I suppose it should no longer be surprising that, in our current, strained “constitutional moment,” many liberals regard anyone as a reactionary who refuses to read into the Constitution rights that they (the liberals) find hiding in its “emanations” and “penumbra,” while they also regard as a reactionary anyone who wants to take seriously some rights — like the right to “equal protection of the laws” — that are clearly in the text. Oh well.
Nor should it any longer be surprising that Democrats, who also profess to be small “d” democrats, are fighting furiously in Michigan to deprive citizens there of the opportunity to vote on whether the state should continue to distribute benefits and burdens based on race. Still, amidst all these non-surprises, I confess that I still find it surprising that responsible Democrats (even if they aren’t democrats) in Michigan, such as Gov. Jennifer Granholm and UM president Mary Sue Coleman, continue to associate themselves with BAMN (By Any Means Necessary), a group accurately described in today’s online Wall Street Journal as a “1960s-style Trotskyite group.” The title of the WSJ article says it all: “Michigan Meets Malcolm X: Gov. Granholm joins forces with a Trotskyite group to suppress democracy.”
The group, which lives in a Malcolm X-inspired fantasy world and calls itself By Any Means Necessary (BAMN), has been engaged in a long guerilla campaign to prevent the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) from getting on the state ballot.
Polls have repeatedly shown that over 60% of Michigan voters oppose preferences, even though the U.S. Supreme Court last year ruled them constitutional in a lawsuit challenging University of Michigan admission polices.
But instead of doing the hard work required in a democracy to convince voters, BAMN has been using its patented formula of political intimidation and legal harassment in an attempt to strangle the initiative in the crib. Last year, it disrupted initiative meetings on college campuses and tailed initiative signature-seekers, denouncing through bullhorns any student who approached them.
All of this is par for the course. What is sub-par is that the Michigan Democratic Party, from Gov. Granholm on down, has lined up behind BAMN and is even relying on it as the mouthpiece against allowing the anti-preference provision onto the 2006 ballot.
Reasonable people, of course, can disagree about racial preferences, but BAMN is not a collection of reasonable people. At its national conference in 2002, for example, Dumaka Shabazz, a student at the University of Tennessee, “said to loud applause”:
If we have to destroy some things, we will destroy some things.
At the same meeting Luke Massie, now national co-chair of BAMN and “a member of the socialist Revolutionary Workers League,” led a workshop entitled “”A Revolutionary Anti-capitalist Perspective in the New Movement.” He also bragged about using fraudulent means of gaining access to a federal court hearing on the Michigan preference cases.
BAMN member Luke Massie told the conference that activists counterfeited tickets to the University’s affirmative action lawsuits hearing in Cincinnati on Dec. 6, which he said shows what the new Civil Rights Movement is willing to do to win.
“There’s not a lot of case law on counterfeiting federal court tickets,” Massie said. “When we say ‘By Any Means Necessary,’ we mean it.”
Indeed they do, and have since their inception. In Berkeley, for example, they resorted to violent tactics that led a collection of leading Bay Area socialists to condemn BAMN in a public statement:
On Wednesday, August 30th [1995] at UC-Berkeley, the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action by Any Means Necessary, which is composed largely of members of the Revolutionary Workers League, assaulted leaders of the broad student Diversity in Action (DIA) coalition and sought to disrupt DIA’s pro-affirmative action rally. Members of the Revolutionary Workers League assaulted students and shoved them aside in order to seize DIA’s microphone and harangue the crowd gathered at the rally. This followed a pattern of disruption of DIA organizing by the Revolutionary Workers League.
As socialists, we condemn the actions of the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action By Any Means Necessary and the Revolutionary Workers League (RWL). The Revolutionary Workers League’s actions in no way reflect socialist values and contribute nothing to social change, “revolutionary” or otherwise. The Revolutionary Workers League, both under that name and its National Women’s Rights Organizing Committee (NWROC) name, has a history across the United States of similar disruption and undermining of progressive coalitions.
