Supreme Court reverses ruling on White Firefighters Case

[construct]

Horse feathers!

"You know what the book says. 'We may be through with the past, but the past isn't through with us.'" --Jimmy Gator

 

[construct]

Affirmative Action is racism, make no bones about it.

Not true. Racism is systemic subjugation of one race by another. It can only be maintained by the ruling class.

 

[Just1Cool]

Interesting thread. I am surprised by how much support there is on here for the Court's decision.

 

[hotatlboi]

Racism may or may not be the technically correct term, if you don't like that here I'll substitute another, "racially motivated favoritism".

 

[SonOfSlobone]

Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again... all these fat-assed white conservatives never gave a shit about discrimination until white people started being discriminated against... then they hollered bloody murder...

Fuck em. For 300 years it was perfectly legal to refuse to hire somebody just because he was black. How about, say, 150 or so years to refuse to hire somebody because he's white? Fair enough, don't you think?

 

[Lostlover]

Um, I said the "whites and hispanics" who passed the test elsewhere in my post. I know there were hispanics too. And yes, they too were denied promotion because of their race.


Yes it will, but like I said she will not be judged just on this.


Never said she wouldn't, and I agree.

How will it make her look bad when the SCOTUS voted down party lines?

It was 5 to 4. Guess what, there are 5 conservatives and 4 liberals.

This wasn't so open and shut if it was decided by political affiliation.

 

[Kulindahr]

The only way you can say it is not is if you hold the position that white people can never be discriminated against because of their race. But that's just absurd.

Having lived briefly in inner city St. Louis, I'll testify as to how absurd it is.

You can't remedy hundreds of years of oppression and discrimination by suddenly deciding that everyone will now be held to a standard that only whites were permitted to prepare for or attain for hundreds of years?

So who in the case has been around for hundreds of years?

Denying African Americans access to education and equal opportunity, while extending all of societies benefits to another group and then expecting African Americans to meet the same standards is a form of discrimination and racism in itself.

Somehow I doubt that the blacks involved weren't allowed to study or prepare for this test.

Four Justices dissented and the three Judge panel on which Sotomayor sat did not agree. This is just another indication that the conservative on this court want to roll back the progress that has been made in many areas in the past 50 years.

Yeah, I really think that putting poorly-qualified people on the job to protect people's lives and property is progress -- right, everyone?

 

[Kulindahr]

Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again... all these fat-assed white conservatives never gave a shit about discrimination until white people started being discriminated against... then they hollered bloody murder...

Fuck em. For 300 years it was perfectly legal to refuse to hire somebody just because he was black. How about, say, 150 or so years to refuse to hire somebody because he's white? Fair enough, don't you think?

Somehow I don't think Martin Luther King would be comfortable with the second paragraph.

How about we let individuals be individuals, and neither punish them (as you propose) nor reward them (as wrongly-applied affirmative action does) for their race?

Affirmative action is fine -- it means that when there are a number of equally qualified candidates, it's legitimate to apply racial, ethnic, and other considerations to make the final determination, with the goal of achieving a balance, in cases where there are good solid reasons for wanting a balance. But when the more qualified are turned down because they are one race or another, that's not affirmative action, it's racism.

How about we just throw out all evidence of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, age, political party, or anything else irrelevant to the actual performance of a job, when doing tests and applications? Then, if and only if there is an abundance of qualified candidates will any of these be brought in as "sorting factors" to achieve some goal of balance or integration.

 

[unclaimedblessing]

I can't even imagine the outrage if the circumstances were reversed and black firemen were denied promotion after they passed a qualifications test.
Sharpton would have been fanning the flames of racial discontent.
A test for firemen is undoubtedly configured to determine their proficiency at that particular job and doesn't include questions on geography, psychology, white culture or black culture, geometry etc. If you can't pass a test based upon what you're expected to do in the performance of your assigned job you shouldn't be promoted over those
who know their jobs. That's just common sense.

 

[iman]

Racial inequality died its final death over half a century ago, but people still feel the need to kick its corpse to agitate a response for causes outdated and left behind, if we will let the past be just that - the past. Well, I'm sorry, but the past has come to the present to die, and its haunting is fast becoming wearisome as an excuse for failure to take responsibility. Our society has done more than be "fair," it has exerted itself in being even accommodating. America has changed. Whatever wrongs were committed they have been rectified, and whatever racism still plagues humanity, even America, it stems from the sin of not letting the ugly past die its death. That is the answer in solving "the problem" for the next generation, but if we allow this platitudinous excuse to continue to be accepted as legitimate, than we will still be plagued with this issue one-hundred years from now, which by than may become infected as to be cankerous and reopen the humiliation of the annals of that history. Given the distance and the progress we have made, making concessions to African-Americans who have just as much opportunity as whites, Asians, Latinos, Mexicans, Persians, Arabs, Jews, and every other race that calls America home. Some even coming to this country from conditions unimaginable, having to bridge cultural, language, and social divides, and yet they succeed without excuses. Asians and Jews do well because they foster the importance of succeeding to an extreme degree, and African-Americans can have the same initiative, and I see those who do take the initiative and rise to prominence and wealth. Its not a race issue anymore, its become an issue of finally taking responsibility, and stop excusing yourself because a horrible past many African-Americans can't even identify with today continue to grip, demanding equality, all the time failing to see they have the opportunity and benefits we all share in this world today to the extreme they would fail to see that are the one being unfair now, and anyone who would use that crutch.

