NationStates Jolt Archive

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/No-Troll.png/150px-No-Troll.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/No-Troll.png/150px-No-Troll.png

You didn't even read my entire post. Thus, you are the troll in this situation.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/No-Troll.png/150px-No-Troll.png

I was going to come up with a long-winded response to the OP, but I like your idea instead. :)

*leaves*

Affirmative action (reverse racism) That's a good way of putting it.

The purpose of affirmative action is to reverse racism; the only way to eradicate racism is via affirmative action.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, There's never been a state of equality among all races. Whites have always been, and still continue to be priviledged.

*dies*

You didn't even read my entire post. Thus, you are the troll in this situation.

I truly doubt that you know how much of your post people are reading. However, I did read it, and it felt like your argument was "let's see how many wrongs we need to make a right!".

There is no such thing as "reverse-racism". Racism is racism.

Only experience and qualifications should factor into anything.

Race and religion should never come into it.

Want equality for all? Then why have pro-discrimination?

"I want to oppress blacks so there can be equality! I'm not a racist, I swear!"


Fass really hit the nail on the head.

http://www.woodcentral.com/shots/images/marionette2.jpg

Your continued posting of troll pictures does not mitigate your transgression; in fact, it exacerbates it.

Want equality for all? Then why have pro-discrimination?

Because the public has been imbued with the message that discrimination in favor of minorities is not only acceptable, but encouraged. If we do absolutely nothing to rectify this, there will be no equality as blacks will have a preferential status. The only way to ensure that there will be equality will be to level the playing field.

the only way to eradicate racism is via affirmative action.

You mean, the only way to eradicate racism is through more racism? Really? Do you also believe that the cure for obesity is over-indulgence in food?

Because the public has been imbued with the message that discrimination in favor of minorities is not only acceptable, but encouraged. If we do absolutely nothing to rectify this, there will be no equality as blacks will have a preferential status. The only way to ensure that there will be equality will be to level the playing field.

This will not create equality though, as the number of wrongs in a right is 0, not 2, not 3.

There is no such thing as "reverse-racism". Racism is racism.

I agree , reverse racism justs sounds like a posh way for some one to be racist.

You mean, the only way to eradicate racism is through more racism? Really? Do you also believe that the cure for obesity is over-indulgence in food?

your reverse-affirmative-action is also racism. So you'rebaisically arguing againt yourself. are you aware of this?

I wonder how many people are thinking this thread Is constructive rather than pointless.

This will not create equality though, as the number of wrongs in a right is 0, not 2, not 3.

Let's say that someone creates a law that blacks are entitled to $10,000 dollars each. Of course, this is a wrong. However, to right the wrong and maintain fairness, everybody else could be given $10,000 dollars in order to revert to a state of equality.

Light fuse...run away

Let's say that someone creates a law that blacks are entitled to $10,000 dollars each. Of course, this is a wrong. However, to right the wrong and maintain fairness, everybody else could be given $10,000 dollars in order to revert to a state of equality.

OR take the 10,000 dollars back. You will just add to the problem by creating more layers

Because the public has been imbued with the message that discrimination in favor of minorities is not only acceptable, but encouraged. If we do absolutely nothing to rectify this, there will be no equality as blacks will have a preferential status. The only way to ensure that there will be equality will be to level the playing field.

You know being black Isn't a race? Colour isn't the decider of race.

your reverse-affirmative-action is also racism. So you'rebaisically arguing againt yourself. are you aware of this?

I am advocating eliminating racism by countering the prevalent racism in society in the opposite direction. For example, if today's racism can be denoted by +5 (pro-black), my idea is to use the state to enforce the opposite degree of racism, represented by -5 (pro-white) and thus ensure that there is no net racism. This is not what affirmative action seeks, which is to ensure that there is pro-black racism in society at large.

Let's say that someone creates a law that blacks are entitled to $10,000 dollars each. Of course, this is a wrong. However, to right the wrong and maintain fairness, everybody else could be given $10,000 dollars in order to revert to a state of equality.

Unfortutiously for you, that wasn't what you were arguing for. You were arguing for dropping minourity Affirmative Action in favour of majourity Affirmative Action.

Let's say that someone creates a law that blacks are entitled to $10,000 dollars each. Of course, this is a wrong. However, to right the wrong and maintain fairness, everybody else could be given $10,000 dollars in order to revert to a state of equality.

wow... you're really getting desperate here, aren't you? Also, what your idea is is ginving the one side another $10K, restoring the inequality.

Let's say that someone creates a law that blacks are entitled to $10,000 dollars each. Of course, this is a wrong. However, to right the wrong and maintain fairness, everybody else could be given $10,000 dollars in order to revert to a state of equality.

Is that not discriminating against people who aren't "black" thereby making the playing field even more un-even.

I am advocating eliminating racism by countering the prevalent racism in society in the opposite direction. For example, if today's racism can be denoted by +5 (pro-black), my idea is to use the state to enforce the opposite degree of racism, represented by -5 (pro-white) and thus ensure that there is no net racism. This is not what affirmative action seeks, which is to ensure that there is pro-black racism in society at large.

Your just rephrasing racism , Your going to fight racism with racism which Is literrally the opposite of what you need to do.

You know being black Isn't a race?

The US Census Bureau begs to disagree with you.

OR take the 10,000 dollars back. You will just add to the problem by creating more layers

It's not as easy to take money away from people as it is to give it to them.

I believe the old cliche is "two wrongs do not make a right." This is definitely one of the situations in which that old slogan is relevant.

No reverse-reverse-racism. Just... no racism.

The US Census Bureau begs to disagree with you.

So because the Census Bureau uses the term "race" its correct? No. It's pigmentation, sir

The US Census Bureau begs to disagree with you.

That is literraly retarded , I am white but my race is not white I am white European . Your race is decided by your heritage more than the colour of your skin . A black african is a different race to a Black asian (In terms of the persons family actually descending from whichever continent) Being "black" "white" and "hispanic" are more ethnicitys . sub races than actual races.

You mean, the only way to eradicate racism is through more racism? The only way to eradicate racism is by giving people of minority races equal footing. The only way to do this is via affirmative action.

Really? Do you also believe that the cure for obesity is over-indulgence in food?No, but I do know that the way hyperactive children are frequently treated is by giving them stimulants.

I am advocating eliminating racism by countering the prevalent racism in society in the opposite direction. For example, if today's racism can be denoted by +5 (pro-black), my idea is to use the state to enforce the opposite degree of racism, represented by -5 (pro-white) and thus ensure that there is no net racism. This is not what affirmative action seeks, which is to ensure that there is pro-black racism in society at large.

But -5 does not equal zero!In fact, since direction doesn'tmean anything, it's just racism, let's make i all positive. In this case you're turning it to +15.

Unfortutiously for you, that wasn't what you were arguing for. You were arguing for dropping minourity Affirmative Action in favour of majourity Affirmative Action.

Exactly. Try to follow my example next time. The minorities, via affirmative action, have been given $10,000 dollars. Thus, to maintain equality, the majority must be favored by affirmative action, thus bestowing upon them $10,000 dollars. By this method, everyone will have received $10,000 dollars and there will have been no disparity between the races.

It's not as easy to take money away from people as it is to give it to them.

Sure it is. Stop giving the benefits of Affirmative Action to ANYONE. Thus having a "level playing field" instead of adding more crap

The only way to eradicate racism is by giving people of minority races equal footing.

But they do have equal footing; the free market guarantees this. Interfering with its mechanisms simply results in giving preferential treatment to blacks, which is iniquitous.

But -5 does not equal zero!

Yes, but -5 + 5 does equal 0.

Sure it is. Stop giving the benefits of Affirmative Action to ANYONE. Thus having a "level playing field" instead of adding more crap

Sure, but then the blacks will still retain the extra $10,000 dollars, giving them an edge over competing whites who have not had the privilege of receiving that sum.

Trolls have been proven to not understand Affirmative Action.

Sure it is. Stop giving the benefits of Affirmative Action to ANYONE. Thus having a "level playing field" instead of adding more crapWithout affirmative action, the playing field would not be level.

But they do have equal footing; the free market guarantees this. Interfering with its mechanisms simply results in giving preferential treatment to blacks, which is iniquitous.The free market could only guarantee it if they had equal footing to start with.
If a sizable portion of people were racist, the free market could skew that way. Racism itself interferes with the free market.

Trolls have been proven to not understand Affirmative Action.

If you lack an understanding of the subject, you need not post in this topic.

Your continued posting of troll pictures does not mitigate your transgression; in fact, it exacerbates it.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j315/crashcow/NSG/troll.jpg

Trolls have been proven to not understand Affirmative Action.

*gasp* You Racist, Trolls are people too...:p

The only way to eradicate racism is by giving people of minority races equal footing. The only way to do this is via affirmative action.

But that Is discriminating through race on certain things , the best thing to eradicate racism Is to just not let it be a factor in anything , thus lessening its importance and putting everyone on a equal footing.

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j315/crashcow/NSG/troll.jpg

You're also contributing to the problem; spamming is disapproved of on this forum.

Trolls have been proven to not understand Affirmative Action.

And so have many not-troll people. Just clarifying that the belief does not make someone a troll.

However, trolling about it does...

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j315/crashcow/NSG/troll.jpg

Nice pic.

The US Census Bureau begs to disagree with you.

Speaking of the US Census Bureau:

Number of white families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 3594 = 5.59% of 64,312 total families.

Number of black families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 1529 = 16.44% of 9,299 total families.

Source (http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/faminc/new02_000.htm)

Us white folks could sure use some help leveling that playing field.

But they do have equal footing; the free market guarantees this.

What free market?

How can a free market exist where slavery, segregation, and general socio-economic degradation have not been rectified?

Posters like you are the principle reason supporters of the free market do not get any respect in legitimate discussion.

You're also contributing to the problem; spamming is disapproved of on this forum.

I consider most of the tripe you've been coming out with as spam .

Sure, but then the blacks will still retain the extra $10,000 dollars, giving them an edge over competing whites who have not had the privilege of receiving that sum.

If you stop giving the benefits then they will stop flowing. You cannot retroactively remove Affirmative Action, but you can stop it right here. Instead of continuing to add to Affirmative Action on both sides. Because as soon as one group gets more, the other will want more. Just stop affirmative action altogether, and the next generation does not have to deal with it. Your plan does not create a level playing field

Speaking of the US Census Bureau:

Number of white families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 3594 = 5.59% of 64,312 total families.

