Affirmative action, helpful or harmful?

[JQPublic1]

That's a weak argument. Trying to make a nexus between Freedom of association and applicants seeking employment or admission to a university is a stretch.

You're attempting to place personal choice over administrative perogatives. And SCOTUS has, over the last 50 years, ruled favorably on
both sides of the equation. . The 1978 Bakke vs University of California decision defanged AA by removing quotas. Yet, the spirit of AA was retained by allowing goverment officials and associated civilian contractors freedom to use race to diversify their workforces or student bodies by actively seeking and recruiting qualified underrepresented applicants..That included white women, blacks of any gender, and any other minority.
The key word here is applicants. To me that implies a mandate to bring in qualified minorities to compete and nothing more.
Managers may feel that a qualified black person would enhance profitability in some locations. Universiites, for instance, may be contacted by employers to encourage the recruitment of qualified blacks to meet their objectives of foreign liasons or business operations in Africa or anywhere blacks live around the world.

I'm not sure where the stretch is... The whole thing is pretty cut-and-dry until you get a huge immoral institution bossing everyone around by trying to create legislative solutions to moral problems. There is only one valid solution: Convince people that racism is wrong. It's a challenge, but embracing that challenge is what contributes the forward progress of humanity. Trying to dodge that responsibility by resorting to violence (law) is only treating the symptoms, and the disease will express in other ways. Once you take law out of the equation, any other application of the AA philosophy is well within your rights, as long as you're not committing fraud or acts of aggressive force.

Ever since manuission Black spokesmen have been trying to convince white authorities that racism is wrong. And in the rare occasions some of those authorities responded positively, violence erupted. White thugs initiated and escalated terrorist operations directly against any black person who would
be brave enough to avail themselves of any legislated remedy put forth on their behalf.
Yet, you advise blacks to continue the failed approach of pursing their collective + economic and social goals on moral and non violent grounds. Simultaneously, RW radicals are doing every thing in their power to neutralize black voting power and thereby, in effect, are playing both ends against the middle

 

[rightwinger]

It’s a strange phenomenon... we see people angry about “losing” something they didn’t have to begin with (like a potential job), but losing something that they actually have (like their inherent freedom) is largely ignored or dismissed with parroted political justifications.

AA legislation is wrong because it infringes upon the individual’s freedom of association; not because it’s “not fair”. Similarly, AA as a voluntary practice in any business is well within the owners’ rights, and no one has any cause to complain.

This is an important topic, but only if it’s discussed for important reasons. The black/white thing is not an important reason, but the freedom of mankind most certainly is.

What a Drama Queen

This is precisely why the world is a wreck. I'm considered a drama queen for bringing up the fundamental issue of personal liberty in a "mundane" context. It's taboo to think too deeply. The reluctance to discuss underlying philosophical principles is why the modern population would just abide the King's rule instead of asserting their freedom and starting a revolution. The 4th of July is just about flags, burgers and fireworks, right? Let's celebrate the physical and philosophical courage of our forefathers while embodying none of it ourselves.

Let me amend that

You are a Drama Queen and a whiner

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Affirmative Action and laws like it are bad because they put government in charge of our personal decisions. Moreover they target certain opinions for suppression. It's not illegal, for example, to fire someone - it's illegal to fire them for reasons the state doesn't approve of.

First of all thank you for answering my question and explaining things as well as you have. The thing is though our government is not legislating thoughts or opinions, it's legislating harmful and unconstitutional behavior. People can be bigoted and prejudiced (and are) in their thoughts & opinions all day long but what they cannot do is act on those prejudiced and bigoted thoughts to deprive another person of something to which they are lawfully and/or constitutionally entitled.

I have an associate who comes from a protection background who explained to me that when it comes to having to exert control over another person who is becoming a problem that the process is referred to as ATM - first you ask them to cease & desist, giving them the opportunity to modify their behavior of their own accord, however if they won't then you tell them or demand that they stop and if they still persist that's when you make them stop. The legislation came after the continued abuse and violence directed at Black people going back a century. Threatening and killing people for exercising their right to vote, for wanting to get a good education, for attempting to pursue a career commensurate with one's education, skill set and passion, all of this and more has been LEGISLATIVELY denied to black people for well over a century, yet still we persevere, we have to.

