A common misconception, the classic the Civil War was fought over slavery, bull sh*t, slavery was one of many issues that started the civil war which were: economic deferences, States rights, Federal supremacy, slavery, and a few other things. Slavery was not the end all issue of the war, in fact the Lincoln said that ending the war and reuniting the US was more important than the issue of Slavery, it was the point that most pointed out the differences in the north and the south. However the most important issue was states rights, slavery just happened to be the best example of how the south viewed the north nullifying there right to have property and move it where they want.

Ok DT, I bite who the hell is Che, I have no idea who he is and I would like to know who he is and what he did.

------------------
"Think of all the delightful aspects of the reproductive process: menstruation, pregnancy, labor. And the part we're trying to eliminate is sex?" Cecil Adams the guy who does Straight Dope.

And yet we question whether the those fact somehow let white slave holders off the hook. Not by a long shot.

What do we owe a people after 200 years or so of forced involuntary servitude? And then even after that, 100 more years where the constitutional rights guaranteed them were denied by a series of state laws (Jim Crow laws), private hate groups (the Klan), and yes, a government who sat by why it's citizens were hung and denied edutation.

What do we owe them? A whole hell of a lot. It may not be in terms of money, for I think that people think of monitary compensation far too quickly. We at the very least owe them an opportunity to succeed. And that opportunity needs to come from the sectors that kept them at the bottom of society for too long.

Ask me what success is and what leads to it and I'll say education. Most white folk will as well I think. That's becase I come from a class and a culture where education is valued and seen as very important. However, (and by no means should this be interpreted al la that famous book, the Bell Curve and blacks are any less capable of of learning than whites) after being denied the right to read by slaveholders and denied access to education (or at least equal education), it becomes clear that education is much farther down on the list of social / sub-cultural importance.

So what you say, they have equal opportunity now don't they? I would argue that blacks all across the United States to not have the equality of opportunity that whites do. There are reasons for this. Firstly, whites are at the top of the power food chain and are very loath to give up any of that power to anyone. The Jim Crow laws and the rise of the Klan in the late 19th century and early 20th century point to that, and the rise of the more recent racist milita groups are emblematic of the fact that minorities have gained some enroads into the power structure and some white folk don't like that too much.

Secondly, it takes time to change a culture. How long has it been since the Civil Rights movement began? 40 years or so? Is that long enough for a society as a whole to change and accept the fact that minorities are American citizens and grant them the rights deserved? It seems the answer is still no. Is 40 years enough time for that sub-culture denied educational access to change it's priorities to fall more in line with the majority opinion of success? The answer, while it might not be an absolute no, is certainly not yet.

Afirmative action may not be a perfect plan. To be sure there are many flaws in the system. However, and this is a BIG however, affirmative action regarding educational access is very important in that it allows entrance to university for many for whom they are first generation in their family to go to school. They in turn have the chance to go back into the communtiy to build up the knowledge database as it were to the importance of education. Moreover, their children are more likley to go to university. It's better than sitting on our hands as a society and saying let them claw their own damn selves up.

The conservative backlash against such programs as affirmative action shows to me the fact that they want equality in name only. In other words, they shout "equality, equality," but also to remain on the top of the heap. First among equals is a fallacy.

And lord knows I could, but I ain't about to argue the casue of the Civil War, this is not the thread for it, beyond to say that slavery was the central issue in the casues of the war.

------------------
Smithers, do you realize if I had died, there would be no one to carry on my legacy. Due to my hectic schedule and lethargic sperm, I never fathered an heir. Now I have no one to leave my enormous fortune to. No one.
~C. Montgomery Burns

Like many historical figures, he bacame more important in death as a symbol. To some a symbol to struggle against oppressive governments. To others he was a symbol to try even harder to stamp out insurgents.

"Let me ask you this, how many black billionaires are there? How many CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are black? Hispanic? Native American?"

You realize that this is the case even WITH affirmative action in schools? Here's a suggestion: colleges should be allowed to let people in based on their grades. How does that sound? As it is, black kids are going to get a free ride, and get in no matter how low their grades are. They have no motivation to excell. But if you let schools do as they please, then black kids are going to have to work just as hard as everyone else to get in (unless, of course, you believe they really ARE'NT as intelligent as white folk), and they'll have a reason to do so. It's just the same as the communist beliefs you claim to have abandoned. Everyone gets the same reward, no matter how wall or badly they do. Does anyone else like the idea of being rewarded based on the merit of your work? I certainly do.

