Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Scott,

I wasn't saying you were whining, but there are people that DO whine about it, generally white people.

Yes, historicaly men have treated other men worse, but we are not talking in the whole scope of history we are talking of centuries of oppression in America becuase of race - primarily African.

Is discrimination wrong, is reverse discrimination wrong, yes to both. The point is, we can't please everyone and the best person SHOULD get the job or admission into the University but I don't find it wrong that a small percentage of primarily minority people get a little extra help if they are a victim of their environment (poverty or near poverty level for example)which they had no choice over.

The "hay whitey" thing was just a way to get a reaction -no "discrimination" was meant by it!!

 

My wife is from PR, and on one side, there were both slaves and slave owners. Does this mean that she owes herself reparations?

Also, my family was not here during slavery, and they were poor dirt farmers who never discriminated against anyone because of color.

So, I ask you again, what do I owe to anyone? Why should I be punished for being caucasian? Perhaps I should hyphenate my race, and I can get special treatment: That would make me Irish-Indian. So, what can I get whitey to give me?

 

Hope,

I agree that you or anyone else should not be "punished" for slavery. My point has always been that the opportunities that are now more readily available to minorities are more a result of the Civil Rights movement of the 60's, represented by MLK, than probably any one event in the last century.

It is a FACT even today throughout corporate America especially, that white males hold a higher percentage of management positions than do minority females - as an equal percentage of the population. So discrimination is still here, just not NEARLY to the extent prior to the Civil Rights movement.

Don't you agree the minorities have a greater opportunity now than during the pre-Civil Rights movement days? MLK represents those times and new freedoms awarded to those that never had it as good as caucasions enjoyed. It is not 100% equal but it is light years ahead of what it was before.

MLK may not and in fact was not a perfect man but he did do a lot for Civil Rights and not with violence and an in your face style or with mandatory government handouts that other so-called minority civil libertarians are so vocal about today.

This thread started out as a MLK thread, we got off base here a bit.

 

Tiiiiiiiiiime out! Yes it is a fact that white males hold a higher percentage of these positions. However that is NOT evidence that "discrimination is still here".

To prove that, you need to demonstrate that white males are being given these positions because they are white and not because they are more qualified or have not worked harder/smarter.

Further, if these stats were completely out of line with entrepeneurship then you might have a case. However they are not. In spite of favorable treatment of women and minorities, white men own most small businesses even after you consider that many couples choose to have the wife "own" 51% so that they can get minority favoritism.

Yes. But is that the right question?

Shouldn't we be asking if blacks would have done better simply assured of equal rights and responsibilities rather than quotas and affirmative action? As the police officer case illustrates, blacks have often been subject to the suspicion that they only got their position because of race.

I submit that this has been a hindrance to them.

There is no such thing as a "new freedom". Gov'ts do not grant/create rights nor freedoms. They either protect them or confiscate them.

In some ways yes... however the illegitimacy rate for blacks in the early 1960's was around 20%. It is now around 70%. The single best predictor of poverty, low school performance, illegitimacy, crime, drug use, alcohol abuse, etc in children is being in a single parent household headed by a mother.

I don't know if there is a provable direct link but black dependence on and trust of government action to accomplish "racial justice" directly parallels trends that demonstrate a loss of personal responsibility.

I believe in the long run we may find that most blacks would have been best served by only having their legitimate rights secured requiring them to do the heavy lifting... over a longer period... to overcome the disadvantages inherited from their oppressed forefathers.

 

Scott,

You're right on many points but affirmative action came MUCH later than the 60's. the Civil Rights movement resulted in new and sweeping legislation to minorities and harsher PENALTIES if rights were violated. I think it was the racist MINDSET that changed the most.

I should have said the racist MINDSET of today is far different than yester year. Is it still here yes it is. I have a big family and when we have get togthers (over 100 relatives at some picnics) the older ones are definately less tolerable of "non-whites" than the "under 40" crowd.

I perhaps should have asked if minorities are "better off" or more literate, BUT the opportunities awrded to them now are better than ever. HAve they capitolized on them? NO they have not as you so astutely pointed out.

America, especially the "uner 40" population is much more accepting and tolerable and accepting or minorities today than the under 40 crowd was say in the 50's.

This change of mindset I believe is a result of the 60's Civil Rights movement, not 100% a result of it, but surely it had a HUGE impact though. Do you agree with that?

 

I agree with that. Thanks for the graciousness as well.