Everyone keeps talking about how affirmative action takes from whites in order to give to blacks but that premise, false as it is, would mean that whites were allegedly entitled to the "whole pie" in the first place. Why would anyone think that? Did whites build this place? No the black slaves built it.
The Middleton Plantation

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

If it's made into law, it infringes upon individual liberty. Please explain how not.

I don't even know how to ask this but what about all of the laws that were passed to restrict the rights of black people? Those were bad too and if they were did you protest?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Most anti-discrimination laws infringe on freedom of association. It's their overriding goal. The point is to force bigots to accommodate people they'd otherwise avoid. How do you deny that?

Freedom of association is the First Amendment correct?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You're attempting to place personal choice over administrative perogatives. And SCOTUS has, over the last 50 years, ruled favorably on
both sides of the equation. . The 1978 Bakke vs University of California decision defanged AA by removing quotas. Yet, the spirit of AA was retained by allowing goverment officials and associated civilian contractors freedom to use race to diversify their workforces or student bodies by actively seeking and recruiting ***qualified*** underrepresented applicants..That included white women, blacks of any gender, and any other minority.

The key word here is applicants. To me that implies a mandate to bring in qualified minorities to compete and nothing more.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Well, first of all, you need to understand how the Constitution works:

"Are you saying that each of us should be free to engage in unconstitutional behavior by which we deprive our fellow citizens of their rights?"

The behavior of citizens can't be "unconstitutional". The Constitution is a set of rules for the government, not individuals.

This is what I had in mind when I posted my comment. You are right, I made a mistake as I was confusing civil rights legislation with the U.S. Constitution therefore I stand corrected:

http://mylegalwriting.com/2014/11/14/how-to-assert-a-section-1983-civil-rights-claim-against-a-private-citizen/

Perhaps one of the most effective tools for discouraging violations of our civil rights is 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“Section 1983”), a statute that empowers us to file a lawsuit and recover damages for such violations. What makes this remedy particularly effective is the ability to recover attorneys’ fees as provided in 42 U.S.C. § 1988, thereby enabling the pursuit of meritorious claims despite a lack of financial resources.

There tends to be confusion, however, over what makes for a valid 1983 claim, especially where the defendant is a private citizen rather than a government employee. The prospect of large damages awards and attorneys’ fees can generate an equally large number of defective 1983 claims that will not survive dismissal, so it is worthwhile to review what a meritorious claim against a private citizen looks like.

​

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm a separatist. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Blacks can't live on their own however. They need white people to hire them, white people to create housing and great neighborhoods, white people to create educational systems, white people to create safe environments.

It's one of the reasons why black Americans are the only race in the world outside of those with religious or territorial issues that strive to move away from their own kind. Blacks don't even want to live with each other if they can help it. Do you ever see whites, Asians, Hispanics try to move into black neighborhoods?

So getting back to the topic, what is AA? AA is a dependency on whites to survive. And blacks are more than happy to be such dependents.

I'm a separatist too. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Politicians can't live on their own however. They need average people to hire them, average people to create housing and great neighborhoods, average people to create educational systems, average people to create safe environments.

So, what is government? Government is a dependency on average people to survive. And politicians are more than happy to be such dependents.

If you’ll support my right to live without politicians imposing themselves into my life, I’ll support your right to live without black Americans imposing themselves into yours. Deal?

Uhhhh, yeah.

I have no idea WTF you're talking about or what kind of comparison you're trying to make. Whatever it is though was an utter failure.

 

[IM2]

It’s a strange phenomenon... we see people angry about “losing” something they didn’t have to begin with (like a potential job), but losing something that they actually have (like their inherent freedom) is largely ignored or dismissed with parroted political justifications.

AA legislation is wrong because it infringes upon the individual’s freedom of association; not because it’s “not fair”. Similarly, AA as a voluntary practice in any business is well within the owners’ rights, and no one has any cause to complain.

