This week’s Carnival of the Vanities comes complete with editorial wisecracking about the entries of which the host disapproves. By coincidence, I’m sure, most of those tend to be of the conservative (and sometimes merely American) persuasion.
In my case, the host, who is not dumb, is aghast that I seem to be “against any sort of discrimination.” Well, he’s not dumb, but he obviously hasn’t read enough of my blog to know that his inference isn’t correct. I’m only against, as a matter of principle, discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, and generally sex.
Moreover, he thinks the only reason I oppose discrimination is because I believe it isn’t fair (his emphasis) to handicap runners in a race, ignoring the fact
that the race is not waiting to be started but is in progress, and some runners have got many yards ahead of the others. Become colourblind means, in these circumstances, pretend it is coincidental that most of the runners in dark jerseys are yards behind the guys in light jerseys. It’s not a million miles from there to Hey, the guys in light jerseys must just be better runners, and must deserve their lead (we can ignore that the guys in dark jerseys were shackled for much of the race and have hurdles in their lanes that are missing from the guys in light jerseys’ lanes and that some of the guys in light jerseys seem to be riding bicycles or are even being carried by some guys in a nice shade of purple). Don’t let’s even start on the guys in pink.
A race, you say? Why, that’s brilliant! I wonder why I never thought of, or ran across anyone else thinking of, such a perceptive metaphor. Must be because I’m a dumb American.
But hold on. If this whole preferences thing can be compared to a race, we’ve got a real problem. Even with “handicapping,” some runners win races, and some lose. Lose? We can’t have that, can we? Oh, wait. I have it! Not only is the race already “in progress,” but it never ends!
Or maybe we have to handicap not only the beginning but the end as well.
Regarding the “race” and people “starting out ahead”:
1. Affirmative action is a racial issue, not an economic issue, so “starting out ahead” is not an issue. Some whites/asians are poor, some Hispanics/blacks are rich.
2. If you’re talking about “starting out ahead”, with racial preferences for blacks/Hispanics starting about 1964, and the age of entering college at 18 years old, that means that every person 59 years or younger (almost everyone in the workforce)applied to college at a time when blacks/Hispanics had an advantage, and whites/asians were at a disadvantage. The current generations of college students is the 3rd consecutive generation affected by affirmative action. That’s like giving the first 3 runners in a 4-man relay race a head start and still losing.
3. Even within the same high schools, or factoring for parents’ income, education levels, etc…Asians score higher than whites, who score higher than Hispanics, who score higher than blacks.
4. Actually, it’s easier to get into college from a bad high school. The grading curves are much easier. And as far as the SAT, there’s nothing in the SAT that you can’t get from a dictionary, ora a simple algebra book or geometry book.
5. According to the pro-qota pushers, white “Hispanics” are “disadvantaged”, but other white people are not. And poor Asian refugees are not disadvantaged, but rich black kids are disadvantaged. Their “race” analogy is not only inane, it is incredibly illogically practiced.
Will: According to GVSU President Murray you need to
You know, I almost agree with you on this one, John, because if Anything, your ideology can’t be explained by any simple metaphor. I don’t often AGREE with it, but it’s certainly far more complex than this blogger gives you credit for.
Notherbob writes:
>>> Your insistence on citing actual facts and how the AA program is applied in the real world degrades the discourse, you see.”
Please, now…I’m not trying to be obtuse here. Honestly. I just want to know what “facts” Will cited in his post?
First of all, Affirmative Action deals with race AND gender, so WHITE WOMEN have made gain through the program.
Second, where does Will get his facts from about grading curves in bad high schools? Is Will trying to make us believe that Paterson-East Side High School, (Joe Clark–“Lean on Me”) has a higher college placement rate than Andover, or St. Alban’s? Surely, he has some data to back up that belief, right?
Of course, Will goes on to ascribe race and wealth in his posts, without defining them. I would love for Will to DEFINE what makes a person “black”, “white”, or “yellow” in his eyes. It would also help for Will to DEFINE what a “rich person” is, much less, “a rich black kid.” What income level is that?
You see, with these definitions, I can understand what he’s saying, Notherbob.
–Cobra
(not intimidated by the spell checkers)
Cobra,
Of course, Will goes on to ascribe race and wealth in his posts, without defining them. I would love for Will to DEFINE what makes a person “black”, “white”, or “yellow” in his eyes.
I don’t think Will actually used “yellow,” and I’m rather astonished that you did. But your question is a good one. If you want preferences for Blacks, you’ll have to define “Black.” Can you? Do you want to?
Can you define “Latino”? Thought experiment: Mr. Gonzales marries Ms. Nguyen, and Ms. Gonzales marries Mr. Nguyen. Their children are named Joe Gonzales and Jane Nguyen respectively. Are they both “Latino,” or is Mr. Gonzales presumptively “Latino” and Ms. Nguyen presumptively “Asian,” or what?
