Affirmative action: It's time for liberals to admit it isn't working

[Pacific 0]

No, but getting rid of Affirmative Action is a good start. A diverse or multi-racial or multi-cultural workplace doesn't increase innovation, efficiency, or productivity...not even on paper. Segregation occurs more naturally than you think. Preference points should be done with also. The best and most qualified candidates should be the ones hired.

[airdvr 210]

Tink1717

I didn't read the article, but I'll take your bait anyway. So, for the sake of this argument, I'll take the postition that we liberals have failed to make any progress agaist racial discrimiation and that affirmative action is the failure you think it is.

What then? How would you solve the problem? Go back to Jim Crow? Segragation? Separate but Equal? Apartied? Let's hear it.

Think about MLK's Dream Speech

Quote

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

The only thing Affirmative Action and laws of that nature do is destroy what MLK died for. You can't legislate morality. The people have to believe it to be the right thing. Funny, his words are those of a religious man and yet so many liberals condemn religion as I do.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

What then? How would you solve the problem? Go back to Jim Crow? Segragation? Separate but Equal? Apartied? Let's hear it.

Please read the article. It's worthwhile.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

The best and most qualified candidates should be the ones hired.

+1

We are all engines of karma

[wmw999 2,589]

Quote

A diverse or multi-racial or multi-cultural workplace doesn't increase innovation, efficiency, or productivity...not even on paper.

Bullshit. Groupthink is powerful negative influence on any decision-making process where the answer needs actual thought, and diversity (in this case, cultural) would be the best way to counter it.

The old adage "there is an easy obvious answer to every difficult problem, and it's wrong" is an example of recognizing the negative power of groupthink.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[wmw999 2,589]

For most jobs, "best and most qualified" for the basic requirements doesn't eliminate nearly enough people. So then you're expected to distinguish among the rest.

And how? Does the highest degree get the job? How about if it's for waitress? Does the person with the most years in the industry get the job? How about if it's because he was a drone who never cared? How do you judge which college is the "best?"

Judgment has to enter. For some people (and far less often now than 30-40+ years ago), race, ethnicity, or accent had a significant impact on that judgment. Why? Because they wanted a harmonious cohesive workplace. Of course, that meant a segregated one as well -- segregated by something. I used to work with a manager who gave significant preference to Texas A&M graduates. Does that constitute "most qualified?"

In many industries, the time for AA has probably passed. But just read some of the postings on the internet when something remotely racially or nationally mixed becomes controversial, and then consider the possibility that some of those guys hire people. Do you really think they only consider the qualifications?

I can remember being told I could not get a couple of jobs only because I was a woman. I can remember a hiring manager telling me that "the law says she has to interview them, but it sure don't say she has to hire them." I can remember a relative saying they'd never work for a n* (of course, I'm not sure she ever did hold a job ). And that's just my personal experience.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[StreetScooby 5]

I think these are all valid points, Wendy. Defining the "best person" for a job is rarely, if ever, based strictly on technical merits. Building a cohesive team for a given business is very difficult, and there are always other factors than being "technically best". Those other factors can be quite diverse.

+1

We are all engines of karma

[davjohns 1]

wmw999

Quote

A diverse or multi-racial or multi-cultural workplace doesn't increase innovation, efficiency, or productivity...not even on paper.

Bullshit. Groupthink is powerful negative influence on any decision-making process where the answer needs actual thought, and diversity (in this case, cultural) would be the best way to counter it.

The old adage "there is an easy obvious answer to every difficult problem, and it's wrong" is an example of recognizing the negative power of groupthink.

Wendy P.

An interesting (potential) point here...whether intentional or not.

A multi-racial group does NOT guarantee varying opinions. A multi-cultural group does not. People with different ways of looking at things does. Presuming that people of different culture or race think differently could potentially be a racist point of view.

Personally, I think it is most probable that people from different backgrounds think differently, but that is because I am a racist by some definitions.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

...when Abraham Lincoln read off the Emancipation Proclamation ending human slavery in America.

IIRC, he only ended it in the south, not the north.

We are all engines of karma

[wmw999 2,589]

Good point, and accurate. Thanks.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kallend 2,150]

No need for AA when we have evidence that there are no longer any problems:

Right here.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Pacific

No, but getting rid of Affirmative Action is a good start. A diverse or multi-racial or multi-cultural workplace doesn't increase innovation, efficiency, or productivity...not even on paper. Segregation occurs more naturally than you think. Preference points should be done with also. The best and most qualified candidates should be the ones hired.

This statement implies the commonly held assumption that economic efficiency is the only factor to be considered. Sometimes, though, it's not so simple as "what's good for Ford is good for the country".

In the Slate article linked in the first post, it is alleged that Nixon introduced affirmative action programs to appease "Black activists". The sense I got was that "appeasing" was (in the author's opinion) a matter of political expediency and so the wrong thing to do. I think that oversimplifies the situation Nixon was faced with. Race riots and civil unrest were rampant at the time, and were a real threat to the country. People were (understandably, IMHO) tired of the systematic marginalization of a large segment of the population, based on nothing more than melanin and hair texture. Passing laws to allow people to vote and go to school is all well and good, but hardly sufficient when innumerable practices, built in to the system and working to inhibit economic advancement of those people, are allowed to persist.

