[General Battuta]

Those attitudes can and will change over time, but preferential treatment isn't going to help change it.  Preferential treatment is just going to make people angry.

EDIT:  And sure, there aren't that many black engineers.  There also aren't that many white American basketball players in the NBA.  Implicit discrimination works both ways.

Can you go back and read my first post in the thread?

People keep leaping at shadows - or, in this case, assertions that were never made.

In this case, however, affirmative action may help bootstrap the disadvantaged into better socioeconomic conditions, helping expose everyone to educated, successful Black individuals. These people might otherwise be trapped in poverty. (All that said, I think that class-based, rather than race-based, assistance is a much better route.)

While your NBA example is definitely a good one, I think we can agree that basketball player, a position in which one is bought, sold, and traded on the basis of physical abilities, is not really a great example of Black empowerment.  

[Colonol Dekker]

Any major league sport has that flaw....

[General Battuta]

Also, just to revisit an earlier point, I want to point out that the reason Stealth's commentary on the article is flawed is because it ignores the existence of power dynamics.

For example, there are no lists of the 'top 25 influential White Americans' because influence is historically, and by default, concentrated in the hands of White individuals. There's no benefit from calling attention to it, no negative stereotype that needs to be brought down.

[Stealth]

Trashman, did you see my earlier post in this thread? Racism and discrimination *are* rampant in parts of this country. There are places where blacks can't even buy certain houses, let alone work certain jobs.

No, i disagree.  If a black man tried buying a house, and had all his cards lined up (i.e. he had the credit, etc.) and he was denied it, then there is NO WAY that would fly these days.  Are you kidding?  Sharpton and Jackson would be on that like a duck on a beetle.  THAT would make yahoo.com's front page news right there.

The only way a black can't purchase certain houses in this country these days is when he/she can't afford it.  And that's got nothing to do with his/her race.

If you have the money, ain't no way someone's going to prevent you purchasing a certain house.  no way.

[Blue Lion]

No, i disagree.  If a black man tried buying a house, and had all his cards lined up (i.e. he had the credit, etc.) and he was denied it, then there is NO WAY that would fly these days.  Are you kidding?  Sharpton and Jackson would be on that like a duck on a beetle.  THAT would make yahoo.com's front page news right there.

The only way a black can't purchase certain houses in this country these days is when he/she can't afford it.  And that's got nothing to do with his/her race.

If you have the money, ain't no way someone's going to prevent you purchasing a certain house.  no way.

Hate to break it to you, but that happens all the time. The idea that racism is more or less gone is nuts.

[Polpolion]

Moreover, nearly everyone is racist on a subconscious level - we all maintain stereotypic associations between Black individuals and violence, crime, poverty, and stupidity. Until those are gone, the problem is nowhere near solved.

The problem is, I don't think that this is a very solvable issue because of the very fact that it's subconscious. Persuading someone is one thing, but to change the way their mind works is another.

Not at all. Most people no longer show subconscious associations with respect to, say, Irish Catholics. These would likely have been very prevalent earlier in this century, but now, they've nearly vanished.

These things can change.

These things can indeed change, but I don't think that it's nearly that quick in most cases. Otherwise, I'm at a loss as to why there has been racism and sexism for thousands of years, and compared to the issue with Irish Catholics being cleared up within almost a single century.

Granted, I was never taught much about the psychology of stereotyping, and what little I was taught is likely wrong, I think comparing the racism between black persons and white persons to prejudice against Irish Catholics seems a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

[Blue Lion]

To just double up on what I was saying before and to give some background. I live just outside Baltimore. If you don't know, Baltimore is 65% black and 35% white. Baltimore County, where I live (about 15 miles from the city itself) is almost reversed. 75% white and 20% black.

I have seen some really racist people on both sides of the line, and enough of them that I know it isn't just a few bad apples.

Whites ***** about blacks ruining areas and blacks ***** about whites keeping them down. But believe me, the racism IS there.

[iamzack]

Trashman, did you see my earlier post in this thread? Racism and discrimination *are* rampant in parts of this country. There are places where blacks can't even buy certain houses, let alone work certain jobs.

No, i disagree.  If a black man tried buying a house, and had all his cards lined up (i.e. he had the credit, etc.) and he was denied it, then there is NO WAY that would fly these days.  Are you kidding?  Sharpton and Jackson would be on that like a duck on a beetle.  THAT would make yahoo.com's front page news right there.

The only way a black can't purchase certain houses in this country these days is when he/she can't afford it.  And that's got nothing to do with his/her race.

If you have the money, ain't no way someone's going to prevent you purchasing a certain house.  no way.

