Sotomayor & The Supreme Court: Redefining Racial Identity

Debate serious and interesting topics, rant about politics or pop culture, or otherwise converse in essay form about your opinions. The rules of conduct here are a little stricter.
User avatar
Boeing Boeing Bone!
Posts: 755
Joined: 2008.12.23 (05:44)

Postby Amadeus » 2009.07.16 (03:52)

Graham Johnson/Amadeus wrote:Although racism is most commonly viewed as hatred or inferiority of a race or ethnicity, it can take an equally discriminatory angle: racial superiority and pride. Many will equate this with cultural pride, a pride in traditions and views. But these two things are vastly different. For cultural identity is principally determined by choices and actions, whereas racial identity is formed only by skin color and heritage. The former is determined by decisions whereas no one can choose their race or nationality. And so to hold oneself higher based on either of these aforementioned traits is as racist as to hold a man of a different in lower esteem.
A recent event serves as a perfect example of racial pride and superiority. On May 26, 2009 Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by President Obama partly on the grounds of her diverse background, her empathy, and her excellent judicial record. She herself says of this “our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging” These two elements form a person's experience, which obviously affects their judging. However, in another speech, Sotomayor expressed her views that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.” Put simply, she is saying her Hispanic roots will make her a better candidate for a judicial position. Advocates for Sotomayor quickly jump to defend her, with claims that privileged Caucasians have never experienced racism and cannot have any possible idea what minorities are going through... a racist comment in itself. A similar statement by a Caucasian man toward a Latina woman would outrage the minorities, who would call that person racist. So what gives Sotomayor the authority to make such a claim? The fact that past Latino generations have faced discrimination. And so again, the white male is being discriminated against based on his skin color and ancestry. As former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich puts it, this “new racism is no better than old racism.”
The above article is from Pride:
An Exploration of Discrimination, Nationalism, and Morality in the 21st Century
by yours truly. As a continuation of the book, I'd like to ask the opinions of members of the community in order to form and further my opinions and views, as well as incorporate the views of others.

The question I'd like to pose: Was Sotomayor's comment racist or not? Feel free to address opinions I've already mentioned in the book, as well as defending or attacking Sotomayor and racial pride.
People write to me and say, "I’m giving up, you’re not talking to me." I just write them a simple message like, "Never give up," you know? And it changes their life
http://greenbrown.bandcamp.com

User avatar
Retrofuturist
Posts: 3131
Joined: 2008.09.19 (06:55)
MBTI Type: ENTP
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Postby t̷s͢uk̕a͡t͜ư » 2009.07.16 (07:06)

Yep, racist.
She really opened up a can of worms with that initial remark, and has only dug herself deeper in trying to make excuses for it. I bet (and hope) she's regretting giving that initial answer.
[spoiler="you know i always joked that it would be scary as hell to run into DMX in a dark ally, but secretly when i say 'DMX' i really mean 'Tsukatu'." -kai]"... and when i say 'scary as hell' i really mean 'tight pink shirt'." -kai[/spoiler][/i]
spoiler

Image


"Asked ortsz for a name change"
Posts: 3380
Joined: 2008.11.13 (16:47)

Postby otters~1 » 2009.07.16 (15:54)

Sotomayor wrote:...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life...
I think that's completely true in certain contexts, and I always hate to label brutal honesty as racism. That happens too often these days. I definitely agree that it was an idiotic thing to say during her first week.

And, I think the statement itself was a bit misread, at least by you. (I didn't see the interview in question; I'm going by what you quoted, which is probably a mistake.) I think she's saying that certain events in her life have made her more experienced to deal with certain cases--not that her race is what makes her more experienced.
the dusk the dawn the earth the sea

User avatar
Queen of All Spiders
Posts: 4263
Joined: 2008.09.29 (03:54)
NUMA Profile: http://www.freeWoWgold.edu
MBTI Type: ENFP
Location: Quebec, Canada!

Postby SlappyMcGee » 2009.07.16 (19:58)

Loathes

User avatar
Boeing Boeing Bone!
Posts: 755
Joined: 2008.12.23 (05:44)

Postby Amadeus » 2009.07.16 (20:45)

flagmyidol wrote:
Sotomayor wrote:...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life...
I think that's completely true in certain contexts, and I always hate to label brutal honesty as racism. That happens too often these days. I definitely agree that it was an idiotic thing to say during her first week.

