Do not make the mistake of thinking that because my conclusion is the same as another person's that my reasoning is the same
Natalie Davis at All Facts and Opinions has a personal approach that I respect for its morality and consistency. My own approach is not moral; it is ethical, and rational. I find Natalie's approach is not incompatible with mine but mine may be incompatible with hers.
This sort of thing troubles me on a certain level. I always feel like I'm yelling at someone that I really don't mean to offend.
I think this quote represents the nub of Natalie's position:
That said, I am put in a difficult position with lefties who insist that AA is the way to go to rectify past discrimination. I know full well that pigmentationism -- "racism," "bigotry," whatever -- exists. I know it causes suffering. Having felt its sting, I can not and will not inflict it upon any other human being for any reason. For every Clarence Thomas, there is an Allan Bakke. I am no fan of US Supreme Court Justice Thomas, but I know he traveled a tough road to get into the dangerous position where he sits. But as much as it is obvious that something must be done to heal the still-open wounds of systematic prejudice, I can not justify causing difficulty for another person using the rationale that "your dad had it easier than my dad" or "it's our turn now." All people are my people. The way I see it, when skin color is the issue, everyone should be treated equally, always.
I'm not looking for affirmative action of the type I think Natalie is describing. What I'm looking for may need a new name.
I'm not looking for anyone to address past discrimination. I'm looking to address present discrimination, present racism.
And I honestly have a hard time understanding how anyone who has been affected and knows the problem is racially based doesn't support a racially based solution.
When I read this post, I left this comment:
Economic status is not equivalent to race (whatever race is). I have no issue with supporting people's efforts to change their financial condition. But that is not an affirmative action approach.
Not just that, but as things are structured now it's not possible to address everyone's economic ills. As long as there is an optimum level of unemployment there will be poor people. Truly addressing that would require removing capitalism's current status as a religion and restoring it to its proper place as a mere economic system. And that's not an affirmative action approach either.
Again, I respect your personal choice. I just don't think it scales well.
And she replied (among other things):
But it could be. Admissions departments could establish quotas based on economic considerations, thereby establishing diversity on that basis. As some minority groups have a disproportionate number of economically disadvantaged people, this would ensure representation in education by members of those groups. Those with financial wherewithal would still have access, so they are not barred from the process. And disadvantaged members of all groups -- even the majority group -- would have access to economically based AA, removing the "reverse-racism" obstacle that exists in attempting to justify melanin-based AA
The thing is, if the discrimination is based on race, then counting on economic assistance (EA, not AA) to correct it is much like the Texas and Florida plans to correct college level discrimination by admitting the top 10% of every school. Just as these state plans actually require discrimination on the high school level to integrate colleges, depending on EA requires to resolve racial discrimination requires economic inequities to be inequitably distributed by race.
As for all people being my people, I just don't find that to be the case.I simply will not accept people without certain ethics in my in-group. Natalie's morals implies ethics that are more than acceptable to me, but I don't think my ethics imply morals that are up to her standard.
LATER: Nightcrawler gives his perspective on affirmative action programs.
P6, I don't give damn about all people being my people since it isn't true. I HATE when people DE-EMPHASIZE ethnicity. Because in that ethnicity is shared experience, culture, and milestones. My grandmother (mother's side) is French. White as snow. She married my grandfather who was from Haiti and is black. All my life I have been raised as a African-American at my grandmother's wishes also. People don't see the French (white) in me, they see this tall, somewhat menacing looking black man. So waht if I'm of the lighter variety. And I was raised that way. And why must we "colored folks" de-emphasize ourselves while the majority iIS NEVER QUESTIONED? This is precisely the reason why some folks in the majority practice systematic discrimination. They looking at for themselves.
That, of course, is why I can't accept all people as my people—because not all people accept me as theirs. I don't give gifts to thieves.
Being a Christian, I have to give my gifts even to those who may not deserve them.
P6 writes: I honestly have a hard time understanding how anyone who has been affected and knows the problem is racially based doesn't support a racially based solution.
I am sorry (no I'm not) that I don't subscribe to the concept of "race." I define myself as "human." That's it. Perhaps life would be easier if I conformed to what the rest of humanity does. But if I find something immoral (or stupid, as in "race"), I can and will not be involved in it. Frankly, I do not call the problem "racially based." You do. I think the problem shows failings of certain members of society: ignorance, closed-mindedness, and worse.
