|
I'm more interested than you are apparently.
You want to pretend it doesn't exist, or if it does, it's all perpetrated against white people.
It's all black peoples fault. If they didn't make us enslave them, none of this would have happened.That's what your mewling sounds like.not at all. i want real equality, you cannot have that by saying that one deserves better than another. You really have not listened to a damn thing i have or are just so stuck on your race agenda that anyone that thinks different you simply dismiss. So lets have it then, a straight talk. WHAT are the INHERENT bonuses and penalties, particularly by law, that seperate the races? Put your money where your mouth is and actually defend what you stand for
And it is not a game, i want you to see that your veiw is wrong. it is not about winning a game, it is about changing a view that i can see as nothing but utterly racist
No, the time for straight talk is past. You've taught me that straight talk is pointless and will be ignored. If you wanted to have an earnest conversation with me, you had plenty of opportunities over the past several years. I'm done putting effort into discussions with you.
If you look carefully though, you'll note I do put that effort in for other people though.
All you're interested in is the vapid talking points of cable news or talk radio. So that is how I will engage with you.
I don't tell you what you want to hear so you dismiss me, very adult.
|
|
I'm curious, what's an example of a LAW that treats black people better than white people.
Notice I said LAW, not college admission policy (which would not be an example of a law).
Now we are getting somewhere. True there is not one law on the books that treats any race better. However, racial discrimination cases and hate crime laws seem to be unevenly judged, i believe that to be an issue. Also affirmative action policies are typically ruled legal, even if they are giving undue "help" to people who do not need it while ignoring people who are disadvantaged that are not of the groups the policies are meant to help, whites and asians typically getting the short end of the stick
]I don't tell you what you want to hear so you dismiss me, very adult.
That's really fitting. I say the reason I don't care to put in effort is because you don't pay attention to what I say... your response? To not pay attention to what I say. Thanks for proving my point dude.
|
|
]I don't tell you what you want to hear so you dismiss me, very adult.That's really fitting. I say the reason I don't care to put in effort is because you don't pay attention to what I say... your response? To not pay attention to what I say. Thanks for proving my point dude.
Yes yes, for too long i have not bowed to your veiw so i must be playing games and so on. Actually say something and i will adress your point.
IT, you should quit while you're ahead. You're just going to make yourself angrier, and you stop having fun, and no one else who talks to you has fun either.
I'd give the same advice to Andrew R., but he has not shown any predisposition towards reasonableness.
|
|
IT, you should quit while you're ahead. You're just going to make yourself angrier, and you stop having fun, and no one else who talks to you has fun either.
I'd give the same advice to Andrew R., but he has not shown any predisposition towards reasonableness.
Sorry, i just don't like giving up when i think someone is dead wrong. Especially when they are dead wrong about policies that cause harm to people.
Yes yes, for too long i have not bowed to your veiw so i must be playing games and so on. Actually say something and i will adress your point.]I don't tell you what you want to hear so you dismiss me, very adult.That's really fitting. I say the reason I don't care to put in effort is because you don't pay attention to what I say... your response? To not pay attention to what I say. Thanks for proving my point dude.
No, you won't. Which is my point, but you can't seem to grasp this, because instead of addressing my point, you make up your own and address that. Like you just did. Twice. In a row.
Strange Fruit
Billy Holiday (sp?)
It's not theft, because it's part of the terms of your employment. By not taking your vacation days the only person you're stealing from is yourself.
More precisely, you are voluntarily working for less money than your employer is offering you. Now I don't know you, nor have I conducted an exhaustive research of your work habits, but odds are you are also lowering your overall productivity by not taking vacation time. Research shows that breaks, both short ones during the day and longer ones like vacations, increase productivity more than the productivity lost due to inactivity. The effectiveness of work done also increases.
In the 1920's, Henry Ford reduced the work week at his plants from 6 days to 5 and found productivity actually went up, even though they were operating for 8 hours less per week.
National University of Singapore found that people who spent less than 20% of their time online were 9% more productive than people who didn't go online during work hours at all. Cat videos can literally improve job performance.
There is no change to my productivity whether I take breaks or not. I get into a rhythm when I work. Breaks screw that up for me.
Can't refute the stealing from myself, as I have heard that same point before, from my wife no less.
Just a crazy suggestion, Gendo, but why don't you TRY taking a vacation, slacking at work, sleeping in on weekends, etc. Just once. Maybe you'll like it. You'll certainly live longer.
