Affirmative Action Ban Voted Unconstitutional

[noise]

That was never claimed, and its disingenuous to infer that it was. See that's the real problem with Affirmative Action - the ends are admirable but the means are discriminatory.

It wasn't claimed, but then you just claimed it. Good move.

[JVB]

It wasn't claimed, but then you just claimed it. Good move.

I think I see the problem. You equate the advancement of blacks with Affirmative Action. You think they are one and the same?

[noise]

I think I see the problem. You equate the advancement of blacks with Affirmative Action. You think they are one and the same?

Of course not. I didn't claim that at all.

On the other hand, I definitely do not see Affirmative Action as discrimination against whites. By definition or practice.

Are you by chance a white guy that feels as though he's been wronged?

[JVB]

Of course not. I didn't claim that at all.

Then I guess I don't understand what you meant by: "It wasn't claimed, but then you just claimed it. Good move." Can you explain what you meant by that because you lost me.

On the other hand, I definitely do not see Affirmative Action as discrimination against whites. By definition or practice.

Any time you base rules on race, there is racial discrimination. By definition and by practice.

Are you by chance a white guy that feels as though he's been wronged?

White, yes. Wronged, no. Is it weird that I think people should be treated equally, and that government shouldn't divide us up into groups to be treated differently? You'll have to forgive me for feeling awkward about having to defend something that seems so logical.

[gazhekwe]

People don't always realize they are treating people unequally. I have seen it time and time again. A white workforce, with work rules laxly enforced. A black person is hired and the work rules are strictly enforced for that person only. Good example, honor system attendance, with people skating in up to an hour late with no consequence. New black employee observes and becomes lax also, and is immediately disciplined. Supervisor has no idea he was unequally enforcing the attendance rules as he was just used to the people he knew coming in when they came in. New guy was noticeable because he was different, got to watch them, you know.

[oladub]

People don't always realize they are treating people unequally. I have seen it time and time again. A white workforce, with work rules laxly enforced. A black person is hired and the work rules are strictly enforced for that person only. Good example, honor system attendance, with people skating in up to an hour late with no consequence. New black employee observes and becomes lax also, and is immediately disciplined. Supervisor has no idea he was unequally enforcing the attendance rules as he was just used to the people he knew coming in when they came in. New guy was noticeable because he was different, got to watch them, you know.

Gazhekwe, That's because all white people look alike. I can trump that tale that with this:

"I have a prejudice against the white-meat sacrament of the holiday that covers up the white man's crimesThe real Thanksgiving story is extremely dark, far darker than any leg and thigh meat.

Could fear of facing our dark history be behind the prejudice against dark meat? Or is there more to the darkness of dark meat that feeds that fear?" " It was enough to make me wonder whether there could be a racial, if not racist, subtext here."

-http://www.slate.com/articles/life/the_spectator/2010/11/the_unbearable_whiteness_of_white_meat.single.html

[Cincinnati_Kid]

Then I guess I don't understand what you meant by: "It wasn't claimed, but then you just claimed it. Good move." Can you explain what you meant by that because you lost me.



Any time you base rules on race, there is racial discrimination. By definition and by practice.



White, yes. Wronged, no. Is it weird that I think people should be treated equally, and that government shouldn't divide us up into groups to be treated differently? You'll have to forgive me for feeling awkward about having to defend something that seems so logical.

That's the problem, people will NEVER be treated equally, especially minorities. That's why AA was created in the first place. People will not overlook personal bias.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

People don't always realize they are treating people unequally. I have seen it time and time again. A white workforce, with work rules laxly enforced. A black person is hired and the work rules are strictly enforced for that person only. Good example, honor system attendance, with people skating in up to an hour late with no consequence. New black employee observes and becomes lax also, and is immediately disciplined. Supervisor has no idea he was unequally enforcing the attendance rules as he was just used to the people he knew coming in when they came in. New guy was noticeable because he was different, got to watch them, you know.

Happens where I work all the time. One set of rules for me, other set of rules for everybody else.