I think we have to ask if it is reasonable to expect people to participate in, or even accept, a system where the rules are obviously stacked against them. Imagine a sport where the opposing team starts with 10 points (0 for you), and they get three points for every goal but you get only one. Would you even bother to play? If you were forced to play, would you not protest the rules? Would you really play, or just go through the motions, since the outcome was dictated beforehand anyway?

The government of the day was faced with some unenviable choices no private business has to consider. What is more damaging to the economy of the country, constant disruption from race riots and protests, or mandating that a (relatively small) portion of economic opportunities be set aside for minorities who have historically been denied those opportunities? Neither choice is great, but which is worse? How many Detroit or Watts riots would we have been willing to absorb to defend the historical economic advantage of white Americans?

Just to be clear, as we have discussed in other affirmative action threads, I think the time for such programs has long passed. I also agree with the Slate article that continuing affirmative action programs has contributed to inaction on efforts that would make for long term beneficial changes. Educational opportunities for children (and adults) from poor families remain significantly worse than opportunities afforded other people. For example, schools are overwhelmingly funded by local property taxes. Schools in poor neighborhoods have little resources to draw on, as low property values ensure an inadequate tax base. The result is overcrowded classrooms, out of date textbooks, inability to retain the best teachers, crappy resources such as computers and libraries, and general lack of programs and activities (such as music and art) that make school more interesting (encouraging students to stay in school). In several states (including Georgia where I live) the courts have ruled that this funding mechanism is unconstitutional (at the State level) because the disparities it creates are so large. In almost every case the State legislature's response is to do nothing, or attempt to amend the state constitution. At the national level, Republicans in general and Tea Party types in particular wail against any expenditure of tax dollars to address the problem.

The race history of the US is miserable, and many of the problems this history has spawned are so deeply entrenched they may never be eradicated, or take centuries to do so. Structural impediments built into society are now nominally directed along economic lines, but the history of race relations has ensured that there is a strong correlation between race and economic position. Black kids are no longer relegated by Jim Crow laws to marginal schools, but poor kids are, and poor kids are largely (though not exclusively) Black. Systematic marginalization, and our lock-em-all-up prison mentality, has fostered development of (IMHO) very destructive cultural trends in certain societal groups, including abandoning the need for fathers to be responsible for their kids, and outright disrespect for education. Destructive forces are now at play that would have been unimaginable at the time people were fighting for basic civil rights, but those forces also have their root in our failure as a society to really address institutionalized economic opportunity.

Private business does not have to think about such matters (unless they choose to), but (I would argue) governments do. And they have, so far, failed spectacularly.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[StreetScooby 5]

Good points, GeorgiaDon, and well put.

We are all engines of karma

[champu 1]

kallend

No need for AA when we have evidence that there are no longer any problems:

Right here.

Thanks Mother Jones for making the headline of that article about guns...

Here's the report and press release more or less on their own if anyone is interested. This is the tale of people who grew their athletic careers to become NFL football players but stopped learning anything academically sometime early in elementary school. They bully people over female family members and for being asian, black, homosexual, and even for flying R/C helicopters and owning guns.

[kallend 2,150]

champu

This is the tale of people who grew their athletic careers to become NFL football players...

NEWS FLASH - The NFL doesn't have a monopoly on bigots.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

This is the tale of people who grew their athletic careers to become NFL football players but stopped learning anything academically sometime early in elementary school.

This is another one of those destructive social trends I alluded to earlier, though I didn't discuss this one. My anecdotal observation, based on doing outreaches in elementary and middle schools, is that far too many young boys, especially (dare I say it) young Black boys (almost all of them, by middle school) see the NFL or NBA as their only career choice. It doesn't matter if they are complete runts or have coke bottle glasses, they all think they'll be the next Michael Jordan. Well, that or a rap singer. Unfortunately the parent (rarely parents) are all too supportive of this "plan", no doubt lured by the prospect of retiring on their kids multi-million-dollar-per-year paycheck. None of these kids seem to have a backup plan, such as a real job. If the NBA or NFL is your only focus, it makes sense to spend all your time playing basketball or football, and learning math or how to read can be considered a distraction you can't afford. Got to perfect that jump shot you know. By the time they get to high school, sports are so serious and competitive that every evening and weekend is spent in organized practice, not doing homework or working a part time job (which builds character and real world experience). By the time these kids figure out they are not going to be a professional athlete (generally when they do not get a university sports scholarship) they're so far behind academically they're locked into a low pay menial job (or crime) future.

It pisses me off how universities play into this exploitation for their own profit.

Sports are great for fun and for entertainment, but we've turned things on their head when football is seen as a preferable career choice over business, medicine, or any other "real" job.

I have no idea how to reverse the trend, in a world where a few people make such outlandish salaries for playing a game. Working hard to master skills needed to have a career that pays a respectable living seems so boring compared to playing sports 24/7 for a 0.000001% chance at a multi-million-$$ payday.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)