- Joined
- Dec 24, 2005
- Messages
- 4,736
- Reaction score
- 824
- Location
- South Dakota
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
What is reverse racism? Racism is just technically discrimination based upon the person's skin-colour, so I don't see how it can be "reverse racism" unless you mean anti-racist.reverse racism
Do you mean people with white-skin? I don't think people should be categorized as "white" or "black" or "red" or whatever, because of the pigment of their skin. For instance I consider myself human. Many would consider me to be Norwegian/German/Dutch/Danish/Gypsy/Jewish, but I've never been to Norway, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, Israel, or Gypsyland, lol, well, the Gypsies orginally came from India, through Arabia and now just wander around Europe, mostly the Eastern part. So why is one catgorized as "African-American" if one has never been to Africa? Why are they often separated from "American"? Another question is, other than being human, what "race" am I supposed to be considered? Indo-European? Indo-Caucasian? Asiatic-Caucasian? I don't understand why humans tend to consider themselves from somewhere they've never been.white people
Comrade Brian said:What is reverse racism? Racism is just technically discrimination based upon the person's skin-colour, so I don't see how it can be "reverse racism" unless you mean anti-racist.
Comrade Brian said:I don't think people should be categorized as "white" or "black" or "red" or whatever, because of the pigment of their skin.
bandaidwoman said:While we are at it, let's get rid of legacy admissions to universities since it discriminates against the less connected middle to lower class people. (or us poor folks.)
Blacks are not the only beneficiaries of affirmative action. Right now there is affirmative action for caucasions (rather than Asians such as myself or Indians) in the hard physical sciences such as physics and chemistry. I believe there were only two caucasian males in a sea of asians and Indians in my graduate quantum mechanics and Inorganic chem class.
FinnMacCool said:I'm against affirmative action because I think that race should have no bearing on what chances you have of getting a job.
:
They found that the "White" applicants they created received one response--a call, letter or e-mail--for every 10 resumes mailed, while "Black" applicants with equal credentials received one response for every 15 resumes sent.
The study authors, including University of Chicago associate professor of economics Marianne Bertrand, said the results can solely be attributed to name manipulation.
"Our results so far suggest that there is a substantial amount of discrimination in the job recruiting process," they wrote.
ptsdkid said:Welcome aboard ROCenter:
I'm actually a bit surprised to see the polling here going the way toward common sense for a change.
Affirmative Action (Quotas) are of course reverse discrimination. Equal Opportunity is completely different than Equal Rights. There is no such thing as equal rights, or there shouldn't be. To assume equal rights through quotas is to set a program (socialism) into effect where everyone becomes a clone of one another. Competition is thus eliminated; the desire to progress is thwarted; ambition is stymied, and a weakened psycological mindset of unionized failures becomes embedded into our society.
Quotas leaves out those possessing the highest IQ's--thus dilutes and weakens the many professional genres that make up our thriving economy. Perhaps these unqualified affirmative action types should get a starting job flipping burgers at McDonalds where they could learn the value of minimum wage as it pertains to their qualifications in life. Once these so-called victims of society learn to hold out their hand to an ever compassionate Uncle Sam--the liberal welfare legacy will continue to dominate.
These quota whores would have competition at McDonalds in securing their starting minimum pay job, because there are teenagers out there like my highly energetic 16 year old son who is looking for part time work at places like Mickey Dee's.
RightOfCenter said:Anti-racist? How is giving someone a job based on their race anything but racist? Giving someone a job or a spot in at a university based on race is the epitemy of racism and is just as bad as a restaraunt serving only black people or a golf course not admitting women.
As nice an idea as that it is most people realize that it's not true. Unfortunately TV, movies, and music are constantly portraying most black characters as gangsters or felons and most white people as rich, well off suburbanites.
hipsterdufus said:Affirmative action is one of the most misunderstood civil rights issue of our time. It's a common misconception that quotas and affirmative action are the same thing. They're not. Affirmative action is a tool to promote diversity and fix inequalities in the workplace. AA legislation is designed to end discrimination in the workplace against women and minorities. AA looks for problems, sets markers to correct them and when the discrimination is corrected AA is eliminated at that workplace.
I think Katrina helped to show that it's not a level playing field out there.
Calm2Chaos said:But don't tell me I have to hire you because of your race, thats horseshit
As a businessman It would seem the smartest thing to do is to hire the people that are most qualified and that fit into your organization the best. I am there to make money, and if your good at what you do and are a team player then I don't care what friggin color you are.
bandaidwoman said:You did not read my thread, I do not have to hire someone because of his race, it is not a quota. How do I know? Because I live and breath it everyday. I want to have the best and most successful business practice and practioners so I hire the best. Yes I do have blacks and one Cambodian but there were superiorly qualified. I don't have any hispanics despite a large hispanic population here because none of them were qualified for the job. The ACLU is not breathing down my back. Why, because I did not turn down an qualified hispanic for an less qualified black or white person. (My office manager keeps all resumes of every applicant for five years.)
