Tailgaiter,
the difference with the asian population is that they are coming here on "equal ground". Many times, the asian people coming here are educated in their home land, or at least have the financial means to come here and start a business etc.

We didn't translocate them from their native land, give them nothing and tell them they have to work for us for 300 years and then say, ok, "you're free" go make it on your own.....and by the way, you won't get any help from us.

I'm really not directly arguing about discrimination, just that there is such thing as priveledge, and that we can't deny that white people have that priveledge, and why we have it.

I do agree that ideals that promote discrimination are not acceptable, but I also feel that if one group has a historical advantage over another group that there needs some sort of way to "level the playing field". This is the delima. How is this historical advantage leveled out without discriminating against someone.

I know that someone is going to respond and tell me that there is no advantage, and "how long are we going to have to pretend like we owe minorities something?". My answer is that white people don't owe black people anything, other than a fair and equal opportunity to be competative in America. Also, consider this....as I mentioned earlier, Africans were kept as slaves for hundreds of years, and only within the last ~60 years have they gained their independance/freedom. You must admit that a people as a whole left to their own devices and with nothing but the shirt on their backs will take some time to catch up to the rest of society who is at an advantage both financially and socially.

So the short answer is, I don't condone discrimination, but there is this moral, social and financial delima of why white people have a historical advantage over black people, and more importantaly, how do we make any market place "equal opportunity" when there has only been ~60 years since we have been considered "equal".

Privilege? Oh you mean when I go to buy a car I get treated better because I'm white?

Oh you must mean when I go to the grocery store and I ask for a lb of lunch meat and they give me a lb and a 1/2 because I'm white?

Then again, there's the realtors. Those mean lots don't like tire kickers, if'n ya know what I mean, but when they see a white man coming they just fling open the doors and lower the price?

What am I privvy to? Certinly not an education at U of M! Certinly not a backing voice from the NAACP! If you want to live in a world of stereotypes go right ahead, but at least be open to see that the world isn't staying stagnant with your musings of privilege. Spence, I've said it before and I'll say it again...if somebody in this day and age is practicing any type of discrimination, they're living in a small world, made smaller by their own devices. I've given reasons and examples of what I believe are blatent discriminations today, want to end them...get rid of them. Watch and see how bridges get built or are mended. We don't need more divisive policies or exclusionary clubs, we need to recognize that were Americans and not Afro-Americans,Euro-Americans,Asian-Americans,Native-Americans or any other hyphenated BS politicians can dream up to make everyone feel better about their personal heritage.

DMV,
no, your examples are not what I mean by priveledge....

Take a look at high ranking officials in
1) Big Business
2) Government
3) Academics

You won't see a ton of diversity. Yes, things are changing slowly, but the scale is still tilted, and there are more white men in these high ranking positions. So you won't have an advantage getting more meat for you buck, or finding a better used car.....but I'm talking about people who control the market, academics etc. And like I said, there is a trend for more diversity, and of course there are always your "tolken representatives" of minorities and women, but we're not there quite yet when it comes to true equality.

DMV,
Just an after thought, what do you think about exclusive clubs for men and/or women? Men shouldn't be able to have men only clubs and vice versa? No mens golf clubs, no women only gyms (which seem to be pretty popular these days) etc.

Yeah, I see what you mean.

Who in their right mind would want to sacrifice their paycheck for Oprah's?! Or Don King's? Herman Cain and Alan Keyes(whom I've voted for every chance I've had!), and JC Watts have suffered miserably. You're right. To just pick a token member out of the blue is wrong.

We should give away repairations, and set up college funds and make sure there's legislation designed to favor minorities only. They should be able to meet and form national organizations to advance their own causes. They should be able to have their own contests and their own tv stations. Lord knows that there's no motivation to want to succeed on your own merits in today's society. Much easier to just take and take and take, than to face the facts of where that taking is really coming from and what it's really doing to the lives it's supposed to help!

For the record, where does it stop? Race, sex,religion, sexual orientation, animal and plant life when will everything equal out? Once one get's what they want, guess what? There's another disinfranchised sect wanting theirs! Freewill shouldn't and can't ever play a part in this plan either. Ownership is a liability not a sought after goal, and we don't need those either...after all we'll have to drop the bar of excellence in order to enable everyone a chance to leap over it!

Some good points spence.
And I'm not suggesting that there is zero bigotry in the US. I just think that OVER compensating today for the indiscretions of yesterday is not the way to go.

What percentage of black Americans are the actual direct decendants of slaves? Those would be the only group who fit into your scenario of "nothing but the shirt on their back".
America is the land of Opportunity. It should not be the land of Entitlement.

Besides, I keep reading on these boards that White America discriminates against the hiring of people of color. That was the purpose of my Asian analogy.
White America does NOT discriminate when people are qualified.
You need look no further than professional sports to realize that.

DMV,
Thank you for pointing out those individuals, would you like to start a little battle listing rich white versus rich black people? I'll do it if you want, but what is the point.

In any event, just to comment on your last statement about disinfranchised individuals....

There are people who have historically kept various groups disinfranchised, and until those historically disinfranchised groups have adequate opportunity to better the situation that was forced on them, there will be an advantage for one group (disinfranchisers) over the other group (disinfranchisees).

Now here is where I don't think you follow me. I'm not saying we have to give the disinfranchisees anything other than a fair opportunity at everything the disinfranchisers have the opportunity to achieve. Ie/ we don't need to give away money or other repairations, only an equal opportunity, which leads to the delimma/question: Can this actually happen without giving the disinfranchisees an advantage to level the playing field?

