Terrapin Tables

I really think that the brothers should be more bitter about the fact that they get the shortest month in the year. They should have a retrospective on the inventor of bling. Or something

I watched some of CB4 yesterday, I think they should be bitter about that film.

You think this might cause any bitterness?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/EDUCATION/02/15/whites.only.ap/index.html

Those kids are idiots. There is affirmative action because there is racism. When you try and combat affirmative action with racism you don't win, instead you prolong the time affirmative action remains in place.
"No matter what my ethnicity is, I'm making a statement that scholarships should be given out based on merit and need . . ."
Does anyone think that being white isn't an advantage in our society? If you are pissed off about affirmative action, blame the racists, not the minorities.

i disagree, i don't think they're idiots and i don't think they're all that wrong. the origin of affirmative action was not to grant to certain individuals things that wouldn't be granted to others. in fact, the origin of affirmative action was to not grant to certain individuals things that wouldn't be granted to others. i think there are a number of problems with AA, among them that it treats people based on group membership instead of as individuals and it reinforces separatism. when we say that discriminating against (or in favor) of an individual based on race is wrong, we mean that it is the principle that is wrong, not the particulars of who is benefitting or suffering. for years, minorities have been (rightly) complaining that they have not gotten a fair chance at scholarships. upon acknowledging that this is correct, i think the proper action is to give them (and everyone) a fair chance, not create one that only they can win.

i disagree, i don't think they're idiots and i don't think they're all that wrong. the origin of affirmative action was not to grant to certain individuals things that wouldn't be granted to others. in fact, the origin of affirmative action was to not grant to certain individuals things that wouldn't be granted to others. i think there are a number of problems with AA, among them that it treats people based on group membership instead of as individuals and it reinforces separatism. when we say that discriminating against (or in favor) of an individual based on race is wrong, we mean that it is the principle that is wrong, not the particulars of who is benefitting or suffering. for years, minorities have been (rightly) complaining that they have not gotten a fair chance at scholarships. upon acknowledging that this is correct, i think the proper action is to give them (and everyone) a fair chance, not create one that only they can win.

Is there an echo in here?

Yeah, I agree that it's stupid to fight affirmative action with more affirmative action.

Maybe there's still a need for BHM and affirmative action, but I don't really agree with them. Actually calling it out separately and teaching "black history" separately from just plain old history perpetuates racism, and almost seems a little like separate but equal. Students see it as black history, and not part of their normal course, almost like it's not quite as important, but it still needs to be mentioned, anyway. It just needs to be incorporated into normal textbooks. And regarding affirmative action & scholarships, people should be hired or awarded scholarships based on merit. Rewarding someone for their race, no matter what race it is, is still racist. But, with the problem of so many racists in our country, it's tough to figure out another way for minorities to get their fair share.
/soapbox

I must have been typing up my last reply while Roy was typing his. But after reading his reply, it poses an interesting question, that I just started to develop in my previous reply. To frame it, I'll use Texas as an example. There are a lot of Mexicans here. There are also a lot of racist white people with managerial positions in many companies, quite a few of whom probably base their hiring decisions at least partly on race. So, how do you make sure that Mexican people do get hired based on their merits, rather than being turned down based on their race? Education may work for our children, keeping them from being racist, but I doubt you're going to change the viewpoint of a middle-aged racist person, which leaves Mexicans alive right now still having to deal with racism when trying to get a job in Texas. AA may be based on group membership, but is there a legal solution to combatting racism that isn't based on group membership? They seem to go hand in hand.

I used to be firmly against the implementation of affirmative action programs because they support the mentality that people should be treated differently because of their race. But I recognized that all else being equal, it is disadvantageous to be a minority in this society, and AA programs, although flawed in this principle, still do plenty of good to society, so I never went on some crusade against them.

Anywho, my take is this: the anti-AA people see such programs as racist. Not 'let's go lynch some people' racist, but racist because they treat people differently because of race, which I believe is true. Giving "positive points" to minorities on college applications has the exact same effect as giving "negative points" to people in the majority. I believe the anti-AA people are a bit idealistic, and say that if we really want to stamp out racism, let's stop all racism right now - including "government-sponsored" racism such as AA programs. This is exactly what these students are doing.

People who support AA programs see the world for more of what it is -- it is harder to succeed if you are a minority. Not only is this unfair, but minorities lack appropriate representation in all manners of life, especially where it counts, such as college attendance, upper managerial positions, high-ranking government jobs... etc. So by having affirmative action, we level the playing field and try to get more minority representation in these jobs. Once that happens, the elitism (racism) will diminish, as the people who hold these jobs become exposed to the positive aspects of having a diverse working environment.

My take on it, anyway...

