A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

Court Rejects Schools Racist "Diversity" Agenda

Since there isn't a thread on this, there should be.

He was not quoted, but Roberts reportedly said in his opinion that "The best way to stop discrimination based on skin color is to stop discriminating based on skin color."

I'm all giddy. As a part Jewish, part Black, and part White dude, I'm happy to see that society is beginning to accept the premise that racism goes all ways.

BTW, the case involved the bussing of white students into a predominately black school. So, the people being discrimanted against in this case were the white kids, who would be bussed away from better schools. I have no doubt that the door is now open to fight the debilitating effects of affirmative action in the public sector based on this precedent.

Edit: Here is another, better article with the exact quote above.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

I am beginning to love the Roberts court. Critics of this ruling have said that this overturns Brown vs Board of Ed., yet Brown vs Board of Ed. ruled that you cannot send people to a school based on their race; exactaly what this decision held.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

Brown was a bad decision anyway.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Brown was a bad decision anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

how do you figure?

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
yet Brown vs Board of Ed. ruled that you cannot send people to a school based on their race

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it doesn't. Have you even read Brown? --- (it's really one of the more readable SCT decisions --- one of the primary audience was non-lawyers unlike most opinions of the court)

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brown was a bad decision anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

how do you figure?

[/ QUOTE ]
One of many reasons...

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Court Rejects Schools Racist "Diversity" Agenda

Since there isn't a thread on this, there should be.

He was not quoted, but Roberts reportedly said in his opinion that "The best way to stop discrimination based on skin color is to stop discriminating based on skin color."

I'm all giddy. As a part Jewish, part Black, and part White dude, I'm happy to see that society is beginning to accept the premise that racism goes all ways.

BTW, the case involved the bussing of white students into a predominately black school. So, the people being discrimanted against in this case were the white kids, who would be bussed away from better schools. I have no doubt that the door is now open to fight the debilitating effects of affirmative action in the public sector based on this precedent.

Edit: Here is another, better article with the exact quote above.

[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: I don't know anything about the law or the Supreme Court but I hear they're keeping some black folks down so it's okay by me.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

As a full-blooded, red-blooded Irish-American, I hope the court will someday address the discrimination I have encountered all of my adult life from people presuming I am some kind of a drunk (just because I happen to like a beer or two with dinner or poker). Heck they don't even give my raises any respect at all. It can be really frustrating sometimes, if you know what I mean.

edit: make that lunch, dinner or poker. Well, home from the casino, and at least I had a winning (although very frustrating) session. Ah well, time for bed.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Translation: I don't know anything about the law or the Supreme Court but I hear they're keeping some black folks down so it's okay by me.


[/ QUOTE ]

Translation: I can't win the arguement so I'm going to call the other guy a racist.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

To be more specific, Brown said you can't send a person to a separate school because of their race.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

It's funny you mention this research. There is more research which has been done recently suggests that you can't force people to get along by forcing them into close proximity. Sorry if the previous link didn't work, click on the link in this article. (The word Discovers.)

From the Abstract of the above linked scholarly article by a noted Harvard Sociologist:

[ QUOTE ]
In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic
diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests
that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust
(even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]

From the Abstract of the above linked scholarly article by a noted Harvard Sociologist:

[ QUOTE ]
In the short run, however, immigration and ethnic
diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests
that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust
(even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this may hold true on a small scale, but you don't have to look far for examples of this changing as you move up levels in a community.

EX: You and I are both exsubmariners. I'm sure there was at least one fellow submariner on one of your boats that pissed you right off almost like it was his job. Now on the boat, you'd give him little of your time/effort (aside from what was dutily RQD). Now lets say you pulled into a Liberty Port. Lets say, you happened across him in the "bar section" getting his arse kicked by 5 foreign dudes. Despite your personal distaste for him onboard, my bet is you, and your mates, would jump into the fray to save a shipmate.

A different example: I grew up in Brooklyn, NYC, in a very Italian Neighborhood. At the time, there was strong dislike (or at least it was portrayed that way) between young black guys and young Italian guys. (Fights and whatnot were standard for encroaching each other's "turf.") Now fast forward to both myself and a young black kid at Yankee Stadium cheering on the Yankees and we were all solid.

Another example: The stereotypical rivalry/dislike between Southerners/Texans and Northerners/Yankees. On 9/11, I'm pretty sure everyone from the South felt the same shock/horror/anger witnessing their fellow American's being murdered grandscale.

