NATION

PASSWORD

Affirmative Action

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:54 pm

Artoonia wrote:It's very simple math: 2 wrongs = 1 right.

And I'm sure you would love to explain that to the dozens of applied anthropologists who helped devise a solution to what is primarily a cultural problem.

You know... that didn't require mass execution of bigots or brain-washing.
Last edited by Seperates on Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:54 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:Affirmative action itself is discrimination.

It's hypocrisy. I would rather all poor people be helped equally rather than just some people.

Oh well, at least I'll be part of the minority by 2050 so I'll get some benefits.

The last two sentences compliments your first sentence very well. It implies that even affluent minorities aren't discriminated against or that all minorities are poor.

Good jerb.
Last edited by Norstal on Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:56 pm

Neo Art wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Affirmative action itself is discrimination.



Except it's, you know....not.

I mean, ok, I suppose, in the realm of college acceptance, it is "discrimination" in the sense of "we only take people who have good grades and SAT scores" is discrimination. But for some reason, nobody seems to wave the banner of Johnny C- who didn't get into Harvard.

Yes, it is.

It's racially discriminant.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Norsklow
Senator
 
Posts: 4477
Founded: Aug 22, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Norsklow » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:56 pm

Neo Art wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Affirmative action itself is discrimination.



Except it's, you know....not.

I mean, ok, I suppose, in the realm of college acceptance, it is "discrimination" in the sense of "we only take people who have good grades and SAT scores" is discrimination. But for some reason, nobody seems to wave the banner of Johnny C- who didn't get into Harvard.


Johnny C- got protected in the pre-SAT days. Lets make darned sure that Johnny C- is shut out for good.

Fairness = the absolute primacy of Meritocracy.
Joseph Stalin, 20 million plus dead -Mao-Tse-Dong, 40 million plus dead - Pol Pot, 2 million dead -Kim-Il-Sung, 5 million dead - Fidel Castro, 1 million dead.

"We the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much, with so little, for so long, we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing"

Don't call me Beny! Am I your Father or something? http://paanluelwel2011.wordpress.com/20 ... honorable/
And I way too young to be Beny bith.
NationStates: Because FOX is for douchebags.

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:57 pm

Norstal wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Affirmative action itself is discrimination.

It's hypocrisy. I would rather all poor people be helped equally rather than just some people.

Oh well, at least I'll be part of the minority by 2050 so I'll get some benefits.

The last two sentences compliments your first sentence very well. It implies that even affluent minorities aren't discriminated against or that all minorities are poor.

Good jerb.

Clearly, that's not what I meant.

Let me clarify:

I think all poor people should be helped, rather than people who are a certain race.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:57 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Neo Art wrote:
Except it's, you know....not.

I mean, ok, I suppose, in the realm of college acceptance, it is "discrimination" in the sense of "we only take people who have good grades and SAT scores" is discrimination. But for some reason, nobody seems to wave the banner of Johnny C- who didn't get into Harvard.

Yes, it is.

It's racially discriminant.

Against whom?
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

User avatar
Neo Art
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14258
Founded: Jan 09, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Art » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:57 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Neo Art wrote:
Except it's, you know....not.

I mean, ok, I suppose, in the realm of college acceptance, it is "discrimination" in the sense of "we only take people who have good grades and SAT scores" is discrimination. But for some reason, nobody seems to wave the banner of Johnny C- who didn't get into Harvard.

Yes, it is.

It's racially discriminant.


Why doesn't anyone think of Poor Johnny C-?
if you were Batman you'd be home by now

"Consistency is a matter we are attempting to remedy." - Dread Lady Nathinaca

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:58 pm

Seperates wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Yes, it is.

It's racially discriminant.

Against whom?

Against the majority.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:59 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Norstal wrote:The last two sentences compliments your first sentence very well. It implies that even affluent minorities aren't discriminated against or that all minorities are poor.

Good jerb.

Clearly, that's not what I meant.

Let me clarify:

I think all poor people should be helped, rather than people who are a certain race.

Affirmative action does not consider wealth. It considers sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. So I don't know what the relevance here.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Cameroi
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15788
Founded: Dec 24, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Cameroi » Tue Sep 11, 2012 1:59 pm

Artoonia wrote:It's very simple math: 2 wrongs = 1 right.


close but no ceeegarrr. 2 wrongs = 1 political right wing.
truth isn't what i say. isn't what you say. isn't what anybody says. truth is what is there, when no one is saying anything.

