Lestat de Lioncourt

Gee...nice (unsubstantiated) ad hominem there.

There was nothing 'supreme' about what I said, and I object to your characterization of my post (no matter how indirect it was) as such. I wasn't being a racist or prejudicial in any way, shape or form. I was merely repeating what so many others (white, black, hispanic, indian, etc.) have said and/or printed many times before.

Perhaps you'd like to prove (thereby substantiating your ad hominem) that the cited referenced cases/incidents have absolutely no implications whatsoever whereas Affirmative Action/quotas are concerned and are merely fabrications in all our 'supremist' minds.

Please tell me you have something more intelligent to say than just... 'Wow, such bigotry...I'm dumbstruck by my cognitive dissonance so I'm leaving.'

Your loss...

Lestat

Gurdur

Like your posts about illegal immigrants ?

Doubtful, very.

Buddrow_Wilson

Wow, now I'm a white supremist. Well, since it has been established that, being caucasion, my opinion on this topic and any objections I may have to the concepts of AA or reparations are petty and unwarranted....


...screw this thread, I'm outta here.

Tristan Scott

Civil cases involving lobor AA issues? Yeah, I hear that all the time, but seldom see it in reality. Got any back-up?

Lestat de Lioncourt

Please...

Just like the information I provided in my previous posting so was the information provided in that thread, factual (as in 'the real world' and not made up emotional confirmation bias). Perhaps you'd like to substantiate this lame retort by proving all said cases cited and further discussed as never even happened and are all fictional works in our 'supremist' minds!?!

Lestat

Loren Pechtel

The EEOC will even take them if you don't meet quota. They are out looking for companies to make an example of.

You don't see that many because companies know what they have to do in order to stay safe.

An admittedly old example I remember: A factory in Chicago. It was in a predominantly black neighborhood. The owner figured that since his entire workforce was either black or hispanic that he wouldn't have any trouble. Big mistake. It seems there was a serious flaw in his hiring: He hired people through the closest labor company. Unfortunately, that was some blocks away, the neighborhood there was more hispanic, less black. The racial distribution of his workforce reflected this. Clear evidence of discrirmination aginst blacks--he was hit with a judgement that was more than a year's profits.

repoman

Koy, I don't see why you don't want to look at the negatives of AA. You are just trying to proscribe others from rattling your house of cards.

I find it interesting your comparison of reparations for the countries we've invaded to AA (and possibly slavery reparations). I think their is a big difference, because at least for blacks and whites of similar economic status, they go to similar schools, can work similar jobs, go to the same stores and are free to make smart or stupid choices with their money and time. But with counties we have gone in and blown up their entire infrastructures as well as stolen their resources. WW2 was a major exception, but I don't think black America needs a marshal plan, becasue it won't go to making factories or roads, things that are needed by everyone.

Now I realize what happened in inner cities up until the 70's by way of banks and landlords. But now that is extremely regulated and fair, redlining is over. But look at the immigrant asians who move into those same crappy neighborhoods and whose kids attend the same schools. They are kicking the black kids' asses academeically and displine wise.

The only money that should go to blacks to a higher degree should be very large marriage tax breaks and free parenting classes. Of course plenty of whites need this too, my mom sure as hell did.

Lestat de Lioncourt

Yeah, and if we go by your (il)logic then the child of a rapist could be jailed for his crime!

Which is only relevant in the here and now not what happened 150-350 years ago. I mean really, does 'Statutes of Limitations' mean anything to you? Obviously not...

The commander is responsible for those in his charge, not the other way around. His peers are the ones who are responsible for him, not the pawns. He does not speak for me nor does he speak for the citizenry. If he did he would first have to have listened to know what we were saying in order to repeat it (as the wishes of the people) himself (for the people). Which is something that the office of the President and his Adminstration has failed to do for the past 30+ years (every since JFK, specifically).

Uh, no...it's not. Loyalty, honor, respect and above all appreciation (i.e., don't bite the hand that feeds you, don't take it for granted, etc.) towards one's own country is what it means to be a citizen. Not taxes, etc. etc. etc.

