Airlift, or was it Les.. yeah Lex.. this is for you..

MrVicchio · 2003-01-15, 03:26 PM

This is a saliant way of saying that Diversity and such (i.e. a direct hit on Affermative Action) is not only bad, but racist. Period.

President Bush faces an ideal opportunity to take a principled position on the issue of racial "diversity." As his administration ponders whether to support the legal challenge, now before the Supreme Court, to the University of Michigan's affirmative action policies, he should go further and raise a moral challenge to the entire notion of "diversity." Instead of timidly wavering on this question, in fear of being smeared by Democrats as racist, President Bush should rise to the occasion by categorically repudiating racism�and condemning "diversity" as its crudest manifestation.

It is now widely accepted that "diversity" is an appropriate goal for society. But what does this dictum actually mean? Racial integration is a valid objective, but that is something very different from what the advocates of "diversity" seek. According to its proponents, we need "diversity" in order to be exposed to new perspectives on life. We supposedly gain "enrichment from the differences in viewpoint of minorities," as the MIT Faculty Newsletter puts it. "It is the only way to prepare students to live and work effectively in our diverse democracy and in the global economy," says the president of the University of Michigan. Minorities should be given preferential treatment, the university's vice president says, because "learning in a diverse environment benefits all students, minority and majority alike."

These circumlocutions translate simply into this: one's race determines the content of one's mind. They imply that people have worthwhile views to express because of their ethnicity, and that "diversity" enables us to encounter "black ideas," "Hispanic ideas," etc. What could be more repulsively racist than that? This is exactly the premise held by the South's slave-owners and by the Nazis' Storm Troopers. They too believed that an individual's thoughts and actions are determined by his racial heritage.

Whether a given race receives special rewards or special punishments is immaterial. The essence of racism is the idea that the individual is meaningless and that membership in the collective�the race�is the source of his identity and value. To the racist, the individual's moral and intellectual character is the product, not of his own choices, but of the genes he shares with all others of his race. To the racist, the particular members of a given race are interchangeable.

The advocates of "diversity" similarly believe that colleges must admit not individuals, but "representatives" of various races. They believe that those representatives have certain ideas innately imprinted on their minds, and that giving preferences to minority races creates a "diversity" of viewpoints on campus. They have the quota-mentality, which holds that in judging someone, the salient fact is the racial collective to which he belongs.

____

The value of a racially integrated student body or work force lies entirely in the individualism this implies. A racially integrated group implies that skin color is irrelevant in judging human beings. It implies that those who chose the students or the workers based their evaluations only on that which reflects upon the individual: merit. But that is not what the advocates of "diversity" want. They sneer at the principle of "color-blindness." Whether the issue is being admitted to college or getting a job at a corporation or being cast as an actor on TV shows, the "diversity" supporters want such decisions to be made exactly the way that the vilest of racists make them: by bloodline. They insist that whatever is a result of your own choices�your ideas, your character, your accomplishments�is to be dismissed, while that which is outside your control�the accident of skin color�is to define your life. Their fundamental goal is to "diversify"�and thus to undercut�the standard of individual achievement with the non-standard of race.

As a result of their efforts, the creed of "diversity" is metastasizing. There are now demands for "linguistic diversity," under which English teachers grant equal validity to ungrammatical writing�for "diversity" in beauty pageants, under which the unattractive are not discriminated against�for "diversity" in oratory contests, under which mutes are not excluded. These egalitarian crusaders for "diversity" seek to wipe out a standard of value as such. They want to negate genuine, life-serving values by claiming that non-values must be given equal status.

Is this the philosophy that will "prepare students to live and work effectively"?

Racial "diversity" is a doctrine that splits people into ethnic tribes, which then battle one another for special favors. If President Bush is eager to demonstrate his disagreement with the racist views of a Strom Thurmond, let him stand up and denounce all forms of racism�particularly, the one that underlies "diversity."

*(*()))**(**()))))((((****(()()***)(*&)*()*()*()*( )(*)(*()*()*()(*)*

For the whole article:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...le.asp?ID=5550

Airlift · 2003-01-15, 03:28 PM

What is this, freeper south?

Unregistered · 2003-01-15, 04:04 PM

rac�ism
n.
1)The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2) Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Like it or not Afirmitive Action = Racism because it discriminates against against people bassed on their race.

I would prefer a society where I am judged by my merits not by the color of my skin. Afirmitive Action was indeed a good idea at one point, but the population has out grown the Civil Rights movement, and it is time for everyone to be treated equally. Personally I am offended that Race is even a concideration in anything.

Tobias · 2003-01-15, 04:25 PM

We are all one race, the Human Race.

Nuf said.

Cept those people in tibet. I hate them, I dont know why. Death to all the tibeti peoples, may their citys crumble and all their young be born with only 9 toes.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-01-15, 04:34 PM

Nice artice, but the premise is incorrect. I do not see affirmative action's purpose as allowing cultural idea to be represented. I see it as an attempt to correct social inequality that has been created. Yes creating diversity is important, but I do not see it as the primary reason for Affirmative action.

Bottome line, there is some affirmative action in place. Do you really feel like white Americans are being oppressed?

Lexington_Steele · 2003-01-15, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered
Like it or not Afirmitive Action = Racism because it discriminates against against people bassed on their race.

I would prefer a society where I am judged by my merits not by the color of my skin. Afirmitive Action was indeed a good idea at one point, but the population has out grown the Civil Rights movement, and it is time for everyone to be treated equally. Personally I am offended that Race is even a concideration in anything.