I kind of got under my dad's skin awhile back on a related subject. He asked what I would do if my daughter brought a black boy home. I guess he thought he had really backed me into a corner... I told him that I would find out about his spiritual condition and character then have no problem with him that I wouldn't have with a white kid. Further, she would do much better dating a good Christian who happened to be black than an ungodly white kid.

Attitudes definitely take time to change but I do see alot of positives. The disappointing thing is that polls show a disparity between blacks and whites over whether most whites are still racist. Most whites think they aren't racist... most blacks think that most whites are.

 

Actually I don't quite agree with that... I am 41.

 

Shouldn't we be asking if blacks would have done better simply assured of equal rights and responsibilities rather than quotas and affirmative action? As the police officer case illustrates, blacks have often been subject to the suspicion that they only got their position because of race.

I was not going to comment on this thread anymore because I do not see the point, but I did want to comment on this. It seems you are forgetting that the reason affirmative action and quotas began in the first place was because simply assuring equal rights was NOT working. That is not to say anything about affirmative action now, but when it was instituted it WAS necessary. By your line of reasoning we would not even have needed the civil rights movement of the 60's. The 14th amendment was ratified in 1868, and by the 1960s, nearly one hundred years later, things were NOT better for black Americans. Reverse discrimination does not even compare to the racism that black Americans have, and still do, face everyday, in every aspect of their lives. Honestly, I do not even really feel for those who claim to have been affected by reverse discrimination because the majority of the time they cannot prove their claims. How do they know their test scores were higher? How do they know that the other candidates did not have better extracurricular activities? Why are they the better candidate? Because they are white and did not get accepted? That may seem cold, but so be it. Growing up I always heard the arguments against MLK and affirmative action and welfare, etc.etc. For a time I actually believed them. Now I KNOW better. I have seen racism first hand. I have seen the negative effects of preconceived notions and racial profiling. These things affect my family everyday, directly and indirectly. My husband has lived with it all his life, so will my children. I am on the outside looking in because I am white, but I have also learned that until someone experiences racism first hand AND it affects their family first hand they will NEVER understand. So I'm sorry, but IFBMole's statement was right. "HEY WHITEY-GET OVER IT".

 

Oh, I wanted to point out, for the record, that I was not referring to ScottJ's claim of reverse discrimination. My comment was purely general.

 

You can't prove that. It is a purely subjective assessment. To say that it would have been more difficult and halting in the beginning is not the same as saying that it was not working. I happen to believe that black people are equal and don't need special treatment. And I don't think that civil rights nor progress on racial issues has been served well by affirmative action. I believe far more problems were caused than solved.

That is not true in two regards. Things were better for blacks... not equal to whites but none the less better.

Secondly, people had used legal maneuvering to evade the spirit of the law. A correct was necessary.

It can in the life of the individual who suffers from it.

I knew the people who were favored over me. I knew their cadet ratings, gpa's, and test scores.

Because we shared them with each other openly... how naive we were.

There were only about 12 of us... we knew each other well.

Justice can't be served by being unjust out of revenge.

If most crime is committed by people in a given demographic, please explain why this is not a reasonable consideration when attempting to prevent crime. Crime disproportionately effects black people... is that desirable to ensure that the police aren't allowed to consider a person's appearance?

That's a pretty defeatist point of view.

NO. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Period.

I WON'T MISTREAT A PERSON BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR AND I WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY TYPE OF IMMORAL, RELATIVISTIC RATIONALIZATION FOR WHY I SHOULD NOT REASONABLY EXPECT THE SAME MEASURE OF JUSTICE.

As I have told you before, I wasn't born with a silver spoon... and I did overcome by pulling myself up by my own boot straps. So I will not accept the notion that I should be discriminated against because of my skin color because some other white person did it to a black person.

 

NO. Right is right and wrong is wrong. Period.

Yet, you believe racial profiling is okay? There are MANY black people who ARE NOT criminals who are GREATLY affected by racial profiling. Take a look at a recent BB thread on racial profiling for one of the latest incidents to affect my family, near the bottom of the third page. Yes, I am bitter about it. It was unnecessary and uncalled for, and just plain WRONG. I do not agree with racial profiling for any reason. Behavioral profiling, yes, racial profiling, NO.

BB Politics thread concerning racial profiling

I WON'T MISTREAT A PERSON BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR AND I WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY TYPE OF IMMORAL, RELATIVISTIC RATIONALIZATION FOR WHY I SHOULD NOT REASONABLY EXPECT THE SAME MEASURE OF JUSTICE.