This is an important topic, but only if it’s discussed for important reasons. The black/white thing is not an important reason, but the freedom of mankind most certainly is.

You don't even know what AA is.

I have described the two possible expressions of the AA philosophy - legislative or voluntary private policy. Please explain how this means I don't know what AA is.

Pretty much it starts with your claim of how it infringes upon a individuals freedom of association. You don't have a clue of what the policy is about.

If it's made into law, it infringes upon individual liberty. Please explain how not.

We have laws because people don't respect individual liberty. Racism infringed upon individual liberties of all who were not white.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Passed into laws when?

You seem to be living in the past........well into the past. Probably a time when you were not even born yet like most black Americans.

You know nothing about me and have made a lot of erroneous assumptions, not just about me but about black Americans in general but you have the right to believe whatever you want ***edit*** however that doesn't mean it's true.

And I see that you've acknowledged below that you're a white separatist so that explains to me pretty much everything.

No I don't live in the past but I love visiting it, know why? Because my ancestors persevered under much more hostile conditions than I do currently and I believe that maybe I can learn something from them or how they dealt with life under such adverse conditions.

That's also why I spend time conversing with people like you, I never know what I may learn even though you obviously think so little of me.

In any case I would love to know how you determined that I am a failure in life, because the last time I asked how you define success you never answered.

I have no idea where you get the idea that I attacked or criticized you personally; I haven't.

I can't "think little" about somebody I don't know or ever met.

Yes I do believe in separation. Why? Because I seen what happened to my suburb when it changed. I seen what happened to the suburb and neighborhood I grew up in. I see the exact same things happening to neighborhoods all over this country.

White people and black people are totally opposite; we are two different animals. We talk different, we have different names, we dress different, we have political and social differences, we have different priorities and concerns, we have different opinions on our police and laws. We differ in almost every way.

I grew up in a totally white community and it was the greatest. When I lived in a totally white community, it was fantastic. Now that things have changed everything fell apart at the seams.

All of our major stores closed down because of theft. Many of our smaller stores closed down because of crime and armed robberies. My housing value is estimated at half of what I paid for it 25 years ago; all properties here are. We went from one murder every 10 or 15 years to three or more a year. Armed robberies that we had in our white community never happened; maybe one in 20 years. Today it's almost every week.

Our schools were rated one of the best in the county when it was white. The last several years, we are in what's called Academic emergency. Of course back then, our teachers didn't get assaulted every month either. We used to have Forth of July fireworks every year and Home Days. Both got canceled because you simply cannot assemble any group of blacks without it turning into gang fights or riots.

I remember going out in the morning and just cutting my lawn. Can't do that today. You need to take a garbage bag and clean all the garbage off of your tree lawn, and pull pop and beer bottles out of your hedges; sweep the broken glass off the sidewalk. I remember sleeping with my windows open all night and having a restful evening. Can't do that today. If you can fall asleep, it's only temporary until the HUD people next door awake you or blacks on the street arguing at the top of their lungs at 2:00 am on a work night.

We used to have malls that were nationally renown. Southgate Mall and Randall Park were visited from people all over the country. Southgate is half empty, and Randall closed down years ago. Thankfully, Amazon bought the property and are building a distribution center.

So I'm a separatist. Can you blame me? Can you blame me for wanting clean and quiet streets? Can you blame me for wanting thriving businesses and stores? Can you blame me for not wanting decreased property values? Can you blame me for not needing to carry a gun just to go to the store? Can you blame me for not wanting unsafe violent schools where drug sales are common?

You just didn't have any of these problems when the community was white, and I would give anything to return to those days. Can you blame me?

 

[IM2]

I'm a separatist. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Blacks can't live on their own however. They need white people to hire them, white people to create housing and great neighborhoods, white people to create educational systems, white people to create safe environments.

It's one of the reasons why black Americans are the only race in the world outside of those with religious or territorial issues that strive to move away from their own kind. Blacks don't even want to live with each other if they can help it. Do you ever see whites, Asians, Hispanics try to move into black neighborhoods?