That's the same disingenuous argument that the racist right has made for years. The argument is a variation of the "separate but equal" argument that was made in favor of segregation. George Wallace and company used to claim that it was just all up to African Americans to have the initiative to take responsibility for their own communities and lives.

The argument that all impediments to black success have been removed essentially blames blacks for their own lack of success and implies a belief in the basic inferiority of blacks - the same argument used by the segregationists and perhaps from a similar motivation.

This is not a question of just "equal opportunity". One can cut off somebody's leg and then tell them that they will have the equal opportunity to try out for the team. "Good Luck, fella"!

The real failure to accept responsibility is the argument that you are making. It is an argument that pretends that there are no long term effects to American racism and slavery, an argument that pretends that the handicap of poverty can and should be overcome by everyone (Social Darwinism? Maybe it's actually good for them!) and that the goal of a race neutral society is not a good or proper goal.

I think the evidence has become clear, affirmative action has built a large black middle class, enabled families to give their kids opportunities unheard of 40 years ago and integrated the society to an extraordinary extent in a short period of time.

Have whites suffered? I don't see the evidence that they have suffered anything but some occasional inconvenience from competition - a competition that blacks were either denied access to or were severely handicapped if they had access. Affirmative action has leveled the field in the broader context and historically will be one of America's prouder achievements.

 

[crzyrazn]

That's the same disingenuous argument that the racist right has made for years. The argument is a variation of the "separate but equal" argument that was made in favor of segregation. George Wallace and company used to claim that it was just all up to African Americans to have the initiative to take responsibility for their own communities and lives.

The argument that all impediments to black success have been removed essentially blames blacks for their own lack of success and implies a belief in the basic inferiority of blacks - the same argument used by the segregationists and perhaps from a similar motivation.

This is not a question of just "equal opportunity". One can cut off somebody's leg and then tell them that they will have the equal opportunity to try out for the team. "Good Luck, fella"!

The real failure to accept responsibility is the argument that you are making. It is an argument that pretends that there are no long term effects to American racism and slavery, an argument that pretends that the handicap of poverty can and should be overcome by everyone (Social Darwinism? Maybe it's actually good for them!) and that the goal of a race neutral society is not a good or proper goal.

I think the evidence has become clear, affirmative action has built a large black middle class, enabled families to give their kids opportunities unheard of 40 years ago and integrated the society to an extraordinary extent in a short period of time.

Have whites suffered? I don't see the evidence that they have suffered anything but some occasional inconvenience from competition - a competition that blacks were either denied access to or were severely handicapped if they had access. Affirmative action has leveled the field in the broader context and historically will be one of America's prouder achievements.

Likewise, yours is the same dishonest argument self-sympathizers continually use to gain the unfair aggressive advantage of being labeled a "special class of citizens," when there is clearly no great disadvantage of one population over any other population within present society regarding race to the extent prior in the past, and protected by laws. I understand the need for affirmative action, to always be present in preventing racial, gender, or ethnic discrimination from happening again; however, to apply it in an unfair manner in a fair situation causes it to become contentious and reversely discriminating.

You continue to use racial arguments as if you are still fighting for civil rights and negative attitudes when society or culture no longer to a disadvantageous extent discriminates or hold such views. All "impediments" for black success have been removed. There is nothing preventing African-Americans from attaining anything from education to wealth. As for the argument that there is a prevailing belief blacks are seen as "inferior," is, frankly, an African-American belief and bias. Society at large should afford no special privileges to a minority with as much opportunity in fear of being labeled racists.

This is exactly a question of "equal opportunity." You believe we are still stuck in an era of wide discrimination and prejudice, and refuse to move past it into a reality where such prevailing negative attitudes no longer triumph, even a reality where racial diversity is embraced. The new generation certainly holds no such attitudes, as apart from their older, Civil Rights era, antecedents. I only hope that they see the fairness, for which I am arguing to prove to you.

Why do you afford African-Americans such a privilege of an excuse as the disadvantage of a disenfranchised past? You act as if African-American's were the only people to suffer a bitter past. Jews were held in captivity for thousands of years, to overcome dispersion, to end up in the concentration camps of Nazi Germany, they do not claim their horrible past an excuse for their failings, rather remembering it solemnly, not to cling to it and demand continuous unequal, unfair treatment. There are many white impoverished children who lack the social advantages of black children, and yet to those who succeed, lesser qualified African-Americans should be promoted because of the color of their skin, and a lip service to the past?

