Almost exactly a year ago Roger Clegg reminded us that “affirmative action” was turning 50, noting that “the first time the phrase “affirmative action” was used in the civil rights context, in Executive Order 10925, which President Kennedy signed on March 6, 1961.”
He also noted, of course, that then the phrase meant the opposite of what it quickly came to mean: “taking positive steps, proactive measures … to make sure racial discrimination did not occur, that individuals were treated “without regard” to race by government contractors.
“Fifty years [now 51] is a long time,” Clegg observed.
It means that about seven out of 10 Americans have never lived a day of their lives when there wasn’t affirmative action. Even if we make the generous assumption that it took a decade for the phrase to be twisted into its current meaning, that still means more than half of Americans have always lived under a legal regime in which politically incorrect discrimination was banned but politically correct discrimination was permitted, even encouraged, even required.
Perhaps in Fisher v. Texas, to be argued next fall, the Supreme Court will recognize that discrimination based on race can never be politically correct.
Roger Clegg writes:
“There are those who believe racial preferences were needed in the 1960s, in the immediate aftermath of Jim Crow. I’m not one of them, but I respect that point of view.”
Being against something that’s 51 years old that you never agreed with in the first place is no great feat, but we know from past writings, that neo-confederate Clegg has a fetish for “interesting” commentary on American History in regards to race:
“The Senate unanimously passed a resolution on June 18 that “apologizes to African-Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow laws.”
Sorry, Senate, but you’re not speaking on my behalf…
…I’ll be accused of just not getting it, and I am afraid that’s true. I do not understand why people who had nothing to do with two shameful institutions can or should apologize to people who may have nothing in common with the victims but skin color. And I do not understand — I really don’t — how this is supposed to advance rather than retard racial relations.”
http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-senate%E2%80%99s-slavery-and-jim-crow-apology-from-whom-to-whom-and-why/
What I don’t understand, is how any objective observer, particularly conscious minorities, cannot now see that there is something “extra” fueling Clegg’s Koch-funded Pickett-like charge against minority progress in America.
–Cobra
Cobra – look, I get it – by it I mean your plea to properly recognize the status of minorities (particularly blacks) as victims. There is no question that black Americans were subject to a horrific historical turn of events.
I have observed affirmative action programs in action for a few decades now, including having an opportunity to observe one such program in one of America’s most successful business enterprises. The programs in general do not work very well at all, although in the one successful enterprise I think (just like virtually everything else at this entity) it does work better than most. And by “work” I mean fully integrating people in the mainstream, and holding all people to the same rigorous performance standards. I can’t speak to Roger Clegg’s internal motivations or what goes on in his head, but I can observe how well programs work.
Affirmative action in practice has been the least effective in highly competitive university settings (remember, given how poorly most students, irrespective of race, are prepared for college competitive admissions only take place in about 20% of schools). There are some great exceptions, but it is really difficult for a student to enter two standard deviations or so behind in terms of skill (note that I am not alluding to test scores or GPA’s – although at some level they are relevant – but rather skill and preparation) and perform at the level of most of their peers. And this is no idle concern. The job market has irrevocably changed since 2008, and it is vital to gain an education with minimal debt and which conveys practical skills. This is a reality irrespective of even the most generous civil rights programs. I just wonder how many black students with considerable race preferences are admitted to the Duke University’s of the universe, only to major in subjects with less rigor than they otherwise would have if, for example, they simply were matched at schools at their demonstrated level of preparation. Put one way, how many black students forego at a pharmacy degree at VCU in exchange for an ethnic studies degree at Duke (pharmacy jobs pay over a 100k)? It is not an idle question, and it puts affirmative action debates in an entirely different context than the typical discussion over which white or asian student was displaced by affirmative action. My own experience at a very top ranked graduate school was depressing in terms of affirmative action, leading to lots (and I mean lots) of debt for the students involved and way too many challenges, including professional licensing challenges, for the bulk of the students, who never really were properly counseled as to the likelihood of ending up in the bottom of the class and the negative consequences which could obtain. It is tough, because the symbolism which would obtain at the top schools would be, to say the least, disappointing. But merely having school administrators to bask in the glow of diversity does not get the job done in terms of jobs, preparation, and personal development.