We call on all socialists and left-minded individuals of principle to reject the tactics of the Revolutionary Workers League and the Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action by Any Means Necessary.
The statement was signed by a large assortment of national, Bay Area, and Berkeley socialists and progressives.
Now, if only Michigan Democrats would wake up and realize who they’re in bed with. (Or do you think they already know?)
John writes:
>>>Now, if only Michigan Democrats would wake up and realize who they’re in bed with. (Or do you think they already know?)”
If I were to list some of the fringe groups who oppose Affirmative Action, some of which are on the record supporting the MCRI, would you say Michigan Republicans were “in bed with them?”
–Cobra
cobra – Go ahead and name them and we’ll see. I do know that the KKK offered support to MCRI and Ward Connerly rejected them out of hand and would have nothing to do with them.
John writes:
>>>cobra – Go ahead and name them and we’ll see. I do know that the KKK offered support to MCRI and Ward Connerly rejected them out of hand and would have nothing to do with them.”
“rejected them out of hand?”
>>> WITH FRIENDS LIKE THIS WHO NEEDS ENEMIES? Supporters of the petition drive to place a public referendum on the Michigan ballot this November, which would ban affirmative action admissions at state universities, cringed when the Ku Klux Klan openly supported the effort. In a press statement, the Mystic Knights of the Ku Klux Klan urged its supporters to collect signatures to help get the initiative on the ballot. Grand kleagle of the KKK’s Michigan chapter said in a statement, “To let a lesser-qualified minority into college over a better scoring white student is an injustice to all people. We want to do away with preferential treatment for minorities. We must outlaw affirmative action once and for all.”
http://www.jbhe.com/rrr/rrr_jan04.html
Despite what you claim to be rejection from Ward Connerly, how many signatures were delivered to the MCRI’s cause by this Klan group? Was there an official audit done to determine the source of these signatures, and if there were significant numbers, would the powers that be at the MCRI expunge them from their official tally? If there are signatures gained from KLAN activity, wouldn’t rejecting those signatures be the only non-hypocritical stance an alleged “civil rights group” like the MCRI can take?
But since you asked, let’s run down the list of other groups and individuals that support the MCRI:
Found this gem on the “Stormfront: White Nationalism Community” Forum:
>>>Help on Election Day in Michigan!!!
——————————————————————————–
The MCRI (Michigan Civil Rights Initiative) needs volunteers to help collect signatures at polling locations across the state.
If you can be present at a polling location from 7am-9am or from 5pm-8pm,
pm me and I will give you a number to call to find a precinct location nearest to you.
This is a chance to get out and make a difference for our childrens future!”
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=162006
Now, you can say that the MCRI has no control over what random people post on web forums. Lord knows nobody has that control over me. However the attention to detail and contact numbers would suggest to me that the poster, “Lorrie1488″ was privy to a lot more information than would suggest a disaffected random blogger.
The same with the American Renaissance site:
>>>”(Should anyone care to donate, The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, PO Box 1398, Southgate, Michigan 48195. They need money to get on the Nov, 2006 ballot to do away with AA. Jesse Jackson, and Sharpton are harassing people getting petitions signed.”
Posted by Sue at 8:49 PM on October 13
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/10/african_town_de.php
Now, hey…it would be PRESUMPTUOUS and WRONG of me to extrapolate from these posts that there was some sort of official directive to canvas white separatist websites for petition signatures. But it’s obvious that the posters felt that there was a sympathetic voice to be found at these websites. I’m not going to list the numerous white hate groups that are also against Affirmative Action, because I couldn’t find a specific reference to the Michigan topic after a cursory search. It would be naive to assume that any movement designed to work against underrepresented minorities would NOT attract those whose core philosophy is aimed against those said groups.
–Cobra
Cobra,
The difference is between fringe groups supporting a mainstream cause (MCRI) for their own gain, and leaders (Gov and Dem Chair) a mainstream cause (the Democratic Party, which I’ll certainly say is an umbrella for a mainstream cause) endorsing or assisting a fringe group to do their dirty work.