No one is arguing against the continued need for affirmative action, yet we shouldn't allow it to disadvantage others because African-American have the race card to play. In this case, affirmative action wasn't offering competition to the white firefighters who fought to be acknowledged in their success on the exam - it didn't level the playing field. It tried to disadvantage them because of fear of racial attitudes and condemnation when they worked, and took advantage of the same opportunities the black firefighters had, and didn't pass. What of the other forty something whites who took the test, and didn't pass? Are they to qualify in this unfair advantage argument as well? Its a case of individual promise, not group discrimination.

 

[iman]

You are misrepresenting what I said. I did not argue that racism is still an impediment (although I'm sure it is), but rather I spoke of the consequences of oppression of blacks in America. One need only to go into the inner city or poor rural areas or look at virtually any statistic from child death rates to educational levels to know that blacks start out well behind their white counterparts.

The black experience (from Africa to Alabama) is unique and is not comparable to the unique experiences of other groups, it's apples and oranges. Jews were educated, sophisticated and mercantile people before the holocaust. They may well have been persecuted in Germany because of their success. African Americans were forcibly brought from relatively primitive societies to be slaves. It is a disgrace for anyone to pretend the experiences are comparable.

It is equally disgraceful to attempt to depict this old, old rightwing argument as the view of a new generation of young people, unless the young people you are thinking of are The Young Republicans.

New Haven, like most other cities had a history of denying blacks opportunity and wanted to rectify that problem by getting some blacks into responsible positions. The same thing has been done all over the country and has resulted in integrated Police and Fire services and many distinguished black commissioner and officers. Now the right wing Justices have changed the law, but hopefully Justice Ginsburg is correct when she warns; “The court’s order and opinion, I anticipate, will not have staying power.”

 

[hotatlboi]

New Haven, like most other cities had a history of denying blacks opportunity and wanted to rectify that problem by getting some blacks into responsible positions.

Why couldn't they rectify it by just, you know, providing opportunity?

And yes, these were positions of responsibility. I don't want positions like firefighters to be filled by people who are not qualified. That's a public safety issue that could affect others. Blacks had the same opportunity as anyone else. If they had shown themselves qualified for those positions, they would have gotten them.

 

[chuck10x]

Not true. Racism is systemic subjugation of one race by another. It can only be maintained by the ruling class.

I hate to point this out, But didn't we just elect an African American man to the most powerful position there is?

 

[Kulindahr]

New Haven, like most other cities had a history of denying blacks opportunity and wanted to rectify that problem by getting some blacks into responsible positions. The same thing has been done all over the country and has resulted in integrated Police and Fire services and many distinguished black commissioner and officers. Now the right wing Justices have changed the law, but hopefully Justice Ginsburg is correct when she warns; “The court’s order and opinion, I anticipate, will not have staying power.”

What they wanted to do was get some irresponsible blacks into responsible positions -- because any black who would accept a position for which the tests said he was not sufficiently qualified would be irresponsible by definition.

If it had been a matter of, say, six positions available, and there were three blacks and six whites who qualified, and the three blacks were selected in order to achieve better racial balance, it would be an entirely different matter; they would have been choosing among qualified candidates. But when the situation is one of denying advancement to those of one race because none of the other race qualified, then action is reprehensible.

 

[construct]

I said that racism is systemic subjugation of one race by another. It can only be maintained by the ruling class.

I hate to point this out, But didn't we just elect an African American man to the most powerful position there is?

Yes, we did. Racism is systemic. The mere fact that 53% of voters were able to vote for a black person does not mean that the system-wide subjugation has been eradicated. You're going to have come up with something better than that.

 

[iman]

What they wanted to do was get some irresponsible blacks into responsible positions -- because any black who would accept a position for which the tests said he was not sufficiently qualified would be irresponsible by definition.

------------------------------------------------------------------
You are assuming that anyone that cannot pass a test is not qualified. We have many years of experience at this point to know that failing tests does not mean that a person cannot do the job. We have placed thousands of people who could not pass the standard tests into jobs where they have functioned admirably. The skills necessary to do well in traditional tests is a learned skill and a literate skill and is not necessarily an indicator of performance. Case in point: SAT's.

Soon, we will have two Justices that have benefited from affirmative action, Sotomayor and Thomas. Do we know what what benefits that may seem "unfair" the other Justices my have benefited from? Do we know what considerations were given to George Bush to get him through Yale and Harvard? Tests do not level the playing field - it is more complicated than that.

 

[SonOfSlobone]

Somehow I don't think Martin Luther King would be comfortable with the second paragraph.

Well, let's ask him:

Reporter: "Do you feel it's fair to request a multi-billion dollar program of preferential treatment for the Negro, or any other minority?"

Dr. King: "I do indeed...Within common law, we have ample precedents for special compensatory programs. ... America adopted a policy of special treatment for her millions of veterans...They could negotiate loans from banks to launch businesses. They could receive special points to place them ahead in competition for civil service jobs...There was no appreciable resentment of the preferential treatment being given to the special group." -- (Interview,1965)

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Racial inequality died its final death over half a century ago

i can't think of a single person who would agree with this statement. are things better? yup. is the problem over with? not in the slightest.

 

[chance1]

I cannot believe it was only 5-4

This one should've been a landslide

Political correctness is a terrible thing