Affirmative action: defeating perceived discrimination with actual bigotry!

pic_giant_053013_Affirmative-Action-Rally

 

I read that the Supreme Court upheld Michigan’s voter-approved initiative banning affirmative action in college admissions.

They didn’t rule on affirmative action itself, but merely affirmed the voters’ right to have a say in our democratic system. Predictably, a mob of left-wingers immediately took to the internet to advocate for racial tolerance by saying a bunch of racist things about Clarence Thomas.

In the mind of Liberal Whitey, not only should we have a paternalistic mechanism in place to treat minorities like children who need special treatment, but we should even disallow the citizens of individual states from getting to decide for themselves whether their education system will be based on racial quotas and institutionalized discrimination.

Notice: I didn’t call it ‘institutionalized reverse discrimination.’ I called it discrimination. Affirmative action is discrimination by definition. Literally, by definition.

Discrimination: treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit.

To call it ‘reverse’ discrimination is to insinuate that ‘real discrimination’ is an innately white phenomenon. I know that such a view is actually held by many Americans, and actually taught in our schools, but it is a patently idiotic notion. Discrimination rears its ugly head in every corner of the globe, whether the white man is present there or not. If you want to blame white people for something, blame us for ironic bumper stickers and Aaron Sorkin TV shows. Neither of those would exist in a world without honkies. But discrimination? Find me a race not guilty of it, and I’ll show you a race not of this Earth.

Affirmative action is discrimination. It’s also bigotry, and strangely enough, the people mostly victimized by the bigotry are precisely the ones supposedly helped by the discrimination. That’s what angers me the most about the whole ludicrous affair. Can you think of anything more belittling than the white folks in charge of universities counting their students like faceless statistics, measuring them based on their skin color, and then decreeing that they need a few more blacks to fill the quota?

This is equality? This is progress? Bureaucratic calculations predetermining the exact allotment of skin pigmentations — this is the sort of diversity we want in America?

I’m repulsed by it, as any American ought to be. I struggle to even write a few paragraphs criticizing affirmative action, because the entire thing is so nakedly degrading and blatantly self-defeating.

It depresses me that discussions about affirmative action always devolve into arguments over whether it ‘works’ or not. It doesn’t work, and the fact that we’ve had affirmative action policies in place for decades, yet much of black America still struggles so mightily, proves that point. Even liberals are starting to understand the strategic disaster that affirmative has proven to be. But, really, what kind of question is that? Does it work? We’re talking about people here, not cows. Not robots. Not numbers on a spreadsheet. Even if discrimination works, it still doesn’t work. Even if the end is desirable, it can’t justify the means if the means include elevating a certain group through the targeted utilization of systematic racism.

When we criticize segregation, do we criticize it because it didn’t work? Or do we criticize it because the forced, government-imposed segregation of people based on race is a moral evil?

Affirmative action is designed to ignore a person’s merits, their achievements, their character, their ambition, their efforts, and instead rank and categorize them according to the color of their skin. This is wrong. It doesn’t matter who it’s supposed to benefit. It benefits no one, but it doesn’t matter if it does benefit someone. It’s wrong. It’s wrong to discriminate against someone or for someone simply because of their ethnicity. This is basic stuff, my liberal friends. These are basic, fundamental ethical concepts. It doesn’t matter if the discrimination is supposed to combat discrimination. That’s like cheating on your wife and telling her you only did it to address her infidelity.

Dear Lord, affirmative action proponents, please never become marriage counselors. I can only imagine what sort of advice you’d dole out.

“Hmmm, Mrs. Johnson, you say your husband is deceitful and abusive? Well, I recommend that you employ a policy of reverse deceit and abuse against your husband. Problem solved. That’ll be 600 dollars.”

It’s wrong. I shouldn’t need to spell it out. I shouldn’t need to give reasons why affirmative action in higher education (or anywhere else) makes no sense, when we’ve already established that it’s a moral and ethical travesty.

But, if I wanted to give a few reasons, I’d point out that the term ‘affirmative action’ first appeared in a Kennedy executive order, which called for people to be given opportunities “without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” This is notable because the current iteration of affirmative action is exactly designed to ensure opportunities by taking special regard for a person’s race, color, and national origin.

And if I wanted to give more reasons, I’d bring up the Jews and Asians, who are both ethnic minorities, and have both experienced enormous hardship and prejudice, yet they both are, in fact, disproportionately represented in ‘higher education,’ not to mention fields like medicine and engineering. If the university system is stacked in favor of white males, why have we wielders of white privilege made such a glaring exception in their cases? Actually, they’re such an exception, that now affirmative action policies require institutions to discriminate against them in order to stop them from being too successful.

And if I wanted to give still additional reasons, I’d say that it’s absurd to think that universities are run by white supremacists whose inherent racism needs to be regulated through affirmative action policies, when it’s the universities that peddle white guilt more passionately than any other institution in America. Many colleges go so far as to teach that all white people are racist, no matter what, without exception. Until recently, the University of Delaware, for instance, required that all residents be indoctrinated to radical left-wing racial theories, even if they weren’t taking any classes on the subject. And you’re telling me these places that convince white people to hate themselves and their heritage are actually bastions of white privilege? I think we must be working with drastically different understandings of the word ‘privilege.’

And if I wanted to continue giving reasons, I’d observe that if anti-minority sensibilities are still such a prevalent problem as to warrant affirmative action, then clearly affirmative action has not succeeded in achieving the thing which it was supposedly designed to achieve. Either our academic institutions are run by white bigots, and affirmative action has failed to change that dynamic, or they aren’t run by white bigots, and affirmative action only succeeds in creating a problem that wouldn’t otherwise exist. Either way, affirmative action loses. You are left with nothing that could lead any rational person to the conclusion that affirmative action policies must continue.

And if I wanted to give even more reasons, I’d mention that you’re putting a minority student at an extreme disadvantage when you throw him into an academic environment because he fills your skin tone quota, but isn’t otherwise prepared to handle the workload.

And if I wanted to offer yet another reason, I’d say something about the fact that affirmative action makes wild assumption contingent solely on race, while taking no account of other factors that might put someone at a greater disadvantage. We’re left with a ridiculous dichotomy where a black male from a wealthy upper class family is given the benefits of affirmative action, over the son of an impoverished white single mother, or the daughter of a poor Japanese fisherman.

And if I wanted to keep tossing out reasons, I’d probably tell you that the very term ‘ethnic minority’ is virtually impossible to quantify. Elizabeth Warren claimed she’s a Native American. Sure, she’s a shameless, lying, Socialist, but who’s to say she doesn’t have some minority blood? Who’s to say I don’t count as a minority? My ancestors came from Ireland, and weren’t exactly greeted with open arms when they arrived on our shores. At what point in the lineage does a family lose its minority status? Is it all based on skin color? Is the child of a Polish immigrant less an ethnic minority than Barack Obama, the wealthy biracial man raised by his white mother? What if Obama’s skin complexion more closely resembled his maternal side? Would that make him less a minority? Who is the arbiter of these things? Who decides? Does any of this make even the slightest bit of sense? Have all our brains simply turned to mush?

If I wanted to give a bunch of reasons why racial discrimination is a bad idea — aside from the fact that it’s just a generally repugnant practice — I’d probably say all of those things.

But I won’t, because it shouldn’t be necessary.

Affirmative action is an atrocity.

Also, college is often a terrible waste of money, so this whole conversation should be a moot point.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

231 Responses to Affirmative action: defeating perceived discrimination with actual bigotry!

  1. Steven says:

    Have to say I love your point about what does/does not count as a minority… because I usually take advantage of that when discussing supposed instances of racial discrimination. Whenever I’m confronted with a ridiculous racial argument I try and illustrate just how silly/unrelated to the issue race is by applying it to my own oppressed minority: being left-handed (10% of the population, burned alive at birth during the dark ages, still forced to learn to write right-handed by some teachers, shorter life expectancy, can’t even fight for equal ‘rights’ without facing language discrimination- the list goes on). “No, they didn’t keep her out because she was black; they didn’t let her come to the school because she was left-handed. They could tell by her writing on the entrance forms; I know, it’s happened to me. We need to get some laws that require more lefties in school, and lower the overwhelming percentage of right handed students, to make this right.”

    It’s silly, but it conveys my point that many of these so-called instances of discrimination/racism aren’t really that at all, and usually without making people as angry as a direct ‘you’re wrong and here’s why’ challenge. When somebody who was attacking you for being white suddenly has to defend something as irrelevant as their own right-handedness, in the face of the same arguments they were just making (and you would be surprised how many of the cases made about race can apply just as well to handedness), they generally realize they’re being unfair and start to actually think about the issue beyond just the party lines/propaganda they’ve been told.

    • David says:

      “your wrong and here’s why”. Left handedness can be applied to a wide variety of people( black, white, Hispanics, Asian,and so on). Race is more specific, more sensitive. Affirmative actions is so because of the very facts that still put minorities at a disadvantage in this country, not other places, this country. AA would not exist had it not be for the “former-America”. Just think about this, where would minorities be had they not been oppressed in early years. At what level would they be at compared to their white counterparts? This “former America decided to exercise its own affirmative action against minorities until people started seeing this as wrong. Its almost like non-minorities got a head start before the whistle was blown, obviously people are not openly racist today, and some who are denied from college are indeed genuinely denied because of merit, but again I ask the question what level of merit would the person who was denied in this school be at had this country not exercised its own form of affirmative action for the white? There are minorities that want to be chosen for jobs and college based on merit alone, I’m one of them, but most cannot see the constant uphill battle they have to face for absolutely no reason. I am confident that if AA is ever taken away, the number for.minorities in higher edu will decrease why? Am I blaming this on slavery, no, but the aftermath the lingers still. I’m an African American and I hate when people blame slavery, but that doesn’t defeats what was long after slavery. Those who are against AA do not understand statistics, and the implications weight hey bring.again this is not based on blatant racism because who can tell, not me, not you but what speaks loud are the stats against minorities, micro aggressions of discrimination. Again just ask yourself where would minorities be had they not been held down in America.