Fair or not, people get promoted for shmoozing, or at least seeming personable. Your work ethic likely alienates you from your coworkers and kills opportunities for you. You should take your wife's advice!
since I don't work with you as a person or even in your field, I am not going to know the details of your job, and details are the dwelling place of devils. But going on what you have said thus far, I have to ask a few questions.
Is your job performance based? Are you paid or evaluated directly upon your performance I. E. The number of jobs you work or work tickets you complete? If so, then you could be making your coworkers look bad and even endanger their job because there is no work left for them to do. There is a name for this practice /phenomenon, but for the life of me I can't remember it. Also, I'm not saying you're doing this at all, I'm just curious. Double also, how is your work handed out? By a supervisor or some governing body? Or do you pursue your own tickets/orders?
When you say you don't socialize, do you truly not say a word to anyone beyond good morning/night? Or do you just not talk while you're on the clock?
Do you get paid for vacation time you don't use? If so, then you could be accused of hoarding day to bring home a larger end of year paycheck, something upstairs hates to see/freaks out over. My job used to do this and had to stop because the everyone was hoarding days to get big xmas checks.
I get paid by the hour no matter how much work I do or don't do. The company I am with came out of Lucent, which was a heavy Union employer. The company that came out of Lucent is non-union, however, they do things with a very Union mentality - raises across the board for everyone regardless of productivity...the ONLY bad aspect about my employer, as it has lead to employees who do the bare minimum. Take that with a grain of salt, as for me, barely acceptable minimums is doing enough to meet weekly goals when capable of accomplishing more. As for how work is handed out, we have set targets as determined by our Engineers, with the understanding that if we can exceed those targets, do it. There is always more work to do, so no fear of running out.
Before me, hitting targets was a struggle. Since I've been in the position, 3 years now, we not only meet targets, we exceed them by an average of 20%, have kept scrap below thresholds, and have added challenges of handling special projects that come through for R&D. I don't expect my coworkers to work at my pace, and with the way the company handles raises and evaluations, neither do my employers. As long as work keeps moving and they are hitting or exceeding revenue goals, my bosses are happy.
As for not socializing, I mean that I don't engage in small talk. Once I get started, I am focused on work and keep anything I feel the need to say related to keeping work moving. Yes, when my boss enters the room and requires my attention, I talk, but don't talk about much of anything. I come in, do the best I possibly can, and then go home. For me, that is working as efficiently as possible without loss of quality
As for vacation, unused time is lost. I take off a total of 7 days a year - birthdays for myself, wife and kids, wedding anniversary, and the day we adopted our kids.
I refuse to change how I work for anyone's benefit. I am not working to make friends, I work to provide for my family, That purpose gives me all the drive I need to keep going at work.
It's not theft, because it's part of the terms of your employment. By not taking your vacation days the only person you're stealing from is yourself.
More precisely, you are voluntarily working for less money than your employer is offering you. Now I don't know you, nor have I conducted an exhaustive research of your work habits, but odds are you are also lowering your overall productivity by not taking vacation time. Research shows that breaks, both short ones during the day and longer ones like vacations, increase productivity more than the productivity lost due to inactivity. The effectiveness of work done also increases.
In the 1920's, Henry Ford reduced the work week at his plants from 6 days to 5 and found productivity actually went up, even though they were operating for 8 hours less per week.
National University of Singapore found that people who spent less than 20% of their time online were 9% more productive than people who didn't go online during work hours at all. Cat videos can literally improve job performance.
There is no change to my productivity whether I take breaks or not. I get into a rhythm when I work. Breaks screw that up for me.
Can't refute the stealing from myself, as I have heard that same point before, from my wife no less.
Hey man, I know what it is to get into a rhythm. But it was killing me at work more often than not. I work in a different field than you(social work), but there were days, especially when I was running all the groups, where each day followed a rhythm that was damn seductive. I loved it because I could essentially turn my brain off, get through the day, and go home. But it was really killing me, and I didn't even notice it, and socializing with coworkers was impossible when I was resenting them because I was doing all of the work- primarily because I didn't stand up to my supervisor and let him know I was being overworked, which became the norm. I can't say I agree with everything meatrace says, but you DO need a break every now and again. It's counter intuitive, but resist the rhythm. It's not helping you, just making you work harder.