Like it or not, racism exists. Outgrown civil rights? (have you been to the south recently?) Have you heard about Senator Lott's comments at Stom Thurmans birthday party? This man was Senate majority leader and was saying that if we had followed Strom's seperate but equal platform we would not have the problems we have today.

I love Strom's quote, during his canidacy for president, "We will not allow ****3%$ in our pools." Yes, that would solve all of the problems that we have today.

I am offended that a person of color is less likely to succeed than a white person. I see this as a problem that should be corrected.

I would love to see the society that you are talking about. You must remeber affirmative action is not meant to last forever. It is an attempt to correct a problem. When that problem is corrected, affirmative action will no longer be neccessary. Ignoring the problem and allowing this social injustice to continue is not an acceptable solution.

Tobias · 2003-01-15, 04:55 PM

what about sexism, like the fact that in most jobs (real jobs, not burger flipper at Mc'Donolds), women only make 75% of what a man, with the same or lower skills, in the same job, makes.

Unregistered · 2003-01-15, 05:27 PM

First off I said we had Outgrown the Civil Rights Movement, not Civil Rights. The problems that exisited in the 1960's that made the Civil Rights Movement necessary simple do not exisit to the extent that Afirmitive Action is necessary.

You asked "Do you really feel oppressed as a White male?" and the answer to this question is yes, I do. There are countless programs that I am not eligable for simply for the color of my skin.

I am less likely to recieve a scholorship because I am white.

Many of my friends that work for Muni in SF have been passed over for less qualified Blacks/Asians because they were white, and Muni did not want to be racist be giving them the position.

The last cencus proved that there is no Majority in California. Afirmitive Action is supposed to help Minorities, so i ask the question: If there are no minorities then who exactly is it helping?

I also question the exisitance of organizations like NAACP. It is set up to help non-whites. Do you think that I can start an orgonisation with the sole purpose of helping whites, and whites only? Not with out being branded a racist.

Affirmitive Action does more to foster racial hatred then anything. It gives racists on both sides of the argument ammunition to accuse the other of discrimination.

Anything that mentions your race or the race of another is racist. When is Asian history month? How about Native American history month? Or the ever elusive Latino History Month? How is not racist to dedicate an entire month to the history of one culture while ignoring every other culture?

Anytime you bring Race into any equasition you take America a step in the wrong direction. We are supposed to be the "Melting Pot" of the world where all cultures come togeather to become one. Instead what we have become is the worlds "Salad Bar" where everyone is catagorized by race and then tucked neatly away into seprate containers. There is no true diversity untill you remove the things that keep them apart and toss them all onto one plate.

Afimitive Action is Racism and it's wrong.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-01-15, 05:34 PM

Originally posted by Unregistered
Afimitive Action is Racism and it's wrong.

Then how do you propose that we fix the social inequality between races? Do nothing?

MrVicchio · 2003-01-15, 05:37 PM

Like it or not, racism exists. Outgrown civil rights? (have you been to the south recently?) Have you heard about Senator Lott's comments at Stom Thurmans birthday party? This man was Senate majority leader and was saying that if we had followed Strom's seperate but equal platform we would not have the problems we have today.

The question, has your appologist arse been in the south..EVER?
I am FROM the south... little town called Cameron Texas... Whites and blacks live together with very little animosity.. sure there is some.. but those ppl aren't worth a damn and the town knows it.

I bet you are for Reperations too aren't you?

These injustices you speak of.. most are gone.. they just don't happen... when they do, there is a perfectly good legal system in place to smak the pee pee's of racists...

Most of the big racists bad things happen 40 plus years ago by people long since dead.. should we now today, commit an equal evil as a way of making up for the past?

Lexington_Steele · 2003-01-15, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by MrVicchio
The question, has your appologist arse been in the south..EVER?

I live in Charleston South Carolina.

Navaron · 2003-01-15, 05:41 PM

How about letting people make their own places in the world. If anyone works hard, then they'll reap those rewards. That women's income statistic is outdated and misleading. That study ranked women in predominately male occupations. That study didn't take into account seniority. So if I have been doing job A for 10 years, I should make more than the broad who comes in the door for the first time tommorrow, right?

What really makes me mad is how the system is set up - Fraternal order of Black police officers, NAACP, Black Colleges, Black Scholarships, Black only fraternities, BET. If any of these were switched around, bang - - - rascist - - - . I sure wouldn't mind watching the WET channel.

mistled · 2003-01-15, 05:44 PM

"We will not allow ****3%$ in our pools." Yes, that would solve all of the problems that we have today.

So we replace this statement with, "We will not allow whites to have our scholarships." Like it or not, it's the same thing. Only difference is that no one has the balls to say it like that because people will see the racism in it.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-01-15, 05:47 PM

This boils down to two main things. Both of which we seem to disagrgee on.

Is there a social injustice? (the numbers are on my side on this one)

If there is a social injustice should the government correct it? (Like I have said a number of times, a survival of the fittest view is fine, but it is a bit too cut throat for me.)

mistled · 2003-01-15, 05:50 PM

The problem with AA is the same as the problem with the Crusades. You can't force people to believe anything. You can kill them as the Crusades did for not believing, but no one was actually converted. You can force people to hire unqualified people by threatening fines and jail time, but all you do is reinforce a sterotype by making the employer hire someone they know isn't qualified. Nothing is fixed this way. All it does is remind us that racists are out there, and that a lot of them are making stupid programs to try and force people to think a certain way.