Actually, this happened to my family a few years ago when we first moved to North Carolina. The Realtor wouldn't sell us a house because she thought we were black based on our last name. She told us this. The house was in the white part of town, and we had more than enough money to buy it (in fact shortly after we bought that house, we bought several other ones in town).

These things can indeed change, but I don't think that it's nearly that quick in most cases. Otherwise, I'm at a loss as to why there has been racism and sexism for thousands of years, and compared to the issue with Irish Catholics being cleared up within almost a single century.

Granted, I was never taught much about the psychology of stereotyping, and what little I was taught is likely wrong, I think comparing the racism between black persons and white persons to prejudice against Irish Catholics seems a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

It probably has something to do with the fact that you can't look at a person and know they are an Irish Catholic, whereas it's usually obvious if someone is black/white or male/female.

[jdjtcagle]

Trashman, did you see my earlier post in this thread? Racism and discrimination *are* rampant in parts of this country. There are places where blacks can't even buy certain houses, let alone work certain jobs.

No, i disagree.  If a black man tried buying a house, and had all his cards lined up (i.e. he had the credit, etc.) and he was denied it, then there is NO WAY that would fly these days.  Are you kidding?  Sharpton and Jackson would be on that like a duck on a beetle.  THAT would make yahoo.com's front page news right there.

The only way a black can't purchase certain houses in this country these days is when he/she can't afford it.  And that's got nothing to do with his/her race.

If you have the money, ain't no way someone's going to prevent you purchasing a certain house.  no way.

Actually, I've also seen this happen around here and a lot.  Blacks will be denied the house because they couldn't in "good conscience" sell them the house.  Also I've seen it with whites in a predominately black neighborhood.

[Liberator]

I think what's being missed is that these so-called "minority groups" are just as biased, if not more so, than the average white person.  And unlike the average white person, won't get called on it.

People are biased, it's just the way it is.  Opinions are like noses, everyone has one unless there's be a severe incident to remove it.

[General Battuta]

What does 'biased' mean? You act like it's some kind of fluid that fills up in a tank in people's heads.

Given that racial prejudice has apparently decreased sharply in the past fifty years, your point seems a little spurious.

[iamzack]

Hopefully there's no one on here racist enough, but I've seen in other forums that around now, someone starts whining about blacks not showing enough gratitude for desegregation, affirmative action, etc.   I'm half waiting for it.


careful CD

[MP-Ryan]

I'm not throwing myself into this debate, but this needs to be said:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "REVERSE DISCRIMINATION."  IT IS JUST "DISCRIMINATION" PERIOD FULL STOP END OF SENTENCE.

The term "reverse discrimination" implies that the group experiencing it is the group which ordinarily promotes negative forms of discrimination in the first place - and such generalizations are patently false.

[StarSlayer]

I gotta admit, I found Obama commenting on the issue very inappropriate.  Making decisive commentary on a situation at this stage of the game from a person in his position doesn't seem in keeping with the impartial role of the office.  If it was something clear cut like Rodney King then by all means drop the hammer, but in this case its just as likely that the Professor was in the wrong.  Until a proper investigation has been conducted the President of the United States shouldn't be back handing the police department.

[Flipside]

Add to that the fact that the defendant and President know each other and it gives even more reason for him to not state an opinion on the matter.

I don't mind if Obama highlights the problems of racial profiling, but there are far more obvious cases that he could use, as you said, Rodney King is a good example, this, however, is not, and I suspect he's severely set back Police relations in the area by accusing them of acting 'stupidly'.

[Liberator]

Here's the thing.  Obama isn't impartial, and I'm ok with that, but what scares me is he has now something like 23 people doing the jobs of Cabinet level officials, they aren't accountable to anyone BUT Obama.  Add to that they are among the most lunatic fringe leftists in the entire country.  That scares me.  I know this is off topic, but it's on my heart.  This Czar situation frightens me.

[General Battuta]

How is this any different from anything Bush did?

Obama's presidency seems to be going swimmingly so far, I see no cause for alarm.

[Blue Lion]

Here's the thing.  Obama isn't impartial, and I'm ok with that, but what scares me is he has now something like 23 people doing the jobs of Cabinet level officials, they aren't accountable to anyone BUT Obama.  Add to that they are among the most lunatic fringe leftists in the entire country.  That scares me.  I know this is off topic, but it's on my heart.  This Czar situation frightens me.

You mean there are people in the Executive Branch who answer to the Chief Executive? You don't say. Isn't that what Cabinet level officials.... do?

Secondly, they aren't the lunatic leftist fringe. That's just scare tactics. Believe me, we can find a lunatic leftist fringe. It's not Obama.

[Mr. Vega]

It's me.

[StarSlayer]