Any kid who gets into college without knowing what he needs to know first is not going to get much out of it. So even with a college degree, the kid won't know much about how to get along in the world. THAT, I submit, is why there are so few rich black people. Because they never had to work hard to get anywhere, so they never learned that that's required in the real world.

"Incidentally, it was also white people who committed the greatest act of genocide ever, destruction of the Natives. Do you deny this?"

That it was purposeful, yes. Most of the natives that died died from diseases that the europeans didn't even know they were carrying. Besides, there were, what, one million natives in all the Americas? Two, at most. And not all of them died, by a long shot. I'm pretty sure that more Jews died during the Haulocaust. Oh, and the people Stalin killed. Heck, more people are starving to death in China (a communist country, I might add; I thought everyone was supposed to have food under communism?) than that. Hardly the greatest act of genocide ever. And you might be interested to know that there are more native americans alive today than there were in Columbus' time.

HMS:

Pretty good. South Carolina seceded because Lincoln was elected, and they thought he was going to outlaw slavery. The irony was that he had no intention of doing so, and their succession probably hastened the end of slavery by a good bit.

Che Gueverra was a revolutionary/terrorist (depends on if you win or not; he did both) in south and central America. He helped Castro overthrow the Cuban government.

"I bet you didn't know this one Omega, there were black slave holders in the south."

As a matter of fact, I had read that.

"And yet we question whether the those fact somehow let white slave holders off the hook. Not by a long shot."

Uh, you may not know this, but I've got news for you. The white slaveholders are already off the hook. They're all dead! To quote Data, "In 2036, the New United Nations declared that no Earth citizin could be made to answer for the crimes of their race or forbearers." Do you not like this idea? If not, maybe we should hold blacks from one part of Africa responsible for Shakka the Great, hmm? Or Germans responsible for Hitler. I don't see the difference.

"We at the very least owe them an opportunity to succeed. And that opportunity needs to come from the sectors that kept them at the bottom of society for too long."

That's what I suggest we give them. But as long as affirmative action is in place, they won't have it. See the first part of this post.

You know, liberals seem to be stuck in the past. Yes, there WERE Jim Crow laws, and there WAS slavery, but they aren't there today! The only thing stopping black people from getting an equal education is a lack of motivation, which is caused by affirmative action!

You also seem to think that the members of a minor portion of a group can represent an entire group. Just because the Klan exists, with all of ten thousand or so members, that doesn't mean that there's a streak of racism through the entire white population. As I told DT last night, there's a fundamental law of humanity that applies here:

Among the members of any group above a certain minimal size, there will always be people who hate members of a different group for no rational reason. The only exception comes when being a member of that group precludes hating another group.

This is invariable. There are black people who hate white people just as much as the Klan hates them. But they're a minority, too.

"Secondly, it takes time to change a culture."

Agreed. What you're missing, however, is the fact that you're trying to force the change that takes place in the integration of both cultures. That can't be done. Another fundamental law of humanity is that when a person has an opinion, and someone else tries to change that opinion, that person's opinion will almost always end up strengthened, not weakened. People have to change their minds on their own. You can't legislate morality.

"They in turn have the chance to go back into the communtiy to build up the knowledge database as it were to the importance of education."

Not if they don't learn anything in college, as they probably wouldn't if they didn't know at least most of what they needed to know to get in to begin with.

"It's better than sitting on our hands as a society and saying let them claw their own damn selves up."

Why? People don't learn anything by being given things all their lives, except to expect to keep being helped along. The entire idea of school is to claw your way up. That's how the world in general works. Just being passed through school does no good. You have to LEARN what they teach, or the school has failed. If you graduate high school without being able to read, there's something seriously wrong with that school. If you graduate first grade without being able to read, there's something seriously wrong with that school. There are requirements for getting into college for a reason. If you don't meet those requirements, then you shouldn't get in. Period. Otherwise, it won't do you any good, and it'll just be a waste of everyone else's time. The key isn't letting black people into college. The key is their learning what they need to know. No one can force them to do that. They have to desire it. A few good teachers might help there, but that's mainly a parent's job.