Number of black families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 1529 = 16.44% of 9,299 total families.

Source (http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/faminc/new02_000.htm)

Us white folks could sure use some help leveling that playing field.

How about we just try to reduce that group through all-encompassing social projects rather than wasting money focusing on one group at a time.

Us white folks could sure use some help leveling that playing field.

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."

If you lack an understanding of the subject, you need not post in this topic.

Very true.

But that Is discriminating through race on certain things , the best thing to eradicate racism Is to just not let it be a factor in anything , thus lessening its importance and putting everyone on a equal footing.But racism is a factor. Removing affirmative action would not change this.
Racism stems from ignorance. Affirmative action seeks to remove this ignorance.

Without affirmative action, the playing field would not be level.

Wow...how do you figure? Why should one ethnicity get anything over another?

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."

Huh? :confused:

Posters like you are the principle reason supporters of the free market do not get any respect in legitimate discussion.

Unfortunately for you, the free market has been proven to be the optimal economic system and is employed extensively throughout the world with the exception of such communist utopias as lovely North Korea. Those who obdurately refuse to accept the free market are scoffed at everywhere (except France).

Speaking of the US Census Bureau:

Number of white families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 3594 = 5.59% of 64,312 total families.

Number of black families with income < $10,000 in 2005 = 1529 = 16.44% of 9,299 total families.

Source (http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032006/faminc/new02_000.htm)

Us white folks could sure use some help leveling that playing field.

Why not just leave everyone alone , Black families may make less money but maybes thats for a reaosn not connected to race. The world is much more accepting of different ethnicities / race / colour.

Why should one ethnicity get anything over another?

Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.

But racism is a factor. Removing affirmative action would not change this.
Racism stems from ignorance. Affirmative action seeks to remove this ignorance.

Remove ignorance with more ignorance?

Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.

Perhaps you should stop advising people to talk to themselves and actually answer the questions posed to you instead of ceaselessly trolling.

Haha. This thread is funny. The argument fails totally as it follows exactly the same logic as the affirmative action it opposes. That logic being: there has been previous discrimination (against whites, in your argument) so to solve it, lets introduce more discrimination! Grade F.

Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.

Well why should It?

Perhaps you should ask yourself that question.

Umm...would you care to clarify that statement?

FreedomAndGlory no one is going to take your threads seriously because your just another MTAE clone, and no one cares.

Multi-culturalism and tolerance are liberal terrorism!!!1111 oh noes111!!!

But racism is a factor. Removing affirmative action would not change this.
Racism stems from ignorance. Affirmative action seeks to remove this ignorance.

Thats not true. How is Affirmative Action helping? It's just more discriminating, except this time it against a different ethnic group.

Unfortunately for you, the free market has been proven to be the optimal economic system and is employed extensively throughout the world with the exception of such communist utopias as lovely North Korea. Those who obdurately refuse to accept the free market are scoffed at everywhere (except France).

Surely you would have bitten the dust by now if you were some trolling puppet, right?

All I can say is that you do not understand me, my argument, affirmative action, politics, and the world in general very well at all.

But racism is a factor. Removing affirmative action would not change this.
Racism stems from ignorance. Affirmative action seeks to remove this ignorance.

It only serves as troll fuel, though.
There's only one way to kill an idea: education. And that's probably gonna bring up new problems... :(

Surely you would have bitten the dust by now if you were some trolling puppet, right?

All I can say is that you do not understand me, my argument, affirmative action, politics, and the world in general very well at all.

Could you please answer some of our questions towards you, instead of dodging them, and babbling about something else

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."Black culture? You mean like Kwanzaa?

Wow...how do you figure? Why should one ethnicity get anything over another?One etnnicity does get something over another - i.e. white priviledge.
Removing affirmative action would not remove white priviledge.

Remove ignorance with more ignorance?In what way is affirmative action ignorant?

Thats not true. How is Affirmative Action helping? It's just more discriminating, except this time it against a different ethnic group.Give an example of how affirmative action discriminates, so we can be sure we're on the same page here.

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."

You read those numbers and think, "white people need more opportunity"?

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."

Say erm what the hell is black culture , I live in Britain and theres no such thing here.

Also, unregulated markets are chronically prone to failure and collapse, that's an economic fact, the more you deregulate the more speculative a market becomes, the higher the risk is. Regulated markets provide greater economic direction and control of assets can produce greater surplus, also Freedom, Chinas market is heavily regulated and restricted (under socialist doctrine), is there economy going badly? You fail troll.

Why not just leave everyone alone , Black families may make less money but maybes thats for a reaosn not connected to race.

Maybe so. What does that have to do with whether or not affirmative action should exist?

FreedomAndGlory no one is going to take your threads seriously because your just another MTAE clone, and no one cares.

Multi-culturalism and tolerance are liberal terrorism!!!1111 oh noes111!!!

I submitted a premise which contained an intellectual foundation (whether you may disagree with it or not). All you have to your credit are 7 "1"s and 6 exclamation marks; hardly an impressive achievement.

Well I put fourth as much of a logical argument that I could, but it would seem that there are too many ignorant people and "trolls" on this subject now. Not to forget the ones making unfounded statements and ignoring logical questions. That being said, this argument is going nowhere, good-day

Yes, but -5 + 5 does equal 0.

you forgot about the other -5. Besides, that's just going along with your view on racism. Going along with the realiy (no direction just racism), this would be even further from 0 (positive or negative 15, depending on which way racism should be counted.).

Say erm what the hell is black culture , I live in Britain and theres no such thing here.

Have you ever listened to rap music, for example? By what race is the "genre" (if one can call the incoherent babbling intermixed with shouting a "genre") dominated?

In what way is affirmative action ignorant?

Its ignorant of the need of races , You said there has been alot of ignorance in the past therefore affirmative action is what we need but affirmative action is fighting fights racism with racism and Is that not ignorant of the needs of culture / ethnicitys / society.

Have you ever listened to rap music, for example? By what race is the "genre" (if one can call the incoherent babbling intermixed with shouting a "genre") dominated?

Theres no such thing as black culture and just because lots of "black" people listen to a certain type of music doesn't change that.

fine....

Well why should It?

It shouldn't.

But.....

Umm...would you care to clarify that statement?

the status quo is not a system of fair and free exchange of labor and goods, but a system tainted by hundreds of years of government discrimination against certain category of individual for the benefit of another category of individuals. The remnants of a discriminatory system still insure that there is a systematic divergence of privilege between the two groups, and affirmative action is a method for putting an end to this.

So again, you should ask yourself, why should some someone be privileged because of race?

Haha. This thread is funny. The argument fails totally as it follows exactly the same logic as the affirmative action it opposes. That logic being: there has been previous discrimination (against whites, in your argument) so to solve it, lets introduce more discrimination! Grade F.Actually, if the point of the thread is to be satirical, then under that logic it would succeed. MTAE did a lot of satirical stuff like that.

The argument fails, however, because of its mischaracterization of what affirmative action is.

It only serves as troll fuel, though.
There's only one way to kill an idea: education. And that's probably gonna bring up new problems... :(One aspect of affirmative action is education.
How is a racist's experience with black people being limited to a handful of negative experiences best countered?

Maybe so. What does that have to do with whether or not affirmative action should exist?

Theres no need for affirmative action , Affirmative action is putting fuel to the fire.

Also, unregulated markets are chronically prone to failure and collapse, that's an economic fact

Actually, given classical economic theory, the more flexible (ie, deregulated) an economic market is, the better able it is to internalize a shock of some kind. Without restrictions, the market is able to efficiently correct itself via lowering wages; however, unions preclude this possibility and thus lead to contractionary periods. On the opposite side, increasing prices is a tactic used to curb excessive demand which exceeds the ability of the market to satiate all the want. Combined, these measures ensure that there will never be a surplus or a shortage of goods and that severe inflation and a recession will not occur.

-snip-
And why are you linking there?

I submitted a premise which contained an intellectual foundation (whether you may disagree with it or not). All you have to your credit are 7 "1"s and 6 exclamation marks; hardly an impressive achievement.

An intellectual foundation which is flawed , Your pathetic troll-like argument Isn't impressive you know.

And why are you linking there?

He is probably trolling via posting in an inflammatory manner.

Unfortunately for you, the free market has been proven to be the optimal economic system and is employed extensively throughout the world with the exception of such communist utopias as lovely North Korea. Those who obdurately refuse to accept the free market are scoffed at everywhere (except France).

I am one of the staunchest defenders of the free market on this forum, many could vouch for that.

As for your statement, the free market is not employed extensively, there has never existed a reasonably "free" market.

Have you ever listened to rap music, for example? By what race is the "genre" (if one can call the incoherent babbling intermixed with shouting a "genre") dominated?What race is the majority of consumers of rap music?

Its ignorant of the need of races , You said there has been alot of ignorance in the past therefore affirmative action is what we need but affirmative action is fighting fights racism with racism and Is that not ignorant of the needs of culture / ethnicitys / society.There's a lot of ignorance currently, not just in the past.

/snip banned link.Yeah, you should remove that.

I submitted a premise which contained an intellectual foundation (whether you may disagree with it or not). All you have to your credit are 7 "1"s and 6 exclamation marks; hardly an impressive achievement.

Yes, but the problem is that we have demonstrated the logic behind this argument to be fundamentally flawed, because (as said earlier) it follows the same logic as affirmative action it opposes. There has been previous discrimination (against whites, in your argument) so to solve it, introduce more discrimination! What about the black people who would be turned down jobs to grant them to whites in your scheme? Why is this any more moral than white people being denied jobs on the basis of their colour? Surely your viewpoint is inherently inconsistent. THAT is why people dismiss you as a troll, because the argument is clearly incoherent.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/DoNotFeedTroll.jpg

Theres no need for affirmative action , Affirmative action is putting fuel to the fire.

You've said this already. I was asking how

Black families may make less money but maybes thats for a reaosn not connected to race.

justifies your conclusion.

And why are you linking there?

It's for FreedomAndGlory.

I am one of the staunchest defenders of the free market on this forum, many could vouch for that.

Maybe Stalin and Marx would call you a capitalist pig, but I consider you a socialist. Saying that you are one of the staunchest defenders of the free market on this forum is like saying you are a one of the staunchest defenders of civil rights in the North Korean government.

there has never existed a reasonably "free" market.

Obviously, you are using a radically different definition of "free market" as that employed by the vast majority of economists.

It's for FreedomAndGlory.