And, I think the statement itself was a bit misread, at least by you. (I didn't see the interview in question; I'm going by what you quoted, which is probably a mistake.) I think she's saying that certain events in her life have made her more experienced to deal with certain cases--not that her race is what makes her more experienced.
But isn't she saying her experiences are richer because she's Latina?

As I wrote in a different passage,
Sotomayor expressed her views that “a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.” Put simply, she is saying her Hispanic roots will make her a better candidate for a judicial position. And so what advantages does her race give her? In the next paragraph, I'll trace through her early childhood for clues.
Born in The Bronx, New York City on June 25, 1924, Sotomayor grew up in an ethnically and racially mixed, middle class neighborhood along with Caucasians. Along with children of all races, she was diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes from an early age and lost her father shortly after. Along with many children of many ethnicities, she was raised by a single parent and enjoyed reading the popular Nancy Drew novels. No less privileged than most, she attended parochial Blessed Sacrament School and Cardinal Spellman Highschool, gradauting as the valedictorian of her class. Her only differences were self-inflicted, when she describes her time at Princeton as feeling "alien" as one of the few Hispanics attending. Unable to overcome this difference in chromatin, she could neither associate with or feel at home with Caucasians. This life could have that of any White, Black, Asian, or Latino schoolchild, what makes her experiences richer than her neighbors' and classmates' ? Absolutely nothing.
So what does she claim qualifies her as a better candidate? The fact that her skin is a different color from approximately five sixths of the America's population. And these ethnic origins give way to making her experiences somehow richer than the Caucasian boy who lived next door, or went to her school, from a white child who also suffers from diabetes and has lost a parent.
People write to me and say, "I’m giving up, you’re not talking to me." I just write them a simple message like, "Never give up," you know? And it changes their life
http://greenbrown.bandcamp.com

"Asked ortsz for a name change"
Posts: 3380
Joined: 2008.11.13 (16:47)

Postby otters~1 » 2009.07.17 (01:59)

Amadeus wrote:But isn't she saying her experiences are richer because she's Latina?
Maybe, but I think what she means is that she has a different viewpoint of things, because she grew up in a Latina household. Not necessarily richer, but different. There's nothing racist about that, and I think it's possibly true. Time will tell if her judgements are more insightful or whatever.

“...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life.”

I think what she's saying is: in certain cases, Sotomayor has more insight into the defendant's pleas (or the accuser's problem, or whatever), just because she has lived that life, partially. Not because of her skin, because of the events in her life.

I think that's what she meant, but she came across as a bit elitist, like "I have a troubled childhood so I'm special, elect me to the Supreme Court."

I'm having trouble articulating my thoughts about this for some reason, but make no mistake, I am not defending her. By the way, where exactly are you getting these quotes? I'm a little confused.
the dusk the dawn the earth the sea

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 586
Joined: 2008.09.19 (12:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Atilla

Postby Atilla » 2009.07.17 (02:12)

Amadeus wrote:
flagmyidol wrote:
Sotomayor wrote:...a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life...
I think that's completely true in certain contexts, and I always hate to label brutal honesty as racism. That happens too often these days. I definitely agree that it was an idiotic thing to say during her first week.

And, I think the statement itself was a bit misread, at least by you. (I didn't see the interview in question; I'm going by what you quoted, which is probably a mistake.) I think she's saying that certain events in her life have made her more experienced to deal with certain cases--not that her race is what makes her more experienced.
But isn't she saying her experiences are richer because she's Latina?
Not really. She probably meant that her experiences are richer because of the way Latina people are treated in America and because Latina are a minority - not because her race is inherently superior. Most Caucasians do not have the kind of experiences she has, because they are the privileged majority.

User avatar
Lifer
Posts: 1099
Joined: 2008.09.26 (21:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/smartalco
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby smartalco » 2009.07.17 (03:20)

Amadeus wrote:Caucasians have never experienced racism
So the fact that I am ineligible for a good half of the scholarships I have come across simply because I am a caucasian male isn't racism?
Image
Tycho: "I don't know why people ever, ever try to stop nerds from doing things. It's really the most incredible waste of time."
Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

User avatar
Boeing Boeing Bone!
Posts: 755
Joined: 2008.12.23 (05:44)

Postby Amadeus » 2009.07.17 (04:22)

Whoa there smartalco, take it in context
Amadeus wrote: Put simply, she is saying her Hispanic roots will make her a better candidate for a judicial position. Advocates for Sotomayor quickly jump to defend her, with claims that privileged Caucasians have never experienced racism and cannot have any possible idea what minorities are going through... a racist comment in itself.
I agree entirely that 'new racism' presents itself very differently then how people normally think, yet it is still entirely discriminatory. Atilla needs simply to read your post to see his claims that all whites (as an entity) never face discrimination is false.