"The conservative backlash against such programs as affirmative action shows to me the fact that they want equality in name only."

Funny, it shows me that we have a far better idea of how the world works than you do. As I've shown, affirmative action does no good. Going to school does good only as long as you want to learn. Everyone has an equal opportunity to learn. What they do with it is their decision. 'Bout the only thing schools can help with there is motivation. Kids need to be told that if they work hard (emphasis on that) and get the best education they possibly can, they can be whatever they want to be. And they need to be told that over and over.

Your liberal view of the world is either too simplistic or completely insidious. Just because I disagree with your methods doesn't mean I disagree with your goals. It just means that I think that my methods of reaching those goals work better, or that yours don't work at all.

As for Che, I guess that encyclopedia article isn't worth all that much, eh? It didn't mention a thing about his being something of a hero to terrorists/revolutionaries.

------------------
You are wise, witty, and wonderful, but you spend far too much time reading this sort of trash.

I do. Let's apply it to Christianity as well, rather than this 'saved by grace' hooey. Works, kids, let the disbelievers have a shot at it, too.

------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson

"As for Che, I guess that encyclopedia article isn't worth all that much, eh? It didn't mention a thing about his being something of a hero to terrorists/revolutionaries."

Yeah, encyclopedias are like comic books for the mind.

"Not if they don't learn anything in college, as they probably wouldn't if they didn't know at least most of what they needed to know to get in to begin with."

What are you, simple?

Since you have never been to college, let me explain things to you. It ain't high school. You don't get a free ride in college. Once admitted you do what is necessary to stay there or you go home.

So, like duh, if ya don't learn you don't get to graduate. So, it is clear that the opportunity is a chance to succeed. They don't give you a diploma for showing up.

Having worked with students who were admitted with either less than perfect grades or SAT scores, once there some failed to do what was required to stay there and were send home. However, those who did stay succeeded on their own terms. As they learned they grew. Many became mentors to other students. Several went on to higher degrees.

As to the rest of your tripe, why bother?

In other threads, Sol and others showed you flaws in you arguments and you ignored those and went ahead with the dogma of your talk radio conservatism. As for me, I have shown you the other side of the argument about minorities and access and you spout the same arguments that we've all heard before that basically says screw 'em, I've got mine and I going to do my damnest to make sure that no one else gets any. And say that my world view is insidious?

Continue lock step all you want down your fascist road. Perhaps someday you'll come to see that the world is a complicated place and your thinking will match the depth that it requires.

Sorry, forgot to put in a new header.

"Since you have never been to college, let me explain things to you. It ain't high school. You don't get a free ride in college. Once admitted you do what is necessary to stay there or you go home."

So this so-called "affirmative action" doesn't put any pressure on schools to actually have minorities GRADUATE, just to admit them?

"As to the rest of your tripe, why bother? In other threads, Sol and others showed you flaws in you arguments..."

Not that I've found, so either I have a memory that's alot worse than I think, or you're wrong. Name one flaw in the argument that affirmative action removes motivation.

"...dogma of your talk radio conservatism."

I don't believe I've heard Rush talk about affirmative action yet. I've only listened for a few months. It's common sense talking.

"As for me, I have shown you the other side of the argument about minorities and access and you spout the same arguments that we've all heard before..."

Well, let's see here. There was the one about how a kid who's ancestors have never been to college needs an advantage to get there, but that doesn't really make sense, since whether their parents went to college or not will have little if any effect on their SAT scores. How they did in twelve years of school determines that. Then there was... hmm, I can't find any other arguments about how minorities don't have the access white people do. Just the same statements on how people who had the same color skin as I do mistreated black people a couple of centuries ago, and I should pay for that, even though they weren't related to me.

Tell me: you believe that blacks have a disadvantage in society. Why? Who gives them that disadvantage? It's not the government. The extremely small minority of racists in the population can't have much to do with it. So what is it?

And YOU never responded to MY question: why should someone who's great-great-grandfather was mistreated by someone who happened to have the same color skin as I do, but is not related to be in the slightest, have an economic and educational advantage over me? Do I need to carry around papers showing that my ancestors never owned slaves, so I won't have to suffer a disadvantage?