As I have told you before, I wasn't born with a silver spoon... and I did overcome by pulling myself up by my own boot straps. So I will not accept the notion that I should be discriminated against because of my skin color because some other white person did it to a black person.

Totally missed my point. I was not defending reverse racism or discrimination of any kind. I do not accept discrimination of anyone, by anyone, for any reason. For the record I was not necessarily talking about you, or your situation. My comment was purely general in nature. I find it ironic how MANY, not all, white people will complain about injustices from reverse discrimination, but heaven forbid a black person even mention racism that exists today. Seems like a double standard to me. My point was along those lines. Reverse discrimination is WRONG, but it definitely not worse than other types of racism, nor is it as common. I also do not believe in reparations for slavery, or any type discrimination. I also do not believe that revenge needs to be taken for slavery. What's done is done. I just want TRUE equality for all, now.

 

Filmperson,

This rings sooooooo true:

"I find it ironic how MANY, not all, white people will complain about injustices from reverse discrimination, but heaven forbid a black person even mention racism that exists today."

I don't think any white person alive with breath doesn't believe racism isn't still here. Also I agree with your statement as very sobering and true.

What gets under a "whitey's" skin is when minorities (especially well-known ones in the media)use racism as the ROOT of ALL of America's problems and primarily THEIR problem of poverty, drunkedness, drugs, crime, AIDS, unability to get a job because "I'm not white" or can't get an education because the education is geared "for white folks".

Some, not all, minorities use racism as an excuse for all their problems

 

IFB Mole,

I could not agree with you more. I know MANY black Americans who have not used racism as an excuse for their problems. If it is used for anything at all, it is used as motivation. Even then, it is more of just an everyday experience. It is something you don't even think about, because you know it is going to happen. Now, that is not to say that all white people are racist. I am not implying that at all, and I know that is not true. It is just that certain things, such as being watched or followed in a store, are so commonplace that you know they are going to happen. Does that make it right? NO, but commonplace all the same. I just get tired of people talking about how black people need to "get over it", (slavery and racism), but then turn around and whine about reverse racism and affirmative action. Again, I am not necessarily talking about anyone in this thread, just in general terms. People are very quick to judge black Americans when they talk about the very real problem of racism and racial profiling, but they do not hold the same standard to themselves. Please notice that I did not say it is the "root" of all problems, but it is a problem nonetheless. Like I said in the profiling thread, the people who do not have problems with racial profiling are NOT the ones who are continuously labeled and profiled negatively. Yes, white people can be profiled, but no one can make a case for it being to the same extent, and severity, as black Americans, and now Arab Americans. I am at a place now where I understand the anger and frustration. It affects my family. I see it on a daily basis to varying degrees. Does that mean that we let it conquer us? NO, we accept it and move on. Still the anger and frustration remain. It is not right, and it is not equal, and it certainly does not constitute justice.

 

OK, think about this: A young black man who has the aptitude to be the best accountant in the last 10 years is accepted at a more prestigious law school because of AA, where he will be a mediocre lawyer at best. How much does he benefit?

Any time you put someone in a position for which he is not qualified, you are courting disaster.

In the example of management, how many of those men had dedicated their lives to their job, while those women dedicated their lives to their family? (Which they rightly should have, but it would take awy from their work record.)

Also, when I lived in DC, I knew a MD state trooper who was black. He had an incredibly high number of arrests because he could profile and not be called "racist". By the same token, as a white man, if I went into an all black neighborhood known for drug dealing, I should rightly be pulled over, even if I were there legitimately.

"Quota" is not the same thing as "equal", and "blindness" does not equal "justice".

 

That mindset might not be as public anymore but it happens in private. People don't want to be sued. The real solution is when God changes hearts.

 

Film, Hope, Rachel and Scott

Excellent posts, insightful and absoulutely true. I couldn't agree more.

The depth and pain of mans sin runs into the very fiber of our society. The "root" of society's woe's is not anything but man's sins.

As Christians we see the results of sin, the unconverted are blinded.

How important we win the lost and pray for a great Revival in America!!

I do appreciate the spirit and insight in these last couple of pages of this topic.

 

Not if race is the only consideration but the misnomer "racial profiling" often includes much more- clothes, mannerisms, behavior, etc. These legitimate reasons for suspicion have been swept up in the rush to avoid using race as a factor at all.

I don't think it would be out of bounds by the way to count as suspicious a white guy trolling a minority neighborhood where a serial child rapist was active.

We may again be closer than we thought on an issue. If race is the only consideration then I am opposed to that type of harassment.

Sorry. I took it that way. I need to learn to be more careful with you... we would probably make good friends face to face.