I am not a racist and I resent the implication that I am a bigot for having the courage to stand up to the racist establishment.

Don't get me started on how unregulated markets fail please, the Chinese economy will have outdone the US in 5 years because of a regulated and manipulated currency market. The fact the clothes you wear are most likely communist products proves the US market in deregulation attempts has been swamped.

It's for FreedomAndGlory.

don't worry about him, he's just a troll, after all, he's ignoring that last post of mine, polly because he does not have a good comeback.

You've said this already. I was asking how

It fights racism with racism . I know that I would be incensed If the goverment started using racism as a solution to a much bigger problem.

Maybe Stalin and Marx would call you a capitalist pig, but I consider you a socialist. Saying that you are one of the staunchest defenders of the free market on this forum is like saying you are a one of the staunchest defenders of civil rights in the North Korean government.

Perhaps we should put it to a vote?

I am not a racist and I resent the implication that I am a bigot for having the courage to stand up to the racist establishment.

Erm weren't you standing up for the racist establishent over affirmative action?

we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts

"Racism is bad. So let's employ racism!"

Ah MeansToAnEnd. How I missed your trolling threads.

It fights racism with racism . I know that I would be incensed If the goverment started using racism as a solution to a much bigger problem.

Surely you agree that those numbers represent a social problem? How then should it be solved, if not for affirmative action? An income gap has been there for a very long time ... I don't think just leaving it alone is going to solve it anytime soon.

I am not a racist and I resent the implication that I am a bigot for having the courage to stand up to the racist establishment.

You're not talking about standing up to the 'racist establishment'. What you're proposing is putting up a second 'racist establishment'.

I don't agree with affirmative action completely, but what you're posting is utter nonsense: Answer Racism with Racism?

What about changing things so that no one has priviliges in society?

...Saying that you are one of the staunchest defenders of the free market on this forum is like saying you are a one of the staunchest defenders of civil rights in the North Korean government...

The vast majority of people here accept an economy inclined far more towards the free market than towards government control. The majority would probably advocate a limited amount of regulation in certain areas, but that is because that is the political centre-ground. Most people agree with a certain degree of redistributive taxation, and some level of corporate regulation to prevent corruption and exploitation. This isn't the Hayek fanclub. This forum is only marginally inclined to the left of the general political spectrum, and in a non-American context would be pretty much dead in the centre. So that statement above is one of sheer idiocy, and is just the sort of comment that means that people single you out as a troll.

Ahem....

Perhaps you should stop advising people to talk to themselves and actually answer the questions posed to you instead of ceaselessly trolling.




Well why should It?

It shouldn't.

But.....

Umm...would you care to clarify that statement?

the status quo is not a system of fair and free exchange of labor and goods, but a system tainted by hundreds of years of government discrimination against certain category of individual for the benefit of another category of individuals. The remnants of a discriminatory system still insure that there is a systematic divergence of privilege between the two groups, and affirmative action is a method for putting an end to this.

So again, you should ask yourself, why should some someone be privileged because of race?

Surely you agree that those numbers represent a social problem? How then should it be solved, if not for affirmative action? An income gap has been there for a very long time ... I don't think just leaving it alone is going to solve it anytime soon.

Society Is slowly shedding its racial prejudice , although not everyone will atleast a majority and affirmative action is more likely to create a further social space between different coloured people than lessen it.

And again, for FAG (I can't use that acronym without thinking he is a joke troll), a question that he has not yet answered:

What free market?

How can a free market exist where slavery, segregation, and general socio-economic degradation have not been rectified?

The vast majority of people here accept an economy inclined far more towards the free market than towards government control. The majority would probably advocate a limited amount of regulation in certain areas, but that is because that is the political centre-ground. Most people agree with a certain degree of redistributive taxation, and some level of corporate regulation to prevent corruption and exploitation. This isn't the Hayek fanclub. This forum is only marginally inclined to the left of the general political spectrum, and in a non-American context would be pretty much dead in the centre. So that statement above is one of sheer idiocy, and is just the sort of comment that means that people single you out as a troll.

I am a market anarchist and support no government whatsoever.

I am not so dense, however, to be ignorant of the fact that government would still be present if its policies still held sway even after the structure has been abolished.

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.

Umm, okay. Reverse racism is a bitch. But you're spouting off shit.

And again, for FAG (I can't use that acronym without thinking he is a joke troll), a question that he has not yet answered:

The free market implies that individuals have the freedom of self-determination, which negates slavery. Segregation, in the US at least, is an expression of the innate desire to surround oneself with those who most similar; it is the modern-day version of primitive tribes. General socio-economic degradation is an excessively vague term, but, as per my interpretation, it can easily coexist with a free market. Those whose labor isn't prized may find that the reimbursement for their work is minute; wages are determined by the free market as a function of the desirability of such labor, and some people are bound to "draw the short straw," as it were, if they are lazy and lack a strong work ethic.

What about changing things so that no one has priviliges in society?

Are you referring to slavery? That's the only system of which I can think which eliminates privileges completely.

The vast majority of people here accept an economy inclined far more towards the free market than towards government control.

From what I've heard, the main premises of the free market are subject to incoherent yet harsh diatribes by a vocal minority of posters. Furthermore, from threads graphing the results of the Political Compass test, there was a severe leftward skew, which went far beyond the American center (oddly denoted as the center-right by that peculiar test). In any case, the posters here are not a very capitalistic bunch, no matter what you say.

Erm weren't you standing up for the racist establishent over affirmative action?

No, affirmative action is the racist establishment.

The free market implies that individuals have the freedom of self-determination, which negates slavery.

Slavery has not been negated yet.

Segregation, in the US at least, is an expression of the innate desire to surround oneself with those who most similar.

It was also state legislated, and there are far greater differences than skin color.

The vast majority of people here accept an economy inclined far more towards the free market than towards government control. The majority would probably advocate a limited amount of regulation in certain areas, but that is because that is the political centre-ground. Most people agree with a certain degree of redistributive taxation, and some level of corporate regulation to prevent corruption and exploitation. This isn't the Hayek fanclub. This forum is only marginally inclined to the left of the general political spectrum, and in a non-American context would be pretty much dead in the centre. So that statement above is one of sheer idiocy, and is just the sort of comment that means that people single you out as a troll.

ha that's a good one that is.
You can't be serious.

Are you referring to slavery? That's the only system of which I can think which eliminates privileges completely.

lmao, no I'm not talking of slavery:rolleyes:

I'm talking about more equality between the races. I believe affirmative action is nescessary in some (not all) settings.

Whether you are willing to admit it or not, there are still those who would discriminate against others based on their skin color. Affirmative action is a way to even the playing field against such men & women. And it should go both ways.

[QUOTE=Vittos the City Sacker;12738486]Slavery has not been negated yet.

You are far away from context of this thread, which is about the American government. I don't think that can be used as an example.

You are far away from context of this thread, which is about the American government. I don't think that can be used as an example.

Alright then, the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet.

That's a good way of putting it.

The purpose of affirmative action is to reverse racism; the only way to eradicate racism is via affirmative action.

There's never been a state of equality among all races. Whites have always been, and still continue to be priviledged.

I really don't agree with that, though I don't think affirmative action is essentially a bad thing. People will still be racist, regardless of the fact that someone may have had help getting a job or into a college. Though the integration may help if other people are receptive to it.

If whites managed to secure such 'priviledges' (personally, I have yet to see them work for me), why should they give them to people unless they want to?
Why should there be regulated 'fairness'? I am sure that if any other 'race' had taken over other civilizations and built up strong nations and economies, they might do the same thing. Undoubtedly they would. I realize this might come across as racist, however, I came to the conclusion that life wasn't fair, a long time ago. While I don't mean to say that we should endeavor to keep it so, and make no effort to fix it, I do assert that it will always be unfair or biased towards certain groups, peoples, people, or individuals. Unless we can change our human natures, we won't achieve a finality.

Alright then, the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet.

Really? If I wanted, could I purchase you and have you legally bound to me in perpetuity? No, I thought not. Your ridiculous bull**** will not gain any traction, hopefully. No man can own another in the US.

Really? If I wanted, could I purchase you and have you legally bound to me in perpetuity? No, I thought not. Your ridiculous bull**** will not gain any traction, hopefully. No man can own another in the US.

Not literally.

But through suppression of wages perhaps. Determining whether or not someone gets hired or gets into a college? That is suppression, though not slavery.

It still binds though.

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.

Why don't you just say that you're native american on your college apps. It's not like they look into that shit or can prove it. You should start looking at how to work with the system instead of fighting it.

Why don't you just say that you're native american on your college apps. It's not like they look into that shit or can prove it. You should start looking at how to work with the system instead of fighting it.

I like to avoid dishonesty whenever possible. I don't want to get into a college ahead of a better qualified white candidate simply because I stated that I was Native American on my application. According to an old quote, evil can only succeed when good men do nothing; in my opinion, accepting the system is worse than doing nothing, as it actively endorses the system.

Really? If I wanted, could I purchase you and have you legally bound to me in perpetuity? No, I thought not. Your ridiculous bull**** will not gain any traction, hopefully. No man can own another in the US.

I'm sorry, when I said "the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet", I mean that the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet.

I really don't agree with that, though I don't think affirmative action is essentially a bad thing. People will still be racist, regardless of the fact that someone may have had help getting a job or into a college. Though the integration may help if other people are receptive to it.I don't see affirmative action as attemptimg to eradicate racism, but rather as eradicating the effects of racism. (Although it would help against people who are unconsciously racist.)

If whites managed to secure such 'priviledges' (personally, I have yet to see them work for me), why should they give them to people unless they want to?Well, since whites make up the majority of the legislature, and the legislature passed affirmative action laws, it seems as though whites do want to do so.

Why should there be regulated 'fairness'? I am sure that if any other 'race' had taken over other civilizations and built up strong nations and economies, they might do the same thing. Undoubtedly they would. I realize this might come across as racist, however, I came to the conclusion that life wasn't fair, a long time ago. While I don't mean to say that we should endeavor to keep it so, and make no effort to fix it, I do assert that it will always be unfair or biased towards certain groups, peoples, people, or individuals. Unless we can change our human natures, we won't achieve a finality.If you see no problem with making life fair then you shouldn't oppose the idea of regulating fairness in and of itself.

I'm sorry, when I said "the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet", I mean that the American Government has not worked to negate the effects of slavery yet.

Well, you should have been clearer.

It's been 150 years since slavery was abolished. Get real; there are no more adverse effects.