Just a crazy suggestion, Gendo, but why don't you TRY taking a vacation, slacking at work, sleeping in on weekends, etc. Just once. Maybe you'll like it. You'll certainly live longer.
Fair or not, people get promoted for shmoozing, or at least seeming personable. Your work ethic likely alienates you from your coworkers and kills opportunities for you. You should take your wife's advice!
Six months after I met my wife, we went on vacation to Ocean City, Maryland. I was conflicted. I enjoyed spending time with her, hated "relaxing". I was more exhausted from a weeks vacation than I was working 12 hour days for two straight weeks.
I agree that my work ethic alienates me from my coworkers and kills opportunities, however it is an aspect of myself for which I will not change.
since I don't work with you as a person or even in your field, I am not going to know the details of your job, and details are the dwelling place of devils. But going on what you have said thus far, I have to ask a few questions.
Is your job performance based? Are you paid or evaluated directly upon your performance I. E. The number of jobs you work or work tickets you complete? If so, then you could be making your coworkers look bad and even endanger their job because there is no work left for them to do. There is a name for this practice /phenomenon, but for the life of me I can't remember it. Also, I'm not saying you're doing this at all, I'm just curious. Double also, how is your work handed out? By a supervisor or some governing body? Or do you pursue your own tickets/orders?
When you say you don't socialize, do you truly not say a word to anyone beyond good morning/night? Or do you just not talk while you're on the clock?
Do you get paid for vacation time you don't use? If so, then you could be accused of hoarding day to bring home a larger end of year paycheck, something upstairs hates to see/freaks out over. My job used to do this and had to stop because the everyone was hoarding days to get big xmas checks.
I get paid by the hour no matter how much work I do or don't do. The company I am with came out of Lucent, which was a heavy Union employer. The company that came out of Lucent is non-union, however, they do things with a very Union mentality - raises across the board for everyone regardless of productivity...the ONLY bad aspect about my employer, as it has lead to employees who do the bare minimum. Take that with a grain of salt, as for me, barely acceptable minimums is doing enough to meet weekly goals when capable of accomplishing more. As for how work is handed out, we have set targets as determined by our Engineers, with the understanding that if we can exceed those targets, do it. There is always more work to do, so no fear of running out.
Before...
Okay, from what you've described here, you sound very much like a happy worker bee. Your coworkers are likely jealous of your ethic, and your bosses appreciate it because they don't have to encourage you- you just get in there and give 110% each and every day. It's great for them, and sets a wonderful example, but the lack of socialization with coworkers along with the possibility that you may not bring any new ideas or even make small talk to your superiors, inferiors or much of anyone means you're likely seen as just as much of a machine as the tools you work with. They need to see you as a PERSON. To stand out, see about requesting things from R&D directly, saying you're actively looking for a challenge. Quote a favorite author or philosopher or comedian or Pathfinder rule(those cheesy quote a day calendars work wonders for this). Tell the occasional (clean)joke. Talk about your kids. Talk about why you like your job, or how you got it. Try to turn scrap into impromptu pieces of zen artwork. Show that there is more to you than a 9-5er.
Just a crazy suggestion, Gendo, but why don't you TRY taking a vacation, slacking at work, sleeping in on weekends, etc. Just once. Maybe you'll like it. You'll certainly live longer.
Fair or not, people get promoted for shmoozing, or at least seeming personable. Your work ethic likely alienates you from your coworkers and kills opportunities for you. You should take your wife's advice!
Six months after I met my wife, we went on vacation to Ocean City, Maryland. I was conflicted. I enjoyed spending time with her, hated "relaxing". I was more exhausted from a weeks vacation than I was working 12 hour days for two straight weeks.
I agree that my work ethic alienates me from my coworkers and kills opportunities, however it is an aspect of myself for which I will not change.
I would suggest that as a husband and father, you need to take that part of your life at least as focused as the work part. Your family needs you to take them on trips, to build memories so that when they are older they have something to remember this time by, not merely, dad went to work each day. Exhausting? Absolutely, many times you'd rather be at work? Sure. But who said taking that role would ever be easy. Don't use work to hide from responsibility to spend time with family and build memories for them.
What I'm saying is you might consider being Clark Griswald. Sure, work hard and try to get enough to put that new pool in for the family. But you still need to take time and take them to WallyWorld. See those "vacation" days as "Dad-Time Work Days".