MCRI wholeheartedly condemns everything the Klan stands for.
I call upon the Governor to condemn BAMN.
And if you read WSJ piece, the reporter interviewed Mark Grebner, a Democratic information services broker (he does mailing list stuff, and no doubt gave BAMN advice based on the list of signers he developed from the public record). Grebner noted that BAMN’s central argument was not sufficient in a democracy, in his opinion. Voters are responsible for reading what they sign — this is from a well-known Democrat. Bill Ballenger, an editor of Inside Politics, said something similar.
This is another instance where we can see the left, including the mainstream moderate left, appeasing violent racial separatists with socialist selfidentification. Having lost their hopes of getting power through a class war some decades ago, the manipulation of racial conflict is their cynical fallback. From this one may conclude that the left has no idealistic motivations, or theoretical consistency, but is driven by amoral power seeking considerations, in the place where principles should be.
I would note my previous response was on my screen waiting for a post command when Cobra posted his, although it appears I anticipated it to some extent, I did not have those details.
Nonetheless, our canvassing of the polls was widely publicized so the details that were there aren’t surprising, and I’d note that the “contact numbers” that Cobra points out as so “specific” aren’t even provided by the poster, which doesn’t seem too credible to me.
Cobra, I would be dishonoring the First Amendment and due process rights of the all the circulators, most of whom were honest (or entitled by law to the presumption of such), to throw out signatures without solid evidence. So rather than me trying to fall into your skillfully laid trap, why don’t you go out and find evidence that 138,000 (that’s how many valid extra signatures we have) signatures were signed by Klan members and meet your burden of proof (Americans are entitled be “presumed innocent until proven guilty”). I’ll give serious consideration to your question at that point, which I consider only to be a hypothetical.
Better yet. Let me save you the time. Call the Southern Poverty Law Center and ask them what they estimate the Michigan Klan size to be.
Cobra, are you a member of BAMN?
Chetly Zarko asks:
>>>Cobra, are you a member of BAMN?”
No, but for reasons I have thoroughly explained on this site in the past, I agree with them on this issue.
As far as Klan support goes, my questions are in response to John’s statement that Ward Connerly “rejected them out of hand,” with the obvious connotation that no support from the Mystic Knights was accepted whatsoever. I posted direct quotes from the Grand Kleagle, who urged his group to collect signatures on your behalf. A good student of history knows that fringe groups don’t neccessarily require MEMBERSHIP for effectiveness. Often, “collaborators” and “sympathizers” are all that they need to achieve their goals.
John’s point in his post “Democrats Against Democracy” was in this question:
>>>”Now, if only Michigan Democrats would wake up and realize who they’re in bed with. (Or do you think they already know?)”
By my quick research, following this logic, would not REPUBLICANS be in bed with white separatist groups like Stormfront, American Rennaisance and the Mystic Knights of te KKK, since the only criteria for the “sleeping arrangement” is sharing a common goal?
–Cobra
cobra – Both Ward Connerly and Chetly Zarko have said they categorically reject everything the Klan stands for, but that’s apparenly not enough for you. You would have the canvassers ask every potential petition signer if he or she is a member of any racist group, and, while we’re at it, why not any other subversive group. The FBI used to maintain a list of such groups. Perhaps you’d like all the MCRI canvassers to make signers swear they were members of none. But what would you do when such low lifes show up at the polls to vote? Should they be denied the right to vote? If not, should they be denied the right to sign a petition calling for a vote? Actually, BAMN’s position is much clearer: they think anyone who would knowingly sign a petition calling for colorblind equal treatement is a racist who should be fought “by any means necessary.”
Supressing the vote — for the “right” reasons
S.D. Melzer notes how the far-left By Any Means Necessary (BAMN) is attempting to prevent the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative from even getting to a vote: The group, which lives in a Malcolm X-inspired fantasy world … has been engaged…
John writes:
>>> Both Ward Connerly and Chetly Zarko have said they categorically reject everything the Klan stands for, but that’s apparenly not enough for you.”