      • Mike Evans says:

        Your statement makes sense for the most part. However, as was stated in the original post, what about the Asians? What about the Jews? Weren’t they held down as well?

        The problem, in my opinion, is not that a particular race got a head start, or that a particular race got held down. The problem is we, as Americans, still use the word “race”. The public education system is an equal opportunity educator. No matter what your skin tone, everyone is taught the same material and given the same tests.
        If college admission forms did not have a spot for race, then applicants would be admitted, or denied, based solely upon personal achievements/merit.
        I hate resorting to quoting Dr. King, but in this case, I think it works. His dream was that one day, his little girls would be judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Affirmative Action takes his dream and smashes it. AA insists that we judge people by the color of their skin, promotes resentment, and in my humble opinion, is one very big reason that racism still exists in the United States today.

      • J says:

        The fact that a person “may have” been at a certain level if their ancesstors had had more rights is firstly a ridiculous argument. If a person wanted to get an education while in high school, where they are for free (usually), so that they could make it in to college on merit, they could go to the public library, check out books on mathematics, read literary fiction to increase vocabulary, reading comprehension, English skills, etc, and compete on the standardized tests. I’m not in favor of standardized tests; they need to change. However, they are what we currently use.

        In addition, even if it WERE a sound argument, we should not be allowing people without the necessary skills for a field into that field. They waste their time and ours when they drop out because they couldn’t hack it as an engineer, lawyer, doctor, whathaveyou: not becuase they were black, but because they did not have the proper education beforehand (which they could have obtained at the FREE PUBLIC LIBRARY). Look up who Andrew Carnegie was and from whence he came and learn what it means to really be a self-made man.

      • LOL says:

        Who gives a flying f*ck? I don’t CARE if you feel disadvantaged. I only care if you’re competent. The most competent people should be in college, no others. It’s rough but the world works on results, not wishful thinking.

      • Steven says:

        This is the whole point, and why I’m personally against Affirmative Action: it’s not a competition anymore.

        You make the point about non-minorities getting a head start, as if African Americans are behind whites. You ask where minorities would be if they hadn’t been oppressed, as if the answer is obviously that they would be better off because then *they* would be better off. And sure, maybe 50 years ago, it was a competition, and African Americans had to run way faster than whites did in order to keep up…

        But that’s not the case anymore. It shouldn’t have even been the case then. Back then we forgot, and we’re forgetting again now, about the *AMERICAN* part of African-American.

        We’re not a country of minorities all competing against each other, and we’re not supposed to be. We’re supposed to be united. One nation, under God. Indivisible, with liberty and justice for *all*. The goal isn’t to have different groups and have each one be out for themselves- the goal is to have one group made from several people. Our money says E pluribus unum- out of the many, one. Would the minorities be better off now if they hadn’t been oppressed long ago? Of course- because *~AMERICA~* would be better off. White people hurt themselves by oppressing African Americans, and women, and anybody else. They robbed all of America of so much that could have been. We would have had more great thinkers, more inventors, more entrepreneurs, more artists. The oppression that was done to Americans *hurt* America- it was wrong, it shouldn’t have been done. America has proven that when people who want to succeed, who want to do something wonderful, are given the opportunity to do so, then the whole world is better off.

        But the answer to injustice, as Matt has pointed out, is not injustice in the opposite direction- that’s like stubbing the toe of your right foot because you stubbed the toe on your left foot; it won’t help your first toe. That line of thought is just going to keep robbing America of wonderful things it could have. If you’re trying to reach where the African American community would have been without oppression, then the answer isn’t to hold others back, or to put underqualified people into positions just because of their race- the answer is to make America as a whole better. It’s to give the inventors their opportunities, and not tell them they’re the wrong race because they’re not white. It’s to let the entrepreneurs give it a go, and not tell them this other person deserves the chance because he’s black. If a white person meets the college’s requirements, don’t turn them away to put a black person in; if a black person meets the college’s requirements, don’t turn them away to put a white person in- don’t hurt America by squashing the opportunities of people who have earned them. Give the people who deserve the chance their chance, and let them make America better, not just African Americans, or just Latin Americans, or just Asian Americans, but for ALL Americans- because when that happens, all of America becomes better off.

        • Lindsay says:

          *applause* to Steven! I saw an American flag waving and heard the Battle Hymn of the Republic playing in my mind reading your post.

        • Great response, Steven! That is what America is truly supposed to be about. I actually caught a glimpse of that idealistic “perfect” American society in your words. Maybe it is a pipe dream, but it is the dream America was founded on, and it is a principle that we all need to take back to heal our nation. Affirmative Action is just one of the other principles that has “killed” that dream.

      • Bob says:

        Haha. I think we should have affirmative action in sports and people would realize how ridiculous it is. Can you imagine if every NBA team had to have an equal amount of white guys as black guys?? Can you imagine if black guys were kicked off the team to make room for gangley awkward white dudes. LOL

      • Jim says:

        Where would they be? Perhaps they would be where my son-in-law is. He is a bonafide wetback (his description), who came here with his father as a child. Today he has a good job, a college degree and a beatiful family. And he is a U.S. citizen. This has nothing to do with understanding statistics, it has to do with understanding the victim mentality. Lyndon Johnson started the preferential treatment of minorities almost 50 years ago. How has that “Great Society” worked out? Still whining about discrimination and “the man” keeping them down. There will never be enough preferential treatment to satisfy the victim mentality. The successful people are the ones that get on with it and stop blaming other people for all of their problems. Micro aggressions? Really?

        • cptdoctor says:

          I was going to say something to this effect but you beat me to it, and yes it is the ones who play victim that are the problem if they would take a second and try to improve on their own we would not see stories of so called racism in job, and college.

      • Curtis says:

        Why are you looking at minorities as a whole? Why can’t we just look at each individual? Being preferred over someone else based on race is racism, and you’re trying to justify racism. Plain and simple. If a black, Asian, Mexican or Arab are qualified or willing to put in the work to become qualified, why do racial quotas need to be met? Filling the quotas just means that for every one qualified ‘ethnic’ student there will be dozens who get into a program only to find out they are either unqualified or aren’t motivated enough to do all the work. Thus, being included for the sake of a racial quota, they’ve wasted their own time and money, the university’s time, and the time of someone who actually was qualified and able to do all the work, regardless of what race they were. The Affirmative Action conversation would go something like this: “We need three more black students, but none of the applicants meet the university standards. But we already have enough Chinese, Puerto Ricans and Indian students, so let’s drop one qualified person from each group to meet our Black quota.”

      • Crissy says:

        I don’t think the moral ramifications of affirmative action are quite as clear cut as this post suggests. David brings up some interesting points. Where would American minorities be now if they had not been systematically discriminated against for generations? Cultural expectations and stereotypes do affect the outcome of individual lives. Whether those views are derogatory or complimentary, they have an impact either way. Just ask anyone who has ever been the black sheep of a family or a teacher’s pet. Or even better, just ask someone who has ever been a minority.

        Also, David’s suggestion that the dominant cultural attitudes in America have given whites a kind of “head start” over minorities, especially African-Americans, has always seemed fairly obvious to me. I’m white. I grew up in a partly lower middle class, partly poor area in Southern California. As a white person, I was often in the minority racial group in class or with friends. When I left California I was surprised that other people, especially white people, didn’t seem to understand how growing up in poverty affects your thinking as a child or how being on the receiving end of other people’s prejudices eats away at your inner self-assurance as you grow up.

        For some people, and a disproportionate number of these people are racial minorities, going to college or getting a white collar job isn’t just a matter of working hard and having ambition, but also requires a gigantic leap of faith. Imagine that you grew up in a community where many of your friends’ moms sell pot, are always moving in with a new boyfriend, or simply don’t want to work. That was me. I knew four adults growing up, besides my teachers, who had white collar jobs. When you bust the books or express the desire to enter the mainstream it comes at a cost. It might also mean you unwittingly alienate yourself from your entire support system.

        Why are minorities so underrepresented in certain colleges and job fields? I’m guessing two of the main causes are racism and generational poverty. It would be nice if affirmative action didn’t cause discrimination against majority races, but as Matt points out in his post, it does by definition. On those grounds, it’s difficult to defend. I don’t think affirmative action is the right way to address the disastrous affects of racism and poverty, but what better options do we have? This is something that has bothered me for a long time.

        • John Hellyer says:

          what other options? remove the question their shouldn’t be a question of race or ethnicity on any application college job welfare or otherwise, their is no way to ever get a clear count of how many people are poor or homeless or what have you, are you going around with a survey? getting records from the welfare office? thiers no way to possibly get an accurate count so saying theirs a disproportionate number of “minorities” is crap, and discrimination isn’t even a Human characteristic its in all of nature, its stupid and we are above it but affirmative action just breeds more and more racism from the “white” people who are upset they don’t have the same opportunities because the person who got their mother pregnant wasn’t the right color, and from the minorities because thiers a constant “idea” that the common white person owes you something, what about religious discrimination? should pagans get lifted on a pedestal and given millions of dollars since the church almost slaughtered us to extinction? no.. I didn’t think so and that happened long long before America was even thought of and we are still discriminated against openly.

