites?


OperaAttorney

  • ****
  • 172
  • Freude, Königin der Weise!
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #131 on: September 14, 2007, 11:34:27 AM »


I agree with Obama, we need AA based on circumstance, not race.


I think you meant to say "not solely based on race," since AA based on circumstance would, of course, have to be inclusive of race because race can be a part of one's overall circumstances.


You know for a Kappa you are not so bad.
06


Thank you my Black and Gold brother from another mother. Not to shabby yourself....for an Alpha.  ;D



I didn't misspeak.  AA based on circumstance wouldn't factor in race.  If it did, then Mr.Obama's kids would get some points for being black.  Racism exists, but how did that affect Obama's kids' education?  It didn't, correct?  No, being black or hispanic would be irrelevant, the only relevant thing would be your circumstances...Class based AA for want of a better term.


I submit that AA based on circumstances must consider ALL circumstances, including race, and apply those circumstances accordingly on a case by case basis.  In the case of Obama's kids for example, his children do not cease to be black merely because their father is Obama.  Nevertheless, in terms of admissions and considering ALL relevant circumstances, the circumstance of their race would be offset by the circumstance of their parent's affluence and/or legacy status, thus canceling each other out and forcing the ad com to look to other factors.  The children of other black parents applying to school may not be in such a great position as the Obama's.  That's why it's important to review ALL of the relevant circumstances on a case by case basis. 

I don't think we can adopt a system that always ignores or relies solely on race any more than we can adopt a system that always ignores or relies solely on economic class.  The two criteria are not necessarily mutually exclusive in my humble opinion.

I don't think we're that far apart here.  I don't have a problem with a school considering a person's ethnicity when it was clearly a factor for them growing up, when it gave them perspective, etc.  I do have a problem with the automatic assumption that someone is underprivileged/disadvantaged simply because they're from a certain ethnic group, or is inherently privileged/advantaged just because they're from another ethnic group.  The reality is far more complex than this, and that's what people should understand.  Otherwise, we're simply engaging in another (perhaps more well-intentioned) form of prejudice that understandably breeds resentment and therefore perpetuates discrimination in other areas.

Look at what I just found: http://www.abovethelaw.com/2007/07/minorities_give_props_to_are_p.php


I find the responses to this offensive incident disappointing. Prejudice and bigotry are alive and well in our nation's law schools and law firms.

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - smileyill4663
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - smileyill
    • View Profile
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #132 on: September 14, 2007, 11:40:28 AM »
Pretty disgusting, but he only acted in his own self-interest. You expect more? I see it all the time. That however, is not discrimination, it's an indirect result of AA.

OperaAttorney

  • ****
  • 172
  • Freude, Königin der Weise!
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #133 on: September 14, 2007, 12:02:10 PM »
Pretty disgusting, but he only acted in his own self-interest. You expect more? I see it all the time. That however, is not discrimination, it's an indirect result of AA.

I'm not surprised at your interpretation of the incident.  In my experience, many whites fail to see the prejudice inherent in such situations.  ("Stop your whining. It's not prejudice.  He's just socially inept.  He's eager to go home and really means no harm." Not!!)

I would have arrived at the same conclusion as Katie Fernandez, but my reaction would have been different--I would not have taken the picture.  I would excused myself promptly, leaving the silly firm associate with one less black face for his deceptive diversity photo.

Freak

  • ****
  • 4767
  • What's your agenda?!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - smileyill4663
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - smileyill
    • View Profile
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #134 on: September 14, 2007, 12:32:11 PM »
And you would've been right to leave. When the factory I worked for discriminated against me, I gave my two weeks notice and left. The employee they had hired for 2x what they paid me left also, b/c she thought I had been treated unfairly. They offered me a huge raise to return a month later, but I declined.

And I see no prejudice as you note. I do think he did harm, whether he meant to or not. Frankly, he probably didn't care. Socially inept? I doubt it, he just has the big law mentality of walking over people to get ahead. He essentially communicated that those students didn't matter so why listen to them? I'll bet he knows how to schmooze with the big wigs just fine.

Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #135 on: September 14, 2007, 02:34:04 PM »
I want a pat on the back for the following reason: I have finally started to get the hang of seeing the little Brad Pitt avatar and then just scrolling on past.

I urge all of you to join me in ignoring Lindbergh, who very rudely repeats himself in quintuple and sextuple posts when one substantive response would likely suffice if written well enough. It makes reading threads significantly more enjoyable. Seriously, just skip 'em. It's awesome.

UNAS

  • ****
  • 146
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #136 on: September 14, 2007, 02:47:42 PM »
I want a pat on the back for the following reason: I have finally started to get the hang of seeing the little Brad Pitt avatar and then just scrolling on past.

I urge all of you to join me in ignoring Lindbergh, who very rudely repeats himself in quintuple and sextuple posts when one substantive response would likely suffice if written well enough. It makes reading threads significantly more enjoyable. Seriously, just skip 'em. It's awesome.

LOL ;D

Credited, but Lindberg should also receive a pat on the back for consistenly riling(sorry i am from the south, maybe i should have said agitate..anyway) the users of this board with his naivety, idealism and microcosmic egocentric view of public policy all under the guise of curiousity and substance

Burning Sands, Esq.

  • *****
  • 6525
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #137 on: September 14, 2007, 03:11:51 PM »
(I've never even seen proof that slavery benefited whites as a whole & given the civil war I don't think it did).



Wow.  I have no words. 

You really believe that?

I think I might be done at this point.



Burning Sands, Esq.