So getting back to the topic, what is AA? AA is a dependency on whites to survive. And blacks are more than happy to be such dependents.

I'm a separatist too. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Politicians can't live on their own however. They need average people to hire them, average people to create housing and great neighborhoods, average people to create educational systems, average people to create safe environments.

So, what is government? Government is a dependency on average people to survive. And politicians are more than happy to be such dependents.

If you’ll support my right to live without politicians imposing themselves into my life, I’ll support your right to live without black Americans imposing themselves into yours. Deal?

Uhhhh, yeah.

I have no idea WTF you're talking about or what kind of comparison you're trying to make. Whatever it is though was an utter failure.

Of you have a problem with blacks move out of Cleveland get into you truck and drive until you find some all white town in Montana.

 

[IM2]

Passed into laws when?

You seem to be living in the past........well into the past. Probably a time when you were not even born yet like most black Americans.

You know nothing about me and have made a lot of erroneous assumptions, not just about me but about black Americans in general but you have the right to believe whatever you want ***edit*** however that doesn't mean it's true.

And I see that you've acknowledged below that you're a white separatist so that explains to me pretty much everything.

No I don't live in the past but I love visiting it, know why? Because my ancestors persevered under much more hostile conditions than I do currently and I believe that maybe I can learn something from them or how they dealt with life under such adverse conditions.

That's also why I spend time conversing with people like you, I never know what I may learn even though you obviously think so little of me.

In any case I would love to know how you determined that I am a failure in life, because the last time I asked how you define success you never answered.

I have no idea where you get the idea that I attacked or criticized you personally; I haven't.

I can't "think little" about somebody I don't know or ever met.

Yes I do believe in separation. Why? Because I seen what happened to my suburb when it changed. I seen what happened to the suburb and neighborhood I grew up in. I see the exact same things happening to neighborhoods all over this country.

White people and black people are totally opposite; we are two different animals. We talk different, we have different names, we dress different, we have political and social differences, we have different priorities and concerns, we have different opinions on our police and laws. We differ in almost every way.

I grew up in a totally white community and it was the greatest. When I lived in a totally white community, it was fantastic. Now that things have changed everything fell apart at the seams.

All of our major stores closed down because of theft. Many of our smaller stores closed down because of crime and armed robberies. My housing value is estimated at half of what I paid for it 25 years ago; all properties here are. We went from one murder every 10 or 15 years to three or more a year. Armed robberies that we had in our white community never happened; maybe one in 20 years. Today it's almost every week.

Our schools were rated one of the best in the county when it was white. The last several years, we are in what's called Academic emergency. Of course back then, our teachers didn't get assaulted every month either. We used to have Forth of July fireworks every year and Home Days. Both got canceled because you simply cannot assemble any group of blacks without it turning into gang fights or riots.

I remember going out in the morning and just cutting my lawn. Can't do that today. You need to take a garbage bag and clean all the garbage off of your tree lawn, and pull pop and beer bottles out of your hedges; sweep the broken glass off the sidewalk. I remember sleeping with my windows open all night and having a restful evening. Can't do that today. If you can fall asleep, it's only temporary until the HUD people next door awake you or blacks on the street arguing at the top of their lungs at 2:00 am on a work night.

We used to have malls that were nationally renown. Southgate Mall and Randall Park were visited from people all over the country. Southgate is half empty, and Randall closed down years ago. Thankfully, Amazon bought the property and are building a distribution center.

So I'm a separatist. Can you blame me? Can you blame me for wanting clean and quiet streets? Can you blame me for wanting thriving businesses and stores? Can you blame me for wanting decreased property values? Can you blame me for not needing to carry a gun just to go to the store? Can you blame me for not wanting unsafe violent schools where drug sales are common?

You just didn't have any of these problems when the community was white, and I would give anything to return to those days. Can you blame me?

Bullshit.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm a separatist. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Blacks can't live on their own however. They need white people to hire them, white people to create housing and great neighborhoods, white people to create educational systems, white people to create safe environments.