    • Becca says:

      So true! I’m a lefty too, the only one in my family, or so I thought. Apparently my grandfather was born left-handed and his mother trained him to be right-handed because it was back in the days when it was still viewed as evil, or at best, a handicap. I now work in a pastry kitchen with a 63 year-old Polish woman and every time she sees me peeling apples she says “OH I FORGOT YOU ARE LEFT-HANDED! OH YOU POOR THING!” It’s pretty comical but she told me that in Poland to this day, if a child is born left-handed, they train them to be right-handed.

  2. Waiting for the blog on why college is often a complete waste of money. I agree it certainly can be, not to mention a good way to be saddle with a huge debt. I can say that I have a college degree.

    • Edik415 says:

      He wrote that one back in August. Unfortunately, the problem is with his tendency to generalize his own experience (in this case, lack of experience) to everyone. But, feel free to read for yourself. http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/08/23/kids-go-to-college-or-youll-die-alone-in-misery/

    • TheKnowerseeker says:

      College is a waste of time and money if you’re not there to major in one of the “right” majors and work hard to try to achieve all-A’s. I did both, and now I have a job in my field (software development); however, because of the Great Recession (being exacerbated by off-shoring), even the “right” majors at the top of their classes are having trouble finding work. Even in my case, where I have successfully carried a career in my field so far, the pay is not nearly what it once was just before I graduated.

      • notsocrazy24 says:

        Whether or not college is a waste of money has nothing to do with whether or not you’re in the right major or even if you try to get good grades. The value of college is in the actual education you receive, not how much someone will pay you later in life because you got that education. Someone could go to college, major in engineering, get straight A’s, get a 150k dollar job afterwards, and still have wasted a hundred grand, because they didn’t really use their time in college to educate and better themselves. College is the last time in your life that someone (the government, your parents, the institution itself, whoever) will actually let you live in (and help pay for) an environment where your only job is to educate yourself and make yourself a better overall person.

        • Justin says:

          That is a complete crock of sh!t! How is learning a trade or skill making you a ‘better person”? The point of learning a trade is to perform a job/service, the point of performing a job or service is to gain employment, the point of employment is to earn money/benefits, the point of money and benefits is to survive in society and try to live a happy and fulfilling life, whatever that may be for you. I’ve never met a sane happy person living in a cardboard box. You can enjoy the “ride” and experience that is college, and maybe even enrich yourself a little along the way but that is not the MAIN point of getting an education. A degree without income is MEANINGLESS!

        • notsocrazy24 says:

          Do you think everyone only goes to technical schools? Most people go to college to get an education. Relatively few people learn a trade in college. They do learn various skills, which will probably be helpful regardless of one’s employment. People learn to perform a job/service by doing that job service under the supervision of an employer (or not, if they figure it out on their own). However, a degree in physics or chemistry or literature isn’t just about getting you to “do physics” or “do literature”, because that’s not a trade, job, or skill. In our quite advanced society, we value pure education for several reasons: 1) We are a democracy, or at least a republic, and having an informed and educated public is paramount for a successful democratic/republic society. 2) We have reached the point of sophistication where the greater portion of our economy is secondary or tertiary, so even highly specific fields require large amounts of extraneous education. 3) In order to keep up with the pace of society, the average newspaper boy on the street today has to know more about the world than Leonardo, Michelangelo, or any of those other guys who were so smart they only needed one name.

    • TheKnowerseeker says:

      College is a waste of time and money if you’re not there to major in one of the “right” majors and work hard to try to achieve all-A’s. I did both, and now I have a job in my field (software development); however, because of the Great Recession (being exacerbated by off-shoring and H-1B visas), even the “right” majors at the top of their classes are having trouble finding work. Even in my case, where I have successfully carried a career in my field so far, the pay is not nearly what it once was just before I graduated.

      • TheKnowerseeker says:

        Hi, I didn’t mean to post this twice. If you’re a moderator, would you mind deleting this duplicate post please? Thanks.

        • Jillocity says:

          sometimes it just happens…i know what you mean…i got my degree in Computer Information Systems right before the economy tanked…now i’m self employed because our field is flooded

    • Curtis says:

      The blog’s been done, months ago. And yes, it’s a waste of time and money if you don’t know what to go for. If you’re going to college just because “you need to go to college,” it’s a waste. That money spent when you don’t even know what to major in could have been saved, and the person could have gotten a job (they’re out there if people would learn to look and quit whining about what their job ‘owes’ them). Who knows, maybe skipping the College step and starting out minimum wage could inspire someone to work hard and (gasp) become a manager where they work. Depending on the company, managers can make decent pay and never have to get a college degree. Heck, my boss started at Subway years ago, fresh out of high school, and became that franchise-network’s youngest manager, and ran one of their busiest stores for years. After some time as a manager, he THEN decided what he wanted to go to college for and started classes, never needing a loan because he earned good money before starting and already had a good 401K building up before he was even 20 years old. Why? Because he worked.

  3. Sean says:

    Lol! Here in Michigan, I actually heard someone on the radio argue that a ban on giving preference to some people based on race violates “equal protection.” I’m not exaggerating. They actually referred to it as a ban on giving preference based on race…AND claimed it VIOLATED equal protection.

  4. Robyn Lee says:

    You know what drives me crazy? All these promoters of affirmative action (and race baiters) use Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to promoter their agendas. One of his most famous saying was about dreaming of the day that his children would be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Affirmative action policies, and many other policies, are working in direct opposition to his dream.

    • roberob69 says:

      You know what drives me crazy? People who cherry pick MLK quotes to further their agenda. Ever heard of Operation Dreambasket? It was an program started by MLK which pre-dated Affirmitive Action. Ever heard this quote directly from Dr. King? “A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years, must now do something special for him, in order to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis.”

      Here’s how Dr. King described the program in Where Do We Go From Here?

      Operation Breadbasket is carried out mainly by clergymen. First, a team of ministers calls on the management of a business in the community to request basic facts on the company’s total number of employees, the number of Negro employees, the department or job classification in which all are located, and the salary ranges for each category. The team then returns to the steering committee to evaluate the data and to make a recommendation concerning the number of new and upgraded jobs that should be requested. The decision on the number of jobs requested is usually based on population figures. For instance, if a city has a 30 percent Negro population, then it is logical to assume that Negroes should have at least 30 percent of the jobs in any particular company, and jobs in all categories rather than only in menial areas, as the case almost always happens to be.
      You may want to do a little more research about What Dr. Kings Dream speech really meant. There is a lot more to MLK than his I have a dream speech.

      • Javin says:

        Holy crap, talk about missing the point.

        Operation Breadbasket was summarized by Dr. King thus:
        “the fundamental premise of Breadbasket is a simple one. Negroes need not patronize a business which denies them jobs, or advancement [or] plain courtesy’’ (King, 11 July 1967). ‘‘Many retail businesses and consumer-goods industries,’’ King explained, ‘‘deplete the ghetto by selling to Negroes without returning to the community any of the profits through fair hiring practices’’(King, January 1967).

        If you’re going to start lying about what someone said, or their intent, you probably shouldn’t make it about Dr. King.

        Martin Luther King was ABSOLUTELY NOT advocating hiring unqualified people based on the color of their skin. It would sicken him to even hear you attribute such a thought to him. What he WAS clearly advocating is not patronizing stores and businesses that DID discriminate based on the color of their skin. NOTHING MORE.

        He CLEARLY stated that if a store was in a 30% black neighborhood, then it should make sense that they should have roughly a 30% black staff. If their staff was 1%, or their black employees were not given equal pay for the same work, and an equal chance of advancement, then that store was to be boycotted. (You know, just like we should still do today?)

        Dr. King would be rolling over in his grave to see how asswipes like you have bastardized this program, and turned it from a system of removing discrimination into a system that actively discriminates.

        • roberob69 says:

          First of all you do not know anything about Dr. King and certainly do not know me. If anyone is an asswipe it is you. It is amazing people get courage on the internet because i know for a fact you would never say anything like that to my face. Maybe you should do some research about Operation bread basket instead of attacking me. I find it hilarious that white people try to champion Dr. King as their savior.

          Perhaps you should read “where do we go from here” Dr. King was an advocate during civil rights for the Negro. So when Dr. King writes “A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him.” what do you think he means? That is the foundation for AA

        • Javin says:

          See? You assume a lot too. You clearly don’t know me, as I absolutely without hesitation would say every bit of this to your face. To include pointing out that you’re an asswipe.

          And that you’re clearly ignorant of Dr. King’s message. You accuse people of “cherry picking” his message about having his kids “judged not by the color of their skin” then you go on to cherry pick a single (and easily misinterpreted) statement and then argue AGAINST everything Dr. King ever stood for.

          Yes, you’re an asswipe, yes you’re an idiot, yes Dr. King would be disgusted by you, and yes, I would be honored to say it to your face. (I live in the Northern VA/DC area. Specifically, Fairfax, VA. Perhaps we could go out for a beer if you’re in the area. I hang out at Fast Eddie’s Billiards on the weekends, and am the 37 year old 6′, 250 lb. redheaded guy with glasses and a goatee, and a poorly-growing-in beard. I wear jeans and slip-on black shoes because I’m too lazy to tie them. Feel free to stop by.)

        • Tony says:

          “do something special for him” doesn’t equate to “pass a racist law”. Good try though. But I do like your tactic of getting all tough when someone counters your points. And suggesting that someone should research something after they give several direct quotes with dates on the topic is a bit illogical.

