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

201–210 of 318 posts

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

#201

Post by astine »

shantanubala wrote: post #85
javert wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's effectively the same as what I stated. It's also still not a valid conclusion. For example, you haven't addressed whether it's worth trying to undo bad things that happened long ago with other injustices, as opposed to simply being just from here on out. For another example, you haven't addressed whether it actually works or not. (Those two examples actually are related, because theory and practice actually ar…

> undo bad things that happened long ago with other injustices First, you are implying that affirmative action is unjust, which it is not . Affirmative action does not mean that an unqualified worker replaces a qualified worker because of race. Affirmative action means that equally qualified workers are then selected to be as representative of the population as possible. This has the added benefit of making sure civi…

"Affirmative action means that equally qualified workers are then selected to be as representative of the population as possible."

Maybe this is what Affirmative Action means to you, but not to everyone. In fact, the University of Texas is currently at court regarding this very issue, where the university intentionally admitted minority students at the expense of white students who were otherwise better qualified in order to meet vague race quotas.

The case is currently being argued: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas

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

#203

Post by jivatmanx »

rmc wrote: post #130
alexanderh wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but not all African American's are disadvantaged. But all disadvantaged people are disadvantaged. Why not make laws to simply help the disadvantaged? Why does race have to be the indicator, even if its a pretty good one? Why cant income be the indicator? It seems like it would be at least as accurate, if not more so... and no need to bring race into it.

How do you define & measure disadvantage? You suggest income, but then that ignores: (a) debt (b) medical costs (Joe & Jim have the same income, but Joe has cancer and has to pay $LOTS per month, has less energy etc. Who's more disadvantaged?) (c) where one lives (Joe & Jim have same income, but Joe lives near where possible jobs are, Jim needs a 2 hour bus journey) (d) existing assets (Jim has a new car and partner…

Assuming that poverty alleviation programs are consolidated, than using the shorthand of race for disadvantages on only the education portion does not actually reduce paperwork/costs.

The strong and convincing argument for affirmative action is that African Americans and Indians have been severely wronged in the past and should be recompensed.

But what about would Hispanics, more recently immigrants who never suffered from Genocide or Slavery.

Or what about Asian Americans, who actually suffer reverse AA (need higher scores than whites) for no reason other than being smart. They're aware of this and don't mark Asian on applications if it can be avoided.

Racial discrimination does cause problems. Personally, I really do feel that Blacks and Indians need to be compensated for past ills. I'm not sure how the best way to do that is, however.

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

#204

Post by tg3 »

javert wrote: post #129
Karunamon wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The idea of "reverse racism" is baloney, and I can explain that opinion further if necessary. I'd be interested in that explanation. Combatting discrimination by allowing discrimination by or for minorities seems like pushing the pendulum too far back in the other direction. Isn't the idea equality? Having everyone playing by the same rules regardless of race? Example (in my own home state, no less) For jobs offered…

> Isn't the idea equality? You weren't asking me, but the idea should be equality under the law , not equality.

But how the law is applied is just as important as its text. A just law applied in a discriminatory way is discriminatory.

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

#205

Post by Karunamon »

king_jester wrote: post #182
Karunamon wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>..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…

shantanubala did a good job talking about some of your points, so I don't have any thing particular to add. However, the fact that you see something wrong with providing help in finding employment for native people speaks volumes about how you feel about native peoples with regard to how they interact in US society. You call decisions that include race as a factor as discrimination, but that ignores the long legacy a…

>However, the fact that you see something wrong with providing help in finding employment for native people

I didn't say this. I said that stating a racial preference in an employment advertisement is wrong and discriminatory regardless of the noble aims of the reasons those ads exist.

>That you yourself took a position to defend normative ideas that actively perpetuate real, actual violence and harm

What the actual fuck are you talking about?! Saying that all discrimination is wrong perpetuates violence and harm?? Explain yourself, please. I don't appreciate being tarred with the racist brush for trying to comprehend this.

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

#206

Post by Karunamon »

tg3 wrote: post #199
stickfigure wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odd that you didn't mention the systematic oppression of Chinese in the USA. However, that's beside the point. My point is that whatever the far-reaching effects of slavery, it's not clear that this specific geographic distribution is one of them - many cultures tend to clump together naturally even without systematic oppression (see: american expat communities around the world). Slavery may have chosen the original…

He mentioned that ethnic Chinese in China were not subject to systematic oppression (which is debatable, especially depending on your definition of "ethnic Chinese", it's a big country). I think the point he's making is that the same areas which were populated by black slaves under systematic oppression 150 years ago were populated by poor blacks under systematic discrimination 50 years ago and are populated by poor…

Thank you, that's exactly what I was going for here.

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

#207

Post by Karunamon »

shantanubala wrote: post #132
Karunamon wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>..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? Her…

>Now you might say, "but what if blacks and latinos just aren't suitable for our government, educational institutions, workforce, and popular culture?"

Except I wouldn't say that, because first, it doesn't make any damn sense, and second, it's the kind of ignorant tripe you'd expect to hear a white supremacist say.

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

#208

Post by wtvanhest »

rayiner wrote: post #191
clarky07 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead we discriminate against the poor white guy from the ghetto growing up with a single mom? Brilliant. That guy had none of the supposed white male advantages. Hire/accept people based on their merits. If you want to take into account overcoming adversity that's fine with me. But picking someone based on the color of their skin, be it white, black, or other, is wrong, and it's racist.

Let's argue based on aggregate statistics instead of individual situations. I don't see why otherwise rational/scientific people feel the need to debase themselves by talking about edge-case individual examples when it comes to things like this.

Individual situations are important in this case. It is as much about fairness for the white guy/girl with poor parents who is being discriminated against by his or her government as it is about the African American who is being discriminated against by employers, schools etc.

This is obviously a tough issue, but edge cases are important. There is too much noise in the statistics.

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

#209

Post by jivatmanx »

Locke1689 wrote: post #193
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 issue here is that affirmative action conflates two separate things. One element of affirmative action is correction for economic disenfranchisement. You're right that maybe we should look at this more broadly and attempt a more race-neutral approach. However, the second horn seeks to correct for prejudice and descrimination, not poverty. This is not necessarily heavy-handed correction, like quotas, either. For e…

I don't think there is a greater aversion to blacks or Indians than there is to Asians. Should Asians be advantaged? For college admissions, they are actually considered more privileged than whites because they score so highly on tests.

As others have pointed out, and as I agree with, affirmative action is for recompensing past wrongs against Blacks and Indians, who suffered slavery and Genocide, respectively.

But what about Hispanics? The affirmative action for them is entirely economic (they are poorer in general).

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

#210

Post by redwood »

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?

I think it's fair to say that it was a necessary phenomenon to kick-start a perception-shift among all Americans that all kinds of people could be in all kinds of roles. We're probably at the inflection point now: a black president means Americans have now come to see as "normal" the possibility of a person of color in the highest office in the land. Thus it's probably the right time to begin moving toward class-based aid instead of race.
Post reply on HN