We actually have had liberal people elected to the White House. However their elections did not produce the spike on gun sales that Obama's did. Are you seriously going to argue that his skin color did not factor in that rise?
Whenever Obama talks about gun control, sales shoot up (no pun intended). When he holds beer summits on race, not so much. It is his attitude towards gun control (see after Sandy Hook for example) that drives this. Sure a lot of dumb whites with guns hate Obama because he is bi-racial, but the sales are driven by fears of gun control not fears of the *racial insult* in the White House.
I'd hazard a guess that when the Brady bill was being passed, there was probably a jump in sales then to. Now it is probably bigger due to (dis)information being able to pass quicker.
Martin Luther King's famous speech discussed the deplorable fact that after a hundred years of legal freedom, "the negro is still not free". That was more than 50 years ago today. Police brutality, uneven judgement, frequent incarceration, poor economic status - the list goes on and on. I am certainly not saying it's all a happy picture of rosy clouds. The problems exist, they are real. Many human beings are treated poorly and unfairly.
But some things HAVE gotten better. There are no "whites only" signs remaining, as far as I know. The laws HAVE changed. Even if the black population still has a poor economic situation, it's far better today than it was in the sixties.
Thing is, in a system with the American style of law, with cases and juries, there is only so much a legal change can do.
So people have thought about how to reach the goal everyone (more or less) can agree on, equality. And the best they came up with was "hey, let's lower the demands for blacks to get into educations, let's make sure every workplace needs to have black people employed or be called racists and sued into the ground, let's act to COMPENSATE them for their poor economic status, I mean, the money is there, right, so let's go for it! Anyone who doesn't like it is a racist, and should gather their own group around them and fight like we have done for the rights of their group!"
The problem with that policy is that it reinforces the view of black people as a GROUP. It also breeds resentment because it makes a racial issue of what is in truth a socioeconomic issue. Someone is not necessarily economically disadvantaged because they are black today. Extremely competent people are hired "because we need to employ black people", not because they are outstanding. As the gobbo stated, black poor workers have a very similar situation to what white poor workers do, and would do better to join them in the fight to improve conditions for the poor everywhere in America. But that will not happen, because people who define themselves as groups are ripe targets for the classic strategy of divide and conquer. The issues of poverty, injustice and cruelty are diseases of the entire society, and I would frame it as "none of us are free until we're all free". Civil liberties are unpopular with the ruling elite, because it limits what they can do to us. And yet, they are vital to a functioning society that treats people decently and fairly. The knee-jerk reaction of limiting free speech you don't like is merely playing into the hands of those who despise your freedom of speech. Limits to free speech can always be expanded - and without it, don't imagine any sort of progress will happen.
So, what SHOULD be done, if what IS done doesn't work? First off, there needs to be a serious attitude readjustment done in the police corps. Seriously, American police uses the laws to commit highway robbery. If anyone believes police work can be done without a sense of morality, that's naive of the highest order. There needs to be education, serious evaluation, scrapping of various "easy income sources" like quick speeding fines that can be set by quota and instead provide a budget for them to work with, honest investigations of accusations of police violence, systems for complaints, and so on. The same needs to be done in the legal world, straightening the routines and making sure the Ts are crossed and the Is are dotted. Obviously racist verdicts need to be investigated so they can be understood. The prison system needs to be reformed, primarily so that getting someone incarcerated isn't a GAIN for someone. That alone should limit the wrongful/excessive incarceration.
Second, addressing the economic status: By lifting the conditions of the poor in general, through better social security nets, better access to education for everyone, free or heavily subsidized health care for everyone. With a system like yours, millions of talented people need to spend their time surviving rather than living. Now... you may say this isn't going to work, the rich and powerful are too strong. I think part of the reason they have been so successful at dividing and conquering is that so many of the poor have accepted group labels in exchange for various benefits. Note also that affirmative action isn't exactly working, if you've been doing it for decades with no real improvement to show for it.
Third, and I think this may be the biggest one: Make sure people meet. Especially children. Sweden, where I live, differs from America in one rather profound way, in that virtually every Swede is a member of a dozen or more organizations, such as sports clubs, study circles, exercise clubs, game clubs, writing circles, political groups, choirs, outdoor groups, and so on and so forth. Whatever else it does, it makes sure we and our children get to know people who are different from us. Not everyone partakes, racism remains a problem, but it does help. The Munchen movie had a lot to criticize, but where it went right, I think, is the idea that someone you eat with becomes a person to you.
