View Full Version : A Victory in the Fight Against Racism in America
PanzerJaeger
06-29-2007, 09:18
Excellent. Next, college admissions! :yes:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/06/28/scotus.race/index.html
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race," Roberts wrote.
"Before Brown, schoolchildren were told where they could and could not go to school based on color of their skin. The school districts in these cases have not carried the heavy burden of demonstrating that we should allow this once again -- even for very different reasons," Roberts wrote.
Banquo's Ghost
06-29-2007, 10:23
The ruling seems to be sensible, in that the forced allocation does indeed use race as a deciding factor.
The problem is that in the real world, this is likely to lead to racially segregated schools and further ghettoisation of black communities.
I can certainly agree that it shouldn't be the government's job to decide who goes to what school, particularly on the grounds of race. But given that inequalities and racism exist, how do you ensure integration? Is it entirely a laissez-faire response?
I've usually been in favour of government "affirmative" action in this area because racism is so hard to shift, but my gut instinct is always that governmental initiatives tend to be blunt instruments, subject to political winds, and it would be far better for people to sort it out themselves.
I'd be interested in views on how to square the circle.
Simply put them together and enforce situations that require and stimulate teamwork.
Simply put them together and enforce situations that require and stimulate teamwork.
Nah, just do nothing http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html
Nah, just do nothing http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html
This article is about communities in general, the original article in the OP is about children and public schools.
This article is about communities in general, the original article in the OP is about children and public schools.
Communities big and small, it's about the damage of diversity. Can be a neightbourhood or a school, take a pick. People flock to their own, get over it. Don't enforce, if you throw someone on my lap I don't think 'what an interesting individual', all I know is that I can't get up.
Communities big and small, it's about the damage of diversity. Can be a neightbourhood or a school, take a pick. People flock to their own, get over it. Don't enforce, if you throw someone on my lap I don't think 'what an interesting individual', all I know is that I can't get up.
There remains the factor of time and age. Allocation of children to schools is when they are still young. This will influence their behaviour. It will influence their thought processes early on and this is a good thing. All schools should be of mixed nature to further unity.
If they will still "flock" to their "own kind" (as in skin colour, etc.) it shows they are too primitive and they must be properly led. Their own kind should have nothing to do with skin colour, ethinicity, and so on: it should have to do with being human and recognizing the simple fact.
There remains the factor of time and age. Allocation of children to schools is when they are still young. This will influence their behaviour. It will influence their thought processes early on and this is a good thing. All schools should be of mixed nature to further unity.
If they will still "flock" to their "own kind" (as in skin colour, etc.) it shows they are too primitive and they must be properly led. Their own kind should have nothing to do with skin colour, ethinicity, and so on: it should have to do with being human and recognizing the simple fact.
Well I don't believe in interference of any kind, in a neightbourhood with many coloured people a school will have many coloured people, I see nothing wrong with that. Neightbourhoods have their own vibes, and people usually identify with that small sub-culture, not race/color. Why destroy that, because that is what you do when you want to enforce spreading them, and besides it's a lot of work that requires extra layers of government because school x doesn't have a x number of x's. Just leave people be, you are right here, Simply put them together and enforce situations that require and stimulate teamwork. , it's called life. Up the scale a bit.
Papewaio
06-29-2007, 13:37
if you throw someone on my lap I don't think 'what an interesting individual', all I know is that I can't get up.
You know they have prescriptions for that :clown:
Little addition, by spreading them you are actually forcing them to flock, you take them from their surroundings and they will identify with the first thing at hand. Yup, skincolor.
Little addition, by spreading them you are actually forcing them to flock, you take them from their surroundings and they will identify with the first thing at hand. Yup, skincolor. Taking this quote and what you wrote afore it (which reeks of illogic or lack of clarity and eloquence)...
It was not about their spread: it was about adjoining them (-- different backgrounds). And here you conveniently exclude the "situations that require and stimulate teamwork" factor which is important. And the other important factors of leading them and idenftication are also excluded: that their identification regarding skin colour (and the likes) is less significant than their identification of being human, where the latter would unite rather than divide.
If separate cultures are to cease for the good of overall humanity, peace, relations, integration, then so be it. It is exactly the differences -- and their emphasis -- that separate, therefore a change of mentality is required.
Taking this quote and what you wrote afore it (which reeks of illogic or lack of clarity and eloquence)...
Oh aren't you the zing-tiger, Grunberg put him back :laugh4: :laugh4:
Have a little faith mia muca, humans achieve most when left to their own devices. Eventually they will coorperate out of necesity, they will meet people at work, universities, can't get around it. Let's take our muslims for example, all efforts have been counterproductive, because the good intentions are intrusive.