"economic freedom" is "the cake"
=^^=
.../\...

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:00 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Seperates wrote:Against whom?

Against the majority.

I don't think affirmative actions discriminates against the Chinese. >:
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:00 pm

Neo Art wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Yes, it is.

It's racially discriminant.


Why doesn't anyone think of Poor Johnny C-?

"Johnny C-" is not entitled to an education that he's not qualified to receive.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Neo Art
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14258
Founded: Jan 09, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Art » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:01 pm

Norsklow wrote:
Neo Art wrote:
Except it's, you know....not.

I mean, ok, I suppose, in the realm of college acceptance, it is "discrimination" in the sense of "we only take people who have good grades and SAT scores" is discrimination. But for some reason, nobody seems to wave the banner of Johnny C- who didn't get into Harvard.


Johnny C- got protected in the pre-SAT days. Lets make darned sure that Johnny C- is shut out for good.

Fairness = the absolute primacy of Meritocracy.


I know that you think this is something deep and profound, full of inspiration and thought provoking intuition, but honestly, I gotta level with you here.

This is absofuckinglutly meaningless, and nobody has a single fucking clue what you're trying to say.
if you were Batman you'd be home by now

"Consistency is a matter we are attempting to remedy." - Dread Lady Nathinaca

User avatar
Big Jim P
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 55158
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Big Jim P » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:01 pm

Neo Art wrote:
Big Jim P wrote:
True. I don't go slumming.


That's...um...that's not how those words work.

Anyway, to make this little tête-à-tête actually somewhat topical, and not just a continual embarassment for you, I will say, even if I swung that way, there isn't enough affirmative action in the world to make me consider it. Sorry to let ya down. It's just never gonna happen between us.


Embarrassment for me? I am not embarrassed. You are nothing more than a source of amusement.

I do note, that while you ridiculed my initial statement, you posted nothing to refute it.

Edit: Of course that is your normal MO:

Neo Art wrote:
Norsklow wrote:
Johnny C- got protected in the pre-SAT days. Lets make darned sure that Johnny C- is shut out for good.

Fairness = the absolute primacy of Meritocracy.


I know that you think this is something deep and profound, full of inspiration and thought provoking intuition, but honestly, I gotta level with you here.

This is absofuckinglutly meaningless, and nobody has a single fucking clue what you're trying to say.
Last edited by Big Jim P on Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hail Satan!
Happily married to Roan Cara, The first RL NS marriage, and Pope Joan is my Father-in-law.
I edit my posts to fix typos.

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:02 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Seperates wrote:Against whom?

Against the majority.

You mean the priviledged majority? The ones who our culture views as more "refined", more "business-like"? Well... in America at least.
Last edited by Seperates on Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

User avatar
Neo Art
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14258
Founded: Jan 09, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Art » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:02 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Neo Art wrote:
Why doesn't anyone think of Poor Johnny C-?

"Johnny C-" is not entitled to an education that he's not qualified to receive.


He's not "qualified"? Someone is deciding he isn't "worth" it? Someone in a room somewhere decides that because of some characteristic of him, he doesn't get to go to Harvard?

Sounds a WHOLE lot like discrimination to me. Weren't you beating that particular drum just a few moments ago?
if you were Batman you'd be home by now

"Consistency is a matter we are attempting to remedy." - Dread Lady Nathinaca

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:02 pm

Norstal wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Clearly, that's not what I meant.

Let me clarify:

I think all poor people should be helped, rather than people who are a certain race.

Affirmative action does not consider wealth. It considers sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. So I don't know what the relevance here.

Okay, look.

Those groups, regardless of wealth, have an advantage over others. So a poor white male might have more trouble affording a college than a middle class African American woman based on things that have no importance to education.

I think that's unfair.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Occupied Deutschland
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18796
Founded: Oct 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Occupied Deutschland » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:03 pm

Cameroi wrote:
Artoonia wrote:It's very simple math: 2 wrongs = 1 right.


close but no ceeegarrr. 2 wrongs = 1 political right wing.

I remember those vaguely from my math classes! Aren't they kind've similar to imaginary numbers? :p

Norstal wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Clearly, that's not what I meant.