Back to the primary example: I don't agree at all with forcing people to coeducate via forced bussing or whatnot, but I do think society as a whole can/will/has benefited when different cultures/races/etc learn to coexist/trust, especially at younger ages when most prejudices are either discarded or learned.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

I like the ruling and think it is really basic...if you want to say a school has to be 15% black, 10% asian....etc then you are making the admissions to the school based on race (which is what they are saying you should not do). Basically, you just don't determine if someone can get in or not based on race....easy enough

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm happy to see that society is beginning to accept the premise that racism goes all ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for conservatives to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

But while I'm waiting, it's good to know you're gonna finally get a handle on that "black racism" problem. The black man has been keeping the white man down for far too long anyway. Hopefully, this decision will be a first step toward integrating white students into the better schools currently reserved only for black children. Who knows, we may now live to see white children going on into medicine, law, the sciences -- areas once reserved only for the children of black elites. Yep, thank goodness the iron fist of black racism is finally starting to crumble, so that white children can finally stand on an equal footing with Black America.

(Now, pardon me while I step through this looking glass.)


q/q

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm happy to see that society is beginning to accept the premise that racism goes all ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for conservatives to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

But while I'm waiting, it's good to know you're gonna finally get a handle on that "black racism" problem. The black man has been keeping the white man down for far too long anyway.

(Now, pardon me while I step through this looking glass.)


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

haha...are you crazy? Conservatives will unfortunately admit some of their supporters are racist, and so are some supporters of Liberals...your point is what that racism exist in many places?

And, now one type (or form) is better/worse than another [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
And, now one type (or form) is better/worse than another

[/ QUOTE ]

exsubmariner is asserting "equivalence" that flies in the face of reality and all of American history.

Furthermore, that assertion of "equivalence" is patently self-serving. It's only purpose is to say "well, yes, my side is racist but if I say everyone else is racist too, then everyone is equivalent and we can just ignore the racism question".

Hint: you don't have institutional segregation when all sides are "equivalent".


q/q

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for liberals to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

BTW, your pic is damned confusing. Keeps making me think you're a Republican.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still waiting for conservatives to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny that a SCOTUS decision that states that more factors than race need to be considered i.e. the decision can't solely be decided due to someone's race is called racist.

In Europe the term that we use for "affirmative action" is often called "positive discrimination." It would hardly be politically correct in the U.S. to call something what it actually is discrimination. BTW I've gone on record on this forum as stating that I'm for "affirmative action" on a limited basis. I have no illusions that on the limited basis I'm referring to I'm supporting discrimination based on race and/or gender when I support "affirmative action." At least I admit it though and don't hide behind some euphamistic baloney.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
At least I admit it though and don't hide behind some euphamistic baloney.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, affirmative action is a positive thing, it is trying to redress an injustice, not creating a new one! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, the case involved the bussing of white students into a predominately black school. So, the people being discrimanted against in this case were the white kids, who would be bussed away from better schools.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was no really "discrimination" here "against" white kids. There was "discrimination", at least in the sense that Seattle and Louisville were making classifications based on race, but there was absolutely no effort made by either school district to send "black kids to the better schools and white kids to the bad schools". The plans were put in place to achieve racial integration; ostensibly, since all of the schools were in the same district, each had equal access to the same funding -- "school quality" wasn't really at issue. In Seattle, something along the lines of 100 black children were displaced from their "first-choice" schools, which of course contradicts the notion that this policy was some kind of policy wrought from white-guilt to punish pale children. There were black students who were also bearing the brunt of the malevolent effects of these plans.

What schools students and their parents were choosing may or may not have involved concerns over quality; some students may have just wanted to go to school close to home, or where their friends were attending, or where their older siblings went, or close to where the parents work, etc. Again, all of these schools were inside the same district; these aren't state plans like METCO in Massachusetts, where minority students are (voluntarily) sent from urban inner city schools systems into suburban schools, which are better funded and seemingly of better quality; in both Seattle and Louisville, these are homogeneous and discrete school districts deciding how to place students within their own systems -- so in theory, the schools were funded relatively equally, given that they were all part of the same district.

As an aside, both Louisville and Seattle enacted completed voluntary integration plans; neither were compelled by courts to do so. So here we have a local school boards autonomously making decisions, and along come those "activist" judges from the federal government, meddling in the affairs of the local government -- and conservatives everywhere stand up and cheer. How interesting that the right-wing talking point machine is strangely silent about that intrusive and meddlesome federal government interfering with the affairs of unsuspecting locals, who just want to live their lives without those pushy, ivory tower judge types butting in.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

In typical fashion, I noticed you distorted things.

Here is an article in the San Francisco chronicle that sums up the case pretty well.

