Jon Stewart on white privilege (cc: unnamed posters... etc.)

[One Brow]

This is based on the assumption that everyone who benefits from AA. I find this stance interesting from someone who goes on and on about "human nature" all the time.

The vast majority of that next generation is still growing up with all the same crap that their parents dealt with. AA did not change any of that. AA can't.

I don't think everyone benefits from affirmative action. Some people are better at adapting to culture change than others. My whole point in bringing up human nature is that we are all, to a large degree, products of our environments. Some of us adapt more to the environments we experience as adults, some stay primarily the product of their childhood, but we all come from our environments.

Changing a culture is a slow, laborious task.

 

[Stoked]

I don't think everyone benefits from affirmative action. Some people are better at adapting to culture change than others. My whole point in bringing up human nature is that we are all, to a large degree, products of our environments. Some of us adapt more to the environments we experience as adults, some stay primarily the product of their childhood, but we all come from our environments.

Changing a culture is a slow, laborious task.

I absolutely agree. But AA is not capable of accomplishing that. It is a farce that is intended, imo, pacify those that need help the most while actually changing nothing about the system or our culture. It's like winning the lottery. Great for that single person but it does nothing to change the culture.

So I agree that our enviroment produces who we are and that enviroment remains unchanged.

 

[One Brow]

I absolutely agree. But AA is not capable of accomplishing that. It is a farce that is intended, imo, pacify those that need help the most while actually changing nothing about the system or our culture. It's like winning the lottery. Great for that single person but it does nothing to change the culture.

So I agree that our enviroment produces who we are and that enviroment remains unchanged.

We agree that affirmative action, alone, will not accomplish this goal. I disagree that it does nothing, but I don't think there is any good data to be had either way. I strongly disagree that it's like winning the lottery, because 1) there is still a great deal of competition, and 2) there is no such thing as a specific percentage of blacks that a company is expected to hire (this is constitutionally forbidden).

 

[Stoked]

We agree that affirmative action, alone, will not accomplish this goal. I disagree that it does nothing, but I don't think there is any good data to be had either way. I strongly disagree that it's like winning the lottery, because 1) there is still a great deal of competition, and 2) there is no such thing as a specific percentage of blacks that a company is expected to hire (this is constitutionally forbidden).

Not on any books or records you can find. But we both know it happens. All the time in fact. If you want some ideas on what I think would help where AA cannot, here is a link:

https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php...ation-towards-blacks-in-US-police-departments

Post #10. Keep in mind I was on Xanax at the time so forgive any errors.

 

[LogGrad98]

What form do you think such data would take? I don't think we have the usual access-to-affirmative-action vs. no-access-to-affirmative-action groups.

IMO this is a problem with AA. There is no way to show whether it works or not. We can use anecdotal data, talk about the guy that got into that one college or the woman that got that one job, and try to argue that increased enrollment or employment rates are due to AA. But with no way to really measure the impact, positive or negative, it is shooting in the dark. There is no way to tell that AA directly caused any of those things and not just a change in policy or management. And no way to show that AA caused the change in policy or management.

 

[TroutBum]

Since I wasn't here to answer this abortion of a thread, I'll just sum up my thoughts:

Go **** yourself, Homie.

 

[LogGrad98]

https://screen.yahoo.com/buzzfeed/jose-vs-joe-164424039.html?vp=1

 

[TroutBum]

I tried that and took a letter off my name; Ong Dong.

I still haven't landed that porn role yet.

 

[LogGrad98]

The problem is you used the same resume.

 

[moevillini]

The problem is you used the same resume.

and probably included photos of poop thinking they wouldn't know the difference....

 

[One Brow]

[LogGrad98 thinks if is untrue that] That the majority of white people would actively have a preference for black people to be kept on a lower power level.

https://www.wnd.com/2014/08/savage-feds-arming-for-war-on-white-people/

It's not that Savage wants black people kept on a lower level, he's just scared that the white people are going to have the government turn on them, so he wants to protect white people.

I know it seems like a totally far-off position, except he's actually a fairly popular radio host with a sizable following.

 

[TroutBum]

https://www.wnd.com/2014/08/savage-feds-arming-for-war-on-white-people/

It's not that Savage wants black people kept on a lower level, he's just scared that the white people are going to have the government turn on them, so he wants to protect white people.

I know it seems like a totally far-off position, except he's actually a fairly popular radio host with a sizable following.

Wow, did you really just use Michael Savage and a link to wnd "news" as your evidence? /sigh