  • *****
  • 6525
  • Yes We Kan-sas!!!
    • View Profile
Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #138 on: September 14, 2007, 03:21:00 PM »
I have only one more thing to add that will (hopefully) put things in perspective.  If not, at least it's worth knowing.  Freak, please see bolded below to correct your misconception that slavery did not benefit whites in America:



A Long History of Affirmative Action - For Whites

Many middle-class white people, especially those of us
from the suburbs, like to think that we got to where we
are today by virtue of our merit - hard work,
intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while we
may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down
when we hear the words "affirmative action" or "racial
preferences." We worked hard, we made it on our own, the
thinking goes, why don't 'they'? After all, the Civil
Rights Act was enacted almost 40 years ago.

What we don't readily acknowledge is that racial
preferences have a long, institutional history in this
country - a white history. Here are a few ways in which
government programs and practices have channeled wealth
and opportunities to white people at the expense of
others.


Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth
reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative
action in the American "workplace" first began in the late
17th century when European indentured servants - the
original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco
plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by
African slaves.
In exchange for their support and their
policing of the growing slave population, lower-class
Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities
from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help
of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for
example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other
eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make
room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed
suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been
Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270
million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United
States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly
white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white
persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the
doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens
could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some
cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land
Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm
land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants,
ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing
land. Immigration restrictions further limited
opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to
naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the
McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences
in immigration remained until 1965.

In the South, the federal government never followed
through on General Sherman's Civil War plan to divide up
plantations and give each freed slave "40 acres and a
mule" as reparations. Only once was monetary compensation
made for slavery, in Washington, D.C. There, government
officials paid up to $300 per slave upon emancipation -
not to the slaves, but to local slaveholders as
compensation for loss of property.


When slavery ended, its legacy lived on not only in the
impoverished condition of Black people but in the wealth
and prosperity that accrued to white slaveowners and their
descendents. Economists who try to place a dollar value on
how much white Americans have profited from 200 years of
unpaid slave labor, including interest, begin their
estimates at $1 trillion.


Jim Crow laws, instituted in the late 19th and early 20th
century and not overturned in many states until the 1960s,
reserved the best jobs, neighborhoods, schools and
hospitals for white people.


The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences,
first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to
white families and continue to shape life opportunities
and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety
net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income
after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two
occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants,
who were predominately African American, Mexican, and
Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least
opportunity to save for their retirement. They couldn't
pass wealth on to their children. Just the opposite. Their
children had to support them.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish
an important new right for white people. By granting
unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped
millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class
over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted
unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to
better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such
as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft
unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s. In
1972, for example, every single one of the 3,000 members
of Los Angeles Steam Fitters Local #250 was still white.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the
Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much
of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today.
These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions
of average white Americans - but not others - to own a
home for the first time. The government set up a national
neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage
eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso
facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home
loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934
and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of
home loans. More than 98% went to whites. Of the 350,000
new homes built with federal support in northern
California between 1946 and 1960, fewer than 100 went to
African Americans.

These government programs made possible the new segregated
white suburbs that sprang up around the country after
World War II. Government subsidies for municipal services
helped develop and enhance these suburbs further, in turn
fueling commercial investments. Freeways tied the new
suburbs to central business districts, but they often cut
through and destroyed the vitality of non-white
neighborhoods in the central city.

Today, Black and Latino mortgage applicants are still 60%
more likely than whites to be turned down for a loan, even
after controlling for employment, financial, and
neighborhood factors. According to the Census, whites are
more likely to be segregated than any other group. As
recently as 1993, 86% of suburban whites still lived in
neighborhoods with a black population of less than 1%.


Reaping the Rewards of Racial Preference

One result of the generations of preferential treatment
for whites is that a typical white family today has on
average eight times the assets, or net worth, of a typical
African American family, according to economist Edward
Wolff. Even when families of the same income are compared,
white families have more than twice the wealth of Black
families. Much of that wealth difference can be attributed
to the value of one's home, and how much one inherited
from parents.

But a family's net worth is not simply the finish line,
it's also the starting point for the next generation.
Those with wealth pass their assets on to their children -
by financing a college education, lending a hand during
hard times, or assisting with the down payment for a home.
Some economists estimate that up to 80 percent of lifetime
wealth accumulation depends on these intergenerational
transfers. White advantage is passed down, from parent to
child to grand-child. As a result, the racial wealth gap -
and the head start enjoyed by whites - appears to have
grown since the civil rights days.

In 1865, just after Emancipation, it is not surprising
that African Americans owned 0.5 percent of the total
worth of the United States. But by 1990, a full 135 years
after the abolition of slavery, Black Americans still
possessed only a meager 1 percent of national wealth.


Rather than recognize how "racial preferences" have tilted
the playing field and given us a head start in life, many
whites continue to believe that race does not affect our
lives. Instead, we chastise others for not achieving what
we have; we even invert the situation and accuse
non-whites of using "the race card" to advance themselves.

Or we suggest that differential outcomes may simply result
from differences in "natural" ability or motivation.
However, sociologist Dalton Conley's research shows that
when we compare the performance of families across racial
lines who make not just the same income, but also hold
similar net worth, a very interesting thing happens: many
of the racial disparities in education, graduation rates,
welfare usage and other outcomes disappear. The
"performance gap" between whites and nonwhites is a
product not of nature, but unequal circumstances.

Colorblind policies that treat everyone the same, no
exceptions for minorities, are often counter-posed against
affirmative action. But colorblindness today merely
bolsters the unfair advantages that color-coded practices
have enabled white Americans to long accumulate.

It's a little late in the game to say that race shouldn't
matter.



Copyright (c) California Newsreel, 2003
RACE - The Power of an Illusion




Re: The smart minorities get it....Class based AA.
« Reply #139 on: September 14, 2007, 03:25:23 PM »
I'm sure everyone's seen this by now, but just a refresher course on white privilege:

http://seamonkey.ed.asu.edu/~mcisaac/emc598ge/Unpacking.html