[ QUOTE ]
School boards in Seattle and Louisville said their race-conscious plans were necessary to prevent schools from turning into white and minority enclaves. They were sued by groups of white parents whose children were denied enrollment in their preferred schools.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, somebody felt they were losing out, somehow. Otherwise, there would have never been a case. Your characterization makes out like the poor benevolent schools were set upon by a group of vicious white supremicists. I noticed it took about 24 hours for the liberal spin machine to get up to speed on just how to distort the facts in a self serving eqivolency kind of fashion.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

Positive Discrimination....heh.... I like that.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At least I admit it though and don't hide behind some euphamistic baloney.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, affirmative action is a positive thing, it is trying to redress an injustice, not creating a new one! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That is, unless you are directly affected by the newly created injustive. Like, say, if your white child is getting bussed to a really crappy school.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm happy to see that society is beginning to accept the premise that racism goes all ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for conservatives to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

But while I'm waiting, it's good to know you're gonna finally get a handle on that "black racism" problem. The black man has been keeping the white man down for far too long anyway. Hopefully, this decision will be a first step toward integrating white students into the better schools currently reserved only for black children. Who knows, we may now live to see white children going on into medicine, law, the sciences -- areas once reserved only for the children of black elites. Yep, thank goodness the iron fist of black racism is finally starting to crumble, so that white children can finally stand on an equal footing with Black America.

(Now, pardon me while I step through this looking glass.)


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that all men should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Reading what you wrote, I don't think you believe that.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for liberals to admit that racism comes from their direction AT ALL.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP



[/ QUOTE ]

NH - See that Wiki article about Clark....

[ QUOTE ]
"It took me 10 to 15 years to realize that I seriously underestimated the depth and complexity of Northern racism. ... In the South, you could use the courts to do away with separate toilets and all that nonsense. We haven’t found a way of dealing with discrimination in the North."


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

There's another way to look at it. Proponents of affirmative action would argue that if there is a situation where blacks are underrepresented in a certain population---say, admissions to a university--then discrimination must be at work to some degree. By allowing the use of race as one factor in determinating admission, use of that factor in actuality reduces discrimination. Levels the playing field, so to speak. I believe Lyndon Johnson may well have used that metaphor in his landmark speech on the matter.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And, now one type (or form) is better/worse than another

[/ QUOTE ]

exsubmariner is asserting "equivalence" that flies in the face of reality and all of American history.

Furthermore, that assertion of "equivalence" is patently self-serving. It's only purpose is to say "well, yes, my side is racist but if I say everyone else is racist too, then everyone is equivalent and we can just ignore the racism question".

Hint: you don't have institutional segregation when all sides are "equivalent".


q/q

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, I'm sorry. I can't tell the nuanced differences between one sort of racism and another. I guess I'm not enlightened enough. Please share with me how a school system determining what school a child has to go to based on the fact that they are white is any different than deciding what school a child has to go to because they are black?

BTW, you don't have institutional segregation when children go to schools in their own communities that are paid for with the taxes of their parents. Here's a hint: people of similar race tend to like to live around other members of their race. This is true about whites, blacks, hispanics, asians, etc.. Are you going to decide where people have to live, next?

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously, somebody felt they were losing out, somehow.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which I conceded. Read what I wrote earlier:

[ QUOTE ]
In Seattle, something along the lines of 100 black children were displaced from their "first-choice" schools, which of course contradicts the notion that this policy was some kind of policy wrought from white-guilt to punish pale children. There were black students who were also bearing the brunt of the malevolent effects of these plans.

[/ QUOTE ]

So yes, again, obviously someone didn't like this policy, and felt harmed by it. But it wasn't just white people.



[ QUOTE ]
Your characterization makes out like the poor benevolent schools were set upon by a group of vicious white supremicists.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, what? I said nothing, nor even hinted at anything of the sort. It was your characterization that demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of the facts of the case. Here's what you said:

"BTW, the case involved the bussing of white students into a predominately black school. So, the people being discrimanted against in this case were the white kids, who would be bussed away from better schools."

Again, these are nothing but canards:

1) "White kids" weren't discriminated against; racial classification was occurring, no doubt -- but it certainly wasn't "against" white students, unless of course you think making white students attend school with black kids is somehow causing them harm.

2) The case (at least in Seattle) didn't involve "busing white students into predominantly black schools" because their plan was such that THERE WERE NO PREDOMINATELY BLACK SCHOOLS. Hence why it was an integration plan. The school board controlled student placement so that schools in the district were racially integrated. That you think it involves busing white students into black schools demonstrates you have a limited understanding of the actual facts of the case.