[JVB]

Happens where I work all the time. One set of rules for me, other set of rules for everybody else.

Everyone is out to get you. It's probably a conspiracy.

[gazhekwe]

White people seldom actually realize they are scrutinizing the black employee more closely but see, they EXPECT him to mess up so they are just watching and waiting. JVB, we don't expect you to see it yourself. You probably do it though. Cinci Kid has experience in the workplace, and I have many years of experience investigating civil rights complaints. This hyper-scrutiny by white managers of blacks or employees with a foreign accent is very common and very easy to uncover.

It's usually the same rules, but laxly applied in the case of whites and strictly applied in the case of blacks. That way the manager can say he had cause to discipline the black employee, because he broke the rules.

[JVB]

White people seldom actually realize they are scrutinizing the black employee more closely but see, they EXPECT him to mess up so they are just watching and waiting. JVB, we don't expect you to see it yourself. You probably do it though. Cinci Kid has experience in the workplace, and I have many years of experience investigating civil rights complaints. This hyper-scrutiny by white managers of blacks or employees with a foreign accent is very common and very easy to uncover.

I worked in management [[and on the floor before that) for years in the auto industry, so I have a little experience too. I can remember several instances where we had an employee complain that they were being targeted due to their race, even when in many cases their supervisor was black. It didn't matter how many times they were wrote up for packing defective parts, punching in late, coming back from break late, crashing into baskets with their hilo, etc etc etc - no amount of evidence was enough to dispel the cries of racism. It was always someone else's fault.

What they generally failed to realize [[and why the EEOC never found any merit to the claims of racism) is that 95% of the workers never had problems with management and most of those workers were black or Yemeni. So we'd have 30 black workers on a shift that were great and one bad apple would get repeatedly wrote up and shit-canned because apparently the whole company was racist. Anyone that's ever worked in management or HR knows exactly what I'm talking about.

I can't say it happened a lot, but I can say it happened enough. We had several white guys that were shitty workers too and they also got repeatedly wrote up and fired. Of course, they never bitched about racism, their excuse was always different, but the one thing they all [[black and white) had in common was it was never their fault. Strangely enough, I don't recall any shitty Yemeni workers - those guys generally busted their ass and were great workers.

What anyone that has never worked in management of a production facility may fail to realize is - you want the best person for the job PERIOD. Shit has to get done and it has to get done right. We had a lot of great workers of all races and they never got a hard time from any of us because we knew they made our jobs easier. The shitty workers made everyone's job harder so they had to go. That's just good business. I've never met any business owner or manager that wanted anything but the best workers, to think otherwise is ridiculous.

tl;dr - if you think you're being targeted at work it's probably because you're a shitty employee.

[gazhekwe]

Apparently you worked for a great company that had wonderful representation. There are many that do not have great representation. In my experience, there were indeed workers who felt they had been singled out when there was no evidence to support that. There were also workers who actually were singled out by their manager who followed the rules precisely for only those workers, while others were able to break the rules without discipline. As I said those kind of cases are pretty easy to investigate. A lot of records to scrutinize carefully, but usually you can come up with a pretty clear pattern one way or another. Not all workers are disciplined equally, rules are not applied equally, and for someone to accuse another person of being a shitty worker with no evidence is a pretty good indication of the way they think.

[JVB]

Not all workers are disciplined equally, rules are not applied equally

I agree with that. Supervisors are human and they'll play favorites. We actually had to fire one supervisor because he would never write up one of the inspectors, even though she was always screwing up and letting defective parts go. I'll give you one guess why she was getting special treatment [[hint - nothing to do with her skin color). We also had another Supervisor that almost got fired for not disciplining a hilo driver who was always shutting the line down. He requested a transfer which saved his job, but it turned out that the hilo driver was his bookie which is why he got special treatment. Sometimes it's as simple as one worker is friends with the boss and the other one isn't. I'm not saying everyone always gets treated equally, all I'm saying is if you're a good worker, management is gonna do everything they can to keep you.