And flag, I wrote the quotes in a book I'm working on.
People write to me and say, "I’m giving up, you’re not talking to me." I just write them a simple message like, "Never give up," you know? And it changes their life
http://greenbrown.bandcamp.com

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 586
Joined: 2008.09.19 (12:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Atilla

Postby Atilla » 2009.07.17 (13:58)

Amadeus wrote:I agree entirely that 'new racism' presents itself very differently then how people normally think, yet it is still entirely discriminatory. Atilla needs simply to read your post to see his claims that all whites (as an entity) never face discrimination is false.
Alternately, you could read my post and realize that I said "most Caucasians" have not had the same experiences of discrimination as people in racial minorities, not "OMG NO WHITE PERSON HAS EVER FACED ANY DISCRIMINATION AT ALL EVER". It's certainly possible for white people to suffer discrimination because of their race, but it is much less common and easier to escape. Imagine, for example, that everyone not of your race is a total bigot at despises you utterly because of your skin colour. If you're black, this means that 9 out of 10 people you meet will hate you; if you're white, it only means 1 in 10, which is obviously a hell of a lot easier to deal with. This is further exacerbated by the fact that white people, on the whole, have more property, power, and other nice things than most minorities, which lets them throw their weight around even more.
smartalco wrote:So the fact that I am ineligible for a good half of the scholarships I have come across simply because I am a caucasian male isn't racism?
Not as such, no. Non-caucasians generally find it more difficult to get an education, as a result of past racism and oppression by Caucasians. Consider this - even with the scholarships, you are twice as likely to go to college as an African-American, because you had the good fortune to be born white. I understand that it's annoying to miss out on scholarships, but shit, a lot of these people are living in inherited poverty because our bigoted ancestors shoved them there, and then stomped on them. Repeatedly. Trying to give them a hand up through education is the least we can do. Think of it as a compensation for our past crimes, if it makes you feel any better. You might also think about the scholarships and bursaries that exist specifically to help poor people, and why those exist.

Wizard Dentist
Posts: 604
Joined: 2008.09.26 (15:04)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/SkyPanda

Postby SkyPanda » 2009.07.17 (14:01)

flagmyidol wrote:I think that's completely true in certain contexts, and I always hate to label brutal honesty as racism
I'm not sure what you mean by 'completely true in certain contexts'. Can you elaborate on that before I start shooting? :P
Amadues wrote:These two elements form a person's experience, which obviously affects their judging.
This is not something I would expect a judge to be speaking publicly about.
"Oh hey guys, i'm gonna go easier on young latin kids than most of those old white dude judges. Whoops, did I just start an appeal-fest? My bad!"

User avatar
Lifer
Posts: 1099
Joined: 2008.09.26 (21:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/smartalco
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby smartalco » 2009.07.17 (19:23)

(This post also directed at Atilla)
DemonzLunchBreak wrote:The purpose of affirmative action, as I see it, should not be to make sure that there are proportional numbers of racial demographics in a school or whatever. Instead, it should be to help people who are at a disadvantage economically.
Sort of. The purpose of affirmative action was to try to squelch racism in selection, 50+ years ago (speaking in American context). Today, merit based scholarships aren't being hand picked nearly as much. They are tied to ACT/SAT scores, your GPA, your extracurricular activities. That means that an African American/Hispanic/whatever student has an equal opportunity to get the scholarship as I do. This is the point where affirmative action is no longer needed. When the system isn't biased anymore, trying to correct for bias is ridiculous. Why should someone else get money from KU, when I have the higher ACT score, just because they were born black? There was a time and a place (and in some instances, there are probably southern schools that still need it from what I have heard from people living in the area) where affirmative action was required to give everyone an equal opportunity. That time is not now for the majority of American schools.