3) All of the schools are theoretically of equal quality, since they're all in the same district and share the same resources. So there was no effort to "bus white kids away from better schools".

But yes, I'm the "spin doctor" for doing nothing more than pointing out the falsehoods of your 'white-victim' narrative. Seriously, given your complete lack of understanding, I think VayaConDios was spot on earlier when he characterized your post this way: "I don't know anything about the law or the Supreme Court but I hear they're keeping some black folks down so it's okay by me." At the very least, he was correct in noting you don't seem to have even a rudimentary knowledge of what happened or what got ruled.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Proponents of affirmative action would argue that if there is a situation where blacks are underrepresented in a certain population---say, admissions to a university--then discrimination must be at work to some degree.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing is, they aren't really making a whole argument with that, it's more like they're making an assertion. It's an argument if one unquestioningly presumes the underlying premise is true, but they're trying to convince people who question the premise. Therefore in order to make an actual argument to the other side, they need to do more than merely assert based upon their own self-suggested premise.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, NewTeaBag.

I don't think it is a question of scale, I think it is a question of time and assimilation.

I know what you mean about the guy whose job it was to piss you off. And you're right, you'd jump in to help your buddy.

Your neighbor, however, is not your shipmate. Your lives don't depend on each other, he hasn't been through the weed out process, the schools, displayed competance, proved himself in any way or manner similar to what you have. The comparison is completely not equivalent.

Your baseball example is a good case of how people of different ethnicities develop bonds and common ground and begin to interact and assimilate with each other. Left on their own, however, they are going to live in different neighborhoods and practice their own cultures. Those cultures will not necessarily be compatable.

I submit, based on research cited previously in this thread, that forced integration actually reinforces racial stereotypes. At a young age, children do not have the emotional intelligence to empathize with someone who is not like themselves. Empathy is what leads to understanding between people from different backgrounds. This is why everyone who was ever on a boat had to prove themselves through training. That way, they were all assimilated into a common culture (submarine culture, for what it is) and that made ethnicity irrelevant.

The original purpose of the public schools, according to Ben Franklin was to make Americans. You can't make Americans by creating a situation that will lead to reinforcement of differences.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) "White kids" weren't discriminated against; racial classification was occurring, no doubt -- but it certainly wasn't "against" white students, unless of course you think making white students attend school with black kids is somehow causing them harm.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, when you classify white kids according to their race, you aren't discriminating against them, then?

[ QUOTE ]
The case (at least in Seattle) didn't involve "busing white students into predominantly black schools" because their plan was such that THERE WERE NO PREDOMINATELY BLACK SCHOOLS.

[/ QUOTE ]

But what about Kentucky? Doesn't that count? So what I said didn't apply to every single case, so I must not understand what was going on? Whatever.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

Cons: We waste tons of fuel, manhours, and money busing children against their wills to schools their parents don't want them to go to.

Pros: We soothe liberal white guilt a tiny bit.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

The argument, for college admissions, went something like this: Blacks are X% of the population; yet they're only X-Y% of college admissions. They're scoring worse on entrance tests. They're not genetically inferior intellectually. Therefore the reason why they're scoring worse, and therefore being admitted less, is that they're not prepared as well in their pre-college education, for a variety of reasons, the most important one being the general circumstances of racism and the legacy of racism. That is, the fact that they didn't do as well on tests and were underrepresented in college was de facto evidence of discrimination.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
The argument, for college admissions, went something like this: Blacks are X% of the population; yet they're only X-Y% of college admissions. They're scoring worse on entrance tests. They're not genetically inferior intellectually. Therefore the reason why they're scoring worse, and therefore being admitted less, is that they're not prepared as well in their pre-college education, for a variety of reasons, the most important one being the general circumstances of racism and the legacy of racism. That is, the fact that they didn't do as well on tests and were underrepresented in college was de facto evidence of discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like this argument. I've made it a few times myself and its my main justification for AA.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At least I admit it though and don't hide behind some euphamistic baloney.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, affirmative action is a positive thing, it is trying to redress an injustice, not creating a new one! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree basically. I actually don't have a problem with using the word discrimination though because showing preference for one particular race is discrimination. It would be ludicrous if immediately after the Civil War that people stated the government shouldn't give extra support to former slaves because it would be discrimination. Almost as ludicrous would be to state that showing racial preference is wrong because it's discrimination after a century of Jim Crow laws with their effect on culture in the U.S. My take anyway. Still discrimination though and I readily admit it as well as support the events that ended Jim Crow laws. IMO one of the best things that's happened in this country over the last 50 years if not the best.

