Nubblies.net Forums - Wtf Did You Google To End Up Here? - View Single Post

11-26-2002, 03:21 AM

If you read nothing else, read this -

We as a society can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality.

Since Affirmative Action is always in the news, this seemed like the best place for this post.

This post is long, we don't need you to make a post stating the obvious, if you don't want to read it, than don't. Hopefully this post will fuel some intelligent, thoughtful disccusion on the subject. I've presented both sides to the topic, and mine, and hopefully you shall post yours.

If you don't know what affirmative action is -Affirmative Action are programs that take special measures to recruit, hire, train, and upgrade members of groups that have suffered have from past discrimination.

Affirmative Action basically results in racial quotas, but here is the not so short of it...

The Civil Rights Movement made great leaps in breaking down discrimination against African Americans and other minority groups. Throughout the country discriminatory practices were struck down by courts at all levels. Minorities in America have moved past equal rights and past equal opportunity, they now seek equal results. The vehicle by which this is being done is Affirmative Action. In the aftermath of World War II and the Civil Rights Movement, Affirmative Action was a tool which helped minorities get into fields they might not have otherwise been able too. But in a more modern society, the question has been asked: Is Affirmative Action a desirable policy to remedy discrimination?

Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the Nation Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense Fund, presents the case in favor of affirmative action. He states that Affirmative Action is a moderate, effective remedy for exclusion, to achieve equality that is real and not illusory. Affirmative Action, he contends, has worked well. Millions of men and women have been provided an equal opportunity in employment, education, and housing because of affirmative action. Mr. Shaw also brings light to the fact that women and persons of color is still a tragic fact of life in America. Lastly, he claims that both Affirmative Action programs to remedy discrimination and programs to address poverty and economic disadvantage continue to be necessary to overcome this country’s history of gender-based and race-based exclusion and to achieve meaningful opportunity for all.

Mr. Brian W. Jones, president of the Washington, D.C. think tank the Center for New Black Leadership, presents the case against Affirmative Action was justified when it was initiated thirty years ago but today it does more harm than good. The modern beneficiaries of racial preferences tend to be individuals likely possessing the requisite advantages to compete effectively without the taint of preference. He also says that the cost of preference policies can be measured in terms of (a) the social discord created between preferred and non preferred groups, and among the preferred groups; (b) the opportunity cost of mismatched minority talent and capital; and (c) the economic cost to employers of complying with affirmative action mandates. The inexorable trend of preference policies in America, as everywhere else in the world where they have been tried, is to ceaselessly elevate new groups to preferred status. All in all, Mr. Jones states, “I maintain that government-imposed preferential policies based upon race and gender, whether in the employment or education context, presently do a great deal more social harm than good.”

I believe that we can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality. I am firmly against discrimination of all sorts, but we already have laws in place to combat such acts. The only purpose Affirmative Action really seeks is to establish racial quotas, which have been repeatedly stuck down in cases by the Supreme Court.

Affirmative Action is in a large sense, simply reverse discrimination. We have fought for years to get equal rights guaranteed to minorities. Now though, instead of being equal, we must elevate the minorities above the majority, in hopes to balance biases. That is a gross distortion of what civil rights leaders fought for. We must eliminate barriers between people, not build them. Affirmative Action only does the latter. Affirmative Action may seem beneficial in the short run, but we are simply forcing equality. To obtain true and longstanding equality it must be achieved, not forced. The nature of employment has been changed from the notion that race would not be a determining factor in employment, that Affirmative Action means that it most certainly will.

We must firmly support all discrimination laws. Such laws make the playing field even and eliminate preferences, which are a root cause of discrimination in the first place. If black person is applying for a job and does not get it over a lesser-qualified person, than racial discrimination could have taken place, so we use the current laws to rectify the situation. The only thing honestly left for Affirmative Action to do is to elevate an under qualified person to a position they should not have otherwise had. Regardless of it’s intended purpose, quotas are the result of Affirmative Action. Again, we can never obtain equality through inequality.

What would happen when the Caucasian majority no longer exists? Do we switch the tables around and apply Affirmative Action to whites? Instead of a futile and ineffective game of preferences, why do we not simply make the playing field equal in all aspects and let discrimination laws serve their purpose.

As a whole, Affirmative Action only leads to discrimination itself. It builds barriers that only separate and lead to inequalities. Affirmative Action laws as a whole are simply doing more harm than they are help. We must look at the big picture and let equal opportunity, not forced immediate results, rule. We can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality.

What are your thoughts?

[This message has been edited by pliedes (edited November 26, 2002).]

