« UPDATE | Main | What About The Assimilation Of Citizens? »

Gutter Arguments

One of the ubiquitous and hence sad characteristics of the opposition to colorblind equal treatment, in all the states where it has been or is about to be on the ballot, is that so much of it never emerges from the gutter. That’s not to say there are no reasonable arguments on the other side, or that all opponents are permanent gutter dwellers. But, alas, many of them are.

Take this article from the Lincoln Journal Star on the campaign to get a civil rights initiative on the ballot in Nebraska. The article itself is fine, straightforward and unusually even-handed. But I encourage you to read through the comments to the article.

Those supporting the initiative made such arguments as the following:

  • “It is long past time to end this archaic, esoteric, and racist practice. I applaud those who are trying to eliminate reverse discrimination.”

  • “... at my job, I see this in play over and over again. One would think that anyone seeking a job, or promotion at their work place would want the position based on merit alone, not getting extra points due to being a protected class. Would'nt one feel like they didnt earn what they got?

  • “I love ballot initiatives. We should have more say in over arching social legislation and policies. Whatever your stance on the issue, being given the chance to voice your opinion on this matter will have a significant positive impact for years to come. I encourage everyone to sign the petition so we can see both sides of the argument and put it to rest.”

  • “If all races want to be treated equal, then we have to stop the special treatment for some but not all. Affirmative Action is outdated and needs to go away.”

  • “As Dr. King said, he dreamed of a day when his children " will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character". Since affirmative action brings skin color into the hiring equation, he'd want to scrap it too.”

  • “I see that to the left, treating people the same regardless of their race or sex is 'Neanderthal'. Boy, we've come a long way since Martin Luther King.”

  • “I had no idea that the Nebraska Association of Scholars was an 'outside' group. Everyone I know in the group lives in Nebraska. Thus the name. As a matter of fact, the Republican Party has never made a serious effort to end affirmative action. Their corporate backers LIKE affirmative action, because hiring quotas are a quick and easy way of getting Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton off their backs.”
Now look at the comments of some of those who oppose requiring the state to treat everyone without regard to race, ethnicity, national origin, or gender: equality:
  • “Nebraska has already honed discrimination against persons of age, race, gender, religion and now political party in spite of affirmative action. We hardly need a petition to drive the nail in our coffin of homogenized societal norms here. Apparently in Nebraska we prefer stagnation, lack of innovation and perpetuating class warfare by the walk we walk.”

  • “outside money trying to control Nebraska. I hope we don't fall for it again”

  • “....The Republicans routinely promote some Neanderthal ballot initiative about gays, guns, race, or hate to bring their voters to the polls. Each and every time Nebraskans react like trained seals and respond to the bait. Nebraskans are too dumb to catch on to the fact they're being manipulated.”

  • “This is nothing more than another outside group trying to put a knee-jerk issue on the November 2008 balot to boost Republican turnout. They did the same thing in 2004 by getting gay marriage on the ballot in, I think, 11 states. Nebraska doesn't need this; our small minority population and traditionally backward attitudes toward women mean that white males will always be firmly in control.”

  • “I’m so embarrassed ... at times to be from a state that is so obviously full of bigots and hicks and dinosaurs (all together, usually). The best example is the term ‘reverse discrimination’. Please. This area does not embrace culture, art, any sort of growth; just lots o' white people that hate and fight EVERYTHING resembling growth from the stone ages.
For another example of the behavior of those opposing the civil rights initiatives, take a look at this video of signature gatherers being harassed in Oklahoma.

No surprise, in either Nebraska or Oklahoma. If your arguments are weak, contempt for the voters, name-calling, and disruption must seem like reasonable substitutes.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.discriminations.us/sa/mt-tb.cgi/6412

Say What?

not sure where you're going with this. the comments aren't outrageous, though obviously they aren't very nice. and they're certainly not atypical of what you'd expect to find on an anonymous discussion site. i'm sure there are lots of sites out there where pro-preference commenters post nice stuff while anti-preference people post bad stuff, but i think it'd be a bit silly to pick random bad samples from the anti-preference group to prove a point. we all realize of course that you're not saying that all pro-preference people come from the "gutter" (why a person who comments that "Nebraska has already honed discrimination against persons of age, race, gender, religion and now political party in spite of affirmative action. We hardly need a petition to drive the nail in our coffin of homogenized societal norms here. Apparently in Nebraska we prefer stagnation, lack of innovation and perpetuating class warfare by the walk we walk" is obviously a "gutter-dweller" remains a bit mysterious), but i doubt you'd deny that the basic theme of your post is that there are more pro-preference gutter-dwellers out there than there are anti-preference gutter-dwellers. yes, i think that's a silly statement.

Post a comment