Okay, feel free to call me racist now. It speaks more of you than of me anyway.
I think there is still a great deal of racism in the US still, based on how stereotypes are portrayed in Hollywood and TV shows.
I think it's a combination of economic and racial that presents problems to minorities in the US. For example, even if someone was born and raised in the US, they will be asked what nation they are from or what they are. Even if they say American...then it will be pursued and someone will ask...yes...but where are you really from?
I've heard that one in person to an Asian American.
African Americans in many ways I think are still stereotyped by police, regardless of the situation. I think think there was a news story recently in regards to some African Americans who were dance instructors with a student getting arrested for nothing more than being in the wrong place at the wrong time (aka...being where a cop could see them as they went home).
Ah yes, here' a link to the story
http://www.khou.com/news/local/oklahoma-dancer-houston-police-cps-234062201 .html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/teen-dancer-legal-guardian-alleges-racial-profilin g/story?id=21083133
So, I think economic status has a TON, in fact a gigantic part, but I also think it is somewhat influenced as well if you aren't part of the white majority.
Oh, for crying out loud... I am saying the cops shouldn't do that to ANYONE. Net result being, blacks don't get subjected to it either. Straightening up the police force would go a long way toward making things work better in precisely the areas you want them to. But, apparently, making the police do their job as they should is too much of a fantasy, so instead you focus on affirmative action and group identity as the solution - despite the fact that it has been tried for decades with no success in sight. Answer me, please... how long would it take, if the same amount of energy was put into it as affirmative action has had, to seriously raise the work ethics of the police force?
You have a better chance convincing a zebra not to be stripey than you do of convincing a cop to be a decent human being.
Martin Luther King's famous speech discussed the deplorable fact that after a hundred years of legal freedom, "the negro is still not free". That was more than 50 years ago today. Police brutality, uneven judgement, frequent incarceration, poor economic status - the list goes on and on. I am certainly not saying it's all a happy picture of rosy clouds. The problems exist, they are real. Many human beings are treated poorly and unfairly.
But some things HAVE gotten better. There are no "whites only" signs remaining, as far as I know. The laws HAVE changed. Even if the black population still has a poor economic situation, it's far better today than it was in the sixties.
IIRC, by every measure of economic standard of living, blacks are worse off today than before the Civil Rights Movement.
Interesting. Could it be that... Gasp... Affirmative action doesn't work?
|
|
We actually have had liberal people elected to the White House. However their elections did not produce the spike on gun sales that Obama's did. Are you seriously going to argue that his skin color did not factor in that rise?Whenever Obama talks about gun control, sales shoot up (no pun intended). When he holds beer summits on race, not so much. It is his attitude towards gun control (see after Sandy Hook for example) that drives this. Sure a lot of dumb whites with guns hate Obama because he is bi-racial, but the sales are driven by fears of gun control not fears of the *racial insult* in the White House.
I'd hazard a guess that when the Brady bill was being passed, there was probably a jump in sales then to. Now it is probably bigger due to (dis)information being able to pass quicker.
Gun sales shot up long before Obama talked much about gun control, which was very little before popular opinion after Sandy Hook forced his hand.
How much is race and how much is "Democrats are gun-grabbers!!!!" is less clear. Race definitely plays into the propaganda machine, but it's as much a tool as a reason. If Hilary had won in 2008 (or if she wins in 2016), the propaganda would be sexist more than racist, but the goal would be the same: discredit the Democrat.
Not so much discredit the democrat as discredit the notion that we should give up the second amendment and be disarmed. It is just that right now only democrats seem to be actively pursuing that. Again there is his background to think about. not racial, chicago. the home of failed gun control.
Interesting. Could it be that... Gasp... Affirmative action doesn't work?
I don't know if you're aware of this over there in Sweden, but despite what you might pick up from far rightists and other Archie Bunkers, Affirmative Action has mostly been rolled back.
I'm not even sure if there are all that many AA programs in the workforce left, and they've mostly been eviscerated in public education as well.
Which isn't to say that AA was ever a good program. It kinda took the old quotas on Jews in the Tsarist Empire system, and added in a pinch of that pitting poor blacks versus poor whites that the U.S. has always done so well.