"...basically says screw 'em, I've got mine and I going to do my damnest to make sure that no one else gets any."

Where the heck do you get these ideas, anyway? Oh, wait, I forgot. You actually BELIEVE liberal propeganda. As I have said several times before, I have no problem with black people earning money. I DO, however, have a problem with someone being given something when they haven't earned it, because it does them more harm than good.

Oh, well. Continue lock step all you want down your socialist road. Perhaps someday you'll come to see that the world is a complicated place and your thinking will match the depth that it requires.

"So this so-called "affirmative action" doesn't put any pressure on schools to actually have minorities GRADUATE, just to admit them?"

Yeah, no shit.

Some of the kids I worked with don't make the grades. Which also works towards you lame lack of motivation argument. Once again, just to be clear on the subject, if the student does not get the required grades the student is gone. In case you missed it in the precious post "So, like duh, if ya don't learn you don't get to graduate. So, it is clear that the opportunity is a chance to succeed. They don't give you a diploma for showing up. I'm sure you will find that out should you ever go to college. It isn't eary for anyone. Now, has that penetrated that extra thick Cro-Magnon skull yet?

In fact, lets continue with this...the afirmative action programs as they existed didn't kidnap people off the street. No, and nor do they just throw everyone who applied throgh the program into college. But we'll just ignore that like we do the rest cause it don't fit you dogma.

Moreover, were you to have experience with the people in such programs, you would find out that they are incredibly motivated. Their family often places a great deal of presure on them to be the first to graduate college.

I swear, some day it's going to dawn on you that there has been as systemic attempt to keep minorities in their collective place. But no, conservative types are so quick to use the "most persecuted group of people in all history are white, Christian males and it is about time they started to fight back against their oppressors." argument.

"Some people say we have a color-blind society," Powell said in his commencement address to the historically black university. "But it's not yet. Some people say we have a level playing field, but we don't yet. Some say all you have to do is pull yourself up by the bootstraps, but there are too many people who don't have boots, let alone straps."
~Colin L. Powell

Good lord, did he say that?? Maybe that's what the far out wacko Republicans don't like him.

Oh, and try this one: "We (black people) are said to receive undeserved special privileges, while we know that hardly a single white would willingly trade places with us today."
~Deval L. Patrick, U.S. DOJ attorney general for civil rights

"I don't believe I've heard Rush..."

So, you do listen to him...I was right. LOL!!

"Continue lock step all you want down your socialist road."

Come now, be more original than that.

------------------
Smithers, do you realize if I had died, there would be no one to carry on my legacy. Due to my hectic schedule and lethargic sperm, I never fathered an heir. Now I have no one to leave my enormous fortune to. No one.
~C. Montgomery Burns

One thing we have to keep in mind about conservatives is that their definition of someone who isn't racist is: someone who ain't lynch up a darkie lately. So by that token, most people aren't racists. I'll give Omega that.

Also, as can be easily seen, it's obvious that he's still a high school kid who has no idea what the real world is like. When I was that age, I thought affirmative action sucks. Now, I realize that it is a flawed program, but the best we've come up with. So I'm gonna cut the kid some slack.

He's also shown that he has absolutely no idea how college works. It's not the goal of the college to have anyone pass. As a Professor once told me, their job is to make you enthusiastic about the material, present it to you so you can understand it, and then help you if you want to be helped. This ain't high school.

Omega has, however, brought up an interesting point. That is we need to work on getting better education to the inner city youths at an early age. As such, I believe we should begin diverting more money to improving inner city schools (certain liberal programs provide "combat bonuses" to those who teach in the inner city). To begin with, we can stop diverting more money to the military than every other power combined does. If we cut off, say, 50 billion, (which, incidentally, is more than the UK spends, and would bring the US down to still well over 200 billion per year) we can send that to these inner city schools. Or, more precisely, formula grants, determined by a federal agency established to improve inner city schools.

Pretty much everything else is conservative rhetoric we've already shot down, but I will talk more about Che.

Kudos Jay for that one! Che Guevera is generally considered to be the patron saint of revolutionaries. His guerilla warfare tactics, albeit not as advanced as the VC's, are copied all over Latin America. More importantly, Gueveraism, an offshoot of Marxism and a dead-end, is the prevailing political philosophy in Mexico and elsewhere (it differs from Maoism in that Gueverism emphasizes the workers over the peasants, thus being the reason it is dominant over Maoism, albeit both a dead-end). Yes, Omega couldn't tell you that. He also couldn't find Chiapas on the map, nor would he be able to identify Subcommandant Marcos if he tripped over him. And I'm glad to see Jay picked up on my subtle Bush reference. Gueverism was the "reason" George Bush needed to sell crack cocaine to the inner cities. (hey, that's not fair! white youths should have had first crack at buying crack!)

------------------
"Here is another word that rhymes with shame" - Kurt Cobain
Blew, Nirvana

China is not a communist country. There has never been one. Even Maoists say that China is not communist. Gawd... how many times do I have to say it. China is about as communist as the US is.

------------------
"Here is another word that rhymes with shame" - Kurt Cobain
Blew, Nirvana

"Yeah, no shit."

One, please watch your language. Two, maybe I should have made it clear that I wasn't being sarcastic. You actually just told me exactly what I wanted to hear.

Hypothetical situation one: A black kid is admitted to a college through affirmative action. He doesn't know some of the material he should, but he's motivated enough to go back and learn it in his spare time. He passes all classes, and graduates. If he's that motivated, would it not make sense that, with a little more effort, he could have gotten in normally by taking the SAT (or whatever test this particular school uses, since I assume they don't ALL use the SAT), even if it took a few tries? And if he DID have to take the test multiple times, he'd be likely to learn quite a bit from the studying he'd do.

Hypothetical situation two: A black kid is admitted to a college through affirmative action. He doesn't know some of the material, and isn't motivated enough to go back and study. He fails some nesecary classes and goes home. If he couldn't have gotten in normally by taking the SAT, and wasn't motivated enough to go back and study, then he probably wouldn't have been motivated enough to take the SAT multiple times so he could get in without affirmative action.

So assuming those two situations are accurate, the people who get into college on affirmative action and pass could have gotten in anyway, and the people who get in and fail probably wouldn't have gotten in, making their forced presence a waste of time and money. Affirmative action does no good, because everything in life is about motivation. If someone thinks that they don't have to do as well as everyone else to get by, they're not going to try as hard, and thus not learn as much. I'd bet that if you took two identical colleges, one with affirmative action, one without, who drew students from two identical school systems, the one without affirmative action would have MORE black graduates. The ones in the school without AA (as affirmative action will be hereafter refered to) (and yes, I know it stands for acloholics anonymus) would know they'll need to work harder than the ones at the school with AA. The students motivated enough to want to get into college will also be motivated enough to pass the test, no matter how hard. Those in the system WITH AA that are motivated will still be motivated, but only to do what they have to. Which means they'll only shoot for the lower standard, and won't learn as much.

"I swear, some day it's going to dawn on you that there has been as systemic attempt to keep minorities in their collective place."

Some day it's going to dawn on you how much you sound like that nutcase Jim Carville. "It's a right-wing conspiracy, Larry." Right. Just like the attempt to get rid of Nixon before he resigned was a left-wing conspiracy. A systematic attempt by whom? The Klan, with all their thousands upon thou-
well, thousands of members? Hmm? Who?

"But no, conservative types are so quick to use the "most persecuted group of people in all history are white, Christian males and it is about time they started to fight back against their oppressors." argument."

You two seem to assume a lot of things are true that you have no evidence for. I doubt you could find one person who believed that. Well, since we are on the internet, I'll grant you the one, but one rational person. This is so stupid and baseles I'm not even going to bother responding.

"So, you do listen to him...I was right. LOL!!"

Uh, you think that might have something to do with the fact that I SAID I listen to him a couple debates back?

Well, it was such a great line. I hated to see it so badly applied, though, so I had to use it properly somehwere. I'd love to hear your definition of facist, too.

DT:

"One thing we have to keep in mind about conservatives is that their definition of someone who isn't racist is: someone who ain't lynch up a darkie lately."

*ahem*

WHERE THE HECK DO YOU GET THESE STUPID IDEAS?!? AND ANSWER ME THIS TIME! TELL ME WHERE YOU HEAR THIS BASELESS CRAP!

*calms down*

Sorry, I just don't like being accused of something that you have no evidence for, and when your only reason for accusing me is because all the liberal propeganda you've been fed tells you that all conservatives are racist, simply by virtue of being conservative, it get's worse. You two are more racist than I am, simply because you actually care about race. A racist is someone who discriminates based on ancestory, usually distant. That's you. Whether you discriminate in favor of a minority or not is irrelevant. I couldn't care less, nor could most conservatives.

"it's obvious that he's still a high school kid... When I was that age... So I'm gonna cut the kid some slack."

DT, I will ask you one more time to kindly shut up about my age. My age is irrelevant. And even if it was relevant, you're only seventeen, yourself.

"Omega has, however, brought up an interesting point. That is we need to work on getting better education to the inner city youths at an early age."

Are you saying you agree with me?!

*world implodes*

Now look what you've done!

"I believe we should begin diverting more money to improving inner city schools..."

Why is it that liberals think the solution to everything is more money? It's like going to a doctor for a headache. If he gives you two asprin, and they don't work, he's not just going to give you four more. Hard work is the answer, not money. In my area, the city is spending something like $7,000 per kid in public schools. That's twice the tuition of private schools in the area. Throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it. You need someone who knows what they're doing running things to solve a problem. All the money in the world can't help incompetence.

"To begin with, we can stop diverting more money to the military than every other power combined does."

Oh, yeah. In the face of a country with four times our population, who was just sold two or three decades of nuclear technology by a certain leader who shall remain nameless, and within three or four years will be able to nuke any city on the planet, let's cut military spending. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. If you want more money, cut taxes. It's called supply-side economics. Check the records on the Regan admin. It works.

*remembers a parody*

It's time to play "Your Price is Right"!

Al: Pakistan's Mahat n'Masandals, India's Alligot Ismulah, and China's I'Bring Do, come on down! Let's see what our first item up for bids is. Ohh, it's some super-secret satelite technology that can be used to hook classrooms up to the internet...

Bill: Or to target those classrooms with thermonuclear weapons. Ha ha. But it will stop those kids from smoking!

*L*

I know I don't speak from experience since I've never been in the army. I also know that those methods (as harsh as they seem) are necessary to accomplish the goals you stated. I just find it revolting that people would be willing to submit to such treatments. A "Necessary Evil" of sorts. Feel free to say want you think but don't flame that much.

By the way, I don't even know why I talked about the military in the first place ... I always make an a**hole of myself...

First of Two: What do you mean? It is real! The movie said so ! By the way, I'm a big 20 years old kid who doesn't understand anything about the whole thread dealing with US politics nor do I want to know. Too complicated to me .

------------------
-If you ask me, I think continuity is highly overrated...
*Brannon Braga*

"Tell me: you believe that blacks have a disadvantage in society. Why? Who gives them that disadvantage? It's not the government. The extremely small minority of racists in the population can't have much to do with it. So what is it?"

"And YOU never responded to MY question: why should someone who's great-great-grandfather was mistreated by someone who happened to have the same color skin as I do, but is not related to be in the slightest, have an economic and educational advantage over me? Do I need to carry around papers showing that my ancestors never owned slaves, so I won't have to suffer a disadvantage?"

Anyone have answers? Anyone?

TerraZ:

"Looks like a typical brainwashed soldier to me, ready to do what and ONLY what we tell him."

Well, you know, there's a reason for this.

"Target missiles at the enemy base and fire!"
"Yes, sir! Target destroyed. Oh, and I took the liberty of destroying ths surrounding city, too. I hope nobody minds."

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"I'm still amazed at how unintuitive the Windows world is and how it tries to mimic the Mac." - John de Lancie

Anyway, he went to a cross-training session at Fort Bragg, and spent some time with the Rangers, and Delta Force troopers. When they were done, some Rangers came back to Canada for more cross-training. The JTF-2 guy was the chaperone for some the Rangers, and by chance, I got to go to a hockey game with them.

ANYWAY, I spent a bit talking to them, (Usually answered with 'that's classified. I'm not sure if they were joking or not.) Anyway, they seemed to be quite laid-back, and not 'brainwashed' or anything like that.

So, I guess the point of this grotesquely long message is that in every instance that I've ever met anybody from the Military, US or otherwise, I haven't met any that qualify for 'brainwashing' or mindless servants, even the Green Berets, which would most likely be portrayed as.