It's one of the reasons why black Americans are the only race in the world outside of those with religious or territorial issues that strive to move away from their own kind. Blacks don't even want to live with each other if they can help it. Do you ever see whites, Asians, Hispanics try to move into black neighborhoods?

So getting back to the topic, what is AA? AA is a dependency on whites to survive. And blacks are more than happy to be such dependents.

I'm a separatist too. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Politicians can't live on their own however. They need average people to hire them, average people to create housing and great neighborhoods, average people to create educational systems, average people to create safe environments.

So, what is government? Government is a dependency on average people to survive. And politicians are more than happy to be such dependents.

If you’ll support my right to live without politicians imposing themselves into my life, I’ll support your right to live without black Americans imposing themselves into yours. Deal?

Uhhhh, yeah.

I have no idea WTF you're talking about or what kind of comparison you're trying to make. Whatever it is though was an utter failure.

Of you have a problem with blacks move out of Cleveland get into you truck and drive until you find some all white town in Montana.

Well, that's the problem; too many whites ran instead of fighting back. Mostly liberal whites, but whites nonetheless.

I guess that's black America. If you don't appreciate the crime, the filth, the noise, just find someplace else to move. We are here now and we are hell bent on destroying everything whitey created. So just move. But give it time, and after we destroyed where you lived, we will move to where you live now and destroy that as well.

 

[dblack]

It’s a strange phenomenon... we see people angry about “losing” something they didn’t have to begin with (like a potential job), but losing something that they actually have (like their inherent freedom) is largely ignored or dismissed with parroted political justifications.

AA legislation is wrong because it infringes upon the individual’s freedom of association; not because it’s “not fair”. Similarly, AA as a voluntary practice in any business is well within the owners’ rights, and no one has any cause to complain.

This is an important topic, but only if it’s discussed for important reasons. The black/white thing is not an important reason, but the freedom of mankind most certainly is.

You don't even know what AA is.

I have described the two possible expressions of the AA philosophy - legislative or voluntary private policy. Please explain how this means I don't know what AA is.

Pretty much it starts with your claim of how it infringes upon a individuals freedom of association. You don't have a clue of what the policy is about.

If it's made into law, it infringes upon individual liberty. Please explain how not.

We have laws because people don't respect individual liberty. Racism infringed upon individual liberties of all who were not white.

Sure, when racism find it's way into legislation, it can infringe upon individual liberties. And when it does we should vigorously stamp it out. But that's not what we're talking about. You're equivocating. We're talking about laws dictating individual behavior, not state policy.

 

[dblack]

Affirmative Action and laws like it are bad because they put government in charge of our personal decisions. Moreover they target certain opinions for suppression. It's not illegal, for example, to fire someone - it's illegal to fire them for reasons the state doesn't approve of.

First of all thank you for answering my question and explaining things as well as you have. The thing is though our government is not legislating thoughts or opinions, it's legislating harmful and unconstitutional behavior.

Again, individual behavior is not a Constitutional concern. The Constitution is a set of rules for government, and only government can violate it.

 

[IM2]

I'm a separatist. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Blacks can't live on their own however. They need white people to hire them, white people to create housing and great neighborhoods, white people to create educational systems, white people to create safe environments.

It's one of the reasons why black Americans are the only race in the world outside of those with religious or territorial issues that strive to move away from their own kind. Blacks don't even want to live with each other if they can help it. Do you ever see whites, Asians, Hispanics try to move into black neighborhoods?

So getting back to the topic, what is AA? AA is a dependency on whites to survive. And blacks are more than happy to be such dependents.

I'm a separatist too. I believe that in a free country you should be able to live with the people you want to live with. Politicians can't live on their own however. They need average people to hire them, average people to create housing and great neighborhoods, average people to create educational systems, average people to create safe environments.

So, what is government? Government is a dependency on average people to survive. And politicians are more than happy to be such dependents.

If you’ll support my right to live without politicians imposing themselves into my life, I’ll support your right to live without black Americans imposing themselves into yours. Deal?