      • This is a voluntary program carried out by ministers. That’s awesome. It’s like choosing to live in a city that has a lot of your minority, like Koreans or Mormons or Barbecue Enthusiasts. Everyone is perfectly okay with that. But we all need to be equal under the law. Because the law has guns and prisons. That’s why private initiatives like this are different from the government coercion (backed by threats of violence and loss of liberty) that force Affirmative Action.

        • Javin says:

          That’s another excellent point that I missed. Dr. King’s plan was to enlist the LOCAL PEOPLE in making their own changes through completely legal channels. It was never at any point about PASSING LAWS to discriminate against people based on skin color.

        • Curtis says:

          What? Barbecue enthusiasts are a minority? What has this world come to… are the vegetarians taking over?

        • They would tell you so. 🙂 you should hear them complain about the lack of craftsmanship most people apply to the smoking of meat, lol.

        • John Hellyer says:

          lol we should have affirmative action in our prisons.. lol.. any race of person gets arrested over their allotted inmate % should be freed of the charge….; wed have rapist and murderers everywhere…… (not a racist statement, if affirmative action states a certain percentage must be minority then in the opposite key it would also mean a larger % would have to be white with no minority affiliation, and yes whites would have to have a higher percentage.. or else how would they be the majority?)

      • Several points need to be made. Number one: Martin Luther King is capable of being wrong. He isn’t God; he made mistakes. He was even a Communist sympathizer. Number two: this program of his was not a government program. Number three: getting black people into colleges that they aren’t prepared for probably won’t help them. Before you call me racist, I’ll preempt you by saying that their are many black people who are extremely capable of college. But those people didn’t need any help from some condescending program that says that black people can’t make it to college without government mandate.

  5. Pingback: A Response to Matt Walsh: “Christian women: feminism is not your friend” | The Beautiful Kingdom Warriors

  6. JR says:

    Matt called it like it is. Discrimination!

    Before someone jumps to the conclusion that I am racist… I can’t be because I’m Mexican. 🙂

    • WifeOfLibcraz says:

      You can totally be a racist and be Mexican. Or Asian. Or even black. Because if you bought into what white society is selling, you are racist.

      • Lesley says:

        I think everyone who works hard deserves to attend college. I don’t think it should matter about what color or race you are. It all should boil down to whether or not you worked hard to prove you want to be there. I think that the race card has been played way to much. If someone white says anything they are considered racist, but AA, Native, and the other so called minorities can walk around with shirts that say “proud to be AA, or Native Pride”, and so on, but there was a whole senior class in SD that got suspended from school 3 weeks before graduation because they wore “Proud To Be White” t-shirts to school. They were called racist, and suspended. The Natives who wore their t-shirts were not. Now tell me how and why it is that white people are discriminated against in the work place and can’t get into a all black college, and this still seems right to you. If there was an all white college it would be racist, there are a lot of scholarships I don’t qualify for only because I am white.

      • Jillocity says:

        “Because if you bought into what white society is selling, you are racist.”…isn’t racist? or is it that only white people (and now Mexicans) can be racist?

      • Curtis says:

        I once heard a black person say whites are horrible, racist, and a slew of expletives. It sounded like a very racist remark to make.

      • Bob Platt says:

        I agree that racists come in all shapes and colors. But what is “white society”? How is that different from American society? Can you give an example?

        If I read your last statement correctly, you are saying “white society is selling racism.” Can you provide an example of this?

        Please, I want to know so I can make a difference in stopping it. So far the only racists I’ve encountered are those that seek to judge my skin color and label me “racist”.

        Thanks!

  7. College is a big waste of money? Not for everything, but for anything other than math, science, or engineering, college is worthless.

    • tempestadore says:

      I disagree. I first attended college majoring in literature, and I went into it knowing damn well it was going to be a struggle and likely impossible for me to become successful in the field. But worthless? No way. The knowledge, experiences, and connections I made are priceless. However, I then did realize that I needed a backup plan to support my family, so I changed my major to Secondary Education minoring in English (high school English teacher). I legally cannot become a teacher without a degree, and I still believe the same about priceless knowledge, experiences, and connections. Even once I finish attending for my career option and my main passion option, I still plan to continue my education in many different fields, because I love knowledge. Worthless to you is priceless to me.

      • Matt(Not Walsh) says:

        Alright, but did you get into college to fill a quota of females, or did you get in based on merit?

        • tempestadore says:

          I don’t know what that has to do with this specific comment. If you scroll down (or up, honestly I forget how these comments are set up), you’ll see my whole rant about how this is one of the few of Matt’s posts I agree with; I am against Affirmative Action and I would always rather have the best person for the job, in any given situation.

        • Lesley says:

          Wish I could have gotten in because I was a woman. I have to do on merit alone.

      • If its about knowledge it’s still kind of a waste of money. There’s tonnes of literature available on any subject, and if you want to learn specialized knowledge it’s often best to seek out experts, who are occupationally teachers, but often not.

        In fact it’s kind of sad to me when people go to colledge just for the knowledge… I tend to know a hell of a lot more than many people I have discussions with with basic degrees just because I persistently study. Doctrines tend to be more knowledgeable, but even that is talking with people when they’re specialized and I’m not…

        • TheApostlePaul says:

          *There’s tonnes of literature available on any subject*

          The Internet doesn’t count as “literature,” sorry.

        • notsocrazy24 says:

          For TheApostlePaul: The internet has plenty of literature on it, even if the Internet as a whole doesn’t count as literature. Nearly every subject has accurate representation on the Internet somewhere, even if there’s plenty of misinformation as well.

        • Indeed it may, but there is a great deal of literature still being published since the internet came out, and much more from before its inception.

          Simply because someone like paul is incapable of learning via an abstraction such as a book does not mean that people of normal intelligence should not do it.

        • clayton0982 says:

          I’m currently in school pursuing two graduate degrees, and cannot tell you how much I’ve gained by regular dialogue with a professor. Both college and graduate school have helped me know which resources to read, exposed me to things that I didn’t know I didn’t know, and gave an “expert” in the field an opportunity to speak into and inform my studies.

          Certainly, college is not a necessity and is not for everyone. And certainly, it isn’t the only kind or medium for education. But to say that “if (college is) about knowledge it’s still kind of a waste of money” is painful for me to read. I could not disagree more.

    • Edik415 says:

      If you view college as being strictly vocational training, then I can see how you might make that conclusion. However, that view is far from universal.

      • Strictly vocational? Not at all. Colleges and universities are useful for advancing lasting research and technology, and for educating students who will eventually become the researchers and the men and women creating the technological advances. Is it a place of learning? Certainly. An expensive place of learning. So expensive that it becomes worthless for those who cannot afford to attend without incurring massive amounts of debt. Some few are smart enough to win scholarships (or simply promote themselves well enough to make up for their academic deficiency), but the majority of students take out loans. When you add in soft degrees which aren’t useful for anything but a low-paying job, these loans can take decades to repay and effectively enslaves the debtor to the lender (which is worse than worthless). For the financial elite, college can be a place of learning for the sake of learning (which can be valuable) because they can pay for tuition out of pocket. But for the rest of us, there’s little worthwhile about it unless we train in math, science, or engineering, as otherwise we’re going to be in debt and slaves to the lender (often the government). When college graduates end up working at places like McDonald’s, where even high school dropouts are hired, that effectively means a college education is no longer doing what it’s supposed to do—creating higher functioning adults. And these are only a few of the reasons why college is worthless—I haven’t even touched on the current economy, the increasingly lower standards of rigor pervading all tiers of our education system, or the ability to learn most subjects outside of a learning institution.

        By the way, most views aren’t universal, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to convey other than I shouldn’t think my view is universal. So I guess I agree with you, because most views aren’t universal. If your goal was to convey something else, however, then I think you’re an i—-. But that’s probably not a universal view.

        • Edik415 says:

          …and after your first two sentences, everything you say is related to the job that college is apparently supposed to prepare you for. You’ve couched everything you say in terms of “students who will become researchers, etc” and “soft degrees” and “high functioning adults,” but those are ALL based on the student’s ability to land a job.

        • You’re cute.

          As art and cultural centers go, colleges and universities are prime hot spots. But guess what? The people sponsoring the art and cultural centers are either the wealthy or the tax payers or both. In other words, the people who have jobs and the people who have money to spare (i.e., those without debt). If you think that art will flourish without a healthy and thriving economy, think again. The arts are the first thing to go when the masses are struggling just to survive. Do you remember learning about those famous artists, like Michelangelo or Rembrandt or countless others? Well, they were sponsored by the wealthy—they got to ply their trade because kings and other nobility paid them for their works. Lots of money = Lots of art and greater culture. Do you know why the ancient Greeks still influence modern thought? Because they had a thriving sea-trade and an impressive military which made the people richer and richer. And the richer they got, the more art and philosophy that came from their hands and mouths. The taxes of those who work pay for public universities, and the majority of the tax funds paying for public universities come from the wealthy. Private colleges have an even higher dependence on the financial elite (and which is why they’re usually more prestigious than their public counterparts—because the wealthy are going to buy the best available for their buck). The art and cultural centers of our great nation, our colleges and universities, are dependent on those with money to give. In other words, the art and culture, the entertainment and luxury that you enjoy is a result of workers, all the way up and down the ladder. The artists who created that art trained long and hard to achieve the skill necessary… and then someone (you) paid them for their work. The books you read, the movies you watch… some professional wrote them, someone in the film business created it. They didn’t necessarily go to college, either, but writing and acting and directing are all vocations. The best art is made by a professional artist making a living by creating his or her art… which means someone has to buy it… someone who doesn’t make their own art (otherwise why would they buy it?)… someone who has a career in something more scientific, or perhaps mathematical.