But they do have equal footing; the free market guarantees this. Interfering with its mechanisms simply results in giving preferential treatment to blacks, which is iniquitous.

This is perhaps your worst argument yet FAG and that's difficult. Caucasians have been placed at an advantage in this country for hundreds of years. You tell me when the civil right act was passed and you expect equality to exist in that short time? Because the United States is a Eurocentric society the years of descrimination against people of other races is quite long. Black people were given inferior educations in "seperate but equal" scools for years. Many black people stil live in urban centers where they are not privy to the best the country has to offer. Affirmitive Action exists as a temporary means of leveling the playing field. It is not meant to be permenant. PErhaps if the "poor white man" didn't repress these people for centuries there would be no need for these programs. Giving the majority more advantages makes sense to you? Why don't we give millionares tax free income while we're at it?

ha that's a good one that is.
You can't be serious.

Im perfectly serious. Are the majority of generalites communists or socialists? There are a few extreme-left nutcases, but we also have our fair share of economically extreme right-wing nutjobs. Most people fall somewhere around the middle. However, when the proletariat of NSG rises up against the corrupt and flawed Jolt regime, passionately singing "Red Flag", my opinion may alter.

I like to avoid dishonesty whenever possible. I don't want to get into a college ahead of a better qualified white candidate simply because I stated that I was Native American on my application. According to an old quote, evil can only succeed when good men do nothing; in my opinion, accepting the system is worse than doing nothing, as it actively endorses the system.

So you'd rather piss and moan about nothing? And if affirmative action is really so wrong, then why do you care if you lie about it? They're immoral anyway, right? And you're beating out the same qualified whites b/c you thought of it first.

Why don't we give millionares tax free income while we're at it?

Well, that would be an excellent measure to jolt the economy and would produce real, tangible results for the common man. As more money flows through the economy and more is targeted at private investment, GDP will correspondingly increase to the benefit of all. I'm afraid I don't see your point.

An opportunity is only what people make of it; black culture leads impressionable youngsters down the path to drugs and criminal behavior, yet that problem must be dealt with at its root and not blamed on the "evil white man."

wow is all that needs to be said. You sure as hell are not a racist are you?

Hmm, racism.. Us whites seem to think we are better than anyone else... but we're not. and even those that say they are totally are not racist areto a point because if they are part of the majority, then like most times, the majority is better. Although, it seems now that minorities are getting more privileges then some majorities. For example, on college applications, why is there a box that says "check here is you're African American". Does this make any sense. If the educational system is truly doing an equal job teaching children, then should it matter what "color" you are when you fill out an application. Some may say that it is because the "African Americans" are getting an education that is not quite as good as us "whites", but is that right? Shouldn't the education system be the same, and not only that, how is it different when as far as I know there is no longer any "segregated" schools, so if some "African American" kids arent getting a "good" education, then doesnt that hold true to the white kids also in there class? I dont know... it just doens't make sense to me.

And if affirmative action is really so wrong, then why do you care if you lie about it?

Affirmative action is wrong because it puts whites at a disadvantage; I'd rather not exacerbate the problem by claiming that I am a Native American.

And you're beating out the same qualified whites b/c you thought of it first.

I don't cheat on tests not because the idea never crossed my mind, but because it is immoral and grossly unfair. The same logic applies here; the truly smart will get in on merit, not by deception.

It's been 150 years since slavery was abolished. Get real; there are no more adverse effects.

And 6 generations is long enough for an entire portion of the population to go from property to being equal owners of property?

Although, it seems now that minorities are getting more privileges then some majorities. For example, on college applications, why is there a box that says "check here is you're African American". Does this make any sense. Depends on what the box is for.

If the educational system is truly doing an equal job teaching children, then should it matter what "color" you are when you fill out an application. Some may say that it is because the "African Americans" are getting an education that is not quite as good as us "whites", but is that right? Shouldn't the education system be the same, and not only that, how is it different when as far as I know there is no longer any "segregated" schools, so if some "African American" kids arent getting a "good" education, then doesnt that hold true to the white kids also in there class? I dont know... it just doens't make sense to me.Schools aren't segregated by race anymore, but they are segregated by income...or more appropriately, tax bracket.
Blacks are disproportionately poor.
Nonetheless, while it is true that being poor is a disadvantage, it's not the only one.

And 6 generations is long enough for an entire portion of the population to go from property to being equal owners of property?

Yes, even one generation is long enough.

Affirmative action is wrong because it puts whites at a disadvantage; I'd rather not exacerbate the problem by claiming that I am a Native American.
Whites aren't at a disadvantage if they all claim to be native americans.


I don't cheat on tests not because the idea never crossed my mind, but because it is immoral and grossly unfair. The same logic applies here; the truly smart will get in on merit, not by deception.
Then start a movement to get other whites to say that they are a minority. Then it will be fair and you will have destroyed affirmative action from the inside.

Yes, even one generation is long enough.

Well, shit.

Well, that would be an excellent measure to jolt the economy and would produce real, tangible results for the common man. As more money flows through the economy and more is targeted at private investment, GDP will correspondingly increase to the benefit of all. I'm afraid I don't see your point.

Sure, you ignore the rest of my post FAG. Please present me with one empirical example of this happening. Please explain how trickle down economics is so wonderful. Of course you don't see my point because you believ e more power and wealth should be in less hands. You clearly understand nothing of macroeconomics and you ignore the China example. Uou can't ignore the rest of my argument and pick what you want. So please expound beyond your carefully worded generalities. Your education seems to be a mile wide and an inch deep.

Oh, btw it has been shown that placing more $ in the hands of the greater number of middle class produces far more spending and incfrease in gdp than in the hands of the wealthy. Here's an example for you that you might understand. Man A owns 2 factories. Man A gets a tax free life and buys a third factory. This third factory sits useless because there is no money in the hands of the consumers hands thereby not allowing for an increase in jobs or wealth for the middle class. Less taxes on the rich means more taxes in the middle class. So now the middle clas has less jobs, less money, and much contribute more so that the rich can get a whole lot richer.

Then start a movement to get other whites to say that they are a minority. Then it will be fair and you will have destroyed affirmative action from the inside.

But.... whites arent a minority. Besides, lying on a form isn't the way to fix a situation.

But.... whites arent a minority. Besides, lying on a form isn't the way to fix a situation.

How would it not fix the "situation." It negates any advantage that minorities gain because everybody gets the same advantages. And if everybody gets them then nobody gets them. So affirmative action is gone. No FAG can go throw a party or whatever he does when the ebil liberals lose.

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.

Let's see. Blacks are allegedly more privileged than whites.

Well, the poverty rate must be higher for whites. Nope.

Well, then the unemployment must be higher for whites. Nope.

Well, whites must be underrepresented in government and business positions. Nope.

Maybe studies show blacks have an easier time getting a job. Nope.

Well, FAG must be able to point to some objective measure by which blacks are more privileged than whites.

Or maybe FAG is full of shit.

Yes, even one generation is long enough.

So, 245 years of slavery and 100 years of segregation, but there are no lingering effects.

But there are lingering effects from affirmative action that require racist policies to correct?

That tin-foil hat must be cutting off the circulation.

Time for no racism whatsoever.

You clearly understand nothing of macroeconomics and you ignore the China example.

I avoided that example to spare you any embarrassment, but now that you bring it up again, I feel bound to respond. First of all, China's economic growth accelerated when it adopted more free-market policies, a testament to the efficiency of the system. However, because it still retains many economic relics of its communist past, its GDP per capita is not even one-fifth of what the US's is; it is, by and large, a country comparable to Romania or Bulgaria in terms of prosperity, which isn't a very high benchmark.

Man A owns 2 factories. Man A gets a tax free life and buys a third factory. This third factory sits useless because there is no money in the hands of the consumers hands thereby not allowing for an increase in jobs or wealth for the middle class.

Ooh, what a complex yet flawless example! I'm shocked speechless! That brief comment incorporated the most complicated economic axioms and managed to provide a very persuasive argument. It belied an exceptional familiarity with economic theory; this much is indisputable. Oh, wait! Why did the man purchase the factory in the first place if people weren't willing to buy the additional goods he could produce with it? Similarly, if people wanted more goods but there wasn't a third factory, the only result would be inflation. Try again.

So, 245 years of slavery and 100 years of segregation, but there are no lingering effects.

Indeed, because virtually no people living today (with the possible exception of Zell Miller) have been exposed to slavery and it thus has no impact on them. Segregation was abolished a sufficiently long time ago in order for most people to become accustomed to the new order of things and thus plays only a minuscule role in modern politics.

But there are lingering effects from affirmative action that require racist policies to correct?

Of course, since almost every living American person has been subjected to a society which adopted affirmative action. Some may have undergone social stigmatization because of their views which weren't politically correct; thus, they may retain a flawed viewpoint even after affirmative action no longer holds legal sway.

Society Is slowly shedding its racial prejudice , although not everyone will atleast a majority and affirmative action is more likely to create a further social space between different coloured people than lessen it.

I'm not even speaking about racial prejudice. I just showed the gross disadvantage that blacks have when compared with whites. You don't have any more idea than I or the next person about what will create 'social space' and we've been waiting for over a century for blacks to catch up.

I don't see affirmative action as attemptimg to eradicate racism, but rather as eradicating the effects of racism. (Although it would help against people who are unconsciously racist.)

Well, since whites make up the majority of the legislature, and the legislature passed affirmative action laws, it seems as though whites do want to do so.

If you see no problem with making life fair then you shouldn't oppose the idea of regulating fairness in and of itself.

Got it.

Seems so.

That is why I asked "Why should there be regulated fairness?" not "Should there be regulated fairness?" I don't oppose it, I was just wondering if you had a reason. I would like to see a world where everyone is equal under the law, has equal oppurtunities, and can do with their life what they want(within reason), without being oppressed or held back by a larger group of people.
I know there will never be complete equality, and I would be content without going so far as having a Harrison Bergeron type of scenario.

I'm not even speaking about racial prejudice. I just showed the gross disadvantage that blacks have when compared with whites. You don't have any more idea than I or the next person on what will create 'social space' and we've been waiting for over a century for blacks to catch up.

I think reintegration wasn't over until the '80s. THAT'S when we need to start the clock IMO.

I think reintegration wasn't over until the '80s. THAT'S when we need to start the clock IMO.

True, I suppose, though it's always more complicated, because it would vary regionally.

True, I suppose, though it's always more complicated, because it would vary regionally.