Whatever the origins of affirmative action may be, de facto implementation of affirmative action rewards minorities. The executive order includes accomplishing the goal by means of "employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination." Not all of these terms are positive ones. It essentially means that to accomplish affirmative action, someone can be fired. At its worst, affirmative action allows instances where only a minority can win. Fortunately, all the available opportunities where it is impossible for a minority to win are not government sanctioned. If you can create a world where in actuality you can give everyone a fair chance at the some resources and opportunities, then by all means get rid of affirmative action. If you are unable to do that, then I would imagine you would have to propose an alternative.
I agree with Fatboy about the integration of history. There is no need to differentiate or compartmentalize history.
And finally, I think its important that we not overlook the fact that affirmative action applies to many more things than race, not the least of which is gender.

I don't like Affirmative Action. I don't like the "Diversity" requirement at UMD. I'm in an African-American Lit class (that, in all honesty, I probably would have taken regardless of any requirements) that strikes me as silly. Good literature is good literature - if it warrants study, lets study it. Cultural contexts are important to all works, but I feel focusing on one serves to exclude the others, and creates a limited perspective. Just like people make the argument that racism would go away if "It's a Black thing you wouldn't understand" shirts were never printed, I think focusing on racial divisions in areas like acaademics only highlight the schism.

Now, for the real reason I wanted to post: in high school, the morning announcements advertised a special free 2-week summer science program for Women and Minorities only. So I got up, went to the office, and tried to apply. Obviously, they told me I couldn't. I demanded they say the words "You can't apply because you're a white male," but they wouldn't.

So, I think a big step to getting past racism is to truly move past it. Treat people as equals. Affirmative Action doesn't do this. When you guarantee acceptance to people without regard to merit, you exclude those that are more qualified.

Yes it can be hard for minorities to get into colleges. It's also hard for Bob to pay mine and Casey's tuition as he qualifies for no help from the government. It's hard for everybody to find work right now. I'm only able to live in College Park because I took out student loans - it won't be easy for me to pay that back. Bottom line, I guess, is AA functions based on broad societal generalizations. And as I can't imagine blacks, latinos, whatever are disproportionately as intelligent as whites, I find the generalizations to be bullshit (something we can all agree on), and therefore I see a problem in AA.

I'd also like to point out that Rick (in a moment of clairvoyance) said "AA programs [...] still do plenty of good to society." I have a funny feeling AA will do lots of good for Rick down the road. "Hi, my name is Rick, and I'm an alcoholic. COCK."

john, i think you misread the executive order. it states that "The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin" and then goes on to list the actions you listed. In other words, one must make sure that employees are hired, fired, etc without regard to their race, etc. it makes no sense to say that someone can be fired to make room for aa.

i think fatboy is dead on about how we educate children in terms of what is and what isn't their history. as for how to solve the anti-mexican managers in texas, there are mechanisms for suing organziations for unfair hiring practices. if you can show they discriminated unfairly amongst qualified candidates, you have a case. this does not translate into hiring certain individuals who are less qualified (if that be the case).

rick distinguishes between the idealism of anti-aa people and the folks who see the world for more of what it is and support aa. so we have a principle (race ought not be a factor in my being selected, hired, etc) that leads us to change, but we choose to enforce that principle for some while for others, we happily violate it. interesting.

chris, i had a similar experience. i went into the office of multi-ethnic student edcuation as a freshman and they told me to i wasn't welcome. they took one look at me and decided there was no way i was a student born outside the country to a south african mother and middle eastern father. i think these organizations thrive on division instead of collection. i never cared for any of the student groups (even those whose categories i fell into). i think we stop emphasizing what makes us different and start emphasizing what makes us the same.

i also think aa is insulting and condescending, especially at the college entrance level. it tells minority applicants that the university didn't really expect them to do that well so they lowered their standards. and when universities spout off about how it brings diversity to the university, it's essentially treating these students as a means to an end (of divesifying our all-too-white-male campus), which is yet another principle (namely, treating people as ends, not merely as means) we commonly hold yet set aside in the name of aa.

You're right, I misread it. Can't read. Affirmative action is supposed to ensure the eqaul treatment of all in a world where a number of people have no intention of treating everyone fairly.
Would many of the minority scholarships (especially private ones) exist if they weren't ear-marked for minorities? That is to say, supposing that BET had a scholarship program at UMD, do you think BET would bother to donate money if their were no assurance that an African American would receive it?

I saw Super Soakers used in Mexico as means to get tequila into the system quickly. Go figure...must be affirmative action

Since this is the BHM thread...go to the Albino Blacksheep box on the right side, and click the "DooDooCaCa" link.

Is anyone else bothered by the sight of MLK, wearing a loincloth, tribal dancing in a jungle?