Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 318 posts

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#131

Post by ajross »

MordinSolus wrote: post #120
ajross wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you simply don't understand what affirmative action is. It's not welfare. You're seriously saying we should give out slots on boards of directors to people on food stamps ? AA doesn't correct for immediate need, it corrects for the fact that people growing up in unpriviledged environments lack advantages. So they have to work a job instead of going to a test prep class. They go to schools with high tea…

> AA doesn't correct for immediate need, it corrects for the fact that people growing up in unpriviledged environments lack advantages. So poor white folks never grow up in unpriviledged environments? You're providing no justification for why AA is race based instead of socio-economic based.

The first sentence is just bad statistics. Obviously all that's required is that "more" poor black kids grow up in unpriviledged environemnts (something that I assume you agree with) to have a problem worth correcting. You can't disprove a correlation with a single counterexample.

And why must I "justify" that it be "race based"? There's a problem. It's a solution. It works, if imperfectly. I'd like to see a better option too. (Not least because one of it's biggest problems is that it pisses off entitled white kids like you and starts pointless internet flames like this.)

So I repeat what I said earlier: if you have another solution that works better, then propose it and advocate for it. Right now all you're doing is whining.

(edit to avoid prolonging thread: both replies have ignored the issue mentioned upthread, namely that AA corrects for disadvantage in the past, not currently. You can't give executive jobs to unqualified poor people, you need to start farther upstream. So if that's your suggestion, come up with a new one -- you're essentially saying "eliminate poverty", which is dumb.)

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#132

Post by shantanubala »

Karunamon wrote: post #116
king_jester wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You cannot create institutional and systemic racism against white people. White is the cultural norm in the US: everything is default to white perspective and whiteness is considered the most desireable state. Even if a minority treats an individual white person badly, that white person can typically walk away from that encounter without being affected, nor have that sentiment compounded by society at large every day…

>..that white person can typically walk away from that encounter without being affected Meaning, what? I'm not "affected" because I have to deal with someone who, say, hates white people? >Yes, but the rules are not evenly applied. Aha. Sounds like the problem is here. The laws we have need to be applied correctly, instead of inventing new and questionable ones. >The only thing wrong here is your sentiment. Any "sent…

> Meaning, what? I'm not "affected" because I have to deal with someone who, say, hates white people?

The problem is mainly that a white person only needs to deal with racism on a personal level, and this racism is easy to ignore and "walk away" from.

A black person or latino has to not only deal with racism from individual people, but also inequities that are the result of our society. What are these inequities?

Here's a list of some: - lower representation in government - stereotyping in movies and popular culture - lower representation in institutions of higher education - lower representation in the workforce - more difficulty growing and getting promoted once hired - assumption that he or she might be residing illegally (this applies mainly to latinos)

Now you might say, "but what if blacks and latinos just aren't suitable for our government, educational institutions, workforce, and popular culture?" Or "what if they just don't want to participate?"

So now the real question becomes, "so how do you encourage them to participate? Or would you prefer to be a society that deliberately ignores a portion of its population?"

And this isn't even mentioning the fact that children don't get to chose where they grow up, who their parents are, and what the color of their skin is. I'm very happy that I didn't grow up black in Compton, and I'm sure you would also feel the same.

We are a byproduct of our surroundings, and until we can eliminate the gang violence, substance abuse, etc. etc. that surrounds a lot of children (predominantly minorities), it seems that the best we can do is lower the barrier to entry for "a different life." Which part of that is racist against white people?

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#133

Post by arrrg »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #89
rayiner wrote: post #41

I think this is a great answer to people who ask why we still need things like affirmative action. Here you have a continuing demographic phenomenon that can be traced directly back to slave ownership patterns hundreds of years ago. It should be noted also that the black belt is also a terribly poor stretch of the country. Unfortunately, it appears that socioeconomic patterns are imprinted more deeply than anyone wou…

The problem with affirmative action is that it is based on race. It is racist. In fact it isn't just based on race, it is based on skin colour - since some mixed black-white people with white skin can be discriminated against. America needs to put race on the sidelines and start thinking in terms of class. You should help the disadvantaged or poor regardless of their great great grandparent's struggles. Affirmative a…

No, counteracting racism (which has to happen based on race, any other way doesn't make sense) is most certainly not racist.

AA is not reparations, it tries to correct for existing racism.

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#134

Post by arrrg »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #117
rayiner wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The justification and rationale for race-based affirmative action is somewhat different from anything favoring people of low socioeconomic class generally. It has to do with correcting specific and massive historical wrongs in which our government was complicit, not lifting up disadvantaged people generally. Conflating the two is a little silly. If I destroy your house, you're not going to be happy if I make amends t…

Let's accept that rational; but that does leave one question: when does this end? If we have no way to measure the damage then how do we measure the resolution of the damage? Do we continue this for 5, 10, 50, 100, 500 years? Or do we simply never end it? Do we try to "correct" it so there are literally no poor people of a particular ethnicity? How realistic is that?

How about until there no longer is any significant racism that systematically disadvantages black people?