(I don’t imagine that Tiger Woods particularly likes being a case in point — in fact, he’s been rather outspoken on the subject — but if it had been his father who was Thai and his mother who was Black/white/Native American, and he had a Thai surname, rather than “Woods,” do you think people would be talking casually of him as a “Black golfer”?)
Cobra, define “Black” and “Latino.” And as long as you’re there, please explain why a first-generation Mexican immigrant for whom English is a second language ought to get preferences, whereas a first-generation Chinese immigrant for whom English is a second language ought not. I really never have managed to understand that.
Michelle writes:
>>>I don’t think Will actually used “yellow,” and I’m rather astonished that you did. But your question is a good one. If you want preferences for Blacks, you’ll have to define “Black.” Can you? Do you want to?”
I always found it interesting that society reserves color names for certain groups but not others, depending on the era, and locale. For example, despite the chagrin of many Native Americans, “Redskins” is accepted as a sports team name, yet would “Blackskins”, “Whiteskins”, or “Yellowskins?”, I doubt it. Even the word “negro” is just a color description at root, correct?
Though I’ve used it often enough because it’s so prolific in the nomenclature, I consciously try to use the term “African-American,” because a simple skin-color definition is not sufficient for the variance of the spectrum. As far as your question is concerned about what defines a black person?
Well, to be perfectly blunt–MY definition of what constitutes a “black person” doesn’t matter at all. AMERICA, according to many learned scholars, defines race based upon the theory of
“hypo-descent.”
>>>The Northamerican folk model of race classifies people according to descent; people who have any trace of African ancestry, no matter how distant, can be classified as “black”. A person can only be classified as “white” if they either have no African ancestry or if nobody knows about it. This system is sometimes referred to as a system of hypodescent, because people born of “mixed” matings are put in the category with the lower socioeconomic standing.”
http://www.unf.edu/~rkephart/Writings/6.%20Race.html
This type of rationale can’t be determined on skin color alone, because origin is the more weighted factor. For example, Tiger Woods is of fairer complexion than Vijay Singh, but since Vijay Singh has no African ancestry that’s been announced, he is not labeled “black”, while Tiger, despite his mixed heritage, is indeed black based on the hypodescent rule.
Plessy vs. Fergusson determined that a person with one black ancestor 4 generations past was still “black.”
Basically, Michelle, I could declare myself as a chilled head of lettuce, but the hypodescent rule deems me “black.”
As far as other definitions go, other rules seem to apply. You seem to have no problem defining Asians as people who have Asian ancestry, so I can’t imagine why Latino or Hispanic nomenclature would be much different. Remember that hypodescent rule…
–Cobra
–Cobra
Cobra, I don’t think the “one-drop” rule is plausible now. For one thing, no one’s enforcing it. Can you imagine a university insisting on a genealogy going back three generations so as to prove that a candidate is officially “Black”? Would you want to see it?
You seem to have no problem defining Asians as people who have Asian ancestry, so I can’t imagine why Latino or Hispanic nomenclature would be much different. Remember that hypodescent rule…
Ummm . . . Cobra, my hypotheticals involved Latino/Asian marriages and their progeny. If you can tell me how the “hypodescent” rule handles the offspring of a Mexican woman and a Vietnamese man, and how (if at all) the rule gives a different result for a Mexican man and a Vietnamese woman . . . well, I will be interested to see it, that’s all.
And I really don’t get this bit (“You seem to have no problem defining Asians as people who have Asian ancestry[.]”). I’ve consistently talked about Asian-Americans, not “Asians,” and I’ve defended the right of people of mixed race to define themselves as such. What I want to know is whether you’d consider the child of a Mexican-American and a Vietnamese-American Latino or Asian-American, and whether it would matter at all whether the surname was Gonzales or Nguyen. Does it matter, to you? Would you want a child of such a marriage to have preferences or not?
Cobra says: “Is Will trying to make us believe that Paterson-East Side High School… has a higher college placement rate than Andover, or St. Alban’s?
Reply: Uh, no I’m not trying to make you believe that, since I never said that. I said that the grading curves are much easier when you’re in classes with worse students (in poor/minority schools). Also, when colleges (like California, Texas, Florida, etc) guarantee admission to the top X% of students (by GPAs) from each high school, it’s WAY easier at inner city schools with lower average GPAs.
Cobra says: I would love for Will to DEFINE what makes a person “black”, “white”, or “yellow” in his eyes.
Reply: YOU’RE the one advocating racial preferences. YOU need to make the definitions, not me.
In another post, Cobra advocates the “one drop” rule of race (same one used by George Wallace, the KKK, and all the white supremacists throughout history) – the “hypodescent rule”, but apparently the BLACK race is SO MUCH more important than any other race, that the “one drop rule” ONLY applies to Black people.