          So if college students are attending their universities for the sake of knowledge, that’s great. Some students do that. Usually the ones with extra money. But where did they get that extra money? Oh my! No! Surely they didn’t work for it! Surely they’re not that well off! Surely their parents didn’t work that much! Surely not. That money just appeared out of thin air, that’s what it did.

          When our colleges stop equipping our students for well-paying jobs and high-level professionalism, and when they saddle our students with thousands of dollars in debt without a viable means to repay their loans, they have short-circuited their primary function, cut off their own source of subsistence, and thrown away their own future as public art and cultural centers.

          Strictly vocational? Not at all. Just, well, mostly vocational. But I think you missed that point the first time around. I believe I said, “For the financial elite, college can be a place of learning for the sake of learning… because they can pay for tuition out of pocket.” Except you’ll probably miss the point again even though I explained it. Sigh.

        • Good post Childlike.

  8. picassobull says:

    Wow, I didn’t predict that reaction! Actually, I did — you are very predictable.

    “college is often a terrible waste of money”

    Exactly how does one measure education, and it’s impact on society, in terms of money?

    • Javin says:

      Cost vs. Gain. It’s a simple formula. You should look it up some time.

      • picassobull says:

        Javin – you provide me with the inputs and I’ll gladly look up the “simple formula.” You have no idea the benefit you receive from living in an educated society. By all means, if you honestly think you can quantify the “gain” associated by education…

        • Javin says:

          Well, one of those inputs is something we call “common sense”, and then there’s other inputs such as “opening your eyes” or “reading a newspaper”. Since there seems to be some difficulty in this area, let me explain it to you…

          College education is not the same as high school education. Each child *should* get educated through high school, then perhaps move on to a trade/vocational/skilled labor school.

          Instead, we have a society that, for the past 30 years, has been told not only that every kid should aspire to go to college, go into significant debt to do so (and not pay it back – so the taxpayer – who IS working – can fit that bill) and then refuse to do any job that they’re “overqualified” for.

          Today we have some of the highest unemployment rates while skilled labor jobs are HURTING for people to actually work. And I’ve personally known a good many of these people. 30+ year olds living at home with mommy and daddy refusing to go to work because they’re “above” those kinds of jobs. (Indeed, you need look no further than this very blog for a striking example: http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/21/my-child-is-gifted-hes-also-29-unemployed-and-living-in-my-basement-2/)

          There’s a reason that some celebrities (such as Mike Rowe) have found it necessary to start campaigning that kids SHOULD stop going to college, and start getting some SKILLED jobs, and you know, actually working.

    • TheApostlePaul says:

      People like Matt demonize formal education until a homeschooler gets into Harvard or Yale…then they won’t shut the fuck up about it.

      • Curtis says:

        That homeschooler is probably going to college for a career field that actually needs it, not some cop-out liberal arts degree.

  9. tempestadore says:

    Another thing we agree on — I’m astounded and excited!

    I’ve always had a problem with Affirmative Action. As liberal as I am and as equal rights/minority rights as I am, I think people should be given opportunities and help, not hand-outs. (For example, I am pro-welfare but not so people can sit around and do nothing; so they can get a little help in moving forward and ultimately helping themselves.) Affirmative Action is not equal whatsoever, other than possibly in numbers. A close friend of mine (who is white) went to apply for welfare many, many years ago, and the person she dealt with literally told her that she would be denied because she was white, and they felt that white people had more opportunities and were better able to become successful on their own so they wanted them to go reach their true potential. On the other hand, they felt that black people did not have as much individual potential, would find it much harder to become successful, and needed more help. If that’s not discrimination towards both races, I don’t know what is.

    I think we should be (and be proud of being) a diverse nation. I do not think that diversity should overshadow more important qualifications. I would much rather have a white person with better qualifications perform a heart operation as opposed to a black person with less qualifications, the exact same as I would prefer a black person with better qualifications over a white person with less. Race should really have nothing to do with anything anymore, other than possibly our own individual culture, and the fact that we still make such a big deal about it is helping to fuel this idea of a “racist nation” so many claim we’re in.

    • tempestadore says:

      Oh, but of course I completely disagree on college being a waste of money. I think it’s too expensive, but I think it’s whatever you make it to be. Personally, my college experiences are priceless, and I plan to continue in higher education in many different fields for as long as I can.

      • SingingStrings says:

        In his defense, he did say that it can be a waste of money, not that it is a waste of money. If you go out and get a college degree, and then don’t use it, or spend thousands of dollars an a college education and then don’t graduate, it could be argued that it was a waste of your money. I’m not saying that it necessarily was, just that it could be. Like you said, “it’s whatever you make it to be.”

        • tempestadore says:

          I would blame that on the individual though, not the college or education system. I know he didn’t officially blame the education system, but by having your closing argument “college is often a waste of money,” it implies that college itself is often useless. I firmly believe that the student decides whether to make it priceless, worthless, or somewhere in between.

          For example, last month I bought some lunch meat at the grocery store. I didn’t use it in time and it went bad. If I were telling someone about this, I would say “I wasted my money because I let it go bad,” NOT “That meat was a waste of money,” because that implies that there was something wrong with the meat.

          Not to mention, there are various kinds of “worthless”. Worthless in the workplace? Worthless in life? Worthless in the bedroom? Of course it may be worthless in one aspect of your life, but overall having no worth? I simply don’t see that being possible. Every experience is worth something.

    • Edik415 says:

      “Race should really have nothing to do with anything anymore, other than possibly our own individual culture, and the fact that we still make such a big deal about it is helping to fuel this idea of a “racist nation” so many claim we’re in.”

      This is a thread that seems to have come up several times here and on Matt’s FB page, as well. There seems to be some belief that affirmative action has a connection to a faulty view of racism in our country. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there’s a lot of “affirmative action is bad because racism isn’t a problem in our country any more.” This makes no sense to me. There’s lots of racism in our country…

      • tempestadore says:

        Actually, I tend to disagree with Matt on nearly every point he makes (hence the excitement that we agree on something).

        I’m not saying there is no racism. I think we are still plagued by it. However, I think that’s more on an individual level. I have people come to me left and right about something they think is racist when it reality race more than likely had nothing to do with it.

        What I am saying is that those who cry racism so often are usually incorrect. They seek for ways in which to turn something racist. They turn things around. Imagine if we had a white history month. Could you imagine the outrage? So why on earth do we have a black history month? Why can’t EVERY month be American history month? If a white person claims to be proud of their heritage, they are shunned. How dare they be proud of themselves? THAT, my friend, is racism. The fact that we portray every single thing to be related to race when it’s not. The fact that minorities get treated above white people in situations when they shouldn’t.

        When there are obvious acts of racism, I fully stand up against them. I am an advocate for equality. I am extremely passionate about many “liberal” issues. But, Affirmative Action is NOT fair. And we are not as plagued by racism as so many make us out to be.

      • Actually, affirmative action is bad, Erik, because it makes racism in this country WORSE! I think you will understand that way of expressing it much better. Why does it make it worse? That was precisely Matt Walsh’s point here. It makes it worse because it is a form of racism and discrimination a scale grander than almost any other form of racism today. Does that clear things up a bit?

        • Lili says:

          Take South Africa for example, we have AA (Affirmative Action) and BEE (Black Economic Empowerment). This means that a black person SHOULD by law be picked over a white person even when less qualified. What makes it even worse is that white people only make up 7% of the country. Therefore a minority group is being discriminated against so that the majority group, can have more opportunities….and you know what? It still doesn’t work!!! The population at large are still suffering. Why because they’re getting handouts. Because the focus is not on empowering the people of this country, the focus is not on education and getting somewhere in life on merit, it’s on getting something because of the colour of your skin.

          That is the problem, welfare, socialism and a bunch of corrupt RACIST politicians.

  10. Javin says:

    Here’s a fun little anecdotal story:

    I come from a military family. My mother was a bank teller, and my father was enlisted Army for 26 years.

    They never had the money to put away for 4 kids to go to college, so when we graduated, we were on our own. I had decent grades, and wanted to go into the military anyway, so I applied for the ROTC scholarship.

    I was told, to my face, that the “slots for Caucasians were already filled. Despite [my] high grades and high testing scores, [I would] only have a chance at the scholarship if [I] listed [my] race on the form as a minority.”

    I was as disgusted by it then as I am now. Needless to say, I didn’t stoop to lying about my race to get a scholarship, and I never did go to college. (No worries, though, as by busting my ass, even without a degree, I’ve been making a 6 figure salary since the age of 25 – something I’m punished for by having to pay a higher percentage in taxes.)

    • Curtis says:

      Reminds me of a not-so-funny comedian’s joke… or rather truth.
      If a woman can’t get a job, a man took it.
      If a black man can’t get a job, white man took it.
      If a Mexican can’t get a job, white man took it.
      If a white man can’t get a job, it’s not his fault. Affirmative action gave his job to the woman, the black man and the Mexican. Welcome to the new America.

  11. strawberrygirl says:

    I absolutely detest affirmative action. It claims to solve racism, by instituting racism. It’s the invention of elites who are never subjected to that racism, neither are their spouses or children, because they’ll always have their “in” while they assuage their gilt by making the middle class, the working class, hard working immigrants, and the unconnected pay in their place. It creates a spoils system that benefits some minority groups while punishing others who are “too” successful. It tells whites and Asians that their best will never be good enough while telling other groups that mediocrity is all that’s needed to get by because you’re “owed.” It’s flat out un-American and it needs to head right into the trash bin of history.