11-26-2002, 03:21 AM	#1 (permalink)
pliedes Guest Posts: n/a	If you read nothing else, read this - We as a society can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality. Since Affirmative Action is always in the news, this seemed like the best place for this post. This post is long, we don't need you to make a post stating the obvious, if you don't want to read it, than don't. Hopefully this post will fuel some intelligent, thoughtful disccusion on the subject. I've presented both sides to the topic, and mine, and hopefully you shall post yours. If you don't know what affirmative action is -Affirmative Action are programs that take special measures to recruit, hire, train, and upgrade members of groups that have suffered have from past discrimination. Affirmative Action basically results in racial quotas, but here is the not so short of it... The Civil Rights Movement made great leaps in breaking down discrimination against African Americans and other minority groups. Throughout the country discriminatory practices were struck down by courts at all levels. Minorities in America have moved past equal rights and past equal opportunity, they now seek equal results. The vehicle by which this is being done is Affirmative Action. In the aftermath of World War II and the Civil Rights Movement, Affirmative Action was a tool which helped minorities get into fields they might not have otherwise been able too. But in a more modern society, the question has been asked: Is Affirmative Action a desirable policy to remedy discrimination? Theodore M. Shaw, associate director-counsel of the Nation Association for the Advancement of Colored People Legal Defense Fund, presents the case in favor of affirmative action. He states that Affirmative Action is a moderate, effective remedy for exclusion, to achieve equality that is real and not illusory. Affirmative Action, he contends, has worked well. Millions of men and women have been provided an equal opportunity in employment, education, and housing because of affirmative action. Mr. Shaw also brings light to the fact that women and persons of color is still a tragic fact of life in America. Lastly, he claims that both Affirmative Action programs to remedy discrimination and programs to address poverty and economic disadvantage continue to be necessary to overcome this country’s history of gender-based and race-based exclusion and to achieve meaningful opportunity for all. Mr. Brian W. Jones, president of the Washington, D.C. think tank the Center for New Black Leadership, presents the case against Affirmative Action was justified when it was initiated thirty years ago but today it does more harm than good. The modern beneficiaries of racial preferences tend to be individuals likely possessing the requisite advantages to compete effectively without the taint of preference. He also says that the cost of preference policies can be measured in terms of (a) the social discord created between preferred and non preferred groups, and among the preferred groups; (b) the opportunity cost of mismatched minority talent and capital; and (c) the economic cost to employers of complying with affirmative action mandates. The inexorable trend of preference policies in America, as everywhere else in the world where they have been tried, is to ceaselessly elevate new groups to preferred status. All in all, Mr. Jones states, “I maintain that government-imposed preferential policies based upon race and gender, whether in the employment or education context, presently do a great deal more social harm than good.” I believe that we can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality. I am firmly against discrimination of all sorts, but we already have laws in place to combat such acts. The only purpose Affirmative Action really seeks is to establish racial quotas, which have been repeatedly stuck down in cases by the Supreme Court. Affirmative Action is in a large sense, simply reverse discrimination. We have fought for years to get equal rights guaranteed to minorities. Now though, instead of being equal, we must elevate the minorities above the majority, in hopes to balance biases. That is a gross distortion of what civil rights leaders fought for. We must eliminate barriers between people, not build them. Affirmative Action only does the latter. Affirmative Action may seem beneficial in the short run, but we are simply forcing equality. To obtain true and longstanding equality it must be achieved, not forced. The nature of employment has been changed from the notion that race would not be a determining factor in employment, that Affirmative Action means that it most certainly will. We must firmly support all discrimination laws. Such laws make the playing field even and eliminate preferences, which are a root cause of discrimination in the first place. If black person is applying for a job and does not get it over a lesser-qualified person, than racial discrimination could have taken place, so we use the current laws to rectify the situation. The only thing honestly left for Affirmative Action to do is to elevate an under qualified person to a position they should not have otherwise had. Regardless of it’s intended purpose, quotas are the result of Affirmative Action. Again, we can never obtain equality through inequality. What would happen when the Caucasian majority no longer exists? Do we switch the tables around and apply Affirmative Action to whites? Instead of a futile and ineffective game of preferences, why do we not simply make the playing field equal in all aspects and let discrimination laws serve their purpose. As a whole, Affirmative Action only leads to discrimination itself. It builds barriers that only separate and lead to inequalities. Affirmative Action laws as a whole are simply doing more harm than they are help. We must look at the big picture and let equal opportunity, not forced immediate results, rule. We can never, and will never, obtain equality through inequality. What are your thoughts? [This message has been edited by pliedes (edited November 26, 2002).]
pliedes Guest Posts: n/a