Uhhhh, yeah.

I have no idea WTF you're talking about or what kind of comparison you're trying to make. Whatever it is though was an utter failure.

Of you have a problem with blacks move out of Cleveland get into you truck and drive until you find some all white town in Montana.

Well, that's the problem; too many whites ran instead of fighting back. Mostly liberal whites, but whites nonetheless.

I guess that's black America. If you don't appreciate the crime, the filth, the noise, just find someplace else to move. We are here now and we are hell bent on destroying everything whitey created. So just move. But give it time, and after we destroyed where you lived, we will move to where you live now and destroy that as well.

This is part of East Cleveland which is 93 prcent black.

Here is a picture of a home in a white part of Cleveland.

The entire city of Cleveland went down because of a decline in manufacturing j jobs.

But let us read what another Cleveland citizen who is not a racist piece of shit has to say about this.

When I arrived in April of 1968 the city’s population was about 750,000. The 1970 U. S. Census established that figure. It had been 876,000 in 1960.

Our decline, already in progress, since has been precipitous and severe. And damaging. And painful.

I believe the period I observed had a dramatic and lasting impact on what happened to Cleveland in the past 45 years. It has been a period pockmarked with selfish schemes that put profit ahead of community betterment.

What were some of the causes?

There were the causes that most cities encounter of urban sprawl, the construction of highways through city neighborhoods and the desire for newer housing and, of course, better schools. All aided urban flight.

In Cleveland, however, I think other civic decisions had an instrumental effect on the city, its decline and ruinous state.

I can say that in the 45 years I’ve been here it seems that the main thrust of civic life — directed by those with power — has been to revive downtown. Little attention has been paid to the rest of the city. The University Circle also got attention. Downtown to city leaders — most of whom don’t live in the city — IS the city. That, I imagine, is because they look at the city primarily in commercial terms. Downtown has been a place of business and commerce.

I’ve continually observed this attitude of selfishness of the Corporate Elite. It has revealed itself over and over again.

More.

In 1966 the U. S. Civil Right Commission held hearings in Cleveland. Some of what they found even shocked blacks.

For example, between 1960-65 — as I and a CWRU professor wrote in The Nation — “the number of poverty families in every Negro planning area increased, and the median income slumped. In Hough, median income skidded from $4,732 to $3,966, and two other areas with 60,000 Negroes, had median incomes lower than Hough’s.”

Other figures from the Rights Commission study revealed disturbing facts of discrimination. The building trades, for example, had 13 Negroes among 11,500 workers in five major construction trades; only 43 Negroes were among the 1,350 apprentice trainings in federally sponsored programs in 1965; unemployment among young Negro males was at 58 percent. Racism raged as demands for change rose.

Yet the policies pursued by Cleveland leaders simply added to the problems. In particular, the vast urban renewal program pushed by the private sector and spurred by foundation funds made matters worse by causing a forced movement of blacks without adequate replacement housing. The city embarked on six major urban renewal projects, with a major effort downtown called Erieview. Ironically, Erieview still is not completed.

Cleveland leaders didn’t understand or likely care about the plight of blacks. They pursued urban renewal that exacerbated the severity of urban problems. Further, they didn’t care much about the Cleveland school system. Indeed, the segregation of schools intensified just as the civil rights movement here began to move. It made for nasty times here.

Decisions in this period, I believe, created the Cleveland we have today. And its problems.

More.

James C. Davis, managing partner of Cleveland’s second largest law firm – Squire, Sanders & Dempsey – gave a speech to assess Cleveland’s problem. I doubt if it was helpful.

Without a touch of irony, Davis blamed white ethnics for Cleveland’s racial problems. His speech to the Cleveland Bar Association in 1967 was entitled “Cleveland’s White Problem – A Challenge to the Bar.” He packaged the speech in a 13-page pamphlet. It was given wide distribution.

There was not a word of criticism in the Davis speech about Cleveland corporate or civic leaders No acknowledgement of mistakes. No self examination. Davis instead pitted whites against blacks. There was more than a touch of politics in this. White ethnics were typically Democratic. Davis was Republican.