However, I am entirely OK with need based scholarships. Everyone should have a chance at an education, wealthy background or not. My friend/roommates' girlfriend is starting college this fall. She is fairly intelligent, and got a good bit of merit based scholarship money, but it would have only been about 1/2 of KU's tuition (which is where she really wanted to go). Her family has nearly literally no money to pay for the rest. This is where need based scholarships/grants are supposed to help, and in this case, they did (she is going to KU). If these grants happen to have a disproportionately large percentage going to minorities, it doesn't really matter (assuming they are being distributed entirely on need). All that tells us is that minorities are generally in a lower income bracket (the reasons of which I do not pretend to know or try to study).

I had something else to add to this, but have, once again, forgot where I was going while typing. (and 'disproportionately' is probably the longest word I have ever typed without misspelling it)
Image
Tycho: "I don't know why people ever, ever try to stop nerds from doing things. It's really the most incredible waste of time."
Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 586
Joined: 2008.09.19 (12:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Atilla

Postby Atilla » 2009.07.18 (01:53)

DemonzLunchBreak wrote:There's a difference between race as a cause and race as a predictor. I'm not more likely to get into college because I'm white, I'm more likely to get into college because I'm a member of the upper middle class and because I am very encouraged (read: forced) to do so. It turns out that race is a decent predictor of the economic and social conditions that lead people to go to college (or not), but that's not to say that it's the reason I'm going to go to college. Like, polo players might be more likely to go to college (this is made up, but you see my point), not because they play polo but because playing polo is correlated with being a New England douchbag having money.
And why is being white correlated with higher socio-economic status? Because, as I said, we pushed other races into poverty through bigoted policy. People alive today are still feeling the effects of that racism, thanks to inherited poverty. Sure, the reason they're less likely to go to university is ostensibly because they're (more likely to be) poor and uneducated, but the reason they're poor and uneducated is because of the way their race was treated.
I'm against affirmative action if it's done for racial reasons. The purpose of affirmative action, as I see it, should not be to make sure that there are proportional numbers of racial demographics in a school or whatever. Instead, it should be to help people who are at a disadvantage economically. Now, the majority of those who need economic assistance are from racial minorities, but if an affirmative action program ends up helping a white family that's having trouble putting food on the table, I think I could live with that.
Well, scholarships don't really "make sure" there are proportional numbers, as such; they don't actually give you a place at university and push some white guy out. They're just monetary assistance, so that people who might not otherwise be able to attend college (or who might have to work four jobs and not have time for study) can afford to do so.

The controls on race are there so that, for example, the scholarships don't "just happen" to go to white families far more often then they should. As you said, the majority of those who need assistance are non-white. So if things were fair, you'd expect most of the scholarships to go to these people even without racial restrictions, right? The restrictions make sure that that happens. And white folks can still get assistance through the bursaries and the scholarships which are not restricted by race; it's not like there's no assistance available whatsoever.


@smartalco: it's true that merit-based scholarships today are, for the most part, systematically fair. However, because minority groups were often denied education, and because people from minorities are generally of lower socio-economic status (as discussed above), you have advantages outside the test itself. For example, your parents are more likely to be educated people who can help you with your schoolwork; a black person's parents may have lived, as you say, 50+ years ago and as a result weren't able to access that education.

Also, sadly, outright racism does still occur today. Many universities are still run in large part by white men who were born 50+ years ago, and might still carry the prejudices which were rife back in their day (which is not to say that younger people can't be racist gits, too). As I said above, race-specific scholarships are there as a kind of insurance against prejudice in selection.

"Asked ortsz for a name change"
Posts: 3380
Joined: 2008.11.13 (16:47)

Postby otters~1 » 2009.07.18 (02:59)

SkyPanda wrote:
flagmyidol wrote:I think that's completely true in certain contexts, and I always hate to label brutal honesty as racism
I'm not sure what you mean by 'completely true in certain contexts'. Can you elaborate on that before I start shooting? :P
Heh. I meant that Latinas have definitely faced racial situations that white people haven't. I'm not at all sure about her in particular.