[gazhekwe]

Not always, they don't. Sometimes it really is somebody else's fault. Here is an example for you, not a race example, but discrimination for sure.

The Hispanic woman was discharged before completing probation. In the interview with the foreman, he said he was sorry to have to let her go because she was turning out to be one of the best workers. He had to let her go because she weighed more than allowed for her height, according the company's standards. We clocked them. In Michigan, it is unlawful to discriminate against someone because of their height and/or weight. A company could defend that the person's weight interfered with their ability to do the job, and that would be investigated to ascertain its veracity. If they could not do the job, then the company would be cleared but the rule would have to go. Each person must be assessed on ability, not weight [[or height, race, sex, color, national origin, age, disability).

[noise]

Then I guess I don't understand what you meant by: "It wasn't claimed, but then you just claimed it. Good move." Can you explain what you meant by that because you lost me.

You claimed you didn't say something and then said that very thing in your next statement.

Any time you base rules on race, there is racial discrimination. By definition and by practice.

Actually, by definition, Affirmative Action is to benefit an underrepresented population. It has nothing to do with discrimination AGAINST a different population.

White, yes. Wronged, no. Is it weird that I think people should be treated equally, and that government shouldn't divide us up into groups to be treated differently? You'll have to forgive me for feeling awkward about having to defend something that seems so logical.

It only seems logical because you benefit from white privilege. I'm white, as well, and certainly don't agree with you in the slightest. You have a very awkward grasp on what these policies do, why they exist, and any related history therein. That's why you feel awkward.

[Cincinnati_Kid]

[QUOTE=JVB;352190]Everyone is out to get you. It's probably a conspiracy.[/QUOTE\]

Guess what, you're probably right.

[JVB]

It only seems logical because you benefit from white privilege. I'm white, as well, and certainly don't agree with you in the slightest.

Maybe you've benefited from some sort of a privilege, but I haven't. White privilege is a myth, I've already explained that earlier in this thread. If you've benefited in some way, it was a class privilege, but not all whites have that benefit. Go explain white privilege to all the poor rural whites that don't even have running water or electricity. Look how far their "white privilege" has gotten them.

[noise]

Maybe you've benefited from some sort of a privilege, but I haven't. White privilege is a myth, I've already explained that earlier in this thread. If you've benefited in some way, it was a class privilege, but not all whites have that benefit. Go explain white privilege to all the poor rural whites that don't even have running water or electricity. Look how far their "white privilege" has gotten them.

You've only explained your own phony context, completely devoid of history, research, or reality.

This is further supported by your ridiculous belief that privilege can be reduced to running water or electricity.

[oladub]

Noise, I'm not sure that you are adding much to the conversation but why are you supporting this cottage industry of reverse racism when affirmative action could more positively be instituted through merit based criteria which would include all poor people or by showing businesses that it would be to their advantage to hire minorities? It would be too anecdotal to carry weight but I have actual hunger on both sides of my family one and two generations out. I think a lot of other whites could claim something similar. How do you explain the success of Asian Americans like Koreans who come here with very little and start running circles around whites though hard work? What privilege explains their success? I've thought about privileges Asian American children have. Their daddies stay home and help raise them and they have to deal with demanding parents. Sounds like cultural superiority is crucial to the need or lack thereof of affirmative action. Policies enhancing the nuclear family should therefore be high on the list of affirmative action policies. But no, the affirmative racism crowd wants to sacrifice poor and working whites and Asian-Americans to feel good about themselves and their beloved theories.

If you want need some numbers for context, compare the success of children raised in two parent homes with those raised in single parent homes. It will outstrip race as a success factor.

[gazhekwe]

Affirmative action is needed because white privilege, believe it or not, operates at all economic levels. Poor black people are treated differently than poor whites by banks and other lenders, by landlords and realtors, by educational institutions and recognition of merits of same. It is difficult to see something that is part of the fabric of your very existence, but believe me, it is easy to see from outside and easy enough to prove with sufficient data.