Those are my sentiments exactly.:mrgreen: and that is how I practice.
So let me reiterate, affirmative action in the work place is not there to fill a quota, it is to address and correct obvious discriminatory practices (like if I hired only women because I was a man hater or only whites etc.) Only those who are utterly ignorant of hiring practices (ie: non business owners or human resource personell) should not be telling those of us ( who hire and fire on a regular basis) what affirmative action is or isn't. I know what it is in practice and it sure isn't this quota nonsense everybody keeps spewing out.
Calm2Chaos said:First off I never said it was a quota and I didn't mean to infer at any point that it was. But if I am a private business owner with no government contracts I see no reason I can't hire anyone I want. If I want to only hire asians that should be my right as a private business owner. Lets face it your probably not going to be in business hiring based on color and letting the qualified aplicants go. I personally think the concept is completely absurd. I am going to not hire you because of your color even though your going to make me more money then the other guy. But if you want to **** your money and business away that would seem up to you. It just seems to be basic common sense. But I have no doubt there are people out there that still lack that skill....
bandaidwoman said:Since racism is still rampant in the South, a private bigotted business owner has every right to reject a black who may be more qualified because he just doesn't like his blackness?
Should I disqualify you from a partnership track because you are male even though you bring in the revenue? And you would have no recourse if I my only reason for not advancing you up the corporate ladder is your maleness?
bandaidwoman said:But make no bones about it, all business owners make decisons that will profit her company, there is too much crap that brings us down to do so otherwise.
The problem is, how is a educated qualified black man supposed to compete against the inherent racism that still exists (and I posted my study about black names). Caucasians whine about black folks not working and finding jobs...well , if the South had it their way, none of the fine educated blacks would be working except in small pockets such as my business.
Calm2Chaos said:I think this is a stereotype. And I think if you look in any large company based in the south you will find well qualified black men and woman in important rolls.
bandaidwoman said:Thanks to affirmative action. It's an insult to the blacks here to say that the idea of racism is just a stereotype here. I have quite a few patients who refuse to see the black doctor (graduated 4th at Stanford Medical school ) because he is black. I have white patients who insist black nurses call them sir but not the white nurses etc. I'm still called a gook.
In essence you are saying as a person in a positon of power, (business owner) you have every right to excercise your prejudice? The business owners here will choose an equally qualified white over equally qualified blacks anytime. White restaurant owners can only ask for white clientelle? Where does it stop? Once again. look at my study showing equivalent job resumes where blacks were called in for an interview 50% of the time less.
that is the problem with libertarianism, in the ideal world this would be fine but prejudice is still rampant and we need to deal with it
Calm2Chaos said:Do you actually think AA does anything whatsoever to curb prejudice or racism? Forcing someone to do something they don't want to doesn't stop the problem, it just buries it under a new name. Not sure how much I want to work for someone that dispises me anyway, seems like a pretty shitty work environment.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:OF COURSE reverse-racism programs, affectionately called "affirmative action" by their fans, are quota systems. They may not have quota's defined explicitly, but once the legal hacks and the activist judges get done, it invariably turns out that the only way to determine if the RR program is "effective" is by counting heads and looking at skin, or religion, or whatever the scam is supposed to be.
====
Reminds me of a tale a former employer told about his father, who owned a small factory. In the early 70's a group of poverty pimps came to him and told him that he didn't have a racially balanced workforce and that if he didn't adjust things so that he had twelve blacks on the staff, they'd shut him down in court.
The owner thought a bit, and called his secretary in. "I want every black employee in my office, NOW!"
Once all the staff was culled, there were 13 black employees in the boss's office. He looked at them, jerked a thumb at the poverty pimps, and said "these clowns say I must have 12 black employess. There's 13 of you. Which one of you should I fire?"
The thirteen employees didn't react sympathetically to the suggestion, and they properly directed their ire against the poverty pimps, who left. No one was fired.
An apocryphal tale, with absolutely no referential grounding, but amusing.
bandaidwoman said:Nice tale yes indeedy....... But once again, AA is not a quota so the boss would have won in court.
This is exactly what the hispanic that sued my office thought (I have no hispanics despite a community with a high percentage of them). I did not hire her because she was not qualified compared to the black or white equivalent resume. So AA saved my ass.
Scarecrow Akhbar said:Can someone now explain where on earth the government gets the authority to tell private individuals who they can and cannot hire?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?