FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD (It's in the Breaking News sidebar!)
Posted on 07/07/2003 12:00:00 PM PDT by randog
Edited on 05/07/2004 7:36:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Daryl Feemster remembers what life was like 25 years ago for blacks in America, so he is certain that affirmative action will be necessary 25 years from now.
(Excerpt) Read more at rgj.com ...
“Absolutely,” said the 41-year-old black community activist from Reno. “If you’re talking about a society and a community that respects everyone and treats everyone fairly and the same, I don’t know if we’ll ever get there.”
Interesting perspective...We MUST treat people different based on race UNTIL everyone is treated the same regardless of race.
First of all, "25 years ago" was 1978. What exactly was happening in 1978? And what about that situation did affirmative action fix? And even if there was something bad in 1978 which affirmative action fixed, how does this indicate that affirmative action will still be "necessary" 25 years from now?
The only rational way to parse this statement is, he thinks affirmative action will always be necessary, because it doesn't "fix" anything measurable in particular but he just likes it and thinks the lot in life of blacks was bad in 1978, is bad now, and will still be bad 25 years from now. Thus 25 years from now affirmative action will still be "necessary" because he is sure that it won't "fix" anything whatsoever, and he'll still be dissatisfied.
Another way to parse this quote would be to say that the person who said this is stark raving mad and unable to make rational connections between ideas. Kind of like me saying "I remember what taxes were like 25 years ago, so I'm sure that anti-seatbelt laws will still be necessary 25 years from now." The connection between one thing and the other being completely nonexistent except inside my own head.
“Absolutely,” said the 41-year-old black community activist from Reno. “If you’re talking about a society and a community that respects everyone and treats everyone fairly and the same, I don’t know if we’ll ever get there.”
Ok then, where's the "necessity" for affirmative action? If we can't ever "get there", then why bother? (And this of course assumes that affirmative action even gets us part-way "there", which is far from clear.)
Race was used at the university as a factor when evaluating applicants to ensure a diverse educational environment.
Slight correction: it was used to ensure an educational environment with people of diverse skin colors. That's not the same thing as having people who are "diverse", unless of course you think that White Person X and Black Person Y can't possibly be similar to each other in numerous ways. Which is a racist concept. (One apparently held by so-called "liberals".)
“We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today,” wrote O’Connor, who is white.
Wow. That "who is white" at the end there really threw me. Not sure why, exactly, but it did.
Affirmative action was a set of policies established in the mid 1960s to help abolish discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin in hiring practices and school admissions.
No it wasn't. It didn't "help abolish" any such thing. It is discrimiation based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. It's true enough I suppose that its supporters have always told themselves that they are "helping" to abolish these things. But they are deluding themselves.
Langsdale, who said she considers herself Hispanic and white, questioned whether her children would be part of affirmative action if she married someone of yet another race or ethnicity.
Interesting turn of phrase: "part of affirmative action". Apparently now people can be divided into two groups, those who are part of affirmative action (or the People Of Affirmative Action?) and those who aren't.
Yup, this is sure "helping" to abolish discrimination.
“I think people who have racism in their heads will still discriminate but it won’t make sense because they won’t know what they’re discriminating against.”
The people who have racism in their heads are college admissions officers and like. And it may be difficult for them to do their discriminating but that won't stop them from trying.
Several people agreed with Feemster and did not see how enough change could occur in the next 25 years to eliminate affirmative action.
In fact, I agree with that. I don't see how enough change can occur in the next 25 years to eliminate affirmative action. Because the "change" which will be necessary, of course, is a socio-political one: for the bureacratic elites to give up their devotion to this racial spoils system. And they do seem to love it so.
“I’m afraid it’s going to be needed a long time,” said Peter Newman, who is white and co-owns Newman’s Deli in Reno. “I just think people will not learn, will not be educated enough to change their ways.”
Mr. Newman seems to perceive that affirmative action has something to do with "educating people to change their ways". Who told him that? The official argument is: "to ensure a diverse educational environment, which is a valid compelling interest of any educational institution."
O’Connor wrote in the opinion that “the path to leadership must be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.”
So true! After all, as the Constitution says in... uh... which article or amendment would that be, again?