Amadeus: How old are you? I think it's cool that you're writing a book about this, but I want to know how you picked your subject.
the dusk the dawn the earth the sea

User avatar
Boeing Boeing Bone!
Posts: 755
Joined: 2008.12.23 (05:44)

Postby Amadeus » 2009.07.18 (04:11)

DemonzLunchBreak wrote:Not as such, no. Non-caucasians generally find it more difficult to get an education, as a result of past racism and oppression by Caucasians. Consider this - even with the scholarships, you are twice as likely to go to college as an African-American, because you had the good fortune to be born white. I understand that it's annoying to miss out on scholarships, but shit, a lot of these people are living in inherited poverty because our bigoted ancestors shoved them there, and then stomped on them. Repeatedly. Trying to give them a hand up through education is the least we can do. Think of it as a compensation for our past crimes, if it makes you feel any better. You might also think about the scholarships and bursaries that exist specifically to help poor people, and why those exist.
Are you saying that current generations should pay for the crimes of the last? That we must pay for the sins of our fathers?
Isn't the basis America/equal opportunity that everyone has an equal chance given by the government to succeed, and that any scholarship specific to a race is both discriminatory and unequal? As Demonz said, what if I'm a recent European immigrant? Or what if my great-great-grandpa was an abolitionist or civil rights supporter? Abe Lincoln, or Frederick Douglas, or JFK? An entire race would be force to suffer for crimes that not only the current generation did not commit, but that not everyone of the past generations committed. It's akin to jailing a son because his father was never punished for murder.

And Flag, I'm 14. If you'll read my intro below, it'll explain why I wrote the book and picked the topic.
When I set out to write this, it was my first book. I was 14 years old, and it was the summer of 2009. After extensively reading the works of Ayn Rand, and others from past centuries, I convinced myself I should share my own ideals, virtues, morals, and viewpoints on key topics addressing the issues of now, the issues of the 21st century.
I had a solid background to rely on; as a traditional anti-bias, multicultural curriculum professor at a local junior college, my mother would often bring up viewpoints commonly shared by the interests groups, the discriminated against, the handicapped, those facing the oppressions of the time. And so I countered many of these opinions and philosophies with my own, resulting in frequent debate and ponder. In late June, I began this book as a way to put these thoughts on paper. It would give me the chance both to share my views and to have my views shared. It touches on dozens of heavily controversial topics, from racism and sexism to cannabis to morality. I have however, veered away from key issues which many readers will perhaps observe.


These include abortion, most prominently, among genocide, government budget cuts, and the War against Terror in the Middle East. Although many might think I have shirked these topics from fear, I quell those thoughts now in my forward. I made the decision early on not to approach these points because I either lacked sufficient knowledge in a very complex dilemma, or I am still not yet decided on how I stand.
However, I do hope the topics covered will provide a stimulating read on another's views, at the least, and perhaps sway readers to take a more conscious stand on the issues of our time. For the future belongs to those who take it.

-Graham Johnson, Independence Day 2009
People write to me and say, "I’m giving up, you’re not talking to me." I just write them a simple message like, "Never give up," you know? And it changes their life
http://greenbrown.bandcamp.com

User avatar
Lifer
Posts: 1099
Joined: 2008.09.26 (21:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/smartalco
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby smartalco » 2009.07.18 (04:27)

Atilla wrote:@smartalco: it's true that merit-based scholarships today are, for the most part, systematically fair. However, because minority groups were often denied education, and because people from minorities are generally of lower socio-economic status (as discussed above), you have advantages outside the test itself. For example, your parents are more likely to be educated people who can help you with your schoolwork; a black person's parents may have lived, as you say, 50+ years ago and as a result weren't able to access that education.
The last time my parents helped me with schoolwork more then just reading off flash cards (that I made) was elementary school. Meaning it doesn't take an advanced education to help with this stuff. Through middle school and high school I did all my schoolwork by myself. I'd venture to say that by high school, most of the stuff you are doing is advanced enough that your parents can't help you a ton. My dad was a physics major in college, and even he had forgot most of the math I did in my last few years of high school. My sister, who is three years younger than me, has been relying more on me for math help than my parents. I'm sure there are tons of people that get help, but there are plenty who don't, and I'd guess that those are the people that the full-rides are being shelled out to.

Furthermore, these less-educated parents would be making less money, meaning that their kid becomes more eligible for need-based scholarships. Assuming that the need based scholarships are distributed fairly, this is a self-correcting issue.
Also, sadly, outright racism does still occur today. Many universities are still run in large part by white men who were born 50+ years ago, and might still carry the prejudices which were rife back in their day (which is not to say that younger people can't be racist gits, too). As I said above, race-specific scholarships are there as a kind of insurance against prejudice in selection.
Like I said, there are some places that probably still need specific scholarships to keep things fair. But the majority don't. So once again, why should I, as a white male, be excluded from a full half of the scholarships offered? (KU actually flaunts how much of a minority student body they have, the university definitely isn't run by prejudice old dudes (just old though? yes))

Specific scholarships for those with a Y chromosome is in the same vein, but that is unrelated to this discussion.