Interesting. Could it be that... Gasp... Affirmative action doesn't work?
for some reason, I can't help but think of caddyshack when Sissyl in brings up affirmative action. If it disappeared tomorrow, racism would not go with it. Dislike the program/approach all you want, but not everything is affirmative actions fault.
Interesting. Could it be that... Gasp... Affirmative action doesn't work?I don't know if you're aware of this over there in Sweden, but despite what you might pick up from far rightists and other Archie Bunkers, Affirmative Action has mostly been rolled back.
I'm not even sure if there are all that many AA programs in the workforce left, and they've mostly been eviscerated in public education as well.
Which isn't to say that AA was ever a good program. It kinda took the old quotas on Jews in the Tsarist Empire system, and added in a pinch of that pitting poor blacks versus poor whites that the U.S. has always done so well.
Also, this.
|
|
Martin Luther King's famous speech discussed the deplorable fact that after a hundred years of legal freedom, "the negro is still not free". That was more than 50 years ago today. Police brutality, uneven judgement, ...[SNIP]........milar situation to what white poor workers do, and would do better to join them in the fight to improve conditions for the poor everywhere in America. But that will not happen, because people who define themselves as...
Well stated. There are people here who are trying to dissect what I posted to figure out what type of racist I am but the truth is that I am not racist. I would rather see racism and discrimination in general addressed for the real problem that it is. It should be about a change in people's attitudes towards other people. It should be about respecting everyone's right to be here. It should be about removing negative perceptions passed down through generations, religious doctrines, and in society. It should not be about giving assistance based on ethnicity but rather based on need.
I think 20 or so years of Sissyl's police force training would really go far in turning the system around because the longer the training goes on the more of the older, stuck-in-their-ways cops retire or move on. Would it be perfect? No, nothing is. But it would help a lot. I think that removing police records from a huge amount of minorities, through less profiling and perhaps decriminalization of a certain plant which is where a majority of the arrests come from, will go a long way to elevating minorities job options also.You want to help the poor, then help them. Just tossing money at the poor isn't a way to help them though. Give a man a fish is what that is.
We need to teach people to fish.
I love the idea the affirmative action and similar programs are now responsible for racism. Apparently we went directly from an actually racist society, (back in the Jim Crow days) to one which is racist because of programs to combat racism, without ever actually being non-racist in between. Or did I blink and miss the golden age of non-racist America?
Well, I think [Hey! I didn't say my aliases couldn't post in the OTD! Bazinga!] from what I'm picking in other threads, these glory years lasted between the inauguration of Martin Luther King Day in New York City in 1970 and the Howards Beach lynching in 1986.
Also,
{Raises clenched fist]
"I am DMX!"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So people have thought about how to reach the goal everyone (more or less) can agree on, equality. And the best they came up with was "hey, let's lower the demands for blacks to get into educations, let's make sure every workplace needs to have black people employed or be called racists and sued into the ground, let's act to COMPENSATE them for their poor economic status, I mean, the money is there, right, so let's go for it! Anyone who doesn't like it is a racist, and should gather their own group around them and fight like we have done for the rights of their group!"
So you know, this is a completely false claim.
Work places are not REQUIRED to have black people employed. In fact there are a lot of business that don't have black people employed. Work places aren't REQUIRED to have an Affirmative Action plan. Several states, Washington, Michigan and California even have a legal ban against affirmative action.
Don't spread lies.
Martin Luther King's famous speech discussed the deplorable fact that after a hundred years of legal freedom, "the negro is still not free". That was more than 50 years ago today. Police brutality, uneven judgement, ...[SNIP]........milar situation to what white poor workers do, and would do better to join them in the fight to improve conditions for the poor everywhere in America. But that will not happen, because people who define themselves as...Well stated. There are people here who are trying to dissect what I posted to figure out what type of racist I am but the truth is that I am not racist. I would rather see racism and discrimination in general addressed for the real problem that it is. It should be about a change in people's attitudes towards other people. It should be about respecting everyone's right to be here. It should be about removing negative perceptions passed down through generations, religious doctrines, and in society. It should not be about giving assistance based on ethnicity but rather based on need.
I think 20 or so years of Sissyl's police force training would really go far in turning the system around because the longer the training goes on the more of the older, stuck-in-their-ways cops retire or move on. Would it be perfect? No, nothing is. But it would help a lot. I think that removing police records from a huge amount of minorities, through less profiling and perhaps decriminalization of a certain plant which is where a majority of the arrests come from, will go a long way to elevating minorities job options also.