Well, you SAID…”Go ahead and name them, and we’ll see.”
I went ahead and named them. Again, this is what happens when you endorse a movement that will adversely affect minorities. Of course white separatist and supremacist groups will support it. You started attacking Democrats because many of them support Affirmative Action, which happens to be BAMN’s position. When I reveal some of the blatantly, proudly racist supporters of the MCRI, it’s suddenly an unfair supposition to place on Republicans.
You can’t have it both ways, people.
–Cobra
Well, Cobra, as a white guy, I’d respect you a lot more if you would offer to give up your own or your children’s spot at a college of your choice and insist that the college provide it to a minority student (assuming you are white). It’s always easier to give someone else’s possessons to charity –to surrender someone else’s dreams — than to give up one’s own.
I could actually respect poor dead Joe Wagner if he had put his money whre his mouth was and given up his spot at the university to some black folks from Detroit. Instead he kept his spot and tried to give away some other white kid’s dreams.
Of course, if you are black, I understand your desire for yourself, your family and your homies to get ahead “by any means necessary.”
That desire is pretty typical of blacks, in my experience.
Cobra, before you feel the need to say it, Big Bill is out of line.
Chetly,
Actually, I wish Big Bill had made a longer post. The more “centrists”, and people who are undecided on this issue see people like Big Bill and their attitudes, the more they’ll come to understand my arguments.
Far from offending me, Big Bill is performing a service for me, and all those arguing to continue Affirmative Action.
–Cobra
BAMN is simply a bunch of morons. I witnessed their tactics first-hand as an undergrad at Michigan.
Let’s note two things:
1) The name itself is obviously intended to convey a violent message.
2) “By any means necessary” is clearly intended to convey a violent message.
No one should give this group any more respect than they would give groups like the KKK.
“Chetly,
Actually, I wish Big Bill had made a longer post. The more “centrists”, and people who are undecided on this issue see people like Big Bill and their attitudes, the more they’ll come to understand my arguments.
Far from offending me, Big Bill is performing a service for me, and all those arguing to continue Affirmative Action.”
With all due respect, Cobra, while Big Bill may have been out of line in his last statement, he did make a valid point: by supporting affirmative action, you are simply supporting a policy that (at least superficially) benefits yourself. That’s hardly noble or altruistic.
On the other hand, given that affirmative action exacerbates and perpetuates the feeling expressed by Bill, it also appears short-sighted.
I think the real problem, whatever we may think of the fringe groups on various sides of the issue, is that on one hand, you have a group calling for ethnic preferences, regardless of background or opportunity, and another group (led by an african-american) opposing such preferences. It’s hard to dispute that the latter position is simply more principled than the former one.
Also, it should be noted that there is no evidence of the pro-MCRI fringe groups seeking to obstruct the democratic process in this case — unlike bamn, which cannot seem to get beyond the tactics of intimidation.
The bottom line is that even members of groups we don’t like have the right to vote — and there nothing wrong with members of the Klan voting for MCRI, any more than there is for members of Bamn to vote against it. What is wrong is for either group to try to suppress or intimidate others in the process. Currently, there is clear evidence of Bamn doing so, and no evidence of the fringe groups doing so. That appears to be the key distinction in this case, and is why Granholm and other AA-supporters need to make a statement condemning such activity.
J writes:
>>>The bottom line is that even members of groups we don’t like have the right to vote — and there nothing wrong with members of the Klan voting for MCRI, any more than there is for members of Bamn to vote against it. What is wrong is for either group to try to suppress or intimidate others in the process. Currently, there is clear evidence of Bamn doing so, and no evidence of the fringe groups doing so. That appears to be the key distinction in this case, and is why Granholm and other AA-supporters need to make a statement condemning such activity.”