    • Bob Platt says:

      Worse yet, the exceptional people from minority groups get associated with the mediocre people and have to start a new uphill battle to prove they’re not mediocre. For years after they face discrimination because people see AA and say “you only got here because of your skin color not because you earned it.”

      What is the worth of something received for free compared to something earned?

  12. Pingback: What’s Your Box? | Susannah Ailene Martin

  13. G Fox says:

    If I owned my own business, I would want the very best employees I could find. If I were the president of a college, I would want the very best students I could find. I wouldn’t care if they were black, Muslim, white, Hispanic, or female. As with so many things in today’s America, we meet cultural challenges by lowering the bar so more can “succeed” (the “we are all winners” mentality). Is that really success? Instead, we should keep the standards high and recognize those who truly succeed, regardless of race or any other criteria. In addition, we should look for and demand excellence in any job, from fast food workers to ditch diggers to the president of the country. Not everyone will be a doctor, lawyer, or legislator, but a job well done should be recognized and appreciated. When selecting a mate, I might give preference to someone who meets my idea of a good candidate, but as a citizen, I want the very best and brightest working in the professions and businesses in my country. That’s what got us here. We don’t need diversity for diversity’s sake Our country IS diverse. We just need to focus on letting excellence be the defining factor and challenge all of our people to be the very best they can be at whatever they do.

  14. booklassy says:

    Hi,

    Just my 2 cents…..

    I live in South Africa and in our country affirmative action is rife. National Sports teams, the workplace, some schools etc. The difference is that in our case affirmative action benefits the majority, not the majority. I’m not a racist at all but this practise just doesn’t make sense. What does it result in? Sometimes semi-literate, inept government workers. In many instances people are given a job because of colour and when they mess up (and they do – just visit the local municipality) they keep their job because of colour.

    That same majority are given preference when it comes to social housing, welfare and now they want to institute a national healthcare bill as well. (We already have bunches of government hospitals)

    So what if your dad was alive during “the struggle”? So what if your granny was alive during “The struggle”.Why should YOU be treated special? You did nothing. If you get given every opportunity but in many cases do nothing with it, that makes you lazy. Soon we will be left with a lazy majority whose “I’m entitled” attitude will ruin a nation.

    My two cents is not meant to offend anyone – just speaking from experience. My parents weren’t pro-apartheid. I was taught respect for people, no matter their colour or religious background. As a kid I stood up against those who spoke badly of blacks or indians. I had black friends – even in the 80’s during the midst of apartheid. Sure – we could not go outside to play, we had to stay in the backyard. We had bombscares at my primary school. As a 6 year old I was told by authorities that the communists were out to get us (the ANC party was getting funding from Russia)

    Despite the fact that I had NOTHING to do with apartheid, at one stage in my life I was ashamed of my background. But no more! I’m white… and I’m proud of my heritage. Yes we made mistakes but my family were good, hardworking folk. My grandparents and great grandparents were labourers. They weren’t given anything – they had to work for it. They were simple folk that loved their God and loved their family. What’s not to be proud of?

    South Africa was a well oiled machine (granted – there were problems) but now we are a rattling rustbucket….. Its been 20 years since the end of apartheid – stop it now.

    • TheKnowerseeker says:

      Your situation sounds just like that in the U.S. though maybe worse, and you speak for all U.S. whites who had nothing to do with black slavery and little to do with Jim Crow or racism here as well, yet we’re all demonized by liberals and black racists.

  15. Nathan says:

    “Many colleges go so far as to teach that all white people are racist, no matter what, without exception.”

    Many schools teach proper puncuation, but apparently not the University of Delaware. The rest of the sentence, though, makes it pretty clear that they mean ‘all-white’, those of European descent.

    So no one is accusing every white person of being racist. I pick at this nit because the rest of the post is pretty much shiat and not worth rebutting.

    I’m a white guy and I’m perfectly fine with some sort of ratio-based affirmative action. Blacks got the short end of the stick for so long, more so than the Jews or Asians in this country, that swinging the pendulum in their favor a little seems the least we can do. And I’m not talking that the blacks had it ‘a little bit harder’ for – I’m talking about a couple hundred years of enslavement, followed by another hundred years of general dickishness, including random lynchings, discrimination, and bombings. I don’t have white guilt so much as white farking outrage that our grandparents and great-grandparents were responsible for this stuff, whether actively or standing idly by and letting it happen.

    • Don says:

      White people like you are the problem. I’m outraged at you and your kind. Who do you think you are? You are a racist of the worst kind. You think black people can’t possible get by without your help. Maybe if people like you would quit interfering the black family dynamic wouldn’t be in absolute shambles.

    • TheApostlePaul says:

      I heard a stat on the radio the other day that the cost of the California public university system has doubled since 2000 and tripled since 1990. The issue here isn’t who is “qualified” to attend college, but the fact that a public university education (the public university system was founded by Thomas Jefferson under the premise that a college education should be accessible to anyone who was willing to work for it) has become disproportionately unaffordable to people in economically impoverished areas. The fact of the matter is that income inequality is what’s keeping students out of classrooms, not “affirmative action.”

    • pentamom says:

      No individual living black person has suffered enslavement in the U.S. You don’t make up injustice against one person by committing injustice against a completely different person, on behalf of yet a third completely different person.

      It’s horrible that the discrimination and abuse existed in the past, but nothing you can do FOR me or AGAINST some living black person can make it up to the dead black people to whom it happened. The outrage you feel is great; your method does nothing to make any of it go away or make anything better. All you can do is deprive poor white or Asian kids of a shot in life that they otherwise merit, because some rich or middle-class black kid with lower qualifications gets picked first.

    • TheKnowerseeker says:

      Not a single black American alive today is a former slave, and the number of folks who lived through Jim Crow are shrinking fast. Also, because of affirmative action and other lopsided measures, black Americans have as much opportunity (more, I would say) to pursue success today as a white American from a family of the same educational level and finances.

      I, a white male and the son of a white male, experienced a period of time growing up where my dad was unemployed, and my family even found itself “homeless” for a month. (Thankfully, we weren’t on the streets, but rather we legally lived in tents at a state park, and God blessed my dad with work before we would be required to vacate. I know that other people — including other children — have experienced much worse experiences with homelessness and still do.) During that time, one of the ways in which my dad was looking for work was that he would go to visit a state jobs office, and quite a few opportunities existed both within and without his field (construction/carpentry), but he was always told that he was not qualified despite his extensive work experience. One day, a clerk at the office whispered to my dad “I’m not supposed to tell you this, but you’re more qualified than anyone else applying, yet the reason that we can’t offer you any job interviews is because the black job seekers are filling all the positions through affirmative action.” So, you see, affirmative action has directly and unfairly affected me and my parents, and we have been 100% against it since then.

      Lastly, I’d like to ask if you come from a family with money and influence, because those are the only whites not being affected.

    • How does it benefit blacks? College isn’t a privilege. It’s a responsibility to learn and gain skills. How can people who would not have made it into college without the discrimination suddenly find themselves able to handle it when they historically did poorly in academic endeavors? Plenty of black people are capable of college, but they aren’t the ones that needed affirmative action to get there.

  16. Sam says:

    Yes, Mr. Walsh, most of *their* brains HAVE turned to mush.

  17. Bill says:

    “The Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or, The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life”. That’s the full title of Darwin’s book. Want to get rid of “racism”? The first step is to understand that teaching Darwin’s theory as fact (e.g., in public schools) is racist..

    • TheKnowerseeker says:

      Agreed, because then that gets kids’ — and adults’ — minds thinking “Which race(s) is/are the superior one(s)?”, whereas Jesus only held one “prejudice”: Jew versus Gentile, and when most of the Jews rejected Him as Messiah and Son of YHWH, He offered His gift of Salvation to the Gentiles.

    • Matt(Not Walsh) says:

      Well, what’s wrong about that is the fact that the theory of evolution can be taught in school while the theory of creation can’t. Both are theories. Both have people religiously devoted behind them. If they can’t teach the religion of creationism in schools, they shouldn’t be able to teach the RELIGION of evolution.

  18. Will says:

    I haven’t read the whole article, but I laughed because you used the word “honkies.” HAHAHAHA!

  19. brianniemeier says:

    I know a mother of 3 who lost her job, despite having a master’s degree and years of relevant experience, only because the university where she worked chose to retain another woman as their “face of diversity”. Now her husband is being laid off, leaving the family with no income.

  20. TheKnowerseeker says:

    Very well put, Matt; in fact, I hadn’t thought before of some of the reasons you’ve brought to light to oppose “affirmative action”.

    I do have my own bit of input that I would like to add: I am a Cajun. The Cajun people are descendants of former Nova Scotians, (called Acadians, for Nova Scotia used to be named “Acadia”) who were forcefully removed from their homes by the British and dumped throughout the French colonies worldwide and in France but regathered in Louisiana and then intermarried with other white nationalities and with the local Native Americans.

    When the Acadians arrived in Louisiana, they were not welcomed by the existing French settlers — called Creoles — because the Acadians were poor sustenance farmers, while the Creoles were rich merchants and plantation owners. Later, when the U.S. bought Louisiana, the arriving American settlers appeared on the scene with bigotry in their hearts toward French-descended peoples (which Americans still seem to hold onto today — not that France is innocent of its own bigotry toward Americans), yet the French-descended but better educated and wealthier Creoles managed to join together with the Americans to oppress the Acadians/Cajuns in particular, with the Creoles gladly helping the Americans claim (steal) land under U.S. law that Cajuns had lived and farmed on for generations.