Of course it exists. It exists with white bigots... and with black people who would condemn your marriage.

Hopefully you know I am completely opposed to double standards. I genuinely don't believe that God draws a division between blacks and whites so I shouldn't either. It's really very stupid if you believe the Bible. We all are descendents of Noah. I think it was Colin Powell that called race a benign characteristic... I agree.

Probably not since there are simply alot more opportunities for racism against blacks. I have advertised job openings in Seattle and not gotten a single black applicant- same with the Chicago suburbs. Kind of tough to discriminate against a white applicant when all of them are white.

I have given some genuine thought to this.

If the choice is between affirmative action which punishes an individual white person for the actions of the whole society and government and reparations then the latter seems far more just to me.

I am not sure that it isn't legitimate to look at the economic results of slavery. The wealth of the nation in as much as it has been accummulated since the founding did benefit from slavery. I personally didn't. Further, capital availability is one of the greatest inhibitors to ending the wealth inequities and employment discrimination.

The objective in my mind should be to raise black property and business ownership. This puts them in a position to attain wealth... and the power to hire who they think is best. Reparations could be not only an immediate fix to this problem but also a long term investment in the economy as a whole.

More black owned businesses will have a dramatic effect on racial discrimination in employment.

Me too. But in as much as current capital difficulties are the result of 6 or 7 million slaves being "freed" without property or resource... something should be done.

 

Not if race is the only consideration but the misnomer "racial profiling" often includes much more- clothes, mannerisms, behavior, etc. These legitimate reasons for suspicion have been swept up in the rush to avoid using race as a factor at all.

I don't think it would be out of bounds by the way to count as suspicious a white guy trolling a minority neighborhood where a serial child rapist was active.

I agree, but I consider this more "behavior profiling", than racial profiling. A lot, not all, of the racial profiling, against black men, that occurs today follows the misnomer, "driving while black". For example, a black man or men driving a nice car or SUV on the interstate, or driving through affluent neighborhoods. This is entirely different from the arguments I am always given about white people in a known urban drug area. I consider the latter to be behavior profiling, not necessarily racial profiling. Like I said in the other thread, behavior profiling is much more effective and reliable than simple racial profiling.

Sorry. I took it that way. I need to learn to be more careful with you... we would probably make good friends face to face.

Yes, we probably would. When I reread my post, this morning, I realized I may have come off a little harsh, sorry about that.

Of course it exists. It exists with white bigots... and with black people who would condemn your marriage.

agree 100%

Hopefully you know I am completely opposed to double standards. I genuinely don't believe that God draws a division between blacks and whites so I shouldn't either. It's really very stupid if you believe the Bible. We all are descendents of Noah. I think it was Colin Powell that called race a benign characteristic... I agree.

Again, I agree 100%, and the comment about double standards was not directed at you. It is more of a common theme I have noticed. I admit, I get frustrated when I hear white people say "What's the big deal, slavery ended two hundred years ago, get over it already", because slavery isn't the issue. The real issue is the bigotry, inequality, and injustices that were allowed to continue. I find myself reminding people that the significant turning point in race relations, between white and black, in this country, didn't occur until fairly recently in our history. Forty years may seem like a long time, but it took time for the changes to settle in and take effect. I think Rachel said it best when she said it has to be change of the heart.

I have given some genuine thought to this.

If the choice is between affirmative action which punishes an individual white person for the actions of the whole society and government and reparations then the latter seems far more just to me....

I have also. In theory reparations are a just idea. I just do not consider them practical. For one slave records were often incomplete, and after the war many slaves changed their names. The black population in America is very diverse and I think it would be difficult to verify descendants of slavery. However, just because it is not practical does not mean the government couldn't at least make an apology, IMO. I understand the arguments that slavery was not against the law so why the apology, but again, it is not an apology for slavery, in and of itself, but the inequality and injustice that stemmed from it.

As far as affirmative action is concerned I am not convinced that it is a relevant issue today. I believe it was back in 2000 that the idea of eliminating AA was toyed with and after some debate was forgotten. At that time, and even today, there was a split in the Black community over this issue. I believe you will find that many in my generation want to be considered on merits alone. On the other hand, many in the older generations, who remember life without AA, are apprehensive about doing away with it, mainly out of fear, IMO.

The objective in my mind should be to raise black property and business ownership.

Again, I agree with this 100%.

Me too. But in as much as current capital difficulties are the result of 6 or 7 million slaves being "freed" without property or resource... something should be done.