And for the record, I still got enough scholarship money to where my parents are only paying a couple thousand a year, so I'm not bitter about this. I was just going through this over a year ago when I was looking for scholarships and found it completely ridiculous.
Image
Tycho: "I don't know why people ever, ever try to stop nerds from doing things. It's really the most incredible waste of time."
Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 586
Joined: 2008.09.19 (12:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Atilla

Postby Atilla » 2009.07.18 (13:54)

smartalco wrote:The last time my parents helped me with schoolwork more then just reading off flash cards (that I made) was elementary school. Meaning it doesn't take an advanced education to help with this stuff.
Non-white people are more likely to be illiterate, which would prevent them doing even that. Plus, even if your parents weren't much help, I personally knew a lot of people who did get help from their folks, so I don't think you can really say that parental education is completely useless. Plus, direct help isn't the only benefit of having educated parents - educated people are more likely to have books around, for instance, and have their kids see them reading, which can help with literacy.

In any event, that was just one example. There are plenty of other factors which might work against non-white people. I don't really want to go into a huge essay about it here, partly because (somewhat ironically) I have stuff to do for university right now, but if you're interested in the details I'll see if I can find a blog or something that sums it up.
smartalco wrote:Furthermore, these less-educated parents would be making less money, meaning that their kid becomes more eligible for need-based scholarships. Assuming that the need based scholarships are distributed fairly, this is a self-correcting issue.
I'm not sure that's a good assumption at this point. For one thing, every lecturer and faculty member I've met at the two universities I've attended has been white. I'm not sure how much confidence that gives you that things will be "fair" when you're a different race. Actually, I'm not sure how that makes people of other races feel about their position in the academic hierarchy in general.

Also, from a more pragmatic perspective... Checking people's income and suchlike actually requires a non-trivial amount of clerical work, which costs money. There's also the fact that people are lying bastards - I personally know several people who fudged their income figures to pick up study benefits, and I also know many people cheat on their taxes with no remorse. Basing scholarships on what people claim their income is might not be quite as accurate as you might like, and may also be inefficient if you have to keep checking up on people.
smartalco wrote:So once again, why should I, as a white male, be excluded from a full half of the scholarships offered?
And yet you, as a white male, still got a scholarship.
Amadeus wrote:Are you saying that current generations should pay for the crimes of the last? That we must pay for the sins of our fathers?
To some extent. I mean, say that your father mugged someone, took all their money, and gave it to you, then committed suicide. Do you think it would be fair if everyone said "Whoops, he's dead! Well, I guess you can keep the stolen money."? On a slightly more realistic note, if you inherited a fortune from your grandfather, and then discovered that he was an infamous gangster and the money was acquired through fraud and drug dealin', it would be nice if you donated some of his ill-gotten gains to a rehab clinic or something.

Now, obviously things aren't that simple here - for one thing, we're dealing with groups of people rather than a single specific case, and many of the people who were behind the "sins" you speak of are, in fact, still alive. And remember, we're not throwing people in jail, just putting a small portion of their income towards helping a group of people who are, in general, worse off than you.

User avatar
Boeing Boeing Bone!
Posts: 755
Joined: 2008.12.23 (05:44)

Postby Amadeus » 2009.07.18 (15:31)

Atilla wrote:
Amadeus wrote:Are you saying that current generations should pay for the crimes of the last? That we must pay for the sins of our fathers?
To some extent. I mean, say that your father mugged someone, took all their money, and gave it to you, then committed suicide. Do you think it would be fair if everyone said "Whoops, he's dead! Well, I guess you can keep the stolen money."? On a slightly more realistic note, if you inherited a fortune from your grandfather, and then discovered that he was an infamous gangster and the money was acquired through fraud and drug dealin', it would be nice if you donated some of his ill-gotten gains to a rehab clinic or something.