S-train: If my ethnicity covers many groups, why must I pick one? How am I deemphasizing myself? Not everyone gives a whit about ethnicity. (Then again, I don't support the notion of countries, either.) IMO, people are people, period.
And if you label yourself Haitian-American and others label you the same (or as the "big, menacing black man"), are you de-emphasizing your French side? Isn't that side just as important as the other?
Natalie, I am the last person who would ask anyone to conform. I don't ask that anyone believe in race.
I do ask that you recognize that almost everyone else believes in race.
When you say you "think the problem shows failings of certain members of society: ignorance, closed-mindedness, and worse" my first reaction was, "How would you describe these people?"
Natalie: I adore my French heritage. I've been to France with my grandmother more than 20 times. And the sad thing is: I KNOW MORE ABOUT MY FRENCH HERITAGE THAN MY AFRICAN!
And that what gets me. Why is black so hard to find out about? Why do those who trace back their African heritage need to look beyond race? And about picking an ethnicity: I identify with a certain ethnicity because people of that group RAISED, LOVED, SCOLDED, and MOLDED ME. That is my essence. My heart. My soul. The rhythms of Africa and African-Americans. I've talked with my grandmother about this (I used to feel bad about how I felt) and she told me that is what I am.
P6 wrote: "When you say you 'think the problem shows failings of certain members of society: ignorance, closed-mindedness, and worse' my first reaction was, 'How would you describe these people?'"
Depends on my mood at the time. Either bigots, idiots, or "misguided souls." But a person's "race" is not the issue; it is how the bigot perceives that person. When someone sees me, they may think they know what "race" I am (in their eyes) or the societal categorization under which they would put me. But whatever they are thinking has nothing to do with who or what I really am at all. That cop didn't go after me because of my ancestry; he did it because he saw a *brown-colored* person. So the 50-cent word I've coined to describe it is "pigmentationism."
S-Train wrote: "Why is black so hard to find out about?"
Bigotry, stupidity, misguidedness...
"Why do those who trace back their African heritage need to look beyond race?"
Because everyone should, IMO. Race only exists as a manmade social construct -- it isn't really real, not scientifically. Embrace one's heritage and family, by all means; I certainly do. Shout it from the rooftops. But scientifically speaking, we are ALL related. All people are my people. All history is mine too.
"And about picking an ethnicity: I identify with a certain ethnicity because people of that group RAISED, LOVED, SCOLDED, and MOLDED ME. That is my essence. My heart. My soul. The rhythms of Africa and African-Americans."
That's cool; I SO respect that. (Made me smile to read it.) I was molded by all sides of my family; I can not and will not pick one -- it would be like I am ripping myself to pieces. That is indeed what people who insist that I pick a classification (and usually the one they choose for me) are insisting I do. That isn't right.
"I've talked with my grandmother about this (I used to feel bad about how I felt) and she told me that is what I am."
One of my old, old grandmas said something similar to me when I was a small child. "People look and see black, so that is what you are," she said. I thought that was bullshit then, and I consider it bullshit now. When I look at my face, my hand, I see brown. When I look at my family, I see a multiplicity of hues. If someone calls me something I do not see, I consider that person, well, bigoted, idiotic, and/or misguided -- and perhaps in need of glasses. Perhaps if I were one thing I might feel differently, but as a Heinz-57 Muttley, I am not limiting myself to suit anyone's agenda. As I've said, I am equally proud of all the parts of me. I can't ethically or emotionally give one ethnicity or color group preference to coddle the bigots who insist on shoving me into a particular box *or* to boost the well-meaning but wrong people who need me to pump up their numbers (and if I can listen to a particular music, speak a certain lingo, and follow a particular political path, so much the better, for either side of the tug-of-war in which I refuse to engage). Especially because scientifically, it's all bullshit. 99.99 percent of DNA is the same for all members of the human race.
I absolutely stand against what most of you call racism, and have participated in all too many anti-racism events. I'll do that all my life, as my grandpa, who marched with Dr. King, taught me. But I'll do it honestly as myself, the Heinz-57 girl, not as some label that does not apply. I gotta be me and keep it real.