I'm saying to start the clock at the end of the last integration project, once all US integrations were completed.

If hetero white males find themselves oppressed and overly hampered in the Western world today, then I submit that they are either

1) Innately deficient in a manner so severe that no amount of coddling is ever going to help them

or

2) Such crybabies that no amount of coddling is ever going to help them.

I really don't see any possible reason why anybody will benefit from giving additional perks to hetero white males based on their race, sex, or sexuality. And that includes the hetero white males themselves...remember, spoiling a child doesn't actually do the child any good in the long run.

So, 245 years of slavery and 100 years of segregation, but there are no lingering effects.

But there are lingering effects from affirmative action that require racist policies to correct?

That tin-foil hat must be cutting off the circulation.

Ouch. Owned. Yet again. Maybe we should desert this thread now, given that the argument has been thoroughly discredited on numerous occasions? If we stick around we're just giving FreedomAndGlory undeserved attention. And no one wants to be a F.A.G. enabler. :p

I avoided that example to spare you any embarrassment, but now that you bring it up again, I feel bound to respond. First of all, China's economic growth accelerated when it adopted more free-market policies, a testament to the efficiency of the system. However, because it still retains many economic relics of its communist past, its GDP per capita is not even one-fifth of what the US's is; it is, by and large, a country comparable to Romania or Bulgaria in terms of prosperity, which isn't a very high benchmark.



Ooh, what a complex yet flawless example! I'm shocked speechless! That brief comment incorporated the most complicated economic axioms and managed to provide a very persuasive argument. It belied an exceptional familiarity with economic theory; this much is indisputable. Oh, wait! Why did the man purchase the factory in the first place if people weren't willing to buy the additional goods he could produce with it? Similarly, if people wanted more goods but there wasn't a third factory, the only result would be inflation. Try again.

You being sarcastic and snide doesn't lend to you being any more right, just a dick. You still ignored my original post regarding slaver and separate but equal policies due to your fear of inadequacy. Here's how you fell into my trap and ruined your own argument: 1. If man A won't buy a new factory to attempt to sell more products then there is no benefit for the middle class still. So your theory of giving tax free status to millionaires helps no one and you lose. 2. With property ownership comes certain advantages i.e. writing interest off against your tax liability and property tax rebate programs. 3. You still have yet to prove why giving advantages to already advantaged people makes any sense 4. *you've been pawned* by both Cat and myself. 5. China's ECONOMIC EXPANSION is dwarfing the US and that is what we were talking about and you know it. Providing the snide response that the group that started at 1 has not yet caught up with the group at 1,000,000 makes little sense. When Group A has expanded at %400 and will overcome group B that provides an example that group B is going to be at a disadvantage to group A in the foreseeable future. Further, the United States has sold most of its assets and bonds to foreign countries. Do you know what country holds a large majority of the US debt? ding ding ding, CHINA! 6. Let's save the economics lesson for another thread and stay on topic of your original thread. Explain how giving advantages to the already advantaged makes any sense whatsoever.

Ouch. Owned. Yet again. Maybe we should desert this thread now, given that the argument has been thoroughly discredited on numerous occasions? If we stick around we're just giving FreedomAndGlory undeserved attention. And no one wants to be a F.A.G. enabler. :p

quite correct. I will no longer enable FAG and his inane comments. All in favor and agreement that FAG has been thoroughly handled say "FAG Death"

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.

Reverse racism (as i am sure has been mentioned in this thread) is an idiotic and nonsensical

Not only that it helps portray the idea that only a non white can be the victim of racism, what is even dumber is that people who use that "reverse racism" term are usually the ones bitching about how all them dirty minorities get "special privileges"

Hey, if F&G's idea happens and (inevitably) causes another War of Secession, who knows, maybe in the NEXT one the South actually DOES leave the US, resulting in the only powerful part of the US being the better (more liberal, thus better) part. Could happen. The result would be the North joining Canada and becoming a liberal actual world leader and the South reclaiming its due place among third-world countries.

I am afraid the starter of the thread has hit it right on the nail. I am no racist myself, (I am of Chinese descent) but I have had enough hearing of all the 'minority's rights'. Enough ethnic quotas. Let us be one people, the American people. In the USA - love it or leave it. If one comes to the USA to become a citizen to integrate into the Judeo-Christian culture of middle America, then he or she may do so regardless of his or her racial background. However, if one comes to the USA to exploit the racist laws of liberals or to advance his or her nation, as unfortuantely in the case of many Mexican immigrants, then there is no point as they are not here to be part of the USA. They have betrayed the ideas of Dr. Martin Luther King, who spoke of a 'color blind society'. Ironically, Dr. King's so called 'heirs' do exactly the opposite, putting in 'ethnic quotas' for minorties, which is just as racist as segregration. A

All immigration should be halted for a long period of time to allow present immigrants to assimilate. Or else, as Mr Jean-Marie Le Pen said of France (he is no racist, he has Arab, Black and Jewish members in the Front National), we will be drowned by immigration, and as the famous British politician Enoch Powell said in his 'Rivers of Blood' speech, the river Tiber would be foaming with blood, and it is like a nation busily burning it's own funeral pyre.

One should read Pat Buchanan's books on this.
10/10. Comedic gold.

I am afraid the starter of the thread has hit it right on the nail. I am no racist myself, (I am of Chinese descent) but I have had enough hearing of all the 'minority's rights'. Enough ethnic quotas. Let us be one people, the American people. In the USA - love it or leave it. If one comes to the USA to become a citizen to integrate into the Judeo-Christian culture of middle America, then he or she may do so regardless of his or her racial background. However, if one comes to the USA to exploit the racist laws of liberals or to advance his or her nation, as unfortuantely in the case of many Mexican immigrants, then there is no point as they are not here to be part of the USA. They have betrayed the ideas of Dr. Martin Luther King, who spoke of a 'color blind society'. Ironically, Dr. King's so called 'heirs' do exactly the opposite, putting in 'ethnic quotas' for minorties, which is just as racist as segregration. A

All immigration should be halted for a long period of time to allow present immigrants to assimilate. Or else, as Mr Jean-Marie Le Pen said of France (he is no racist, he has Arab, Black and Jewish members in the Front National), we will be drowned by immigration, and as the famous British politician Enoch Powell said in his 'Rivers of Blood' speech, the river Tiber would be foaming with blood, and it is like a nation busily burning it's own funeral pyre.

One should read Pat Buchanan's books on this.

10/10. Comedic gold.

Like the Soup Nazi from Seinfeld, minus the "soup" and the "from Seinfeld" parts? :p

Soup Nazi

So anyone who objects to liberal thoughts is automatically a Nazi? If one day Nazism will return, it will return in the disguise of anti-Nazism!

So anyone who objects to liberal thoughts is automatically a Nazi? If one day Nazism will return, it will return in the disguise of anti-Nazism!

No. Anyone who advocates openly racist and nationalistic ideas while disguising it as "protecting the country" is though. And isn't Seinfeld syndicated there? Watch it. Jeez.

Further, claiming that "anti-Nazism" is Nazi does seem to want to place the Nazis in the position of "victims", which adds to my suspicions.

So anyone who objects to mass immigration is a rascist!? Not surprised about that, Communist socialist Red liberals who are friends of Osama want immigrant votes, so they open up the borders! They don't care what the anti-semitic Arabs do to Jews in Europe, they don't care that they don't assimilate, they hardly care about their riots! It took Chirac 7 days to declare national emergency when immigrants in France rioted and burnt hundreds of cars! Boy oh boy you really don't want to know what radical immigrants did to Ilan Halimi, a young Jewish Frenchman who was kidnapped and brutally rortured to death and killed! Osama and Al Qaeda slip in terrorists through the open US-Mexican border! Radical Islam will soon become a majority in the west, and will implement sharia law! And guess what, your head will be on their scimitar chopping block as well, and only then will you realise that Le Pen and Buchanan were correct!

If one day Nazism will return, it will return in the disguise of anti-Nazism!
In related news, the Ministry of Truth has issued a historical correction: contrary to popular misconception, the sky is--and always has been--orange.

And no one wants to be a F.A.G. enabler. :p

That is so wrong, and at the same time so right! :D

In related news, the Ministry of Truth has issued a historical correction: contrary to popular misconception, the sky is--and always has been--orange.

I always found you to be doubleplusgood. ;)

op snip

I assumed affirmative action was to help minorities get ahead and to make them more representative within the relevant sectors.

maybe it should maintained until the are more or less fully represented within society. Once that's achieved it can be fased out or make it non-race/minority based so that it helps maybe the poorer sections of society regardless of ethnic status

So anyone who objects to liberal thoughts is automatically a Nazi? If one day Nazism will return, it will return in the disguise of anti-Nazism!

We have a Godwin! Thread over.

Hey RC, your underage wife pop out that kid yet? Or should I call you MTAE? Gotta admit FAG is a nice acronym, very flamebait.

No. Anyone who advocates openly racist and nationalistic ideas while disguising it as "protecting the country" is though. And isn't Seinfeld syndicated there? Watch it. Jeez.

Further, claiming that "anti-Nazism" is Nazi does seem to want to place the Nazis in the position of "victims", which adds to my suspicions.

What you mean? I tell you some thing about some radical anti-semitic Islamic immigrants. Do you remember in 2005 when they rioted on the streets, and your liberal friend Chirac took 7 days to declare a state of emergency, by which time hundreds of cars where burnt? Or how they kidnapped and brutally tortured to death a young Jewish Frenchman, Ilan Halimi? I tell you what, maybe you know Buchanan and Le Pen is right when radical Islam takes power in several decade when they become majority of population and intorudce sharia law! Your head would be first on their scimitar knief chopping block, because liberals like you are easy target for them!

I was saying that supposed Anti-Nazi smear real patriot who are not Nazi! Churchill was patriot! And yet the Anti-Nazi act exactly like Nazi!

I do not care all that much for the Black race. However, I do care an awful lot for my country, which I am proud to say is the USA. Here in America, people need to be judged without consideration of their skin color or faith. That is the way that we are. We can all bitch and moan about the problems that the Blacks cause, but when it comes down to judging a man we need to be objective.

Although, I am a bit on the racist side, I would not say that I am prejudiced. I also would fight tooth and nail against any racial prejudice in hiring of people or in recruitment at colleges. I think affirmative action is racist and should have no place in the United States. The only good affirmative action liberal or discriminatory employer or college admissions officer is a dead one.