    Then, when the South lost the Civil War, and the slaves were released, more Cajun land was appropriated for the former slaves to live and farm on, and that is when the Cajuns were driven into the swamps. Finally, the Americans nearly succeeded in wiping out Cajun culture entirely by requiring mandatory attendance by Cajun children to American schools in Louisiana (a good thing), where the teachers and administration ridiculed the French language and the Cajun heritage (a bad thing), and cruely punished any Cajun children who didn’t fully let go of their Cajun language and culture to embrace instead the English language and American culture. Only a recent effort by Louisiana universities has kept the culture hanging on, though the language is continuing to die out with each successive generation. (Because of how the Creoles and Americans got away with treating the Cajuns over time, and because they were driven out even by black former slaves, an ethnic slur was invented by the Americans to refer to the Cajuns that means “less than a black [American]”. I don’t wish to list the exact slur here, because it pains me deeply, but it is still used today.)

    Despite all of this abuse, the U.S. government only recently (since 1980) chose to recognize Cajuns as a distinct (and “protected”) ethnic group; however, we don’t have nearly the scholarships and other privileges that other “minority” groups have, probably because we identify ourselves as “white” racially. This fact exposes liberals as racial bigots, since not all “minorities” are worthy of uplifting in their eyes. (The [white] Creoles no longer exist as a separate group today because they intermarried so much with the Americans. Now, colloquially, the term “Creole” refers to the black and mixed descendants of the slaves released from the white Creole plantations.)

    • These events where a mar on Canadian history and a loss to my nation. Well written.

      • TheKnowerseeker says:

        Thank you, but don’t feel bad about what happened before you were even born, friend. We can only affect the world we live in today.

        • Tony says:

          It’s good to know there are people out there with some capability for rational thought.

          “Thank you, but don’t feel bad about what happened before you were even born, friend. We can only affect the world we live in today.”

          If only everyone would take that to heart and live it, there would be much less racial tension. To be angry that someone’s great grandfather oppressed your great grandfather and hold that against the great grandson is ridiculous at best.

  21. TheApostlePaul says:

    You know, it’s funny…I’m reading outraged response after outraged response from ‘white Christians’ who were ‘discriminated against’ because they were denied entry into their university of choice (more about this below) and here’s a few thoughts:

    Ask any Teapublican what the word “entitlement” means to them, and they’ll respond with the usual talking point/stereotypes: welfare mothers paid to have children and not work, illegal aliens getting treatment at ER’s that should be reserved for white Americans, fast-food workers in expensive metropolitan areas who want an extra couple of bucks an hour so they can live at poverty level instead of starvation level…you know the drill. Well, the moment those same bootstrappy, “I-built-this” types get told they don’t automatically get the red carpet into Stanford or Johns Hopkins (universities that reject far, far more applicants than they accept), boy, the knives come out real fast, don’t they? If THIS isn’t an example of an “entitlement mentality” (as well as a tacit acknowledgment that ‘white privilege’ is alive and well), I don’t know what is.

    I ABSOLUTELY believe that higher education (up to the M.D. level) is a right. So did Thomas Jefferson, who founded the first (SECULAR) public university. The problem with achieving this goal is the cost of a public university education has exploded (tuition at California state schools has doubled in the last 15 years, and tripled in the last 20). The fact of the matter is that all those “unqualified minority students” (go to the Stanford campus-I’ve been there multiple times-and find me ONE ‘unqualified’ student’) are being accepted because colleges-rightly-are under pressure to level the playing field that society has skewed. So, you want PURELY standards-based college acceptance practices? Then, you fight for (and elect representatives who will fight for) 100% taxpayer-funded college education (again, up to the M.D. level) and income equality. ‘Minority preference’ in the college application process will cease when colleges no longer have to consider the socioeconomic status of the applicants.

    People seem to be getting miffed, again, because their (of, course, perfectly qualified 😉 kids and/or boyfriends/girlfriends aren’t getting accepted into elite PRIVATE universities like Stanford or Johns Hopkins. Now, I know you guys work yourselves into a froth over the rights of the owners of private entities to grant or deny services or business to whomever they wish…in a world where ‘private ownership’ is king, wouldn’t these universities have the right to accept or decline ANY candidate…for ANY reason? And, if you’re going to use the argument that these universities receive taxpayer money, well, then shouldn’t you be a FEROCIOUS adversary of ANY institution that funnels public money to private pockets (charter schools, government contractors like Halliburton/KBR/Blackwater, etc.?)

    You either believe education is a right or you don’t, folks.

    • Javin says:

      Typical liberal horseshit from the mouth of ApostlePaul.

      ““I-built-this” types get told they don’t automatically get the red carpet into Stanford or Johns Hopkins (universities that reject far, far more applicants than they accept), boy, the knives come out real fast, don’t they?”

      Right. Now you’re comparing “NOT being discriminated against due to the color of my skin when I SHOULD have gotten accepted due to the merit of my work and achievements” as “getting the red carpet”. What a fuckin’ tool. You’ve yet to make a single coherent argument on ANY post of ANY thread in the months I’ve been reading your drivel. But you sure do like to use a lot of words to say nothing.

      • TheApostlePaul says:

        *Now you’re comparing “NOT being discriminated against due to the color of my skin when I SHOULD have gotten accepted due to the merit of my work and achievements” as “getting the red carpet”. *

        Well, only the admissions board knows for sure whether you’re “qualified,” and it depends on what they’re looking for. For instance, I got a full-tuition scholarship to an elite private university that I never would have gotten into otherwise…because I played the bass and the music department needed bass players. I guess we can make the argument that an “affirmative action” program was in place that gave preferential treatment to white male bassists, hmmm?

        • J says:

          No, you cannot make that argument. You were paid by the university music department to play bass because of your bass skills, and that money went directly to your tuition. You had a skill, which merited a contract between you and the university. Affirmative action is based on neither skill nor merit. You make some very illogical statements in your posts listed and explained below:

          1)““I-built-this” types get told they don’t automatically get the red carpet into Stanford or Johns Hopkins (universities that reject far, far more applicants than they accept), boy, the knives come out real fast, don’t they?”

          Are you propagandizing? This is a strawman argument. They are not complaining that they did not automatically get in. They are complaining that they had a higher measured academic skill than those others who were let in because of affirmative action, a government mandate, on a standard based on academics alone.

          2)”You either believe education is a right or you don’t, folks.”

          If you (as you said) DO believe that it is a right, are YOU fighting for 100% taxpayer funded university education? I don’t know if I would call education a right. I do think we need to have a wel-educated society, but up to the M.D. level? Not everyone can (or wants to) reach such a level. Education is something everyone should strive for, but you must demonstrate in your previous academic endeavors that we will not be wasting our time, money, and energy to educate you further (that is, you must show both willingness and ability to learn and be educated, to think critically, and use logic effectively).

    • Bob Platt says:

      Education is not a right, it’s a requirement. Truancy is a crime in this country. Higher education is similarly not a right but a privilege that is granted by a demonstrated ability and desire to attend. Consider also that in today’s society we have more people with degrees than we have jobs to fill those degrees. The result is underpaid employees with huge bills.

      I think your 2nd paragraph is a useless rant, a story told by an idiot full of sound and fury and signifying nothing. You make statements, contradict them, make general suggestions then exclude huge populations and finally come to erroneous conclusions.

      Stop complaining and go build something. Be proud of what you do rather than frustrated in what others should or should not do. If you want to change the world, start with the man in the mirror. (A Michael Jackson reference, if you’re curious.)

      May you be blessed with great success.

  22. TheApostlePaul says:

    *We’re left with a ridiculous dichotomy where a black male from a wealthy upper class family is given the benefits of affirmative action, over the son of an impoverished white single mother, or the daughter of a poor Japanese fisherman.*

    Fascinating. I’d love to see enough documented instances of this to justify changes to any state university system’s admissions process. Also, are there communities of ‘poor Japanese fishermen’ in the US? If they’re ANYWHERE, they should be here, but everytime I drive through the tunnel that replaced Devil’s Slide into Half Moon Bay, all I see are surfers, tourists and locals who fish to make extra money. Go into Sam’s or Ketch Joanne’s at lunchtime, and you see guys who work on fish and crab boats-most of them are younger, white and are well paid. If there are any “poor Japanese fishermen” in the area, they keep to themselves. I’m not saying they don’t exist…just saying I live near one of the busiest commercial fishing areas in the country and I’ve never seen one.

    * Elizabeth Warren claimed she’s a Native American. Sure, she’s a shameless, lying, Socialist, but who’s to say she doesn’t have some minority blood?*

    One, Elizabeth Warren isn’t a “socialist” (Matt probably has a much clearer idea in his head of what constitutes an ‘ethnic minority’ than what constitutes a ‘socialist’), and two, she committed the sin of repeating third-hand family stories from her grandparents-at no point did she ever benefit from (or SEEK to benefit from) her “Indian” heritage. In fact, in order to qualify as part of the Cherokee Nation, you need to have a direct ancestor on the Dawes Roll between 1898 and 1914-something that probably most people who identify themselves as Cherokee don’t have.

    You’re entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/is-elizabeth-warren-native-american-or-what/257415/

    • pentamom says:

      You’ve never seen a poor Japanese fisherman in the U.S.., ergo his example his false, ergo his point is incorrect. Brilliantly argued.