I'm not attempting to answer this question, so there is no need to shoot off at me, I am just trying to make the individuals on this post aware that there is a reason for affirmative action etc. and that reason is that the playing field is tilted. Like it or leave it, that is the way it is. Is affirmative action the way to deal with this delima? Maybe not, but I guess it is the best solution people (administrators in universities etc.) could come up with. Do I have a better (or any) solution? No!

Then we agree. We just chose different roads to get to the same conclusion.

Tailgaiter,
You are right, I am using the extreme example of decendants of slaves, and again you are right, this not the land of entitlement, but it is also not the land of "equal opportunity" (not yet!) in sectors that really control the power ie/government. How many years will it be until there is a woman elected to be president. How about a black man....or even still how about a black woman? Obviously we are all arguing our own personal views, but until I SEE otherwise, I believe there is not "equal opportunity" where it really matters.

Also, as for your sports scenario, I agree somewhat that the best person for the job will suceed. However, if you look at the # of black quarterbacks, you will see they are heavil out numbered by white quarterbacks? Why?....because as late as the 60's and 70's coaches thought black people were not smart enough to play quarterback, or their racist views stopped them from letting a black person become a quarterback, so they were put at other positions. Obviously there is a trend towards more diversity at arguably the most important position in professional football, but as I said earlier, the playing field is still skewed (ie/ more white qb's). Maybe in our lifetime we will have the priveledge of seeing in that tendency dissolve.

DMV and Tail,
As much fun as I am having, I have to do some work today!!! So I'll check back later in the afternoon.

Just speaking of asians,
Asian americans, have several things going for them that other racial minorites don't. If a newly emigrated Korean, wants to open a grocery store. He submits a buisness plan to an unliscensed Korean neighborhood bank, set up by Koreans, that have been here for awhile. He get's the loan, and opens the buisness, pays back the loan, and succeeds, here in America. Many on this board, would probably say that is racist. By the way, I can't back this up, my Korean ex-girlfriends father told me that that is how he got his start. He now has 13 grocery stores, in S. California. He employs only Koreans. Hmmmm Maybe it is racist. But he sees it as his way of paying it forward, to give other immigrants a foothold, here in the USA.
Later
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)

Homebrew,
You are 100% correct.
And I made an earlier statement regarding the perceived evil when like-people migrate towards each other.
I don't have an issue when the Asians hire Asians, or when Jewish people promote other Jews.
And I don't suggest that white Americans push an all-white agenda.
But to FORCE less qualified individuals into positions based SOLELY on race, that is 100% wrong.
If the Race card is the "tie breaker" when other qualifications are equal, then THAT should be what true affirmative action is all about.

Spence,
Why does everybody jump on the Black QB issue?
You took my bait.
It's hilarious to see "statisticians" show how professional sports are still biased by showing the number of black QB's or black coaches vs the number of black players.
Couldn't the EXACT same logic be applied in reverse to "prove" that teams should be forced to hire more white positional players?
And I even heard this argument once regarding the lack of Black Owners of professional sports teams.
Owners!
Like the league would somehow prevent a black businessman from Paying for a team.

It's a joke, and the biggest losers are the people of color. Because BOGUS issues like this desensitize the public to the real issue of racism.

tailgaiter,
The reason I "took your bait" is because if you look at the coaching and qb (and even owner) situation and apply it to what I have been saying, it fits.
I would not try to argue any other positions fit. Like I said to DMV, i'm not talking about butchers and car salesmen (maybe lineman and recievers), I am talking about the people who make the real decisions (owners, coaches and qb's).

You can't call every job an apple. There are apples and oranges when it comes to jobs and they can't be compared. It is like saying If we compare the # of white CEO's to the # of black employees there is no difference.
That is why statisticians show "biased" stats.

Normally I don't get involved in these discussions, but I have a few cents to contribute.

I do a lot of hiring and firing at my job. Simply put you can fire a white man with very little reason or support for the reason. But to fire a minority (including female)you must have a lengthy paper trail to support the firing. If you have ever sat through arbitration hearings for unemployment or labor board violations then you know what I'm talking about, if you haven't then you don't have a clue. Reverse race/sex ism is alive and rampant. Every T must be crossed and every I dotted.
With that being said, how can you blame some companies for being leary about hiring minorities?
Fair? no. But until all people are treated EQUALLY there will always be problems. Race and sex need not be a factor for anything.

Pipe dream? probably.

Enough rambling, continue on

Mike

Miluns,
So what you just told me, or the way I read what you said is:

Companies are leary about hiring minorities and women, but race and sex should not be taken into account when hiring someone, and everyone should be treated equally, but minorities and women won't be.

Seems kind of contradictory...

I know what you are trying to say, but the contradiction is exactly my point as to why these policies are in place in the first place.

Spence,

Didn't make myself very clear did I? I need to proof read better.LOL

I basically meant, until everybody is treated equally at both ends of the process there will be problems.

Companies are required to hire certain percentages of minorities according the local demographics.

example: if your company is located where there are 70% white, 20% black, 10% hispanic. Then your employee percentages should reflect the same.

The problems arise when one of the minority employees are not performing up to par and the company releases them.

Hope this makes sense.

Mike

Now you know why I hate the paper trail!!!!

I thought using actual numbers ie/percentages was deemed to be unconstitutional....maybe not, but I thought that was the reason most institutions use methods more "open to interpretation" for hiring etc.?

Spence. You are correct about the percentages. NO company can legally hire based on percentages. Being an Equal Opportunity employer means you have to take actions to extend your applicant pool. If you only hire from Northern New York where it's predominately white, than you need to expand your application process to bring about equal opportunities to apply for all. Limiting applications to an area that is predominately one race, color, or religion excludes others from the opportunity of your business.

Skatty,

You sir are correct, it does not have to be by the percentages, but that was the easiest way to get my point across.


Mike