Just leave eachother be for crying out loud, no such thing as a perfect world, stop wrapping reality around a utopia.
Kralizec
06-29-2007, 15:09
I've usually been in favour of government "affirmative" action in this area because racism is so hard to shift, but my gut instinct is always that governmental initiatives tend to be blunt instruments, subject to political winds, and it would be far better for people to sort it out themselves.
I'm not sure wether this ruling has anything to do with affirmative action. I admit I'm slightly puzzled by the supposed measure.
Suppose I'm a father of a black kid, could my child be refused entry to the nearest public school on the ground that it wants more white kids/has to many black kids already? That smells of promoting diversity for diversity's sake, and frankly it's absurd.
As for affirmative action is usually defended on a lack of social mobility especially for minorities. But if you're born out of white parents but in an extremely poor/underdeveloped area, you'll likely have trouble advancing in life as well. I recall somebody in the backroom once posted a graph showing that the majority of people in the USA living beneath the poverty line were still white, but as far as I know no political party is reaching out for them.
I support measures aimed at increasing social mobility, but such measures should be colourblind- access to decent education should be a right for every kid. If there's institutionalized racism in the education system, it should be targeted as such, not by privileging people for belonging to certain minorities in the misguided assumption that the two will cancel eachother out.
Have a little faith mia muca, humans achieve most when left to their own devices. Such as conflict, war, etc.
Eventually they will coorperate out of necesity, they will meet people at work, universities, can't get around it.
It was about children, public schools and the likes, when the mind is young, not about later times.
Let's take our muslims for example, all efforts have been counterproductive, because the good intentions are intrusive.
Query: how do the previous quote and this one, which came immediately afterwards, bind in relevance?
Query: regarding counterproductive effort and the Muslim community; have you proof herefor -- that it is due to intrusion and intrusion only?
Communities big and small, it's about the damage of diversity. Can be a neightbourhood or a school, take a pick. People flock to their own, get over it. Don't enforce, if you throw someone on my lap I don't think 'what an interesting individual', all I know is that I can't get up.
Classic... nearly spit out my iced coffee when I read that.
It was about children, public schools and the likes, when the mind is young, not about later times.
Well that's my point, there is no point. Children are colorblind, so what use is it. Nada.
Query: how do the previous quote and this one, which came immediately afterwards, bind in relevance?
*syntex error*^%*%$makes no sense* eh? Waht?
Query: regarding counterproductive effort and the Muslim community; have you proof herefor -- that it is due to intrusion and intrusion only?
*processing* Well they are digging in aren't they, you know if I prefer a good old white night in town the best bet is a multicultural festival. Maybe you and them want other things, you want pinkostan and they just want to be left alone.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-29-2007, 16:48
Suppose I'm a father of a black kid, could my child be refused entry to the nearest public school on the ground that it wants more white kids/has to many black kids already? That smells of promoting diversity for diversity's sake, and frankly it's absurd.
Thats more like what was happening before. Now you go to the school where you live and they cant use race to bus you out of town anymore. Its a two way street.
Besides too many asians are getting into college we need to make a quota :)
Crazed Rabbit
06-29-2007, 17:33
The ruling seems to be sensible, in that the forced allocation does indeed use race as a deciding factor.
The problem is that in the real world, this is likely to lead to racially segregated schools and further ghettoisation of black communities.
I can certainly agree that it shouldn't be the government's job to decide who goes to what school, particularly on the grounds of race. But given that inequalities and racism exist, how do you ensure integration? Is it entirely a laissez-faire response?
I've usually been in favour of government "affirmative" action in this area because racism is so hard to shift, but my gut instinct is always that governmental initiatives tend to be blunt instruments, subject to political winds, and it would be far better for people to sort it out themselves.
I'd be interested in views on how to square the circle.
What you do is wrest control of public education back from the Washington Education Association - a union seeking benefits for teachers, not students. This is the union that opposed a free grant that would have added great technology resources to one of its lowest performing schools.
Suppose I'm a father of a black kid, could my child be refused entry to the nearest public school on the ground that it wants more white kids/has to many black kids already?
Thats more like what was happening before. Now you go to the school where you live and they cant use race to bus you out of town anymore. Its a two way street.
And what was happening in Seattle.
I believe one reason for the study in Fragony's link is the use of race as an identifying factor and scum like Al Sharpton playing the race card all the time. They keep alive the idea of race struggle long after it should have died with segregation's end.
Crazed Rabbit
Cronos Impera
06-29-2007, 17:48
Fragonny, the American mind is different from the European one. While we don't bother with pseudo-ethical problems they make them an industry.