    • Tony says:

      Elizabeth Warren quote:

      “‘If we started in 1960, and we said [that] as productivity goes up…then the minimum wage was going to go up the same…if that were the case, the minimum wage today would be about $22 an hour”

      Raising minimum wage on unskilled labor is a socialist idea. As she is advocating here for a 22 an hour minimum wage to serve soft drinks through a window, yes that makes her a socialist.

      She has many other socialist economic ideas as well, it’s strange that you don’t understand that she is one, do you even understand the difference between socialism and capitalism?

  23. Heather says:

    I’m usually a big fan of this blog, but I think this post really missed the mark. And isn’t very well-researched. Racial quotas are illegal, for instance. For a more thoughtful, less incendiary look at the issue, I recommend the sociologist Allan Johnson.

  24. Ryan says:

    I do have an idea that I think would work well in place of Affirmative Action. What if schools (at least public colleges and universities) were required to not ask ethnic/racial information. Furthermore, when they went over applicants, the students’ names were replaced with an ID number. That way no obviously ethnic names are recognizable. Then when college admissions look at the applications, they should have an unbiased look at students’ qualifications with no information on race. They would have no way to fill a quota. Schools that require an interview would be trickier, but I don’t think that’s usually necessary for undergrad. Graduate school would be a different story, but it would solve the problem for undergraduate study.

    Does anyone agree with me on this? Or does anyone see any flaw with my logic? Feel free to comment with how you’d modify it if you think I’m missing something. But in theory it would allow minorities in college to equal their representation in the general population. Now, that may be off because of the unusually high concentration of minorities in slums and in other poor conditions, but that’s a problem unrelated to college admissions. One could make the argument that if those people in slums went to college, then they could get out of the slums and reduce the slum population. The flaw with that logic, however, would be that those in slums are already less motivated to go to college, so you’d have to educate them enough to make them even feel like they could go to college in the first place. And then when they’re educated, then they could make it into college on their own merit (at least with my idea in place). And even if they couldn’t get into a regular university, community colleges are open door and can get them an Associate’s degree, opening the door for a possible continuation. The issue there would be targeting the minorities in those terrible circumstances and giving them better conditions so they can make a better life for themselves, not just throwing them in some unfamiliar environment. And some already do this, which is awesome. Once again, feel free to point out flaws in my logic though. I can appreciate a good non-aggressive dialectic.

    • J says:

      The only problem with your idea is that it makes complete sense and is 100% logical, which means Washington D.C. can never accept it as a solution.

    • Jason D says:

      Makes perfect sense in my eyes, I never understood why ethnicity is put on ANY forms, if you want to be anti-racial, then DON’T ASK! Easy as that!

  25. Pingback: Cloth Diaper Giveaway Roundup for 4/25/14 (Giveaways Ending April/May)

  26. I’m not entirely for it either, but in some cases, it does make sense. (Although, I think a system tying college admission to socioeconomic status might work better, because poorer children do tend to have fewer opportunities due to less of a local tax base and thereby less good schools).

    I’ve also benefited from a new strain of affirmative action; grad school applications often now ask if you are LGBTQ, and weigh that similarly to race. I don’t need the help, personally. Even though my relationship with family is strained, I wasn’t disowned or financially cut off. However, for a lot of those individuals, they may be cut off and/or kicked out in their late teens/college years. This means it’s really hard to get the needed funds, logistics, and stability to go to college- and some help is warranted, though affirmative action is a “blunt instrument”

  27. Bob says:

    I don’t know about affirmative actions, but I do support separate standards for schools that are apparently not meeting student need. Kids at title one schools have unique barriers and many of them are minorities, because minorities represent a disproportionate percentage of America’s poorest population.

    • Bob Platt says:

      It should also be noted that some minorities also represent the highest household income. Some minorities also represent a vast majority of professional sports players. Being a minority doesn’t condemn you to being poor. Poor attitude and free government handouts condemns you to being poor.

  28. James says:

    What ie seems like Matt and every commenter has missed is the myth of meritocracy. Hardly anyone achieves anything based solely on merit. That’s why there are classes and workshops on networking. It’s about who you know, not what you know. Far too many incompetent unqualified individuals are in universities because they knew the right people. Just look at the percentages of college applicants accepted due to legacy credits (family members that are alumni). Compare that to the percentage actually benefiting from affirmative action. At least at my school, it’s something like 27% vs 0.25%. To claim that racism at an institutional level has ceased is to ignore the blatant disparity of the criminal system. Look up Mass Incarceration: The New Jim Crow. The essence of white privilege is that whites receive benefits in society that are believed to be based on merit. It’s a lie. I recognize that affirmative action is inherently discriminatory, but it is a necessary temporary bandaid until other problems can be resolved.

  29. Tara says:

    Well college was my key to success. I am a single mother who happens to live in a very small town. Without college, I had my pick of McDonald’s or Hardee’s and a future filled with government assistance. I paid my way through school and can now provide well for my daughters. I just want to make sure you understand that for some, college is not only necessary, but vital for their financial independence.

  30. Jason D says:

    Wow, Matt I honestly think we come from the same mold. Just last week I was doing an assignment for my Pluralism and Diversity class on affirmative action that involved me posting my opinion on it on a college forum and backing it with facts. I was the only one explaining how it’s actually discrimination, and not good at all for America. Everyone disagreed with me. I’m glad to see that you do, because I’ve agreed with you completely on all your posts, and this one I had already written about.
    With that said, you failed to mention one point I included in my post for school. Though you touched on it briefly. You mentioned that colleges will accept a minority student to fill their racial quota who then might struggle because they aren’t prepared for the work load. Well I noted in my post that this happens in employment as well. A company that must fill a quota of positions with people from minority backgrounds is literally taking available positions away from qualified candidates simply because of their skin pigmentation. If that isn’t discrimination, I don’t know what is. Furthermore in the example I made, let’s say an unqualified black man is given a position because of affirmative action. It is a fact that many managers in companies fear discrimination law suits and possibly being deemed as racist by not advancing minorities, so they’ll push this man into a position he is not ready to handle, which then he will fail, and it leads to the age old stereotype that blacks aren’t intelligent. When in reality affirmative action simply forced him into a job he wasn’t prepared to handle. So basically what affirmative action does is actually open the possibilities of us moving backwards as a society.
    Basically all I can say is that you hit the nail on the head once again. Affirmative action is wrong, and it’s discrimination by definition.

    • I get that you guys see it as discrimination, and I won’t even argue the point. Not because I can’t (wrote a fairly lengthy comment below). It does has some discriminatory aspects I admit, but what is the other option. Relying on people to be fair? Why do you think certain groups are federally protected (sexual orientation, religion, sex, race, etc.) because the system was working great and things were equal?

      I GET what you all are saying but please try to look at it from another perspective as well. Also, as I mentioned in my other comment it is almost as if some of you are (unintentionally I’m sure) implying that a person of color is in some way less qualified. What if all things are equal, but because the company is majority white they need to meet a “quota”, they hire the Black person? Is it the worst thing in the world. I get how it may seem unfair but how do you think we’ve dealt with this (and still deal with this by and large) for YEARS. I feel for any disadvantaged group, I really do. I think their is even more discrimination (in some areas) for people who are disabled. If companies were not asked to hire more diverse groups of people, then what do you think most companies and schools would look like?

      Hey, I’m not saying I have the answers but apparently neither do any of you. It’s okay…I just think there’s a lot of “passion” and assumptions being made. My mom was a Computer Analyst and then Programmer for for 30+ years…she didn’t get in and STAY in because of her skin or gender (to the contrary…the stories she could tell you) but because she was qualified, and damn good…and yeah “happens to be” Black.

  31. Todd says:

    I’ve always been curious about one thing. Can a white immigrant from South Africa claim that he or she is African – American when filling out an application?

  32. Well I do disagree with the basis of your argument. And not because I’m black, or “benefited” from affirmative action. But there are several points I will make and then bounce, because hey this is your blog, your entitled to your opinion and I doubt I change anything with this comment. But let me first say, no Affirmative Action isn’t perfect. When it comes to the issue I’m somewhat neutral actually.

    BUT let’s be real for a moment…
    Affirmation Action was put in place to combat (in some small way) INSTITUTIONAL racism. I know that everyone can fall victim to racist remarks, or discrimination. But Blacks, and other minorities, have actually had to deal with institutional racism. Since you think that Affirmative Action is discriminatory in an institutional sense…just take your theory and times in by 10, and add on 100s of years of this ish.

    Even well into the 80s Blacks were being denied access into certain universities.
    But hey, I know Black people get accused of “whining” all the time, so I’ll leave that very big fact alone. But just think about why Affirmative Action was started in the first place, do you think it was ever needed. And what would you put in place of it?

    By the way, I went to school (grad school even) based on merit. As MANY minorities do. When I hear stuff like this it almost implies that every Black person, or person of color, somehow got picked because of AA. I KNOW you didn’t state that, but the article and numerous comments sort of imply such…

    Bottom line, I get it. People want to look at America as being some type of utopia. A colorblind nation, but it is not. It has never been, and I would just hope that all of this energy put into ridding programs that may level the playing ground could also spill over to the very real institutional racism that people of color have been experiencing for YEARS. Oh and, the comment about other races versus Blacks…actually, when it comes to education, economics, and health Native Americans, Latinos, and Blacks, lag behind whites in many areas. So it’s not just Blacks. It’s not your “fault”, I’m not mad but I just hope that people (even Whites) could be more well-rounded in their observations…

    And to the people comparing being left-handed to being Black…please please stop.

Comments are closed.