I agree. I just worry about the practicality of it. I do think an apology would go a long way in the black community, if nothing else, though.

 

OK, how about some thoughts on the following situations. I have lived in several different cities, managing stores. As such, I have been involved in diverse situations.

In one place, they tried to ban those loud thumping stereos, but that was deemed "racist" and lawsuits were brought on behalf of the poor, disenfranchised black people because they can't offend us in our homes. (This was in a city that was 30% black, btw.)

In two other places, those stereos were banned, but they could not bring lawsuits because one of them was 70% black and the other one was 90% "minority". Since it was blacks making the laws, the laws weren't racist, but the laws were identical.

This is my problem with racial profiling. Just because someone is black, they are more likely to get a free ride out of fear of reprisals from race baiting groups.

In one place, they stiffened the penalities for littering. One group filed a lawsuit because that law woule "unfairly" affect minorities, but in the same newspaper, there was a public official that was being blasted as being "racist" because he was commenting on all the trash that the blacks were throwing on the ground.

I believe in fairness. I believe in equal opportunity (but not equal outcome). However, affirmative action and other quota schemes are not fair, nor are they equal.

And to re-ask my earlier question, does my wife need to pay herself reparations?

 

Hope,

First, you said your wife was Puerto Rican, not a black American DESCENDED from a slave. This is the problem with the practicality of reparations.

Secondly, and to be honest, I did not reply to your scenarios because I found them to be a bit stereotypical. For example, loud stereos are not confined to black Americans nor is it something that is predominantly black. On any given day, I can drive in my car and hear everything from rap and hip-hop, to rock and alternative, to country blaring on car radios of all races. This is true not only for Orlando, but also Lexington, Louisville, Columbus, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Miami, Ocala, Kissimmee, Raleigh, Ida (MI), Toledo, Westminster, Westchester, Baltimore, Richmond, Charleston, and DC (all places I have visited in the past year and a half). Please provide citations for these cases you have presented, and then I will respond. I would like to read them in detail.

As far as racial profiling is concerned, again back up your comment documentation. How exactly are Black Americans getting a free ride? The last time I checked Black Americans are Disproportionately represented in the prison population. If you really want to dive into crime stats, lets compare DUI's and drug possession. Which race is more likely to be arrested on drug possession charges? Black. Which race is responsible for approximately 78% of DUI's? White males. IMO, DUI's are just, if not more, dangerous than drug possession, however, DUI's are typically charged as misdemeanors with sentences involving fines, license suspension, and probation. Care to guess about drug possession? They are typically charged as felonies with mandatory incarceration. Now is this a clear black and white issue? Probably not. What is also interesting to note is that DUI offenders are commonly middle-class, and the majority of drug possession offenders are low income. So, socioeconomics is another key factor, as is urban vs. rural. Studies have shown that crime is more actively prosecuted in urban areas, mainly because they have more resources to do so.

Let's look at the history marijuana policy. Before the 60's marijuana was perceived as the drug of choice for black jazz musicians, (as noted in the files of Harry Anslinger head of FBI Narcotics for three decades). He kept a file "Marijuana and Musicians". In, I believe, 1950, The Boggs Act, which set mandatory sentences for 1st time marijuana possession with 2-5 years incarceration, was passed. By the 60's, JFK and Johnson set up commissions to study the "prevailing assumption of a direct link between marijuana and violent crime or heroin use". I wonder why? Could it possibly be that many young middle class white American college students were being arrested for marijuana possession? The 1970 Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act differentiated marijuana from other narcotics and lowered federal penalties for possession. The states followed suit. Do you know the sad part, though? Racial disparity still existed. Take Milwaukee, during this time frame, for example. In the city it was a misdemeanor, resulting criminal records. In the outlying suburbs, it was an ordinance violation, resulting only in a ticket and fine. There are many sources of information on these and other crime issues, such as the death penalty. I suggest the research of Marc Mauer, or the DC based group The Sentencing Project. There are many others if you are interested.

Now I am not excusing criminal behavior, crime is crime, and should be punished; but I do acknowledge racial disparities when they are present. I certainly do not agree with the "free ride" notion you have presented. Like I said before, behavior profiling is one thing, racial profiling is completely different. Also as I have said in other threads, black Americans may be the majority of the prison population, but the majority of black Americans are law abiding citizens.

As far as your comments about littering. Again, provide documentation. Also, the public official should be blasted about being racist if he commented on all the trash "blacks" were throwing on the ground. I seriously doubt that blacks are the only, or the predominant, littering offenders in said city.