I am afraid the starter of the thread has hit it right on the nail. I am no racist myself, (I am of Chinese descent) but I have had enough hearing of all the 'minority's rights'. Enough ethnic quotas. Let us be one people, the American people. In the USA - love it or leave it. If one comes to the USA to become a citizen to integrate into the Judeo-Christian culture of middle America, then he or she may do so regardless of his or her racial background. However, if one comes to the USA to exploit the racist laws of liberals or to advance his or her nation, as unfortuantely in the case of many Mexican immigrants, then there is no point as they are not here to be part of the USA. They have betrayed the ideas of Dr. Martin Luther King, who spoke of a 'color blind society'. Ironically, Dr. King's so called 'heirs' do exactly the opposite, putting in 'ethnic quotas' for minorties, which is just as racist as segregration. A

All immigration should be halted for a long period of time to allow present immigrants to assimilate. Or else, as Mr Jean-Marie Le Pen said of France (he is no racist, he has Arab, Black and Jewish members in the Front National), we will be drowned by immigration, and as the famous British politician Enoch Powell said in his 'Rivers of Blood' speech, the river Tiber would be foaming with blood, and it is like a nation busily burning it's own funeral pyre.

One should read Pat Buchanan's books on this.

F.A.G., is that you?

What you mean? I tell you some thing about some radical anti-semitic Islamic immigrants. Do you remember in 2005 when they rioted on the streets, and your liberal friend Chirac took 7 days to declare a state of emergency, by which time hundreds of cars where burnt? Or how they kidnapped and brutally tortured to death a young Jewish Frenchman, Ilan Halimi? I tell you what, maybe you know Buchanan and Le Pen is right when radical Islam takes power in several decade when they become majority of population and intorudce sharia law! Your head would be first on their scimitar knief chopping block, because liberals like you are easy target for them!

I was saying that supposed Anti-Nazi smear real patriot who are not Nazi! Churchill was patriot! And yet the Anti-Nazi act exactly like Nazi!

2005 was not an islamic thing. It was apoor suburb thing. Many minorities burned cars as a protest to police and social repression.

Islam had nothing to do with it. Zip. Nada. Rien. nothing.

Who is F.A.G? I have never heard of him. I repear, I am new to this, and I have a right to democracy and free speech without personal attacks.

Who is F.A.G? I have never heard of him. I repear, I am new to this, and I have a right to democracy and free speech without personal attacks.

What gives you that right?

And what does democracy have to do with anything?

I do not care all that much for the Black race. However, I do care an awful lot for my country, which I am proud to say is the USA. Here in America, people need to be judged without consideration of their skin color or faith. That is the way that we are. We can all bitch and moan about the problems that the Blacks cause, but when it comes down to judging a man we need to be objective.

Although, I am a bit on the racist side, I would not say that I am prejudiced. I also would fight tooth and nail against any racial prejudice in hiring of people or in recruitment at colleges. I think affirmative action is racist and should have no place in the United States. The only good affirmative action liberal or discriminatory employer or college admissions officer is a dead one.

At that point, you lost me entirely. I can go through with your personal racist tendencies and I can support the rest, but the bolded part... No killing. Killing is bad except when done in self-defense, which this is clearly not.

What you mean? I tell you some thing about some radical anti-semitic Islamic immigrants. Do you remember in 2005 when they rioted on the streets, and your liberal friend Chirac took 7 days to declare a state of emergency, by which time hundreds of cars where burnt? Or how they kidnapped and brutally tortured to death a young Jewish Frenchman, Ilan Halimi? I tell you what, maybe you know Buchanan and Le Pen is right when radical Islam takes power in several decade when they become majority of population and intorudce sharia law! Your head would be first on their scimitar knief chopping block, because liberals like you are easy target for them!

I was saying that supposed Anti-Nazi smear real patriot who are not Nazi! Churchill was patriot! And yet the Anti-Nazi act exactly like Nazi!

First of all: They're called prepositions. And verbs. And articles. Use them.

Second of all: I'm above answering fear-rhetoric-ridden rants that have very little sense and connection between ideas, but I will stoop to answering you because I'm feeling generous. So I'll point out that you apply the wrong thought process (the actions of one = the actions of many) with the wrong premises ("they'll someday out-reproduce us" and "they will impose sharia law") leading to the wrong conclusions ("OMFGWTFBBQ!!11!! EBUL MOSLEMS WILL KILL US ALL RUN FER YER LIVES!!11!!11!!!1").

You bore me.

First amendement of constitution!

First amendement of constitution!

Where does the first amendment give you the right to not verbally "attacked"? personally that first amendment ensures others right to verbally comment on you and your posts.

That being said what does that have to do with these forums in the first place? Not only are they privately owned but they are located outside the US.

Although, I am a bit on the racist side, I would not say that I am prejudiced.

Pick one.

First amendement of constitution!

This is a privately-owned (strike one), british based (strike two) site with rules that limit freedom of expression (strike three).

You are right in that you are supposed to not be victim of personnal attacks but that is it.

You are right in that you are supposed to not be victim of personal attacks but that is it.

Minding that what he calls personal attacks are, essentially, pointing out the flaws in his points. I'm sure he'll say I personally attacked him when I pointed out the existent similarities between his views and the Nazi ones.

~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~BEER~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~~blah~

Most Muslim is not radical, I have Muslim friends but most radical immigrants are Muslim! And it is not wrong, it is from UN statistics! European birth rate is going down, while immigrant birth rate is going up! If they are assimilated immigrants that allright, but many of them not!

Most Muslim is not radical, I have Muslim friends but most radical immigrants are Muslim! And it is not wrong, it is from UN statistics! European birth rate is going down, while immigrant birth rate is going up! If they are assimilated immigrants that all right, but many of them not!

1) No need to shout, JMLP
2) Cite the stats and people will believe you.
3) Seriously, stop yelling

This is a privately-owned (strike one), british based (strike two) site with rules that limit freedom of expression (strike three).

You are right in that you are supposed to not be victim of personnal attacks but that is it.
Add to that that (strike four?) the fact that the first amendment to the constitution does not guarantee what he says it does in the first place.

similarities between his views and the Nazi ones.

How am I Nazi? I hate Nazism, Fascism and Communism! Although in liberal book anyone who hate Communism is automatically a Nazi! I am simply on the centre-right, but so was Churchill, Thatcher and Reagan, and they not Nazis!

Yes, even one generation is long enough.How so?

Here in America, people need to be judged without consideration of their skin color or faith. I agree.
Unfortunately, whites are still priviledged.

Most Muslim is not radical, I have Muslim friends but most radical immigrants are Muslim! And it is not wrong, it is from UN statistics! European birth rate is going down, while immigrant birth rate is going up! If they are assimilated immigrants that allright, but many of them not!

1- Most radical immigrants are bipedal too. Should we start a bipedal-hunt? Most radical immigrants are poor, disenfranchised minorities that realize they're being treated like crap by people like YOU and react against that by making the same mistake you make about non-immigrants: "OMFG they're ebul let's attack them".

2- They have the right to f*ck as they please.

3- The point STILL remains that they probably won't become majorities and that they don't want Sharia, and that, even if they did AND wanted Sharia, the Constitution of these countries wouldn't allow it.

Who is F.A.G? I have never heard of him. I repear, I am new to this, and I have a right to democracy and free speech without personal attacks.

No you don't. The right not to be offended isn't covered in any constitution. Otherwise, people like you would have been put in jail a looooong time ago.

How am I Nazi? I hate Nazism, Fascism and Communism! Although in liberal book anyone who hate Communism is automatically a Nazi! I am simply on the centre-right, but so was Churchill, Thatcher and Reagan, and they not Nazis!

Nazism is in the Right wing. Nazism called for closing borders. Nazism called for disenfranchising minorities. Nazism pretended they were "victims" while doing so.

No, people try to silence me and freedom of speech by trying to get thread locked!

And radical birth rate is certainly concern!

No, people try to silence me and freedom of speech by trying to get thread locked!

And radical birth rate is certainly concern!

No, we try to point out the fact that you have your facts, thought and conclusions wrong, but you try to escape debate by trying to play the victim card.

And you're trying to say that IMMIGRANT birth rate is YOUR concern. It isn't. And most immigrants aren't radicals. No matter how much you'd LOVE them to be so you can play the victim a bit more.

No, people try to silence me and freedom of speech by trying to get thread locked!

You're on a private site. You don't have freedom of speech here.


And radical birth rate is certainly concern!
Why?

No, people try to silence me and freedom of speech by trying to get thread locked!

What was that saying? Ah yes. This is not a democracy. It's not a republic. It's a dictatorship. Run by the mods and Max Barry. Don't like it? Nobody is chaining you to NSG. The door is always open.


And radical birth rate is certainly concern!

Yes. I'm concerned about radicals like you giving birth. We need less

So are you saying that Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan are all Nazis? Nazism is socialist ideology with extreme nationalism (not the patriotic sense, but in expansionist sense)! While nationalism of Le Pen and Buchanan is exact opposite, isolationism!

So are you saying that Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan are all Nazis? Nazism is socialist ideology with extreme nationalism (not the patriotic sense, but in expansionist sense)! While nationalism of Le Pen and Buchanan is exact opposite, isolationism!

No. I AM saying you don't know anything about the ideologies currently being discussed. Nazism is not socialist. And it WAS against the "outsiders" and its interest WAS in creating a mythical enemy, and it DID get concerned about birth rates of those "different". Like you. Le Pen and Buchanan fill the criteria too.

So are you saying that Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan are all Nazis? Nazism is socialist ideology with extreme nationalism (not the patriotic sense, but in expansionist sense)! While nationalism of Le Pen and Buchanan is exact opposite, isolationism!

Strawman if I've ever seen one.

Being right of centre =/= nazism.
Nazism is right of center but so is many other ideologies.

Strawman if I've ever seen one.

Being right of centre =/= nazism.
Nazism is right of center but so is many other ideologies.

He isn't right of center.

He isn't right about anything. :p

This is an interesting thread. I'll think a little, then be back.

So are you saying that Margaret Thatcher, Winston Churchill and Ronald Reagan are all Nazis?

Yes, by God! Also Barney the purple dinosaur! Nazis, one and all!

You mean, the only way to eradicate racism is through more racism? Really? Do you also believe that the cure for obesity is over-indulgence in food?

Nice straw man.

It isn't a straw man. There is no difference between affirmative action and solving obesity by forcing thin people to eat McDonald's for a month. Or reducing homelessness by kicking people out of there houses and giving them to homeless people. Or reducing the murder rate by killing murderers. Oh, wait, they actually do that last one.

