response 164 of 232:

Jan 27 00:35 UTC 2003

Slavery caused the *owners* to develop their *own*, *internal*
rationalisations, and pass them on.  The anti-Japanese sentiment was largely
*ex*ternal.  

response 166 of 232:

Jan 27 03:01 UTC 2003

  By that argument would whites in Fargo, ND, who presumably have
  comparatively little day-to-day contact with blacks, be less likely
  to hold racist attitudes towards blacks than whites in Atlanta?

  It certainly sounds like a reasonable theory, but one of the paramount
  characteristics of the most severe racism is its irrationality / 
  unreasonableness..

response 168 of 232:

Jan 27 03:57 UTC 2003

re resp:158: I can claim affirmative action doesn't work because I
believe it's had *very* little effect for such a widespread system.

response 170 of 232:

Jan 27 13:59 UTC 2003

Re #166: It's hard to say.  There's also the fact that people tend to be
suspicious of people who are "not like them", and to someone from Fargo
a black person would be very conspicuously "not like them".

response 172 of 232:

Jan 27 15:37 UTC 2003

        Re #166:  Very much so, if there was no cultural overlap whatsoever;
however I'd be willing to bet the average inhabitant of Fargo sees quite a
bit of biased information on television and hears a lot of black American
culture on the radio.

response 174 of 232:

Jan 27 18:25 UTC 2003

That is true. However it was not just those that were helped that were
interviewed. Only some of those interviewed were helped by AA. In any
case, I am glad that you agree that SOME system of help is desirable.  Do
you have a suggestion for a better one than AA to increase diversity in
the public college system? 

response 176 of 232:

Jan 27 19:35 UTC 2003

re resp:174: I'd agree a system was desirable if it met three criteria:

1) Has a likelihood of providing results which justify the effort put 
into the program.  (Affirmative action doesn't satisfy this.)

2) Does not too intrusively discriminate against those who are not it's 
targets.  (Quotas and other current affirmative action efforts are too 
intrusive in my opinion.)

3) Does not cost too much.  (Mandatory bussing was expensive, didn't 
work *and* was too intrusive.  Payouts to "families of former slaves" 
would be too expensive.)

No, I do not know of anything that would fit all of my criteria.  This 
does not justify bad systems that are being used now.  It's better to 
do nothing than to do something ineffective and/or harmful.

response 180 of 232:

Jan 27 21:11 UTC 2003

That is actually true, for the majority, like you. But it matters to
the discriminated against minorities.

Re #178: you make the fundamental mistake in not realizing that admission
to Public universtities NEED NOT be based entirely on "academic merit". In
addition to factors like parental alumni, and location (e.g., UP), there
are other factors such as leadership, demographic status, character, etc,
which are important to provide educational opportunities to a cross
section of the public. 

response 182 of 232:

Jan 27 23:45 UTC 2003

Re #176:  I can see already that #2 is your escape clause.  You'd
probably consider any program that had any effect at all to be "too
intrusive."

Re #181: I'll point out once again that the points awarded based on race
are *not* "higher than the rest", and that won't be true no matter how
many times people repeat it.  Athletes, for example, also get 20 points.  

I think people on the right are hoping that if they repeat this bit of
misinformation enough times it will attain "Big Lie" status and be
assumed to be true.

response 184 of 232:

Jan 28 00:49 UTC 2003

re resp:182: Any program which takes away 3 whatevers from general 
Americans to give 2 whatevers to minorities is going to be too 
intrusive for me.

In this discussion it's college degrees, and that's just about what the 
U-M does do.  The university gives 3 general population degrees to 
minorities in order to get 2 degrees for the minorities.  (Affirmative 
action minorities drop out that much more than students admitted 
without the bonus.)  I think that's not good.  In fact, I think it's 
awful.

Are you having trouble countering what I say?  You appear to have 
decided, since I disagree with you, to just assume it's got to be bad 
faith on my part no matter what I say unless I change my position to 
match yours.  I think I've supported what I've said well enough, and I 
think my position is pretty reasonable.  I don't think I've given you 
any cause to attack my character or good will.  I'm disappointed that 
you've dropped away from your generally good statements and gone in 
that direction.

response 188 of 232:

Jan 28 01:08 UTC 2003

Have you done an ananalysis to show whether the dropout rates are higher for
minority enrollees who wouldn't have been admitted without the bonus points
than for minority enrollees who would have been admitted anyway, or is that
just an assumption?