This ethnical diversity policy is actually a way to culturally assimilate those tight-knie ethnical groups whose ideals are opposite to yours. If dominant group A is larger than minority B by spreading minority B through dominant group A you actually assimilate minority B. Ethnical diversity plans are meant to encourage the assimilation of smaller ethnical communities whose very survival is assured through a tight-knit community.
In fact this law actually benefits the rulling anglo-saxon community.
It was about children, public schools and the likes, when the mind is young, not about later times.
Well that's my point, there is no point. Children are colorblind, so what use is it. Nada. The point is that your words were and are irrelevant to the question.
Query: how do the previous quote and this one, which came immediately afterwards, bind in relevance?
*syntex error*^%*%$makes no sense* eh? Waht?
You wrote:
Eventually they will coorperate out of necesity, they will meet people at work, universities, can't get around it. Let's take our muslims for example, all efforts have been counterproductive, because the good intentions are intrusive. How is your example a relevant one to the phrase before it? You state they will cooperate due to necessity and it is inevitable, yet you provide an example supposedly showing avoidance or failure where the supposed reason herefor is not relevant.
Query: regarding counterproductive effort and the Muslim community; have you proof herefor -- that it is due to intrusion and intrusion only?
*processing* Well they are digging in aren't they, you know if I prefer a good old white night in town the best bet is a multicultural festival. Maybe you and them want other things, you want pinkostan and they just want to be left alone. Insufficient.
Fragonny, the American mind is different from the European one. While we don't bother with pseudo-ethical problems they make them an industry.
This ethnical diversity policy is actually a way to culturally assimilate those tight-knie ethnical groups whose ideals are opposite to yours. If dominant group A is larger than minority B by spreading minority B through dominant group A you actually assimilate minority B. Ethnical diversity plans are meant to encourage the assimilation of smaller ethnical communities whose very survival is assured through a tight-knit community.
In fact this law actually benefits the rulling anglo-saxon community.
hehe, you can invite someone to your party but if they decide not to come there is little use in dragging them to it and pour them champagne. Just stop this whole assimilate nonsense. These lefties that yell YOU ARE LIKE US don't seem to realise that that doesn't always come as a compliment, frankly I am not very proud of some things going on here, but I am teh bomb anyway no? If people prefer isolation, fine. Just don't ask any favours, you don't make a blind person a busdriver and you don't look for job offers at a stripclub when you are wearing a tent. Nothing more respectful then keeping distance imho.
The point is that your words were and are irrelevant to the question.
You wrote:
How is your example a relevant one to the phrase before it? You state they will cooperate due to necessity and it is inevitable, yet you provide an example supposedly showing avoidance or failure where the supposed reason herefor is not relevant.
Insufficient.
Dear Bijo, if I ever am to blame someone for global warming it is you, do you want to discuss my points or do you want to discuss discussing?
doc_bean
06-29-2007, 18:24
Thats more like what was happening before. Now you go to the school where you live and they cant use race to bus you out of town anymore. Its a two way street.
Besides too many asians are getting into college we need to make a quota :)
Can you go to school outside your community ?
We here can go to any school anywhere in the country and they'd have a hard time kicking us out unless we'd get caught doing something criminal (and then it still isn't easy).
Dear Bijo, if I ever am to blame someone for global warming it is you, do you want to discuss my points or do you want to discuss discussing? If you refer to yourself being subject to your excited negative emotions, I ask of you "Why?" Though a logical occurrence, an emotional response is highly irrational and illogical in nature.
Nevertheless, you have been incorrect in properly addressing. We are to discuss allocation of kids, teens, etc., to (public) schools.
If one party is not able to properly discuss the matter, what is the use of continuing before this party has acknowledged the irrelevance whereof it previously spoke?
Correct application of debating/discussing truisms is required.
If you refer to yourself being subject to your excited negative emotions, I ask of you "Why?" Though a logical occurrence, an emotional response is highly irrational and illogical in nature.
Nevertheless, you have been incorrect in properly addressing. We are to discuss allocation of kids, teens, etc., to (public) schools.
If one party is not able to properly discuss the matter, what is the use of continuing before this party has acknowledged the irrelevance whereof it previously spoke?
Correct application of debating/discussing truisms is required.
I think I am going to blame you for a whole lot more, namely various levels of insanity and the general state of the world. Does this reasoning thing work for you? Completily lost here, what *are* you saying exactly?
PanzerJaeger
06-29-2007, 20:44
If you refer to yourself being subject to your excited negative emotions, I ask of you "Why?" Though a logical occurrence, an emotional response is highly irrational and illogical in nature.
Nevertheless, you have been incorrect in properly addressing. We are to discuss allocation of kids, teens, etc., to (public) schools.