Now, obviously things aren't that simple here - for one thing, we're dealing with groups of people rather than a single specific case, and many of the people who were behind the "sins" you speak of are, in fact, still alive. And remember, we're not throwing people in jail, just putting a small portion of their income towards helping a group of people who are, in general, worse off than you.
But by punishing all whites, you're punishing the innocent, and stereotyping against an entire race, in effect saying "all whites must be punished because 50 years ago, there were some racist dudes". At this point, you're judging my heritage and me by my race, not my character or actions or decisions. That's racism.
People write to me and say, "I’m giving up, you’re not talking to me." I just write them a simple message like, "Never give up," you know? And it changes their life
http://greenbrown.bandcamp.com

User avatar
Lifer
Posts: 1099
Joined: 2008.09.26 (21:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/smartalco
MBTI Type: INTJ

Postby smartalco » 2009.07.18 (16:16)

Atilla wrote:Non-white people are more likely to be illiterate, which would prevent them doing even that. Plus, even if your parents weren't much help, I personally knew a lot of people who did get help from their folks, so I don't think you can really say that parental education is completely useless. Plus, direct help isn't the only benefit of having educated parents - educated people are more likely to have books around, for instance, and have their kids see them reading, which can help with literacy.
I said I'm sure tons of people get help from parents or the like. I also said I don't think that is where full-ride and other large scholarships are going.
I'm not sure that's a good assumption at this point. For one thing, every lecturer and faculty member I've met at the two universities I've attended has been white. I'm not sure how much confidence that gives you that things will be "fair" when you're a different race. Actually, I'm not sure how that makes people of other races feel about their position in the academic hierarchy in general.
Of the 8 professors I have had so far at KU, only 4 have been caucasian (3 male, 1 female if you are curious). KU's school of engineering human relations head is an African American woman. This isn't a university where everything is run by white males, I already stated that.
On top of this, I'd say well over half of the need-based scholarships/grants aren't given by the university, they are given by the government, and applied for through the FAFSA, which, hopefully, the government will be pretty neutral in regards to race.
Also, from a more pragmatic perspective... Checking people's income and suchlike actually requires a non-trivial amount of clerical work, which costs money. There's also the fact that people are lying bastards - I personally know several people who fudged their income figures to pick up study benefits, and I also know many people cheat on their taxes with no remorse. Basing scholarships on what people claim their income is might not be quite as accurate as you might like, and may also be inefficient if you have to keep checking up on people.
So minorities can't lie about their income as well?
And yet you, as a white male, still got a scholarship.
This statement makes me think that you think I would have got less if I had not been a white male but still in the same academic standing. As the 'I can't even apply for half of them' statement might suggest, I probably would have got even more. There are no 'white' scholarships, or 'male' scholarships, or the combination thereof, every scholarship I received had an equal chance of being given to absolutely anyone.

Just curious, where do you live that you see this much potential for racism? I obviously can't speak for everyone in what I'm saying, but my experience has seen far from it.
Image
Tycho: "I don't know why people ever, ever try to stop nerds from doing things. It's really the most incredible waste of time."
Adam Savage: "I reject your reality and substitute my own!"

User avatar
The Konami Number
Posts: 586
Joined: 2008.09.19 (12:27)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/Atilla

Postby Atilla » 2009.07.20 (02:44)

(Note: I'm being slightly brief because I've got a class coming up, so excuse me if I miss something)
smartalco wrote:Of the 8 professors I have had so far at KU, only 4 have been caucasian (3 male, 1 female if you are curious). KU's school of engineering human relations head is an African American woman. This isn't a university where everything is run by white males, I already stated that.
On top of this, I'd say well over half of the need-based scholarships/grants aren't given by the university, they are given by the government, and applied for through the FAFSA, which, hopefully, the government will be pretty neutral in regards to race.
Mmm, I think it's a little different where I come from, then. It's hard to say exactly how many scholarships are controlled by whom, because there are a lot of scholarships, half of which have esoteric requirements ("Female students from a rural area studying civil engineering with an 80%+ average") and many of which are funded through donations from individuals or companies. The university isn't in charge of all the scholarships, but they've got enough control that they could screw things up. Of course, my government is also composed almost entirely of white people.