It isn't a straw man. There is no difference between affirmative action and solving obesity by forcing thin people to eat McDonald's for a month.

That's absolute bullshit.

1. No one is "forced" to do anything in affirmative action.

2. Obesity is caused by, among other things, eating too much. Racism is not caused by affirmative action.

3. Affirmative action prevents racial discrimination. McDonald's does not prevent obesity.

Do I need to go on? It's sad that you people have to resort to strawmen just to keep pumping your "wah, white people are being oppressed BECAUSE WE CANT OPPRESS BLACK PEOPLE!" arguments.

No. Just no.

Racism is not caused by affirmative action.

i've always been confused by people making that argument. do they think that the amount of racism in society has increased since the start of affirmative action? do they think racism has gotten worse?

i've always been confused by people making that argument. do they think that the amount of racism in society has increased since the start of affirmative action? do they think racism has gotten worse?

Apparently so.

They also conveniently ignore affirmative action laws with regards to people with disabilities, and women. So FAG here is not just arguing for racism ("reverse reverse racism") but misogyny and cripple-hating too.

They also LOVE the strawman that affirmative action laws mean unqualified people get the jobs. The laws specifically state that a person must be qualified. But they prohibit discrimination on various levels. ZOMG OPPRESSION.

Reminds me of this:

http://opendoors.no-ip.org/usr/kookus/oppressed.gif

They also LOVE the strawman that affirmative action laws mean unqualified people get the jobs. The laws specifically state that a person must be qualified. But they prohibit discrimination on various levels. ZOMG OPPRESSION.

even better is that so many of them seem to believe that they personally have been passed over by unqualified minorities. of course, they couldn't actually know this, what with not getting the job or even knowing who did. but they totally saw a black guy at the office, and everyone knows that other than being incredibly fleet-footed, blacks are under-qualified for absolutely everything.

oh preshunz!!!!

even better is that so many of them seem to believe that they personally have been passed over by unqualified minorities.

Indeed, and unchecked affirmative action leads to whites being marginalized in favor of less qualified blacks. For example, look at what happened at certain universities in Texas and California during Clinton's presidency. They heavily discriminated in favor of blacks until the Supreme Court was forced to intervene to stop such blatant racism (affirmative racism, although obviously racist, is somewhat less overt). Because of this pro-equality and pro-civil-rights measure, black enrollment in the institutions plummeted by 80%. This is because those people were unable to enter college by virtue of their skills, yet were given a boost because of their skin color. Another similar situation occurred in Michigan, where a college employed a scoring system whereby blacks were given a 20-point boost over whites (points were assigned for positive characteristics, just as excellent test scores or being competitive at a particular sport). Again, the Supreme Court had no recourse but to step in and reign in the run-away affirmative action policies. I, myself, have been discriminated against because of my skin color.

Race should not be taken as a factor in preferential treatment to fix unfair inequalities, rather, socio-economic class should.

Poor people should get a break on paying for college, not people of certain races.

I, myself, have been discriminated against because of my skin color.

I think you didn't get the job because your only skill was internet trolling. But I'm sure you have proof that it was them dirty blacks who were unqualified but got hired because of the liberal PC police who are out to oppress the white majority.

Let's see. Blacks are allegedly more privileged than whites.

Well, the poverty rate must be higher for whites. Nope.

Well, then the unemployment must be higher for whites. Nope.

Well, whites must be underrepresented in government and business positions. Nope.

Maybe studies show blacks have an easier time getting a job. Nope.

Well, FAG must be able to point to some objective measure by which blacks are more privileged than whites.

Or maybe FAG is full of shit.

I made the above comment yesterday. FAG has been active on the forum and in this thread, but has failed to reply to the challenge.

Obviously, as I said, FAG is full of shit.

Indeed, and unchecked affirmative action leads to whites being marginalized in favor of less qualified blacks. For example, look at what happened at certain universities in Texas and California during Clinton's presidency. They heavily discriminated in favor of blacks until the Supreme Court was forced to intervene to stop such blatant racism (affirmative racism, although obviously racist, is somewhat less overt). Because of this pro-equality and pro-civil-rights measure, black enrollment in the institutions plummeted by 80%. This is because those people were unable to enter college by virtue of their skills, yet were given a boost because of their skin color. Another similar situation occurred in Michigan, where a college employed a scoring system whereby blacks were given a 20-point boost over whites (points were assigned for positive characteristics, just as excellent test scores or being competitive at a particular sport). Again, the Supreme Court had no recourse but to step in and reign in the run-away affirmative action policies.

I love how you try to use instances where the Supreme Court has curbed (or "checked") affirmative action programs as examples of how affirmative action is "unchecked."

See the flaw in your analysis?

Regardless, your understanding of those cases and their outcome is severely flawed.

I, myself, have been discriminated against because of my skin color.

I see. This is about something that allegedly affected you.

Every year there are about 75,000 to 85,000 EEOC complaints. About 28,000 to 30,000 are race-based. Perhaps your alleged "reverse racism" complaint, even if meritorious, isn't significant compared to the active racism out there.

EDIT: By the way, if you were discriminated against because of skin color, what did you do about it?

I made the above comment yesterday. FAG has been active on the forum and in this thread, but has failed to reply to the challenge.

Obviously, as I said, FAG is full of shit.

You've not posted enough this year, my friend.

*hands you a popsicle*

We interrupt this thread to bring you some breaking news:

The poll results currently look like a penis.


We now return you to a rather tired thread.

I made the above comment yesterday. FAG has been active on the forum and in this thread, but has failed to reply to the challenge.

Obviously, as I said, FAG is full of shit.

I don't dispute the statistics you posted; thus, there is nothing to debate. Blacks are given preferential treatment over whites regardless of what percentage of blacks live in poverty. Simply because they do not make the most out of an opportunity does not mean they are not given it in the first place.

I will not touch this thread, even with a 30 foot long metal pole with a shotgun, bayonet, and hand grenade attached to one end.

We interrupt this thread to bring you some breaking news:

The poll results currently look like a penis.


We now return you to a rather tired thread.

Incidentally, I am rather shocked by how few people (6) are willing to stand up to the racist establishment and fight for equality and civil rights for all, but that is another matter.

I don't dispute the statistics you posted; thus, there is nothing to debate. Blacks are given preferential treatment over whites regardless of what percentage of blacks live in poverty. Simply because they do not make the most out of an opportunity does not mean they are not given it in the first place.

So you claim blacks are privileged, but you can't point to any evidence whatsoever that this is true.

To the contrary, you admit that all the objective evidence shows that blacks are disadvantaged compared to whites.

The studies showing that there is active discrimination against blacks in the job market and that there is no net advantage for blacks are particularly telling.

That should be the end of your ranting about a fictional problem.

Incidentally, I am rather shocked by how few people (6) are willing to stand up to the racist establishment and fight for equality and civil rights for all, but that is another matter.And by (6) you mean (14).

To the contrary, you admit that all the objective evidence shows that blacks are disadvantaged compared to whites.

No, that "objective evidence" is irrelevant. I can state that blacks are superior to whites at various athletic venues, but that would hardly matter, now would it? Similarly, the poverty level does not demonstrate discrimination but rather laziness, lack of education, and criminality. The same applies to many other statistics.

That should be the end of your ranting about a fictional problem.

It is certainly not "fictional." In the example I gave with the racist universities, 5 times as many blacks were accepted as were prior to extremely bigoted policies being placed into effect, favoring blacks. That is a revolting statistic. Of course, this type of discrimination is not restricted to colleges, but encompasses various organization and has even infiltrated the market via insidious means.

And by (6) you mean (14).

No, I checked and the figure stood at 6; it has not grown since then. Just a tip, though, sport: don't overuse parentheses. Although it may seem like an innocuous mistake, it may occasionally detract from your point, so you should go ahead and try to keep that in check.

No, I checked and the figure stood at 6; it has not grown since then. Just a tip, though, sport: don't overuse parentheses. Although it may seem like an innocuous mistake, it may occasionally detract from your point, so you should go ahead and try to keep that in check.

Oh, FAG. It seems s/he was referring to the opposite side.

No, I checked and the figure stood at 6; it has not grown since then. Just a tip, though, sport: don't overuse parentheses. Although it may seem like an innocuous mistake, it may occasionally detract from your point, so you should go ahead and try to keep that in check.

Sarcasm still not your strong point then, MTAE

Guy 1:Hai guyz, I finded sum racism!
Guy 2:ZOMG, whut we do?
Guy 3:I knowz, I knowz!
Guy 1:Whut?
Guy 3:We maek moar racism, but at other pplz!
Guy 1-2: Yeah, dat maek racism go away!
Guy 3:We gonna pwn racism

So, can anyone tell me which this is describing, affirmative action or FAG's suggesstion?

Which this is describing, affirmative action or FAG's suggesstion?

Yes.

Yes.

Very yes!

Very yes!

Ultra yes!!

Ultra yes!!

You missed the reference.

Going by genetics, there are about 350 major races of "white" people... can't even count how many of other colours.

Now, racism... I'd probably have to be racist towards myself.

(Personally I don't give a **** about what race someone is, except that for one reason or another, porn written by "black" people doesn't read as well for me as that of other coloured people does... *shrug*)

No, that "objective evidence" is irrelevant.

Well there you have it folks. Only biased anecdotes are relevant. Duh.


It is certainly not "fictional." In the example I gave with the racist universities, 5 times as many blacks were accepted as were prior to extremely bigoted policies being placed into effect, favoring blacks.

5 times as many blacks were accepted after racism AGAINST blacks was restrained by the government.

That is a revolting statistic.

Gee, where's my violin? Let's play the "Oh no, there are more black people succeeding now, thus I am being oppressed" ballad.

5 times as many blacks were accepted after racism AGAINST blacks was restrained by the government.

No, five times as many blacks were accepted after racism against whites was instated. There was no level playing field; blacks were given an advantage over equally competent whites. After the Supreme Court dictated that such obvious bigotry was illegal and the abhorrent policy was repealed, black enrollment plummeted, as they could not succeed given the same standards. Once race was no longer a consideration and blacks were not given a boost, they failed.

No, five times as many blacks were accepted after racism against whites was instated.

I know you would really, really, really like us all to believe that affirmative action is racist.

But you aren't convincing anyone.

Once race was no longer a consideration and blacks were not given a boost, they failed.