No, I am a human being first and foremost (an individual with inalienable rights), then an American citizen.

Again with the asinine (il)logic that the child is guilty of its father's crimes.

This is completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread (i.e., red herring).


Yeah, well I got some reparation calculations for you buddy! So pay up!

Your proposal is completely asinine. Minorities, specifically blacks, have been paid their due 10 times over.

"Since the passage of the original Civil Rights Act in 1964, many billions of dollars -- even trillions -- have been paid to U.S. blacks in the form of racial job quotas and racial preferences which have mandated that a certain proportion of blacks be hired and/or promoted over whites.

Additionally, hundreds of billions of dollars have also been paid to poverty-level black families via welfare entitlements during this same period."

Reparations: Conflicting Facts

Reverse discrimination is the only way you're ever going to justify it, because that is exactly what it is. Not to mention a big old SLAP in the face to those blacks and other minorities who are actually trying to legitimately make it on their own in the face of such 'hand me downs' as AA and quotas. Which, for all intent and purpose basically says, "You have to have these preferences because you will never be good enough to hack it in the real world on your own!" Is this the message you really want to sent to minorities!!!?!!!

Yeah, well...speaking of things that are a matter of 'legal record,' so are the thousands of individual and group crimes committed by minorities upon their given community. Which often times have been against their own people. Should we demand that they and their families pay their victims reparations all the same? I mean, going by your (il)logic, they should!

No, they are not and I challenge you to prove every single one of them. Which, of course, you have to do in order to legitimately substatiate this claim of yours (remember, you made the affirmative argument therefore the burden of proof is on you)!

Really? Then what was all the preceding text about if not your consistent blathering about America's 'crime' against blacks and other minorities for then!?!

What to do now? Absolutely NOTHING The 'America as a Nation' you speak of is DEAD! Every person that could have ever been held accountable for their direct actions and participation in furthing the institution of slavery are all DEAD! No one alive today can be no more held responsible for the distant past than a child of a rapist can be held for their father's crime of raping its mother. It's a completely asinine argument that will never win.

Yeah, so what! The Native Indians (among others throughout the world) have been promised a lot of things that never came to pass. You don't see or hear about them whining about reparations, do you!

Face it, the fact of the matter is the US is the richest country in the world. You don't see blacks suing Africa do you? After all, that is where their own people sold them into slavery. So when you look at it this issue, what better country then America to make a claim to $ you didn't earn on some ridiculous notion that your great great great great great grandfather was sold into slavery and brought to America. So what! My distant ancestors were slaves to another at one point in history the same as everyone else on this planet. Should we all bow down to stupidity and laziness (meaning, having integrity to earn it on your own merits) and demand compensation to something we have no legal and/or rightful claim to!?! Of course not!

Uh, last time I checked there was NO 'National' consensus admitting to this awesome declaration of yours. Therefore, it requires proof to back it up. Provide overwhelming evidence that this Nation as a whole admitted to such a thing and gave authorization to a spokesperson to make such an admission on behalf of the entire Nation. Remember, the burden of proof is on you!

Yeah, illegally put on the books it was. Each time a minority was hired, promoted or got a raise over a more qualified individual just because of the color of their skin was/is a crime!

Any cash payout to minorites will not change history, PERIOD! That is a simple undeniable fact. Someone who (through a lack of self-esteem, brainwashed with the idea that they will always be a victim and will never be capable of succeeding on their own) feels they are hurt today will still be hurt tomorrow no matter how large that check is. Money does not buy happiness nor does it change the past. It is what it is and we can only make the best of what we have now and only through collective efforts can we all make tomorrow a better day.

Well there have it folks. If anything about koy's post says anything this says it all! It's only about ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME ME! Screw anyone else, it's my way or the highway. Well koy, look out your window...there's the road. Go pound pavement you self-centered Jesse Jackson wannabe!!!