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#135

Post by bdunbar »

AimHere wrote: post #87
_delirium wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe your chronology is correct: affirmative action was first implemented in the U.S. in 1961, with widespread implementation not until the late 1960s, but there were already many poverty-ridden black ghettoes in the 1950s. (And the areas talked about in this article have been full of grinding poverty for their entire existence , with most of their inhabitants being slaves prior to the 1860s, and then desp…

Maybe I'm leaning too much on the 'benefit of the doubt' side, but I parsed the prior post to mean that all those things existed, but they weren't considered problems by, say, white people, or people in power, prior to the 1960s. The alternative is that some (presumably intelligent) poster on HN stating something completely at odds with the facts, and perhaps even informally suggesting that affirmative action was lik…

"even informally suggesting that affirmative action was likely to have caused black people to live in poor, squalid, crime-filled ghettoes."

That is what I am suggesting.

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#136

Post by adaml_623 »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #113
king_jester wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that race and class are heavily intersectional, right? That rates of poverty are higher for non-whites, right? Also, helping people who are affected by institutional racism is not racist, it is an attempt to correct for existing racism.

Even if everything you say is true (that some races are poorer than other races) how does that counter what I said? The strategy I'm talking about gives to poor and disadvantaged people regardless of their race, so if a ton of blacks are poor then they will receive the majority of the benefits. But as an additional benefit middle and upper class minorities won't get advantages they don't need. You also won't require…

You missed the part of his comment that did counter some of what you said.

You said: "Affirmative action should exist; but it should be entirely based on parental income, growing up in a poor area, or other disadvantaged indicators. Not race, not ethnicity, and not gender. These things don't prove you're poor or disadvantaged." which seems quite reasonable.

He said: "Also, helping people who are affected by institutional racism is not racist, it is an attempt to correct for existing racism."

Your statement doesn't seem to acknowledge things in society contributing to future problems.

So he is saying that you have to counter current institutional *isms which still exists today. Otherwise the current biases of today will just contribute to the population of disadvantaged people of tomorrow. I think you need both approaches. Kind of a PID controller kind of solution to the problem.

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#137

Post by bdunbar »

rmc wrote: post #97
bdunbar wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problems you mention were not problems until after affirmative action was implemented.

You mean there was no extreme poverty amoung marginalized groups before affirmative action?

The poster I was replying to said

"gang violence, intense poverty, substance abuse, neglect, and trauma"

These, by and large, were not systemic problems before the introduction of affirmative action.

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#138

Post by alxp »

grannyg00se wrote: post #114
king_jester wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize that race and class are heavily intersectional, right? That rates of poverty are higher for non-whites, right? Also, helping people who are affected by institutional racism is not racist, it is an attempt to correct for existing racism.

It is racist by the fact that it is based on race. Worse, it continues to reinforce thinking along racial lines rather than circumstancial ones thus perpetuating the idea that we should classify based on race. It would be much better to stop saying "you get this because you are this colour" and start saying "you get this because it looks like you could use a hand." Racism exists, but trying to fight it with more raci…

> It is racist by the fact that it is based on race.

Your definition is too simplistic. Racism isn't just prejudice based on race. Racism requires a power imbalance. Acting to counteract an institutional imbalance caused by racism is not "just anotehr kind of racism."

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#139

Post by ajross »

mtoddh wrote: post #118
ajross wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, what's your solution? Affirmative action is a bandaid, and its effects are at best poorly distributed. But it actually works to reduce ethnic imbalance, and most people (I assume you too) agree that's a good thing. You have an alternative to suggest that doesn't have equivalent problems? Just recognize that (I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume) that, because you are a middle class white man, probably 90…

Just recognize that (I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume) that, because you are a middle class white man, probably 90% of the reason you oppose "affirmative action" is because it negatively impacts your own demographic group. Arguments for or against AA aside, this line of reasoning, where you invalidate somebody's argument based on what demographic group they belong to (white middle class males in this cas…

Sigh... First: that's not a logical argument, it's a message directly to the poster (and anyone like-minded, probably including you) intended to provoke introspection. Read it again, I don't claim anything in those words says anything about AA.

Second: you seriously think it's inappropriate to point out that people tend to have opinions which advantage their own station? Really? You're not simply saying that this is incorrect, you're actually saying that I'm not allowed to make the argument that white people might not like AA because it disadvantages white people. That's insane, sorry.

Re: Obama's Secret Weapon In The South is 129 Million Years Old

#140

Post by abraxasz »

rayiner wrote: post #110
UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with affirmative action is that it is based on race. It is racist. In fact it isn't just based on race, it is based on skin colour - since some mixed black-white people with white skin can be discriminated against. America needs to put race on the sidelines and start thinking in terms of class. You should help the disadvantaged or poor regardless of their great great grandparent's struggles. Affirmative a…

The justification and rationale for race-based affirmative action is somewhat different from anything favoring people of low socioeconomic class generally. It has to do with correcting specific and massive historical wrongs in which our government was complicit, not lifting up disadvantaged people generally. Conflating the two is a little silly. If I destroy your house, you're not going to be happy if I make amends t…

This has to be the most thoughtful comment I've read on the subject of affirmative action. It's definitively gonna be food for thoughts. Thanks!
Post reply on HN