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

151–160 of 318 posts

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

#151

Post by _delirium »

clarky07 wrote: post #145
arrrg wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Instead we have a system that systematically disadvantages non black people. Just stop discriminating. Either way. No reason to have one or the other have an advantage. We just had a black man elected to his second term as president, so I think that's a pretty good sign we aren't that racist. This wouldn't have happened a few decades ago.

Even as a white person I notice anti-black racism quite frequently, and am not sure I'd believe that "we aren't that racist", although granted it's certainly better than 20 years ago. I've since moved away from Georgia, but I was often shocked at how much worse my black friends there were treated than I am, in a whole range of circumstances, ranging from employment, to interactions with police, to interactions with shop owners. Afaict, there is still quite strong and systematic racism in many parts of American society (worse in parts of the south than elsewhere, but not exclusively located there).

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

#152

Post by mkr-hn »

bdunbar wrote: post #148
mkr-hn wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it the flight of money, mostly in the hands of white people, out of the cities and into the suburbs around the time institutional segregation started to crumble, or was it affirmative action? I'm not leaning toward the latter.

"I'm not leaning toward the latter." Are you basing this leaning on study and contemplation of the facts, or because it makes you feel better?

What are you basing your assertion on? I indicated an inclination. It's inherently an opinion. You made an assertion of fact.

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

#153

Post by bdunbar »

_delirium wrote: post #149
tjic wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> completely at odds with the facts Asserted without evidence. The argument makes perfect sense to me. What part of it do you think is false?

Isn't the person making a very strong causal claim the one in need of evidence? If someone's claiming that affirmative action caused black poverty, then I would expect some good data to back up that claim. Merely asserting it is not an "argument".

Why not put it back on the poster who asserted without evidence that affirmative action will cure "gang violence, intense poverty, substance abuse, neglect, and trauma"?

I will allow that it could. But we've had this deal in place for fifty years.

If you've got a program running, and the problems keep getting worse .. maybe it's time to check one's assumptions.

At any rate - I'll go grubbing around for the facts. Later tonight. Now I've got lunch to eat and work to be done. I've got a tax bill to pay.

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

#154

Post by bdunbar »

mkr-hn wrote: post #152
bdunbar wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm not leaning toward the latter." Are you basing this leaning on study and contemplation of the facts, or because it makes you feel better?

What are you basing your assertion on? I indicated an inclination. It's inherently an opinion. You made an assertion of fact.

Data. And you?

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

#155

Post by mkr-hn »

bdunbar wrote: post #154
mkr-hn wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you basing your assertion on? I indicated an inclination. It's inherently an opinion. You made an assertion of fact.

Data. And you?

I made no assertion, so I have nothing to support.

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

#156

Post by grannyg00se »

alxp wrote: post #138
grannyg00se wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

Oppression requires a power imbalance. Racism only requires using race as a classification upon which you base your actions. Choosing who you hang out with simply based on race is racism even though ut is not a power imbalance.

And you can act to counteract an institutional imbalance caused by racism without furthering racism. Focus on something else. Race is being reinforced as an accepted means to classify people and that is the root cause of the problem.

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

#157

Post by zanny »

ShawnBird wrote: post #146
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…

Unfortunately you can't just 'fix' something like that by handing out grants to people with dark skin. Baring some large redistribution of wealth the most effective thing we can do is to remove all the barriers that we can and encourage improvement. There are many people who are direct descendants of slaves who don't qualify for affirmative action and there are people who's families moved here in the 70s who do quali…

It doesn't help that through affirmative action reparations, you are effectively trying to right the sins of long dead people on other long dead people.

I like the two supers up poster on this. Target lower socioeconomic individuals born into poor areas with intellectually hostile circumstances. Don't discriminate on that.

The circumstances that brought the current crop of humanity to populate the Earth were beyond our collective wills. We just need to deal with what we were dealt to the best of our ability. That doesn't include trying to right racism and discrimination for 300 - 5000 years by doing the inverse.

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

#158

Post by ShawnBird »

ajross wrote: post #131
MordinSolus wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 o…

If a policy benefits poor people in general and more black people are poor it would stand to reason that it would help more black people. I think that the problem with AA is that it attempts to treat the entire country. A better solution would be to concentrate efforts on the poorest communities with the largest percentage of black population. Once those cities start to succeed it would help turn around institutional bias. I don't thank that AA has helped reduce bias, it seems like it has served more as a cosmetic measure. I could be wrong.

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

#159

Post by R_Edward »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #112
drharris wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, it's a story at best. The article claims that Plankton -> Soil -> Slaves -> Black People don't move -> Obama support. The first 2 connections are obvious, but the second two do not necessarily connect in any rational way. It's like saying Bedrock -> Highrises -> ???? -> Obama. The first connection works, but the other two would be pure speculation at best.

You read it as more than a storey. Ok. What's mysterious about people staying in the same place for generations? My people have been in Iowa since the Civil War too.

Indeed, most people don't move. I won't be able to put my finger on it now, but several years ago, I read a statistic that a huge percentage of people are born, live, and die within a 20 to 30 mile radius. College attendance, military service, sightseeing vacations and travel for work all bring us out of that circle for a time, but we tend to return to it afterward.

My brother has his radius whittled down to about 10 miles. I, on the other hand, live about 800 miles from where I was born and grew up, and have no expectation of returning, but then, I always was the black sheep of the family.

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

#160

Post by zanny »

adaml_623 wrote: post #136
UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 instituti…

Countering institutional racism is reactive. It isn't passive like affirmative action is. I think he is describing facilitating courts to allow the discriminated to sue the discriminators, and given sufficient evidence charge them with racial discrimination.

I do agree with him though, you don't repay racisms of the past and present with more racism in the opposite direction.

Post reply on HN