You want to help the poor, then help them. Just tossing money at the poor isn't a way to help them though. Give a man a fish is what that is.
We need to teach people to fish.
Would you consider a college education the modern equivalent of "teach a man to fish"? Or are you suggesting we should only give black people jobs on boats?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting. Could it be that... Gasp... Affirmative action doesn't work?for some reason, I can't help but think of caddyshack when Sissyl in brings up affirmative action. If it disappeared tomorrow, racism would not go with it. Dislike the program/approach all you want, but not everything is affirmative actions fault.
Yeah I think that I alluded to that earlier upthread but it's not conducive to the argument at hand I guess.
I think part of my frustration with this whole thing lies in the fact that there was literally an entire generation where this country treated people like garbage and most of the country just turned a blind eye and was like "This is how it is." And did this for almost a century.
So the convenient canard of AA causes more bad feelings than the actual racism that existed BEFORE AA, is a little insulting and self serving. It translates to "Now that it inconveniences people who look like me IT'S NOT FAIR."
Not one of the people who complain about how good blacks have it would ever switch places with me if they could.
It's not that I disagree with some what they say or even if I DID disagree I could do so respectfully if they came across as more empathic and genuine. As it were they usually don't. It might be intended as "I'm trying to do right by everyone" but comes across as "If it didn't effect me or mine I wouldn't care" Which takes us right back to the attitude pre-AA.
I've always said that the whites who stood up against the norm and for and with blacks during the Civil Rights era were definitely heroes. They had more to lose. Black people already were at the bottom fighting for equality. Whites who fought had their status and risked LOSING that for doing the right thing. If we had more people like that during the Civil Rights era (and more importantly AFTERWARDS) I think that it would have gone a long way to changing hearts and minds.
If there were more white politicians or even White Civilians who spoke up about discrimination or police brutality or failing schools in black neighborhoods guys like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton wouldn't have such power in the black community. IT would show that other people actually gave a crap. But that's not how it played out. Although, Im starting to see more and more young white guys speaking up and advocating for people of color. Especially in the face of the police seemingly getting more militarized and violating EVERYONE'S rights. Yes its that case of "Oh wow this happened to me or someone I know but it's been happening in the Black Community for YEARS! It's time do speak up..." but at least it's an honest approach that comes from the heart.
Like I said I think we need to trust each other more but with polarizing attitudes being what they are these days? It seems almost impossible.
Martin Luther King's famous speech discussed the deplorable fact that after a hundred years of legal freedom, "the negro is still not free". That was more than 50 years ago today. Police brutality, uneven judgement, ...[SNIP]........milar situation to what white poor workers do, and would do better to join them in the fight to improve conditions for the poor everywhere in America. But that will not happen, because people who define themselves as...Well stated. There are people here who are trying to dissect what I posted to figure out what type of racist I am but the truth is that I am not racist. I would rather see racism and discrimination in general addressed for the real problem that it is. It should be about a change in people's attitudes towards other people. It should be about respecting everyone's right to be here. It should be about removing negative perceptions passed down through generations, religious doctrines, and in society. It should not be about giving assistance based on ethnicity but rather based on need.
I think 20 or so years of Sissyl's police force training would really go far in turning the system around because the longer the training goes on the more of the older, stuck-in-their-ways cops retire or move on. Would it be perfect? No, nothing is. But it would help a lot. I think that removing police records from a huge amount of minorities, through less profiling and perhaps decriminalization of a certain plant which is where a majority of the arrests come from, will go a long way to elevating minorities job options also.
You want to help the poor, then help them. Just tossing money at the poor isn't a way to help them though. Give a man a fish is what that is.
We need to teach people to fish.
More broadly, this is a noble sentiment, but when you boil it down it becomes a plea for everyone "to just get along", or worse, becomes reason to try to police peoples thoughts and words.
There are people who are being mistreated because of their race. Not everywhere and not everyone, but it is happening. I don't think just sitting around and hoping that people start being nice to each other is enough.
Poverty is a primary problem for minority communities. One of the best ways to mitigate poverty is through employment and education. Show me a better program to increase both of those specifically for minorities and I will throw my support behind that. Affirmative action is flawed and creates additional problems, but you won't convince me that politely asking people to be nice to each other is a better solution.