Anyway, even if the university isn't in direct control of handing out scholarships, having an all-white staff can be a problem. There are a few studies showing that people tend to perform better in classes where the teacher is like them (so men perform better with male lecturers, and women with female lecturers). It can also be kind of discouraging if people of your race don't seem to be able to get positions of authority. This is one reason Obama's election made a lot of African-Americans happy - it was proof that, hey, the old prejudice is fading and a black man really can become president!
Also, from a more pragmatic perspective... Checking people's income and suchlike actually requires a non-trivial amount of clerical work, which costs money. There's also the fact that people are lying bastards - I personally know several people who fudged their income figures to pick up study benefits, and I also know many people cheat on their taxes with no remorse. Basing scholarships on what people claim their income is might not be quite as accurate as you might like, and may also be inefficient if you have to keep checking up on people.
So minorities can't lie about their income as well?
Of course they can! My point was that while race is an imperfect was of distributing scholarships, since there will sometimes be white people who need the scholarship more, going by what people claim their income is isn't entirely foolproof either, and has other costs associated with it. Although racial minorities are statistically more likely to actually be poor, so it might be more likely that the money will go in the right general direction even if everyone lies...
And yet you, as a white male, still got a scholarship.
This statement makes me think that you think I would have got less if I had not been a white male but still in the same academic standing. As the 'I can't even apply for half of them' statement might suggest, I probably would have got even more. There are no 'white' scholarships, or 'male' scholarships, or the combination thereof, every scholarship I received had an equal chance of being given to absolutely anyone.
Not quite what I meant. I was pointing out that, for all your complaints that it was difficult to get a scholarship because they were all for women and racial minorities, you still seem to have got one. Clearly, the restricted scholarships don't make it impossible for white people to get help, though obviously I don't know your circumstances or how many other white people got scholarships. Presumably if non-white people are being looked after by the restricted scholarships, they don't need the unrestricted ones as much, and there would be less competition for them? I'm just saying that restricted scholarships might not be hurting your chances as much as you think (though, again, without specific information I can't really confirm this.)
Just curious, where do you live that you see this much potential for racism? I obviously can't speak for everyone in what I'm saying, but my experience has seen far from it.
Melbourne. And for the most part people are pretty nice. In fact, I might have agreed with you last year. Earlier this year, though, I was on the train when an Asian schoolgirl walked on and went to sit down, when a woman a few seats away started yelling at her to get away, that she was a "filthy Asian", and so on. The idiot women spent the whole trip ranting about how the dirty Asians were spreading their foul diseases and destroying society and so on and on and on. The poor girl looked terrified and I don't blame her. After that, I started paying a bit more attention to what people said... and suddenly it's not so easy to laugh off the jokes about abos and wogs, or the times when someone complains that the Sudanese or Lebanese are ruining the neighbourhood, or calls a girl a terrorist because she's wearing a hijab. There's also been a spate of bashings of Indian students recently, and before that there were the Cronulla race riots... then there's the fact that racism isn't all the overt variety. If I can draw a parallel to sexism, you might recall the discussion here recently about "nice guys" who are creepy and misogynistic, while believing they're being nice and helpful. If you look at history, there are also many instances of black people being forcibly removed from their homes and put in a camp or institution, ostensibly to help them. I think it's easy for us, as white people, to be ignorant of racism because we don't really have to deal with it. If someone makes a derogatory joke or complains about the damn niggers, we can just think "what a jerk" and move on with our lives. I don't think it's quite so easy when you're the subject of the abuse. I'm pretty sure that schoolgirl was much more traumatised than I was, even though I found the woman's words horrifying. And we don't, generally, have to deal with the subtle racism, the people who look slightly afraid when they talk to us because of our race, the people who sneer slightly at your hijab as they walk past. It's difficult for me to judge the extent to which things like this occur because as part of the privileged race I don't experience them. Though I do sometimes notice women looking at me with some suspicion at night, which I assume is because of my sex, but that's a different issue...

User avatar
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 1416
Joined: 2008.09.26 (05:35)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/scythe33
MBTI Type: ENTP
Location: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

Postby scythe » 2009.07.20 (03:41)

That particular sound byte wasn't racist per se because comments can't have opinions, but it was certainly rather offensive, as indicated by the fact that it caused offense. Not to say that out of context quotes actually matter, or anything.

Really, Supreme Court nominees tend to fake their asses off once it's known or even suspected that they're under consideration for the job. If you want to know how she interprets the law, look at her previous decisions.

Oh, and might we move the affirmative action discussion elsewhere? Unless everyone would like to discuss that in this thread, of course.
As soon as we wish to be happier, we are no longer happy.

User avatar
The Dreamster Teamster
Posts: 77
Joined: 2008.10.01 (02:06)
NUMA Profile: http://nmaps.net/user/sept
MBTI Type: INFP
Location: Minnesota

Postby sept » 2009.08.05 (16:10)

SHE SAID NIGGER. Unforgivable.
Image


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests