A few thoughts on rascism / affirmative action

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

Your scenario was about choosing between two identically qualified candidates, right? AA laws basically force the company to hire the black one, and you are saying this is unfortunate because race is being forced upon the employer as a factor when it shouldn't be.


[/ QUOTE ]

AA laws don't force you to hire the black guy when all things are equal. That is a common misconception, and it may be different in some states due to local laws, but as far as I know, AA simply attempts to prevent you from discrimination due to race, creed, gender, etc.

If you hire the most qualified candidate, or close to equal candidate, you aren't going to get in any trouble under AA, no matter the colors involved.

However....if you pass over a black guy with a doctorate in medicine and 10 years residency for a white ambulance driver for the hospital administrator position....then you're probably going to be explaining it to a judge.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Your scenario was about choosing between two identically qualified candidates, right? AA laws basically force the company to hire the black one, and you are saying this is unfortunate because race is being forced upon the employer as a factor when it shouldn't be.


[/ QUOTE ]

AA laws don't force you to hire the black guy when all things are equal. That is a common misconception, and it may be different in some states due to local laws, but as far as I know, AA simply attempts to prevent you from discrimination due to race, creed, gender, etc.

If you hire the most qualified candidate, or close to equal candidate, you aren't going to get in any trouble under AA, no matter the colors involved.

However....if you pass over a black guy with a doctorate in medicine and 10 years residency for a white ambulance driver for the hospital administrator position....then you're probably going to be explaining it to a judge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What would AA say about an employer hiring for 10 positions, has 30 equal candidates 10 of whom are black, but hires all non-blacks (say theres an Asian and an Indian and Middle Eastern hired in there)?

Is that prima facie evidence of discrimination? Im asking because in 35 years of business I have seen only one hiring decision made based on race/ethnicity and that was to hire an equally qualified black woman in a small company that encouraged diversity to begin with.

[magoo]

Amazing. It took all those paragrahs to state a basic Rush Limbaugh principle.

DON'T click the picture on this link if you are a scary type person. http://www.muslimsout.org/videos/Videos.htm

[TaintedRogue]

Discrimination is a thing of the past......
60 yrs ago, we'd call 100 white guys with clubs, chasing 1 black the KKK. Today we call it the PGA Tour. Go to any tour event, and you'll find 20K white people cheering on 1 black guy to beat 100 white guys..........

[briddle]

Wow, this post got long on me. That's what happens when you challenge a philosophy major to argue with your points, [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

As an underprivileged young white male from Metro Detroit with a very conservative background, let me just say as a general comment that yes, racism does still exist. All of my immediate family members are racist, as are most of my closest friends and their immediate family members. That doesn't mean that they don't watch sports, or that they necessarily cheer for white people ahead of black people. It's more of a "have a nice day" racism. They try to keep it in, but they still have strong, typically negative emotional reactions to people based solely on skin color.

That is my understanding of why affirmative action exists. It is not an attempt to keep employers from hiring whites who are smarter than blacks, it is an attempt to do two things:

1) It's an attempt to get employers and people in general to stop believing the stereotype that white people are smarter because they're white. There is no way to logically equate the color of someone's skin to intelligence. To pretend that there is a link is ridiculous -- it's looking for patterns where none exist. Creating more diversified workplaces and schools will help people to realize this when they have a wider range of experiences with the other races in question. While equating intelligence (or inclination to theft, drunkeness, drug abuse, etc) to skin color is very difficult logically, making the connection based on economic/social status is a lot easier, which leads us to...

2) It's an attempt to make up for the inherent inequities in the system based on the fact that non-caucasians (especially African Americans) have been discriminated against for a long time. Even if you believe that racism no longer exists, it's verifiable that it did at one. These past inequities, in which the completely under-qualified white was given the job over a well-qualified black, led to the current situation in which African Americans are made to start at a disadvantage due to economic hardship almost across the board.

So, let's bring this back to your argument for a moment, hmkpoker. You seem to be arguing that, because the people applying for the same job are likely to be from a similar socio-economic background, we are taking the job from the white schmo and giving it to the black schmo simply on the basis of his skin color. For the sake of argument, I will grant you this premise (although I disagree). I still believe that AA is equitable/just/fair (or however you want to phrase it), and here are my reasons:

1) The poor white schmo is more likely, based simply on the distribution of white SES, to be a poor schmo because of his personal choices or as a direct result of the choices of his parents. Take me, as a personal example. My grandparents on both sides were well-off and educated, and better than 75% of my uncles and aunts and cousins are as well. My parents met at Bible college, failed to find employment in any religious capacity and took a variety of low-paying jobs. They are mired in debt due to poor personal financial choices. Now imagine that my dad is applying for the same job as a black man who has never had a person in his family tree who could be considered well-off. Your average African American is not likely to be a poor schmo because of his personal choices, but rather because of the SES distribution of African Americans. Thus, statistically, he is much more likely to be there due to circumstances relating back orginially to racism/slavery.

2) Here in the Detroit area, it is extremely segregated, so my experience may be far from typical, but my family members don't really come into contact with very many minorities (and they're friends with none). This allows them to believe stereotypes with impugnity because their faulty beliefs are never challenged. This is the other reason I believe that AA is fair in this situation -- if it helps the other people in the majority-white work place (if it weren't majority white, they wouldn't be concerned with AA, after all) come into contact with more minorities, it should, in the long-run (we're talking EV-style long-run here) lead to a more equitable, non-stereotyping society.

Once the AA system has done its job (if it ever does), it will help to move more black family lines into better economic positions, leading to a more integrated society in which people aren't judged by skin color, and AA is no longer necessary. Thus, while the short-term, close-up "the white guy and black guy have equal SES" view may make the situation appear unjust, the 50,000 foot approach looks better, imho.

FWIW, I was originally very strongly against AA, and I do strive to keep an open mind. If you wish to continue the argument, I would be more than happy to do so.

EDIT to add: I'm not terribly familiar with employment AA, my response was based more on the college admissions-style AA where applicants are shown more favor due to minority status. I'm not sure if any employment AA works like that or not...

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
1) It's an attempt to get employers and people in general to stop believing the stereotype that white people are smarter because they're white. There is no way to logically equate the color of someone's skin to intelligence. To pretend that there is a link is ridiculous -- it's looking for patterns where none exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a well-known correlation between IQ scores and race, and last I checked I think whites were nearly one SD above on average. Correctly establishing the casual basis, however, is tricky to do, and the AA advocates as well as the stat racists don't understand how to do it.

[ QUOTE ]
Creating more diversified workplaces and schools will help people to realize this when they have a wider range of experiences with the other races in question.

[/ QUOTE ]

My girlfriend, who was struggling to maintain her 3.6 GPA requirement to keep her scholarship, was not too happy about the black kid who got a free ride and had to maintain a whopping 2.5.

[ QUOTE ]
These past inequities, in which the completely under-qualified white was given the job over a well-qualified black, led to the current situation in which African Americans are made to start at a disadvantage due to economic hardship almost across the board.

[/ QUOTE ]

Common sense tells us that a business that hires underqualified individuals is doomed to failure. The incentive to hire good workers is inherent in capitalism.

[ QUOTE ]
1) The poor white schmo is more likely, based simply on the distribution of white SES, to be a poor schmo because of his personal choices or as a direct result of the choices of his parents.

[/ QUOTE ]

...

What the hell is this based on? White people have to take responsibility for their poor SES, but black people don't? Couldn't we just as easily say that blacks are more predisposed to making poor personal choices?

[ QUOTE ]
2) Here in the Detroit area, it is extremely segregated, so my experience may be far from typical, but my family members don't really come into contact with very many minorities (and they're friends with none). This allows them to believe stereotypes with impugnity because their faulty beliefs are never challenged. This is the other reason I believe that AA is fair in this situation -- if it helps the other people in the majority-white work place (if it weren't majority white, they wouldn't be concerned with AA, after all) come into contact with more minorities, it should, in the long-run (we're talking EV-style long-run here) lead to a more equitable, non-stereotyping society.

[/ QUOTE ]

So using distribution/placement methods for some and not others will make us all love each other? Do you think ignorant white people are going to take kindly to the darkie who just got an office position because of AA?

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT to add: I'm not terribly familiar with employment AA, my response was based more on the college admissions-style AA where applicants are shown more favor due to minority status. I'm not sure if any employment AA works like that or not...

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, actually. I'm just arguing from principle [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT to add: I'm not terribly familiar with employment AA, my response was based more on the college admissions-style AA where applicants are shown more favor due to minority status. I'm not sure if any employment AA works like that or not...

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, actually. I'm just arguing from principle [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Guys, AA in employment is nothing like what it sounds like you guys are describing in the college admissions aspect.

Put simply, there are no quotas, there is no favoritism to any minority race or gender, and discrimination is discrimination. The law explicitly outlines that you can't discriminate against anyone, white or black.

In fact, hiring an underqualified black person to fill self-imposed quotas instead of more qualified whites is just as much cause for discrimination suits as the opposite.

I'm not familiar with the AA aspect you guys describe in college, and it sounds like it relies alot on reverse discrimination, which is not right.

In fact, it almost sounds like AA is two totally different animals between employment and university.

[Riverman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT to add: I'm not terribly familiar with employment AA, my response was based more on the college admissions-style AA where applicants are shown more favor due to minority status. I'm not sure if any employment AA works like that or not...

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, actually. I'm just arguing from principle [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Guys, AA in employment is nothing like what it sounds like you guys are describing in the college admissions aspect.

Put simply, there are no quotas, there is no favoritism to any minority race or gender, and discrimination is discrimination. The law explicitly outlines that you can't discriminate against anyone, white or black.

In fact, hiring an underqualified black person to fill self-imposed quotas instead of more qualified whites is just as much cause for discrimination suits as the opposite.

I'm not familiar with the AA aspect you guys describe in college, and it sounds like it relies alot on reverse discrimination, which is not right.

In fact, it almost sounds like AA is two totally different animals between employment and university.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but my understanding is that most corporations impose de facto quotas on themselves in order to avoid possible litigation.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but my understanding is that most corporations impose de facto quotas on themselves in order to avoid possible litigation.

[/ QUOTE ]

A company can impose their own quotas I suppose, but if they employ discrimination to achieve they, then they aren't avoiding lawsuits, they are asking for them.

[FlFishOn]

[ QUOTE ]
1) It's an attempt to get employers and people in general to stop believing the stereotype that white people are smarter because they're white. There is no way to logically equate the color of someone's skin to intelligence.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a free country and you're within your rights to believe this but it's statistically false. There exists an unexplained gap between white and black intelligence. Pick a catagory, I know you can find data to prove my point. Take a random white man and a random black man. I'd wager that the white man stands a 50 to 100 fold greater likelyhood of having won a Nobel science prize. I'd further wager that the white man is 25-50% more likely to have graduated high school. Racism is a tiny portion of today's difference and only a modest factor 50 years ago.

I could go on but I never sway the Kool Aide drinkers.