If one party is not able to properly discuss the matter, what is the use of continuing before this party has acknowledged the irrelevance whereof it previously spoke?
Correct application of debating/discussing truisms is required.
Pindar, you are not. :no:
Pindar, you are not. :no:
Straight from the factory, give him some time ~;)
AntiochusIII
06-30-2007, 00:49
Can you go to school outside your community ?Private: wherever the hell you want. Got money? Got free pass.
Public: not without "good reason" -- a zone variance document thingy you have to send in and get approved; with that you can go to the school of your choice instead of the public school of your zone (arbitrarily drawn by the local school district usually). Usual reasons are clubs and sports and the like. I sent one once and got approved, but didn't use it because I find my new school to be in walking distance...much easier for the lazy arse of mine.
That is, however, in the case of Las Vegas, which has no visible race problems due to massive immigration from both in and outside the country. Diversity doesn't even need to be enforced here. We got it all: Whites Blacks Mexicans Asians Martians and an Andorran or two.
I can see the problem in less "dynamic" locales shall we say and why the situation is a reverse. The government's stuck in a bind. In one way freedom and basic equality ought to mean this race quota thing in K-12 education is a total farce; three hours bus ride to school? In another way refusing to acknowledge the underlying problem is dangerously blind. The whole "white flight to the suburbs leaving the inner city to the (generally poorer) blacks" some generations ago leave the US cities and their surroundings quite racially unbalanced...resulting in a similar but less extreme demographic distribution than de-facto segregation. That's why ghetto culture is associated with blacks and suburbia with whites: it partially reflects the reality of things.
I also notice Fragony mentioned that people like to stick to other people with the same skin colour. As much as it saddens me to admit what bunch of bigoted idiots we are...my observation matches his.
Devastatin Dave
06-30-2007, 01:09
Thank God for private schools. I'm not going to subject my kids to social engineering by ill informed liberals.
Samurai Waki
06-30-2007, 01:54
When my little girls finally turn the age to start going to school, I'm making sure they will only go to Private School...or maybe home school :idea2: :shame:
Tribesman
06-30-2007, 02:09
I'm not going to subject my kids to social engineering by ill informed liberals.
:laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: that is a classic .
doc_bean
06-30-2007, 09:50
Private: wherever the hell you want. Got money? Got free pass.
Public: not without "good reason"
Wow. I think that would be considered pure communism here. (Not trying to be offensive) No wonder private school is so popular if you can't even choose the school your kid goes to in the public system.
Wow. I think that would be considered pure communism here. (Not trying to be offensive) No wonder private school is so popular if you can't even choose the school your kid goes to in the public system.
It varies by state actually. My son is going to a public school in a different county then where we actually live. It costs some - about 10 dollars because we registered him early enough so that we meant the school board planning cycle. If we had done it later then we did - we would have to pay several hunderd dollars extra - but indeed in the rural areas of the midwest - Kansas its even possible to pick a school outside of your own county - school district - in order to assure your child is educated to the standard that you wish. The main requirement being that the school maintains the proper student to teacher ratio. If the student population exceeds that ratio - then my child will have to transfer to the county school in which we live. The only additional cost is that we have to ensure that the child gets to the school - which is a 20 mile drive from my house - but is on the way to my wife's place of employement.
Then in some states you can chose which public school you want to go to, and the school district will bus the child to the school regardless if it is a neighborhood school or one within the school district. While in Texas - in the Garland School district - I and my child had the opporunity to select which school he was going to out of the 5 elementry schools, the 6 Junior High which is grades 6-8, and the 5 High Schools. So to say as a nation that in the United States that you can not select a school in which you want to attend is false. Some states probably have that restriction - but the two states I have lived in while my children were of school age - do not have such a restriction.
Now in small rural areas - you normally only have one school to use.
Then there is the International Bachulete (SP) program that if your child qualifies because of intellengce testing criteria or artist gifts the child can elect to attend the school that has the program. There are programs in most cities in the United States. So that is another way to select a school for your child to attend within the public school system.
Now while the public education system in the United States has many flaws - the ability to chose what school your child attends is not a systemic problem - it is limited to states and yes even school district policy. I might have just been lucky to live in states that allow me to select what school my child can attend - but I don't necessary buy the arguement that one can not select what public school one's child goes to.
Oh and by the way I did not use race or money to educate my child - I have only used the selection criteria as set up by the school district.
Crazed Rabbit
06-30-2007, 19:26
FYI, the Seattle School district - the one trying to maintain racial quotas in schools that got slapped down in this case - also defined racism as something that only whites can do to minorities, before public outcry forced them to retract that.
CR
good decision.
if affirmative action must be used then it should be applied based on poverty, not race.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.