Let me clarify:

I think all poor people should be helped, rather than people who are a certain race.

Affirmative action does not consider wealth. It considers sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. So I don't know what the relevance here.

I think he's arguing that it should ONLY consider wealth/income instead of considering sex, race and ethnicity.

Because weighting people greater for what sex, race, or ethnicity they are is all kinds of fucked up.
I'm General Patton.
Even those who are gone are with us as we go on.

Been busy lately--not around much.

User avatar
Birkinghamia
Diplomat
 
Posts: 668
Founded: Jul 27, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Birkinghamia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:03 pm

Seperates wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Against the majority.

You mean the priviledged majority? The ones who our culture views as more "refined", more "business-like"? Well... in America at least.

White =\= privileged.
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.67

Christian, moderate, New Yorker.
Ich spreche Deutsch.

User avatar
Neo Art
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14258
Founded: Jan 09, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Neo Art » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:04 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Seperates wrote:You mean the priviledged majority? The ones who our culture views as more "refined", more "business-like"? Well... in America at least.

White =\= privileged.


Of fucking course it does.
if you were Batman you'd be home by now

"Consistency is a matter we are attempting to remedy." - Dread Lady Nathinaca

User avatar
Charellia
Minister
 
Posts: 3172
Founded: Jul 24, 2012
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Charellia » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:04 pm

The government should be forced to disregard race in all laws and policies. Only then will everybody get fair treatment.
Last edited by Charellia on Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Norsklow
Senator
 
Posts: 4477
Founded: Aug 22, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Norsklow » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:05 pm

Neo Art wrote:
Norsklow wrote:
Johnny C- got protected in the pre-SAT days. Lets make darned sure that Johnny C- is shut out for good.

Fairness = the absolute primacy of Meritocracy.


I know that you think this is something deep and profound, full of inspiration and thought provoking intuition, but honestly, I gotta level with you here.

This is absofuckinglutly meaningless, and nobody has a single fucking clue what you're trying to say.

In simpler
let the best man or woman always gain the victory -
Joseph Stalin, 20 million plus dead -Mao-Tse-Dong, 40 million plus dead - Pol Pot, 2 million dead -Kim-Il-Sung, 5 million dead - Fidel Castro, 1 million dead.

"We the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much, with so little, for so long, we are now qualified to do anything, with nothing"

Don't call me Beny! Am I your Father or something? http://paanluelwel2011.wordpress.com/20 ... honorable/
And I way too young to be Beny bith.
NationStates: Because FOX is for douchebags.

User avatar
Occupied Deutschland
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18796
Founded: Oct 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Occupied Deutschland » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:05 pm

Norstal wrote:
Birkinghamia wrote:Against the majority.

I don't think affirmative actions discriminates against the Chinese. >:

Actually according to a brief perusal of wiki it pretty negatively discriminates against the Chinese's (well, Asians in general...)
I'm General Patton.
Even those who are gone are with us as we go on.

Been busy lately--not around much.

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:05 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Norstal wrote:Affirmative action does not consider wealth. It considers sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. So I don't know what the relevance here.

Okay, look.

Those groups, regardless of wealth, have an advantage over others. So a poor white male might have more trouble affording a college than a middle class African American woman based on things that have no importance to education.

I think that's unfair.

Why? Because a white male was unable to figure out how to apply for government aid?
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

User avatar
Seperates
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 14622
Founded: Sep 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Seperates » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:06 pm

Birkinghamia wrote:
Seperates wrote:You mean the priviledged majority? The ones who our culture views as more "refined", more "business-like"? Well... in America at least.

White =\= privileged.

Speaking as a white male... yes. Yes it does.
This Debate is simply an exercise in Rhetoric. Truth is a fickle being with no intentions of showing itself today.

Non fui, fui, non sum, non curo

"The most important fact about us: that we are greater than the institutions and cultures we build."--Roberto Mangabeira Unger

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: American Legionaries, Benjium, Caitistana, Cannot think of a name, Cybernetic, DutchFormosa, Elejamie, Fartsniffage, Gravlen, Ifreann, ITALO-FRANCO, Kenmoria, Melexico, Ostroeuropa, Pizza Friday Forever91, Ryemarch, The Chinese Soviet, The Crimson Isles, Tinhampton

Advertisement

Remove ads