Davis wrote, “Another frequent comment among white people is, why should the government spend the taxpayers’ money for handouts to Negroes? We – and ‘we’ frequently refers to Americans of Irish, Italian, Polish, Hungarian or others of the heterogeneous ethnic backgrounds which abound in Cleveland – we were poor – we had nothing – we did not need Government handouts to succeed – we educated ourselves – we worked our way out of poverty to find a satisfactory life in America. Why shouldn’t we expect the Negro to do the same?”

Davis wasn’t wrong about the biased feelings of whites toward blacks. However, he made it a fight between Cleveland’s white ethnics and its blacks. No bluebloods to criticize.

He didn’t mention, for example, who controlled the many jobs where discrimination kept blacks unemployed. He didn’t mention how the real estate industry helped to keep Clevelanders segregated. Or the school administration, which business leaders controlled, kept school segregated.

http://coolcleveland.com/2011/04/roldo-clevelands-decline-from-the-1960s/

As usual the racist piece of shit ignores what really went on to blame blacks for conditions created by whites. Do us a favor Ray, STFU.

 

[IM2]

You don't even know what AA is.

I have described the two possible expressions of the AA philosophy - legislative or voluntary private policy. Please explain how this means I don't know what AA is.

Pretty much it starts with your claim of how it infringes upon a individuals freedom of association. You don't have a clue of what the policy is about.

If it's made into law, it infringes upon individual liberty. Please explain how not.

We have laws because people don't respect individual liberty. Racism infringed upon individual liberties of all who were not white.

Sure, when racism find it's way into legislation, it can infringe upon individual liberties. And when it does we should vigorously stamp it out. But that's not what we're talking about. You're equivocating. We're talking about laws dictating individual behavior, not state policy.

We are talking about laws stopping dictated local, state and national policies.

 

[IM2]

Affirmative Action and laws like it are bad because they put government in charge of our personal decisions. Moreover they target certain opinions for suppression. It's not illegal, for example, to fire someone - it's illegal to fire them for reasons the state doesn't approve of.

First of all thank you for answering my question and explaining things as well as you have. The thing is though our government is not legislating thoughts or opinions, it's legislating harmful and unconstitutional behavior.

Again, individual behavior is not a Constitutional concern. The Constitution is a set of rules for government, and only government can violate it.

Actually individual behavior is, but those like you want make up a constitution to suit your beliefs.

 

[dblack]

I have described the two possible expressions of the AA philosophy - legislative or voluntary private policy. Please explain how this means I don't know what AA is.

Pretty much it starts with your claim of how it infringes upon a individuals freedom of association. You don't have a clue of what the policy is about.

If it's made into law, it infringes upon individual liberty. Please explain how not.

We have laws because people don't respect individual liberty. Racism infringed upon individual liberties of all who were not white.

Sure, when racism find it's way into legislation, it can infringe upon individual liberties. And when it does we should vigorously stamp it out. But that's not what we're talking about. You're equivocating. We're talking about laws dictating individual behavior, not state policy.

We are talking about laws stopping dictated local, state and national policies.

No, you're equivocating (lying by leveraging two different meanings of a word and swapping out definitions at your convenience).

Naturally, most everyone is opposed to government violating equal rights. But that's not what AA and most other anti-discrimination laws are about. They are prescribing individual behavior, not the actions of government.

 

[dblack]

Affirmative Action and laws like it are bad because they put government in charge of our personal decisions. Moreover they target certain opinions for suppression. It's not illegal, for example, to fire someone - it's illegal to fire them for reasons the state doesn't approve of.

First of all thank you for answering my question and explaining things as well as you have. The thing is though our government is not legislating thoughts or opinions, it's legislating harmful and unconstitutional behavior.

Again, individual behavior is not a Constitutional concern. The Constitution is a set of rules for government, and only government can violate it.

Actually individual behavior is, but those like you want make up a constitution to suit your beliefs.

Actually, it's not. You're wrong. Ask a judge. Or anyone who had a high-school civics course.