[JVB]

You've only explained your own phony context, completely devoid of history, research, or reality.

This is further supported by your ridiculous belief that privilege can be reduced to running water or electricity.

The fact is, the majority of poor people in this country are white. More than all other races combined and far more than blacks alone. Blacks suffer from poverty at a greater rate than whites, but in far fewer numbers. So when you have a policy that ignores the majority of poor people, that is an unfair policy and the effect of that will only be to add to the racial problems in this country. Anytime you have government policies that favor one race over another there have been long lasting and unforeseen problems - why would we expect that to change all of a sudden? Are we just gonna pat all the poor whites on the head and say "Sorry, enjoy your white privilege"?

History is replete with examples of people that support racial discrimination when it favors them, so I'm not surprised so many people are in favor of it. But racial discrimination is racial discrimination no matter how you try to justify it. Treating people differently according to their race is counterproductive in every single example I can think of.

We should help people that need it. Any policies should be merit based or income based though - not race based. Russel Simmons kids don't need another leg up. Michael Jordan's kids don't need another leg up. Sasha and Malia aren't going to need our help. But some poor white farm boy might. Why not just help people that need it, rather than making it a racial issue and alienating a large segment of society?

[noise]

It's been ignored before, but can anyone here accurately explain any affirmative action policy as it's implemented in a university for admissions purposes? Or any policy anywhere, for that matter?

[noise]

Interesting graph from Defend Affirmative Action Party at UMich.

Mean LSAT Scores for Ethnic Groups of Various Socioeconomic Status,
1991 First-Year Law School Students

[gazhekwe]

Noise, that is what I have been doing throughout this thread.

[JVB]

It's been ignored before, but can anyone here accurately explain any affirmative action policy as it's implemented in a university for admissions purposes? Or any policy anywhere, for that matter?

I'll ignore the fact that you ignored my entire post, and respond to yours. You can feel free to continue ignoring all of the points that I have brought up because you have no response.

In response to your question, the implementation of affirmative action policy HAS already been addressed in this thread. In fact, two cases have been cited. The UofM case Gratz v Bollinger which the Supreme Court found unconstitutional because it awarded 20 points to underrepresented minorities and "ensures that the diversity contributions of applicants cannot be individually assessed". On a 150 point scale, 100 points would guarantee admission. For getting a perfect SAT score [[something that is merit based and doesn't consider something you have no control over such as your race) you get 12 points. For being born black, hispanic or native American you get 20 points. So it is worth more to be a minority than it is to bust your ass and do well on the SAT.

Then there is the New Haven firefighter case of Ricci v DeStafano which found that the city of New Haven discriminated against 20 white and hispanic firefighters when they invalidated the tests they took for promotions solely because none of the black firefighters scored high enough on the test.

Those are two landmark examples of affirmative action in practice and how it discriminated against people based solely on race.

Now, would anyone care to address anything I wrote in this post:

The fact is, the majority of poor people in this country are white. More than all other races combined and far more than blacks alone. Blacks suffer from poverty at a greater rate than whites, but in far fewer numbers. So when you have a policy that ignores the majority of poor people, that is an unfair policy and the effect of that will only be to add to the racial problems in this country. Anytime you have government policies that favor one race over another there have been long lasting and unforeseen problems - why would we expect that to change all of a sudden? Are we just gonna pat all the poor whites on the head and say "Sorry, enjoy your white privilege"?

History is replete with examples of people that support racial discrimination when it favors them, so I'm not surprised so many people are in favor of it. But racial discrimination is racial discrimination no matter how you try to justify it. Treating people differently according to their race is counterproductive in every single example I can think of.

We should help people that need it. Any policies should be merit based or income based though - not race based. Russel Simmons kids don't need another leg up. Michael Jordan's kids don't need another leg up. Sasha and Malia aren't going to need our help. But some poor white farm boy might. Why not just help people that need it, rather than making it a racial issue and alienating a large segment of society?

Or would you like to keep on ignoring those points?