NATION

PASSWORD

Is Affirmative Action Racist?

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

Advertisement

Remove ads

Is Affirmative Action Just, or Racist?

Extremely Racist
182
37%
Racist
173
35%
Unimportant
41
8%
Fair
31
6%
Much Needed, Just Service
66
13%
 
Total votes : 493

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:43 pm

New Laikland wrote:Affirmative action is the belief that the majority race is superior, and the minority races are inferior and can't handle themselves.

No it isn't.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:47 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
New Laikland wrote:Affirmative action is the belief that the majority race is superior, and the minority races are inferior and can't handle themselves.

No it isn't.


Yes, it is.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:48 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:No it isn't.


Yes, it is.

So you believe minorities aren't discriminated against.

I don't think anyone can post anything that can top that in terms of ignorance.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:50 pm

Mavorpen wrote:So you believe minorities aren't discriminated against.

I don't think anyone can post anything that can top that in terms of ignorance.


I don't believe your ignorance at all, surely you're trolling? Isn't that against the rules?

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:52 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:So you believe minorities aren't discriminated against.

I don't think anyone can post anything that can top that in terms of ignorance.


I don't believe your ignorance at all, surely you're trolling? Isn't that against the rules?

Again, do you believe minorities aren't discriminated against?

Because that's demonstrably bullshit.
Mavorpen wrote:
Jedi8246 wrote: You must live in some rural backwater town full of racist whites to continue to think that most blacks are still discriminated against.

No, I just live in reality. I mean really, I'm not surprised that you're completely oblivious to facts, but don't pretend as though you have a clue what you're talking about. Black people, whether you want to believe they are or not, are in fact constantly discriminated against.

http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colle ... 2011_6.pdf
http://www.civilrights.org/resources/ci ... yment.html
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 43824.html

Are we, on a whole trying to combat the discrimination against black? Absolutely. But that's only because African Americans are a protected groups. Only someone with their head in the sand sincerely believes that black people would be perfectly fine if the Civil Rights Act was repealed.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:56 pm

Mavorpen wrote:Again, do you believe minorities aren't discriminated against?

Because that's demonstrably bullshit.


Image


Indeed, it is. I dunno why anybody would think something so stupid.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:57 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:Again, do you believe minorities aren't discriminated against?

Because that's demonstrably bullshit.


Image


Indeed, it is. I dunno why anybody would think something so stupid.

That's good.

Then affirmative action isn't the belief that minorities are inferior. Thank you for admitted your post was wrong.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:58 pm

Mavorpen wrote:That's good.

Then affirmative action isn't the belief that minorities are inferior. Thank you for admitted your post was wrong.


Please stop destroying the strawmen, we need them to scare off the crows.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:58 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:That's good.

Then affirmative action isn't the belief that minorities are inferior. Thank you for admitted your post was wrong.


Please stop destroying the strawmen, we need them to scare off the crows.

I'll just take that as a concession, then.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:00 pm

Mavorpen wrote:I'll just take that as a concession, then.


Not at all, your ignorance and bigotry is just disgusting.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:02 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:I'll just take that as a concession, then.


Not at all, your ignorance and bigotry is just disgusting.

Like I said, I accept your concession.

When you're ready to formulate a coherent argument, I'll be here.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Uieurnthlaal
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6979
Founded: Jan 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Uieurnthlaal » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:02 pm

The WTF factor in this thread is too damn high.
Official Name : Hanruskë Vangareksau Vjörnatlalos

Language : Vjörnissa

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:04 pm

Mavorpen wrote:Like I said, I accept your concession.

When you're ready to formulate a coherent argument, I'll be here.


I'll take this as a surrender, since you obviously aren't capable of reading a basic, simple sentence without slaughtering the poor strawmen.

When you're ready to properly read a sentence, I'll be here, waiting.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:05 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:Like I said, I accept your concession.

When you're ready to formulate a coherent argument, I'll be here.


I'll take this as a surrender, since you obviously aren't capable of reading a basic, simple sentence without slaughtering the poor strawmen.

When you're ready to properly read a sentence, I'll be here, waiting.

So that's a no on trying to give an actual argument?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:06 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
So that's a no on trying to give an actual argument?


I mean, if you wanna have one, you can always read what I posted and respond properly to it.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:09 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:
So that's a no on trying to give an actual argument?


I mean, if you wanna have one, you can always read what I posted and respond properly to it.