The point of John Rosenberg’s original post was not about voter intimidation or disenfranchisement. John wrote here:
>>>”Now, if only Michigan Democrats would wake up and realize who they’re in bed with. (Or do you think they already know?)”
John’s question implies that Michigan Democrats should feel a sense of SHAME for endorsing a position that groups like BAMN agree with. Furthermore, John himself CHALLENGED me to name fringe groups that supported the MCRI.
I merely complied with his request with aplomb.
Here you write something interesting:
>>>I think the real problem, whatever we may think of the fringe groups on various sides of the issue, is that on one hand, you have a group calling for ethnic preferences, regardless of background or opportunity, and another group (led by an african-american) opposing such preferences. It’s hard to dispute that the latter position is simply more principled than the former one.”
What is the significance of the “led by an African American” line? Ward Connerly doesn’t describe himself that way. Is it your position that having a minority figure head absolves any responsibility to the minority group that the movement is adversely affecting?
Second, Affirmative Action is actually a MAJORITY movement, since it applies to not only racial and ethnic minorities, but WHITE WOMEN, the largest single social demographic in America.
>>>”I am not surprised by White males who only comprise 33 percent of the U.S. population, but constitute 80 percent of the U.S. Congress, 90 percent of the U.S. Senate, 100 percent of all U.S. Presidents, 80 percent of professors and doctors, and 92 percent of Forbes magazine’s richest 400 individuals being concerned with downsizing. We have cities with a greater than 50 percent African American population, who can’t secure legislation assuring them 20 percent of governmental contracts. After the Croson vs. Richmond decision, African Americans comprised 70 percent of the population and were receiving 38 percent of the contracts. Today though, they receive less than one percent of governmental contracts.”
http://www.africanamericanimages.com/Reconstruction.htm
In essence, J. the anti-affirmative action movement is desire, whether conscious or not, to perpetuate the pre-existing status quo of minority white male dominance. That is what the statistics bear out, correct?
–Cobra
cobra:
John’s question implies that Michigan Democrats should feel a sense of SHAME for endorsing a position that groups like BAMN agree with.
No, it doesn’t imply that at all. I do not imply but rather affirmatively argue that Michigan Democrats should be ashamed at 1) working hand in glove with BAMN 2) to prevent the citizens of Michigan from voting on whether or not they wish their state to continue the practice of racial preference.
My complaint, in short, is not with the Mich Dems because BAMN agrees with them; it is with their working so closely with BAMN.
Liberals need feel no shame when commies agree with them; conservatives need feel no shame when David Duke agrees with them. Liberals SHOULD feel shame when they don’t repudiate groups like BAMN, just as MCRI should if had not repudiated the Klan. The difference, and it is a big one, is that MCRI has repudiated the Klan and all racist support, while the Dems continue to work with BAMN.
Big Bill:
Of course, if you are black, I understand your desire for yourself, your family and your homies to get ahead “by any means necessary.”,/i.
That desire is pretty typical of blacks, in my experience.
I just got around to reading the above, and so I am a bit late in saying that comments like this are not welcome here.
John,
I appreciate your commentary on Bill’s post, but I’ve provided clear evidence that supporters of the MCRI trolled for signatures and support on white separatists websites. Now, perhaps the MCRI was previously unaware of this type of activity before my 15 seconds of Google searching uncovered them, but never the less, at least ONE of the high ranking members does now.
Chetly Zarko was honest in his response, indicating that he doesn’t have a clue how many signatures were acquired through Klan activity, and I’m pretty sure that same conclusion exists with “Stormfront: White Nationalist Community”, and “American Rennaisance.”
If you’re unfamiliar with Jared Taylor’s “undeceived” magazine on race, their participants are certainly familiar with you, John, as this comment section on the Michigan situation throws you a shout-out.
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/08/michigan_meets.php#comments
Now, does the obvious support of the MCRI by white separatist groups and the Mystic Knights of the Ku Klux Klan besmirch the name of Republicans who sit on the VERY BOARD of the MCRI?