Mm... and you hold this is because blacks are lazy, right? And good at sports.

I know you would really, really, really like us all to believe that affirmative action is racist.

Actually, by definition, a policy which favors one race over another is "racist." Affirmative action is inherently racist because it places blacks above whites; you can't honestly debate that it's not. The only question is whether or not such racism has a positive or negative effect on society.

Reverse Reverse Racism? That's like... regular racism...

Affirmative action is BS, but racism is even worse.

Yes, by God! Also Barney the purple dinosaur! Nazis, one and all!

Actually, Barney is a socialist; he wants everyone to share.

Actually, Barney is a socialist; he wants everyone to share.

He is also suspiciously homo-sexual in some of his actions, but that is another matter.

He is also suspiciously homo-sexual in some of his actions, but that is another matter.

Really?

He is also suspiciously homo-sexual in some of his actions, but that is another matter.

I'm not sure a sexual orientation could be applied to Barney with any certainty. After all, there are no other purple dinosaurs around; I think he'd take whatever he could get. Then again he has no penis.

I'm not sure a sexual orientation could be applied to Barney with any certainty. After all, there are no other purple dinosaurs around; I think he'd take whatever he could get. Then again he has no penis.

What I mean to say is that he exhibits some untoward behavior towards young children of both genders; perhaps he is bi-sexual, not homo-sexual. Although I am not familiar with Barney's reproductive system, his actions set a dangerous precedent for children everywhere and he inappropriately exploits his position of power over children in order to commit some unseemly transgressions. Of course, I haven't watched Barney episodes for a couple of years, so I do not recall precisely what Barney's misdeeds were.

There are some here who need to go back and watch these two TV shows:

The Cosby Show
The Fresh Prince of Bellair

Why? Because they show me that blacks CAN make it with out any kind of government assistance. The Cosby Show in particular is the Liberals worst nightmare show because Dr. Huxtable's father re-tells a story about how his own father worked and used the tips from his job to send his son to college. They didn't need any government asistance to get to where they were at. My observations in life is this. My self and a friend of mine, who happened to be black, and I only say this because of the point, were walking home from school one day. We passed by a place where elderly blacks usually sit and talk about their haydays. As we passed by, one of the men said to another,"look at that kid trying to be like white folk!" Just because we happened to be carrying our books home to study, they said that my friend was trying to be "white". This proves to me that blacks are racist against their own kind when it comes to other blacks who try to make it on their own. My question is and always has been, why do blacks try to continue to live in the slave mentality?

No, I checked and the figure stood at 6; it has not grown since then. Just a tip, though, sport: don't overuse parentheses. Although it may seem like an innocuous mistake, it may occasionally detract from your point, so you should go ahead and try to keep that in check.The top bar said 14, though now it says 15. It is the only one that describes what you were looking for.

There are some here who need to go back and watch these two TV shows:

The Cosby Show
The Fresh Prince of Bellair

Why? Because they show me that blacks CAN make it with out any kind of government assistance. Nobody ever said that they couldn't.
It's simply harder for them, due to racism.

What I mean to say is that he exhibits some untoward behavior towards young children of both genders; perhaps he is bi-sexual, not homo-sexual. Although I am not familiar with Barney's reproductive system, his actions set a dangerous precedent for children everywhere and he inappropriately exploits his position of power over children in order to commit some unseemly transgressions. Of course, I haven't watched Barney episodes for a couple of years, so I do not recall precisely what Barney's misdeeds were.

Do you mean to say that he is a pedophile then?

There are some here who need to go back and watch these two TV shows:

The Cosby Show
The Fresh Prince of Bellair

Why? Because they show me that blacks CAN make it with out any kind of government assistance. The Cosby Show in particular is the Liberals worst nightmare show because Dr. Huxtable's father re-tells a story about how his own father worked and used the tips from his job to send his son to college. They didn't need any government asistance to get to where they were at. My observations in life is this. My self and a friend of mine, who happened to be black, and I only say this because of the point, were walking home from school one day. We passed by a place where elderly blacks usually sit and talk about their haydays. As we passed by, one of the men said to another,"look at that kid trying to be like white folk!" Just because we happened to be carrying our books home to study, they said that my friend was trying to be "white". This proves to me that blacks are racist against their own kind when it comes to other blacks who try to make it on their own. My question is and always has been, why do blacks try to continue to live in the slave mentality?

First: those are just TV shows, you don't know how well they or your own anecdotes reflect general reality. Second: fpba.ytmnd.com. Third: this thread is no longer about affirmative action, or whatever it was before. It is about Barney. Either make a constructive comment on his sexuality, or don't post. Thank you very much.

Do you mean to say that he is a pedophile then?



First: those are just TV shows, you don't know how well they or your own anecdotes reflect general reality. Second: fpba.ytmnd.com. Third: this thread is no longer about affirmative action, or whatever it was before. It is about Barney. Either make a constructive comment on his sexuality, or don't post. Thank you very much.

As far as Barney goes, he and Tinky Winky were seen comming out of a gay bar, for whatever that's worth. As far as your critique of my spelling skills, or lack thereof, I have two words for you: ksdvs bnurwe! So There! lol!

So is reverse reverse racism just plain old fashioned racism then?

No, that "objective evidence" is irrelevant.

So we're ignoring objective evidence. Relying on pure conjecture instead. Nice.

I can state that blacks are superior to whites at various athletic venues, but that would hardly matter, now would it?

No. It wouldn't matter. I'm not sure why you bring such a statement up.

Similarly, the poverty level does not demonstrate discrimination but rather laziness, lack of education, and criminality. The same applies to many other statistics.

I see. Blacks are disproportionately poorer than whites because they are lazier. Keep up the good fight against racist sentiments.

How does the same apply to unemployment, median income, health problems, and other indicia of disadvantage? (You realize that unemployment statistics, for example, only count those that are actively looking for work.)

Even better, what about the studies that show blacks are net discriminated against in the marketplace? Here (http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/race_at_work.pdf) is a simple example.

It is certainly not "fictional." In the example I gave with the racist universities, 5 times as many blacks were accepted as were prior to extremely bigoted policies being placed into effect, favoring blacks. That is a revolting statistic. Of course, this type of discrimination is not restricted to colleges, but encompasses various organization and has even infiltrated the market via insidious means.

Your false anecdote hardly proves your thesis -- even at face value. As blacks are disadvantaged, they don't do as well without affirmative action policies. That hardly shows that affirmative action policies are unfairly racist.

There are some here who need to go back and watch these two TV shows:

The Cosby Show
The Fresh Prince of Bellair

Why? Because they show me that blacks CAN make it with out any kind of government assistance. The Cosby Show in particular is the Liberals worst nightmare show because Dr. Huxtable's father re-tells a story about how his own father worked and used the tips from his job to send his son to college. They didn't need any government asistance to get to where they were at. My observations in life is this. My self and a friend of mine, who happened to be black, and I only say this because of the point, were walking home from school one day. We passed by a place where elderly blacks usually sit and talk about their haydays. As we passed by, one of the men said to another,"look at that kid trying to be like white folk!" Just because we happened to be carrying our books home to study, they said that my friend was trying to be "white". This proves to me that blacks are racist against their own kind when it comes to other blacks who try to make it on their own. My question is and always has been, why do blacks try to continue to live in the slave mentality?

That's what they call a "racial script." It's just a set of expectations that govern whether you're "authentically" black, or some kind of imposter. Some kind of community-preservation instinct is behind it.

There are some here who need to go back and watch these two TV shows:

The Cosby Show
The Fresh Prince of Bellair

Why? Because they show me that blacks CAN make it with out any kind of government assistance. The Cosby Show in particular is the Liberals worst nightmare show because Dr. Huxtable's father re-tells a story about how his own father worked and used the tips from his job to send his son to college. They didn't need any government asistance to get to where they were at.

Perhaps you shouldn't base your analysis on old fictional sit-coms. Here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=526479) are some facts, instead.

And who claimed that blacks can only make it with government assistance?

My observations in life is this. My self and a friend of mine, who happened to be black, and I only say this because of the point, were walking home from school one day. We passed by a place where elderly blacks usually sit and talk about their haydays. As we passed by, one of the men said to another,"look at that kid trying to be like white folk!" Just because we happened to be carrying our books home to study, they said that my friend was trying to be "white". This proves to me that blacks are racist against their own kind when it comes to other blacks who try to make it on their own. My question is and always has been, why do blacks try to continue to live in the slave mentality?

See. This is typical. You've encountered one black man that made a stupid comment and you erroneously extrapolated this to conclude all blacks have a "slave mentality."

BTW, where would a "slave mentality" come from? What about the history of this country might explain some disfunctional attitudes among blacks?

Affirmative action (reverse racism) has instilled a dangerous viewpoint in the American people: that discriminating against certain people on the basis of race is acceptable, as long as the people are minorities and the discrimination is positive in result. This is not much different from the Jim Crow era South, except for the fact that minorities are now favored instead of whites. More damaging still is that maleficent tactics have been employed to force people to conform with this liberal idea; those who refuse to use race as a criterion in making decisions are sometimes deemed "racists" for their position. All over the US, people are being coerced into accepting a revolting idea with basis only in prejudice against whites. The scope of this policy has increased exponentially since its birth; now, politically-correct culture demands that "diversity" be a sought-after goal and companies are scrambling over each other to hire as many minority workers as possible, even though they may not be the most qualified candidates for the job. This imperils our economic and social well-being. Thus, a more radical solution than simply ending affirmative action is necessary; the problem has progressed so far and is so prevalent that blacks will still be favored over whites and Asians despite no legal impetus for such racism.

To revert to a state of equality among all races, we must employ reverse reverse racism (the opposite of affirmative action) for a period of time. That is, whites should be given priority over blacks for certain posts in order to combat the persistent and pervasive favoritism in society which rewards blacks over more meretricious whites. Whites have been deprived of an equal opportunity in many fields simply because of their skin color. They have been marginalized in the haste to promote minorities. The only way to stop this trend is to give them a helping hand in order to bring equality to the playing field. This policy should remain in effect until all traces of the racist tenet that minorities should be given a free ride ahead of whites is eradicated.


Some valid points, some borderline disturbing. In essence, instead of focusing on race, why dont we try too demolish racial infrasturctures, those toppling the alleged sects of supremacy? Sure the main argument against this is that racial groups need thier native identities too live by. While thats fine, but the way I see it, we can disregard race and move on, or continue this..... eternally contentious struggle.