You didn't give an argument. You made a claim. I then responded to it by asking you whether you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against, because that's what Affirmative Action is trying to combat.

You could try fleshing out your argument.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Swedish Realm
Diplomat
 
Posts: 906
Founded: Oct 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Swedish Realm » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:11 pm

Yeah, it is racist.
Long live the King! Long live Lutheranism! Long live Sweden!
So I herd u liek cultural marxism?
Pro : KD, SD, (Sometimes the Moderates, I said SOMETIMES!)
Anti : SAP, V,
"Everything is better with more Testosterone"

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:11 pm

Mavorpen wrote:You didn't give an argument. You made a claim. I then responded to it by asking you whether you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against, because that's what Affirmative Action is trying to combat.

You could try fleshing out your argument.


I gave a claim, which you could have then escalated that into an intelligent argument, but instead you gave me some random bigotted gibberish that had nothing to do with what I said.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:14 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:You didn't give an argument. You made a claim. I then responded to it by asking you whether you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against, because that's what Affirmative Action is trying to combat.

You could try fleshing out your argument.


I gave a claim, which you could have then escalated that into an intelligent argument, but instead you gave me some random bigotted gibberish that had nothing to do with what I said.

I did escalate it into an intelligent argument.

You claimed that Affirmative Action claims that minorities are inferior. It doesn't. It claims that minorities are discriminated against and thus they need some way to combat it. I asked you if you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against because such a belief could produce a claim that affirmative action claims that minorities are inferior.

All you had to do, was specifically explain what your evidence and/or reasoning is for your claim. Could you do that?
Last edited by Mavorpen on Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
New Laikland
Minister
 
Posts: 2315
Founded: Sep 04, 2012
Father Knows Best State

Postby New Laikland » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:17 pm

Mavorpen wrote:I did escalate it into an intelligent argument.

You claimed that Affirmative Action claims that minorities are inferior. It doesn't. It claims that minorities are discriminated against and thus they need some way to combat it. I asked you if you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against because such a belief could produce a claim that affirmative action claims that minorities are inferior.

All you had to do, was specifically explain what your evidence and/or reasoning is for your claim. Could you do that?


No, you made a bigotted, random claim.

I claimed that Affirmative Action believes that minorities are inferior, because it believes that they need help getting a job or whatnot. That is a pretty good definition of inferiority. It does not claim that minorities are discriminated against, it discriminates against the majority. The last part is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with the argument. The minorities and majority are discriminated against just as much, and adding mandatory discrimination doesn't make it better.

All you had to do with read a bloody sentence and process it with a tiny bit of brain power. Do you think you're capable of doing that, or do we need to break it down into child's terms?

User avatar
Frisivisia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18164
Founded: Aug 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Frisivisia » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:21 pm

If we could not do the masturbatory arguing around your opponent's points lolol ur an bigot thing that would probably go a long ways to making this a conversation that isn't stupid.
Impeach The Queen, Legalize Anarchy, Stealing Things Is Not Theft. Sex Pistols 2017.
I'm the evil gubmint PC inspector, here to take your Guns, outlaw your God, and steal your freedom and give it to black people.
I'm Joe Biden. So far as you know.

For: Anarchy, Punk Rock Fury
Against: Thatcher, Fascists, That Fascist Thatcher, Reagan, Nazi Punks, Everyone
"Am I buggin' ya? I don't mean to bug ya." - Bono
Let's cram some more shit in my sig. Cool people cram shit in their sigs. In TECHNICOLOR!

User avatar
Frisivisia
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 18164
Founded: Aug 01, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Frisivisia » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:21 pm

New Laikland wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:I did escalate it into an intelligent argument.

You claimed that Affirmative Action claims that minorities are inferior. It doesn't. It claims that minorities are discriminated against and thus they need some way to combat it. I asked you if you believed that minorities aren't discriminated against because such a belief could produce a claim that affirmative action claims that minorities are inferior.

All you had to do, was specifically explain what your evidence and/or reasoning is for your claim. Could you do that?


No, you made a bigotted, random claim.

I claimed that Affirmative Action believes that minorities are inferior, because it believes that they need help getting a job or whatnot. That is a pretty good definition of inferiority. It does not claim that minorities are discriminated against, it discriminates against the majority. The last part is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with the argument. The minorities and majority are discriminated against just as much, and adding mandatory discrimination doesn't make it better.