>>>”Gratz is now heading the Michigan initiative started by California businessman Ward Connerly, who led similar successful campaigns in California and Washington. Macomb County Republican state Reps. Leon Drolet of Clinton Township and Jack Brandenburg of Harrison Township also serve on the initiative’s board. The measure has also drawn the support of the Michigan Chapter of the Mystic Knights of the Ku Klux Klan
Cobra writes:
“The point of John Rosenberg’s original post was not about voter intimidation or disenfranchisement. John wrote here:
>>>”Now, if only Michigan Democrats would wake up and realize who they’re in bed with. (Or do you think they already know?)”
John’s question implies that Michigan Democrats should feel a sense of SHAME for endorsing a position that groups like BAMN agree with.”
With all due respect, I think you missed the point of John’s original post.
The fact that Bamn was intimidating voters and interefering with the democratic process was emphasized in his post, and the problem is that Democrats haven’t even bothered to condemn those tactics, much less dissassociate themselves from those groups.
Again, you can’t help which groups support the same goals as you, but you can speak out when such a group behaves unacceptably in furtherance of your cause.
“Here you write something interesting:
>>>I think the real problem, whatever we may think of the fringe groups on various sides of the issue, is that on one hand, you have a group calling for ethnic preferences, regardless of background or opportunity, and another group (led by an african-american) opposing such preferences. It’s hard to dispute that the latter position is simply more principled than the former one.”
What is the significance of the “led by an African American” line? Ward Connerly doesn’t describe himself that way. Is it your position that having a minority figure head absolves any responsibility to the minority group that the movement is adversely affecting?”
The significance is that the movement is led by someone who would, at least superficially, be “harmed” (or at least no longer helped) by the preferential policies at issue. Clearly, Connerly’s position is therefore a principled one.
Aside from that, I’m not sure what responsibilities you’re referring to. I believe we have a responsibility to treat everyone equally, without regard to ethnicity. In fact, I believe this responsibility is enshrined in the constitution, whether or not the supreme court is currently willing to recognize it.
And, if white males are a minority, as you note, then don’t you have a responsibility to them to oppose progarms that adversely affect them, especially the poorest white males? Or do we have a responsibility to elevate wealthier minorities over poor whites simply because of their skin tone? How exactly does that work?
Finally, however, as I have noted, I think minorities overall are harmed by affirmative action far more than they are helped by it, so that is also the reason I support non-discriminatory policies.
“Second, Affirmative Action is actually a MAJORITY movement, since it applies to not only racial and ethnic minorities, but WHITE WOMEN, the largest single social demographic in America.”
In other words, Affirmative Action actually unfairly discriminates against a MINORITY group. Thanks for making even more clear why this program is inherently unacceptable.
>>>”I am not surprised by White males who only comprise 33 percent of the U.S. population, but constitute 80 percent of the U.S. Congress, 90 percent of the U.S. Senate, 100 percent of all U.S. Presidents, 80 percent of professors and doctors, and 92 percent of Forbes magazine’s richest 400 individuals being concerned with downsizing. We have cities with a greater than 50 percent African American population, who can’t secure legislation assuring them 20 percent of governmental contracts. After the Croson vs. Richmond decision, African Americans comprised 70 percent of the population and were receiving 38 percent of the contracts. Today though, they receive less than one percent of governmental contracts.”
http://www.africanamericanimages.com/Reconstruction.htm
In essence, J. the anti-affirmative action movement is desire, whether conscious or not, to perpetuate the pre-existing status quo of minority white male dominance. That is what the statistics bear out, correct?”
Not at all. Whatever the “statistics” may be, the anti-affirmative action movement is simply the desire to ensure that everyone is treated equally before the law.
The real problem with race today, of course, is the perception of intellectual inferiority. Preferential admissions and contracting programs only perpetuate such perceptions, along with other ethnic tensions. They therefore only prolong racism and intolerance in our society. The only path to true equality is one where people are judged on nothing but their own abilities, and when this occurs, individuals of excellence will be recognized and rewarded reqardless of ethnicity. This needs to start with the government if it is to start anywhere.