Also remember I wrote race and/or gender so we're not talking about just race. Women sufferage didn't become the law of the land in the U.S. until 1920 i.e. it came after the slaves were freed.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
Positive Discrimination....heh.... I like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do too.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1) "White kids" weren't discriminated against; racial classification was occurring, no doubt -- but it certainly wasn't "against" white students, unless of course you think making white students attend school with black kids is somehow causing them harm.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, when you classify white kids according to their race, you aren't discriminating against them, then?

[/ QUOTE ]

If "discrimination" merely means "their race was recognized and a decision was made because of it", then yes, they were discriminated against.

If "discrimination" means "action based on prejudice resulting in unfair treatment of other people" -- the way I think of "discrimination" when I hear the word -- then no, white students weren't discriminated against in any way, shape or form. There was no "prejudice" against white people, and the "unfair consequences", if we concede that there were some, were felt by both black and white students; hence why I went to the pains of noting that nearly 100 black students were displaced from their first-choice schools in Seattle.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The case (at least in Seattle) didn't involve "busing white students into predominantly black schools" because their plan was such that THERE WERE NO PREDOMINATELY BLACK SCHOOLS.

[/ QUOTE ]

But what about Kentucky? Doesn't that count? So what I said didn't apply to every single case, so I must not understand what was going on? Whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every single case? The Supreme Court ruled on exactly two cases, so there were only TWO school districts in question in this SCOTUS case -- Seattle and Louisville. Maybe what you said should apply to at least one of them, right?

Unfortunately, that's not the case. Your characterizations about "busing white students" to "predominately black schools" miserably fails to describe both the Seattle and Louisville integration plans.

We already discussed how it missed the mark in Seattle. In the Jefferson County School District in Louisville -- (Jefferson County Schools were the defendant in this case) students at each level may apply to attend schools outside of their residential area. School principals then make assignment decisions -- many factors are considered, and race is one of them; while some variance exists, the guideline is for each school is to seek a black student enrollment of at least 15 percent and no more than 50 percent – that is, about 15 percent below or above the District-wide black student population of 34 percent.

So yeah, there's not a single predominately black school in either case, because both integration plans prevent that from occuring -- THAT'S WHY THEY'RE INTEGRATION PALNS. I mean, when you were typing out that nonsense about busing white students to "predominately black schools", didn't it strike you as a little funny that, at the crux of these cases were integration plans? -- you know, plans to PREVENT racial isolation? The whole point of these integration plans is to prevent the existence of predominately black schools.

But nice try playing the white-victim card anyway. It almost worked, except some of us actually pay attention to this stuff, and read the rulings, and don't get our information from right-wing propaganda organs like WorldNetDaily.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
There's another way to look at it. Proponents of affirmative action would argue that if there is a situation where blacks are underrepresented in a certain population---say, admissions to a university--then discrimination must be at work to some degree.

[/ QUOTE ]
This assumes that black intelligence, motivation, personality traits, etc are entirely equivalent to white/asian at a genetic level. I see a lot of evidence that this isn't the case, and little evidence that it is. For example, Asians appear to have superior spatial intelligence to whites. Either way, it's far from a settled question, and until it is the whole premise on which your argument rests is entirely flawed.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

[ QUOTE ]
The argument, for college admissions, went something like this: Blacks are X% of the population; yet they're only X-Y% of college admissions. They're scoring worse on entrance tests. They're not genetically inferior intellectually. Therefore the reason why they're scoring worse, and therefore being admitted less, is that they're not prepared as well in their pre-college education, for a variety of reasons, the most important one being the general circumstances of racism and the legacy of racism. That is, the fact that they didn't do as well on tests and were underrepresented in college was de facto evidence of discrimination.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does putting people into an environment that they are not prepared for help them? I'm talking about the individual people here.

Re: A Supreme Court Ruling That Warms My Little Racist Heart
 

so am i reading that blacks in racially mixed schools perform better than blacks in predominantly black schools.

and this fact is being used as a basis for wanting more racial diversity.

it seems very likely to me that the racial mix of schools is not a causal factor of performance. doesn't it seem more likely that:

rich black kids go to suburban, racially mixed schools. rich black kids do well. really poor black kids go to inner city schools that aren't really racially mixed. poor black kids do poorly. so at the two ends of the spectrum, obviously the rich kids out perform the really poor kids, which slants the statistics making the racial mix correlated to the economic well being of a student which is in turn correlated (or potentially also a causal factor) of the educational level of black people.