All you had to do with read a bloody sentence and process it with a tiny bit of brain power. Do you think you're capable of doing that, or do we need to break it down into child's terms?

Let's not flamebait, sweetie.
Impeach The Queen, Legalize Anarchy, Stealing Things Is Not Theft. Sex Pistols 2017.
I'm the evil gubmint PC inspector, here to take your Guns, outlaw your God, and steal your freedom and give it to black people.
I'm Joe Biden. So far as you know.

For: Anarchy, Punk Rock Fury
Against: Thatcher, Fascists, That Fascist Thatcher, Reagan, Nazi Punks, Everyone
"Am I buggin' ya? I don't mean to bug ya." - Bono
Let's cram some more shit in my sig. Cool people cram shit in their sigs. In TECHNICOLOR!

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:24 pm

New Laikland wrote:No, you made a bigotted, random claim.

I don't think you know what the word "bigot" actually means. What's bigotted about stating that minorities are discriminated against?
New Laikland wrote:I claimed that Affirmative Action believes that minorities are inferior, because it believes that they need help getting a job or whatnot.

Because we do. That's what happens when you're discriminated against. You're not treated equally and thus need to be protected.
New Laikland wrote:That is a pretty good definition of inferiority.

No, it isn't.

Otherwise, rape victims are believed to be inferior under the law, because it believes they need help from rapists.
New Laikland wrote:It does not claim that minorities are discriminated against, it discriminates against the majority.

Yes, it does.

Of course it discriminates against the majority. EVERY person is discriminated against when it comes to employment. That's why we choose what discrimination is fine and what isn't.
New Laikland wrote: The last part is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with the argument. The minorities and majority are discriminated against just as much, and adding mandatory discrimination doesn't make it better.

No, they aren't. Again, I already provided the evidence that this is wrong.
Mavorpen wrote:
Jedi8246 wrote: You must live in some rural backwater town full of racist whites to continue to think that most blacks are still discriminated against.

No, I just live in reality. I mean really, I'm not surprised that you're completely oblivious to facts, but don't pretend as though you have a clue what you're talking about. Black people, whether you want to believe they are or not, are in fact constantly discriminated against.

http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colle ... 2011_6.pdf
http://www.civilrights.org/resources/ci ... yment.html
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/1 ... 43824.html

Are we, on a whole trying to combat the discrimination against black? Absolutely. But that's only because African Americans are a protected groups. Only someone with their head in the sand sincerely believes that black people would be perfectly fine if the Civil Rights Act was repealed.

You however, have refused to do so.
New Laikland wrote:All you had to do with read a bloody sentence and process it with a tiny bit of brain power. Do you think you're capable of doing that, or do we need to break it down into child's terms?

I'm not interested in a sentence. I'm interested in a coherent argument.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Zaldakki
Minister
 
Posts: 2458
Founded: Oct 10, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Zaldakki » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:32 pm

As a minority myself, yes affirmative action is racist.

User avatar
Uieurnthlaal
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6979
Founded: Jan 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Uieurnthlaal » Wed Dec 11, 2013 8:54 pm

IMO, affirmative action is a deeply flawed policy, that only tries to solve problems of discrimination and socio-economic gaps once they become unfixable, such as with colleges, and job applications. Often, they set up the disadvantaged for jobs they are not yet prepared for. It is, I should note, better than nothing, which some have proposed; ignoring the existing socio-economic gap between genders, races, and religions, will serve only to continue it. A far better solution would be to move affirmative action, so to speak, to small children, who need it the most. If we can eliminate the sense of hopelessness, and the cycle of poverty, from the earliest stages of preschool, we would have the best chance possible to end racism, by molding the new generation. But, the old generation will just have to do with a color-blind application process, which, while not ideal, is better than placing minorities in jobs they aren't prepared for.

But, to get back to the OP, no, affirmative action is not racist. A flawed policy, maybe. But, insofar as any action on civil rights inevitably focusses on the less fortunate group as opposed to the fortunate group, affirmative action is not the least bit racist.
Official Name : Hanruskë Vangareksau Vjörnatlalos

Language : Vjörnissa

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aggicificicerous, American Legionaries, Dimetrodon Empire, Habsburg Mexico, Ifreann, La Xinga, Narland, Necroghastia, New Ciencia, Terra dei Cittadini, The Black Forrest, The Jamesian Republic, Zurkerx

Advertisement

Remove ads