If a certain group is only receiving 1% of the contracts, it is because they are not offering the same work to the city at the same cost. (If the population is 70% african-american, then they are probably electing the officials of that city, and I doubt that one such minority will discriminate irrationally against other such minorties. I also would hope that NO ethnic group would ever be able to demand a certain percentage of set-aside contracts simply because they are the most numerous in a city. This, of course, could hurt minorities even more than affirmative action.)
The idea that any group deserves a certain amount of government contracts or employment solely because of their numbers in the population is simply unworkable, and is one of the reasons inner-cities have so many problems today, including inner-city schools. Obviously, any city (and their residents) are best served by hiring those contractors and employees who can best serve the local community, period.
Cobra – with regard to your second post, again see my most recent post.
Some unaffiliated supporters may well put up notices on extremist website about the MCRI. You can’t exactly blame the MCRI themselves for this. Moroever, there is no evidence that the KKK is trying to interfere with the process in this case.
Dems need to denounce the tactics engaged by bamn, just as MCRI should if extremist groups begin harassing voters during the campaign.
Question: when a poor white person is bypassed for academic or government positions because of ethnic preferences, do you think that helps or hurts KKK recruitment?
J.
I respectfully disagree with your positions.
Here you write:
>>>”The fact that Bamn was intimidating voters and interefering with the democratic process was emphasized in his post, and the problem is that Democrats haven’t even bothered to condemn those tactics, much less dissassociate themselves from those groups.”
How is BAMN “intimidating voters” when the proposal isn’t even on the ballot yet? Yes, BAMN supporters may be vocal, and they have a propensity to chant. Does that make some anti-affirmative action types uncomfortable? I’m sure it does. Is that “voter intimidation?” I think not. If you would like to view true historical voter intimidation, I suggest you observe what occured in the South during Jim Crow for comparison.
J. writes:
>>>The significance is that the movement is led by someone who would, at least superficially, be “harmed” (or at least no longer helped) by the preferential policies at issue. Clearly, Connerly’s position is therefore a principled one.”
No. As I pointed out on numerous times in the past, Ward Connerly has made himself a MILLIONAIRE through these various “initiatives” and movements.
>>>”In his crusade against racial preferences, Ward Connerly portrays himself as fighting a political power structure financially vested in the status quo, but there’s a flip side: He’s making big bucks himself.
Connerly earned more than $700,000 last year — quadruple the salary of Gov. Davis — from two nonprofit organizations he created years ago to fight racial favoritism, records show. In the four years ending June 2002, he made $2.1 million, according to tax records.
Connerly’s crusade, which began eight years ago as a challenge to admission policies at the University of California, has grown into a multimillion-dollar business that has given him national renown and spawned his autobiography: “Creating Equal: My Fight Against Racial Preferences.”
Connerly’s earnings from his two Sacramento-based nonprofit groups — the American Civil Rights Institute and the American Civil Rights Coalition — have become a lightning rod for critics of his new campaign to bar California agencies from collecting racial data.
“I think Connerly sponsors initiatives for the same reason General Motors sells cars — it’s his business,” said Larry Grisolano, political consultant for a coalition opposing his new initiative. “He makes money by being in the limelight and working the speakers circuit.”
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/7031687p-7964834c.html
The only “principles” that I believe Ward Connerly embrace are those acquiring interest in his portfolio. He certainly isn’t in a position to LOSE from his anti-affirmative action stances, as you argue. His pro-white think tank benefactors will NEVER let that happen.
J. writes:
>>>Not at all. Whatever the “statistics” may be, the anti-affirmative action movement is simply the desire to ensure that everyone is treated equally before the law.”