[O'Connor] She emphasized that diversity on campus is important not only to stimulate classroom discussion,
When classrooms contain people of multi-colored skin hues, that's oh so "stimulating" to discussion. Yes indeed! I know at my college we spent hours and hours discussing this oh so "stimulating" fact. That's what college is all about!
What a stunningly ridiculous statement. When the hell did O'Connor last set foot on a college campus anyway? 1928? What the hell is she talking about?
also to open the ranks of future business, government and military leadership to members of all races.
Who says they're not "open"?
Patricia Ryan, 57, said affirmative action is especially needed with the increase of immigrants to the United States. “We have to have something to gauge that everybody is being treated equally,” said Ryan,
Yet another example of thought-disconnect. What the heck does sentence A have to do with sentence B, and what the heck does sentence B have to do with C. affirmative action? I'm trying to parse this, really: A. Because there is lots of immigration (and for some reason this is a law of nature), we B. need to have a way to gauge fairness. So, if there was less immigration, we wouldn't have to care so much about fairness? Anyway, moving on: C. the only way to gauge fairness is to engage in racial discrimination ("affirmative action").
Sorry. It just doesn't even compute. I guess I'm dumb.
Ron Conley, 59, said he looks back as a black man to almost 40 years ago when affirmative action began and cannot see much improvement because of it.
Hallelujah! Someone who has actually objectively evaluated the situation and results of affirmative action! And of course the conclusion he draws is....
But Conley said he is hopeful to see change in the future and move toward a time when affirmative action won’t be needed.
... that it's still "needed". The policy which accomplishes nothing, as far as he can tell, is still "needed". Isn't that one definition of "insanity"?
Justice Lewis Powell wrote in that case there is a “compelling state interest” in racial diversity, and permitted the use of race as one “plus factor.”
And of course the article fails to mention that this was a dissenting opinion and is hardly the law of the land.
Genny Wilson, 24, said she would like to think that affirmative action would not be needed to have a racial mix in schools.
I would too, I suppose. That is, if I cared anything at all about having a "racial mix" in schools per se in the first place, which I don't.
But as things stand, it does appear that when you admit students fairly to competitive schools, you get a disproportionate number of Asians, and then whites, and relatively few blacks and Hispanics. The difference between me and her, apparently, is that she is bothered by the Too Many Damn Asians phenomenon, whereas I am not. Who's the racist?
But the white Reno resident also said she thinks diversity is needed, no matter what.
In other words, this is her religion. Interpret her statements accordingly.
“I feel sorry for the type of people who would want only one type of people in their schools,” the Reno resident said while washing dishes at Deux Gros Nez.
Which people are those exactly, who "want" only "one type of people"? Certainly not me.
But who was talking about "types of people" to begin with? I thought she was only talking about their skin pigmentation. What does that have to do with the "type of" person that they are, inside? Unless of course you're a damn racist.
Scott Goodwin said he hopes “equality will be the natural state of things” by the time he is in his mid 40s.
If by this he means equality of opportunity, that's my hope too. That's precisely why I oppose state discrimination programs such as "affirmative action".
“All things will be equal in the end,” said the white 21-year-old from Reno. “There will be no need for affirmative action because there will be no use of inequality anywhere — a bit idealistic.”
Not only idealistic but quite confused. The only widespread "use of inequality" (by this I assume he means inequality of treatment) anywhere, right now, is in the various affirmative action programs. To hope that affirmative action will not be "needed" because at some point there will be no "use of equality" is like hoping that cigarettes won't be "needed" because there will be no more lung cancer or emphysema.
It's bizarre how confused and muddled the thinking of so many people is on this issue. I can only assume it's from reading so many articles like this one.
That's part of the story. The great untold story of course is that deserving, hard-working, talented, intelligent Asian-American students are really screwed by this educational caste system.
It's enough to make you wonder why "liberals" dislike Asian-Americans so much.
The second group that does quite well is Indians, because of their skin color. They look like African Americans, so they must be like African Americans, according to the radical left, who always judges a persons character by their skin color. Heck, even the African Americans treat Indians like one of their own.
I think elite universities and the mad scramble to attain a pedigree are way overblown. My brother and I grew up middle class and attended the same State U while our rich cousins attended UC Berkley and various expensive private colleges. My brother and I now own cabins at the lake while our cousins rent time-share condos. It's not so much where you went to college but what you do with what you got.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.