And your historical support for this is the side of the segregationists in the case of “Plessy vs Ferguson”? What, you couldn’t get a more recent citation of support for your “one drop rule” Were David Duke and Louis Farakhan out of town? Are you saying you support the entire segregationist policies of the “Plessy v. Ferguson case, or just the “one drop rule”?
This “hypodecent rule” is possibly the most ignorant, racist, ethnocentric opinion I’ve yet read on this board. The only other people who subscribe to such a belief these days are hard-core white supremacists like KKK members and black supremacists like Louis Farakhan. So a person who is 1/256ths black (meaning only one of your great-great-great-great-great-great grand-parents was black) who has blonde hair and blue eyes and multi-millionare parents is considered “black” and “disadvantaged”???
Anyway, in California, the racial preference issue is a lot more about asians and Hispanics than about blacks, since blacks are only about 5% of the state population. What if there is someone who is a combination of one these 3 groups (asian/white/Hispanic), and not black at all? You never answered that question.
Cobra,
If (as the Arfro-centric teachings say) all people trace their ancestry back to Africa, since the first humans came from Africa, then according to your “one drop rule”, we’re ALL black, and we should ALL get affirmative action – ERGO there should be NO affirmative action – CONGRATULATIONS COBRA!!!!! You’ve solved the entire problem!!!
Wait a minute! You people are all bonding on the basis of various skin colors and in this big group hug I am the one with the white skin and therefore the enemy. WASPy old me, regardless of what I think or say. As I and my ilk become a minority in America, is anyone listening to our problems? Does anyone care? Do you wonder why I favor a colorblind Constitution? Hello!
Well, there you people go again. Now, even though there are folks trying to drag this thread off topic, I’m going to steer the ship back. This is about another blogger casting stones at John. I actually DEFENDED John Rosenberg in my first post here (not that JR isn’t capable of defending himself, of course.) Then we lapse into this discussion of how “Cobra discovered race definitions in America centuries ago.” Like I said in the outset with Michelle, MY definition of race DOES NOT MATTER. It’s what SOCIETY defines me as. I can call myself anything I please.
That being said, Michelle, I don’t think John would appreciate another tangential foray into mixed-race designation, but if you really want to know, look at some articles written about Asian-Americans and interracial marriage and come back to me.
http://www.asianweek.com/040998/feature.html
and here: http://www.focusanthro.org/Archive2002-03/essays/reddy–02-03.html
Again, Cobra did NOT author these articles. Cobra did not INVENT hypodescent. Cobra did not sit on the bench of Plessy, design miscegenation laws, or any other of the myriad of theories America has come up with over the years. HOWEVER, you won’t see me simply DISMISS the REALITY of these beliefs, and their PREVALENCE in society.
There are millions of conservatives out there who believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old, and will fight tooth and nail to kick evolution out of school. Apparently there are also folks out there who believe that having African, Hispanic or Native American ancestry doesn’t cause any problems for you in American society.
Both beliefs are hilarious.
–Cobra
If the race never ends, no one can lose. We not only have to handicap the start, but every point thereafter to make sure that no one is falling behind.
The goal of preferences has nothing to do with preferences, it has everything to do with power.
Cobra,
If John wants to remove my posts, he’s certainly entitled to do so; it’s his site.
Like I said in the outset with Michelle, MY definition of race DOES NOT MATTER. It’s what SOCIETY defines me as. I can call myself anything I please.
Well, it would be embarrassing for me to tell you how long it took me to twig to the fact that Mariah Carey is officially “African-American.” If I’d passed her on the street (not that that would actually happen), I would’ve guessed her to be, oh, maybe Spanish or Portuguese. California is full of white sunbathers that are a hell of a lot darker than she is.
So what has “SOCIETY” defined Mariah Carey as? If you’re saying that people call her Black because they’ve all patiently looked up her genealogy and discovered the telltale “one drop,” well, I don’t believe you. This is a woman who could “pass” with ease, and if she doesn’t it’s because being African-American is valuable to her — either (I hope) because there is a heritage there that she values, or else (I hope not) because for the music she does, being Black is important.
Re mixed marriages, Cobra, you’re missing the point. What I want to know is what you’d call the offspring of a Black and an Asian, a Latino and an Asian. You can’t have a “one-drop rule” for all races, obviously. Does Joe Gonzales with the Vietnamese mother get to be Latino and therefore “underrepresented”? Does Jane Nguyen with the Mexican mother ditto? Tell me what you’d call these children; tell me what you’d want them to be called. Tell me, if you feel like it, whether you’d feel more comfortable giving a preference to a kid named “Gonzales” or a kid named “Nguyen,” even if both were children of a Vietnamese and a Mexican.
mariah carey is not african american she is hispanic mulatto
mariah carey is white but mixed race.