That’s just INACCURATE, J. I know John HATES it when I talk about discrimination against African Americans, but did you notice the EEOC reports I posted links to? Did you notice the FACT that Michigan was the second WORST STATE for African Americans in regard to employment discrimination? And this is occuring with Affirmative Action IN PLACE! You want to END Affirmative Action in Michigan, and what’s supposed to happen? All of a sudden African Americans will be “ensured of equal treatment under the law?”
My guess is that you didn’t read any of the statistics from that EXTREMELY LONG AND DETAILED EEOC report, because you couldn’t possibly make a statement about “equal treatment” had you done so.
Please review at least the CONCLUSIONS of the report, and then if you STILL feel justified in this type of wishful thinking, so be it.
J. writes:
>>>”The real problem with race today, of course, is the perception of intellectual inferiority. Preferential admissions and contracting programs only perpetuate such perceptions, along with other ethnic tensions. They therefore only prolong racism and intolerance in our society. The only path to true equality is one where people are judged on nothing but their own abilities, and when this occurs, individuals of excellence will be recognized and rewarded reqardless of ethnicity. This needs to start with the government if it is to start anywhere.”
I disagree. America has viewed African Americans as intellectually inferior since DAY ONE. Read what Jefferson thought about the intellectual capacity of blacks. Or Lincoln. Or Theodore Roosevelt. Read Margaret Sanger. Read what Charles Murray’s “The Bell Curve” says about blacks. Or the Eugenicist movement. Read D’nesh D’souza. Read any HOST of websites and blogs from Gene Expression to Steve Salier.
You KNOW I’m not making this up. You KNOW exactly what they say about blacks. Yet somehow, you seem to feel that Affirmative Action in 2005 will “perpetuate” a feeling among whites that blacks are intellectually inferior that is already written in blood across the American landscape? C’mon J.
J. writes:
>>>The idea that any group deserves a certain amount of government contracts or employment solely because of their numbers in the population is simply unworkable, and is one of the reasons inner-cities have so many problems today, including inner-city schools. Obviously, any city (and their residents) are best served by hiring those contractors and employees who can best serve the local community, period.”
So let me get your logic straight here, so I can’t be accused of misquoting you. You’re saying that the “inner-city” has problems. I agree with you. One of the biggest problems is UNEMPLOYMENT. You suggest in your statement that it is somehow WRONG to hire inner-city residents who, by statistics, suffer the highest levels of unemployment. You’re saying it’s WRONG to hire inner-city contractors, when statistics show they’re the LEAST likely to be hired without government intervention.
….
How does NOT hiring community people who are unemployed help the community?
….
How does NOT using inner-city contractors bring revenue back into that said community?
J. writes:
>>>Question: when a poor white person is bypassed for academic or government positions because of ethnic preferences, do you think that helps or hurts KKK recruitment?”
Why do you place a qualifier on that question? I believe RICH white people are every bit as capable of joining hate groups, or embracing white supremacist ideology as poor ones. If someone’s predisposed to scapegoating minorities for all their problems, those white robes were bought, even if only psycologically.
–Cobra
“I could actually respect poor dead Joe Wagner if he had put his money whre his mouth was and given up his spot at the university to some black folks from Detroit. Instead he kept his spot and tried to give away some other white kid’s dreams.”
That’s hardly applicable. Eastern Michigan University doesn’t have affirmative action; it is already one of the most integrated colleges in the nation without it. Furthermore, EMU is not an institution where you need to “keep” your spot. It is quite common for students to take time off–most commonly for financial hardship, as this is a university that caters largely to students from the middle/working classes and below.
Affirmative action is most common in universities, like the University of Michigan, that cater to the upper middle class and above. My one grievance with affirmative action is its shortsightedness in not dealing with class issues. In fact, if it dealt with class exclusively, it would be all the more effective. Wealth begets wealth to the exclusion if the underclasses…their exclusion to top schools, jobs, and more. Cronyism and elite power is what needs to be defeated. If anything, identity politics serves as a distraction that is beneficial to the elite. We’re too busy griping with each other down in the muck to protest them screwing us over.