I will bring it up because they (racism/reverse discrimination and reparations/AA/Quotas) are NOT mutually exclusive circumstances! You cannot have your cake and eat it too!

The American Nation made no such concession and I challenge you to prove it!

Yeah, it's called AA, quotas, reverse discrimination, hiring by the color of your skin (whites need not apply) over merit, welfare, government housing, etc. etc. etc. that minorities have been receiving ever since Civil Rights was established.

Here is yet another example of your (il)logic that will never see the day. I mean really, if everyone had it their way (I mean, your way), we would being suing our mothers, our fathers, our siblings, our wifes/husbands (respectfully) and everyone else we've ever come into contact with who has broken a promise to us.

The hell there isn't!

The hell it is! As I said before, what these programs established (as a matter of FACT) is the innuendo that minorities are incapable of making it in the real world on their own so the US Government has to steal from the rich (i.e., tax payers - regardless of race, color or creed) to give to the poor in order to give them the chance they could never achieve on their own. It is just one among many things that hangs over the heads of minorities in this country like some ominous rain cloud reading to strike them down if they should ever get close to succeeding on their own.

Martin Luther King had a dream that his children would one day be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. To this day it is a dream that was never realized because we still judge people by the color of their skin and not the content of their character. The proof of this FACT is your AA and quota programs where minorities are judged strictly on their skin color and never rarely if ever on their merit (see previous post of mine with plenty of examples substantiating this FACT).

Last time I checked this was a public forum open for discussion to the public. You have no place to bark such pompous orders!

You really are a pretentious self-righteous little lemon aren't you!

Yeah, it shows that minorities can be racist too and use it to their advantage.

The TRUE FACTS on the baseless claim of reparations for slavery

Lestat

PopeInTheWoods

Loren,

Though it looks like our discussion is starting to get lost in the rather dismal signal-to-noise ratio, I wanted to comment on your points above before I bow out of this thread. We seem to have some level of agreement on a few points, and a somewhat greater agreement on the level of rationality and tone of discourse. But I think our opposing "counter-proposals" have different basic priorities that prevent their reconciliation. Yours is based on maintaining current "fairness" and equal opportunity based on an individual's current competitiveness, a "level playing field". Mine (as well as Koy's original one in the OP) is skewed towards forcing short-term equality of outcome as a step towards long-term equality of opportunity, tilting the playing field to favor those groups that have been discriminated against.

For example, in the employment situation you quoted, I'd agree that candidates below a certain "minimally qualified" level should not be counted when calculating the hiring statistics for compliance. But the quotas should be enforced using the racial percentages of those "minimally qualified" or higher. Assuming that there actually is a racial correlation to candidate desirability, a company would have to either pass on some more desirable candidates, or hire more towards the "minimally qualified" end. Unfair? Yup, but nowhere near the unfairness of the past. A company could deal with this requirement by, among other things, cutting salaries/benefits, increasing their payrolls, and/or increasing training. These costs would be passed on to customers, and therefore the economy and society at large, but would not put any particular company at a competitive disadvantage because all would be subject to the same rules. The USA could, within a generation or two, bring about a situation where a so-called "level playing field" would not inherently favor or disfavor members of any particular race, if its citizens were so inclined. Of course, I don't think we are.

My proposal may not be fair, but its unfairness should be less individually devastating and of shorter duration than the unfairness endured by some minority groups for decades and decades, if not centuries. Two wrongs may not make a right, but a second wrong may be the only option to the perpetuation of the first wrong. Later elimination of the second wrong may then prevent future wrongs.

I'll leave you the last word on our discussion, if you wish it.

Andy

lunachick

Thank you, Andy.

You are a drop of reason in a pool of confusion. FWIW, I agreed with your first post, and thought it was a reasonable proposal - not perfect; but, better than many alternatives. And, judging by that post and the one above, you have a good understanding of why reparations are important now, and until such time they may be phased out, for the benefit of future generations - both white, brown, red and black. Thank you.