I suspect you would say (but am not sure) that you would be happy to let black students take the “mismatch” risks, because what is important is the opportunity above all else. But at some point reality does intrude, and as I say, in many cases these programs are not working well. Not an easy question, and to me, the real burning issue with race preferences.
rogermortimer writes:
“Cobra – look, I get it – by it I mean your plea to properly recognize the status of minorities (particularly blacks) as victims. There is no question that black Americans were subject to a horrific historical turn of events. “
Roger, I appreciate your thoughtful post. Especially the tone you strike at the beginning.
rogermortimer writes:
“I just wonder how many black students with considerable race preferences are admitted to the Duke University’s of the universe, only to major in subjects with less rigor than they otherwise would have if, for example, they simply were matched at schools at their demonstrated level of preparation. Put one way, how many black students forego at a pharmacy degree at VCU in exchange for an ethnic studies degree at Duke (pharmacy jobs pay over a 100k)?”
You raise a real life point here, and it’s truly though-provoking. In the grand scheme of things, there are certain majors and degrees that in theory will lead to higher salaries, especially to start. I know money talks, but I don’t believe it should be the end all and be all of higher education and pursuing one’s dreams. Second, if there wasn’t an added intrinsic value of having a degree from the “public ivies”, (the real focus of the anti-affirmative action crowd) I personally believe they wouldn’t be fighting so hard to “reserve” a mono-racial hegemony at them.
rogermortimer writes:
“I suspect you would say (but am not sure) that you would be happy to let black students take the “mismatch” risks, because what is important is the opportunity above all else. But at some point reality does intrude, and as I say, in many cases these programs are not working well. Not an easy question, and to me, the real burning issue with race preferences.”
It’s not an easy question. American Society and race is not an easy question.
http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/423484_10150579075453589_6277368588_9276902_1077438375_n.jpg
But as I try to get across in my art, “race preferences” in America are certainly not restricted to Affirmative Action. The diversification of American Society from the BOTTOM UP would certainly begin to address many of the issues of jobs, preparation and personal development. One only has to look at statistics regarding the rise of the Black middle class.
In 1960 on 750,000 African-Americans had “middle class jobs.” By 1995 the number was over 7,000,000. In 1967 on 4% of African-Americans over the age of 25 had college degrees at all (much less a public ivy), but be 2007 18.5% had done so. That is DEMONSTRABLE progress, and Affirmative Action undeniably played a role.
One of the issues I have with Roger Clegg, and the ham-fisted, anti-minority think-tank puppeteers is that their movement is methodical in their assault on Black America.
1. More Blacks are getting into good colleges?
“Let’s kill Affirmative Action!” (reducing Black enrollment)
2. Government is the #1 employer of Black men and #2 employer of Black women?
“Let’s cut taxes and shrink the size of government!” (disproportionately and adversely affecting Black workers, causing layoffs.)
3. Non-college educated Blacks gained middle class status through union jobs?
“Let’s bust the unions with uniformed legislation over several states!”
4. 96% of African-Americans vote for Obama in a historic turnout?
“Let’s destroy urban voter registration organizations (ACORN), and impose NEW stringent, unprecedented voter registration and ID requirements to make sure that NEVER happens again!”
I could go on and on, Robert, to school re-segregation, to even the Affordable Care Act. There is a war on being waged on African-Americans, IMHO.
I chose which side I’m fighting for.
–Cobra
You left out part 5 of the evil (WN I think) racist conspiracy, Cobra:
5) low skilled, hard-working blacks able to make living?
“Open the borders to low-skill illegal immigration to bid down the price of labor.” (Evil White conspiracy)
Oh, and six:
6) Black illegitimacy rates only 24% in 1965?
“Too low. Raise those illegitimacy rates to above 70%!” (Evil White conspiracy)
7) Black people starting to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps?
“Can’t have that. Invent a conspiracy behind every rock so some blacks might blame others for their own social pathologies.” (Evil White conspiracy)
8) Black people starting to think and act for themselves politically?
“Endow a few chairs at Presitigous Universities for paid, articulate Grievance Mongers, throw $Billions at poverty, illegitimacy, and social dysfunction, thereby aggravating and perpetuating all of it, so that blacks’ll continue to vote for Leftists who will otherwise act completely against black interests.” (Evil White conspiracy)
I see now… you really could go on and on…
Steve writes:
““Open the borders to low-skill illegal immigration to bid down the price of labor.” (Evil White conspiracy)”
LOL…so African-Americans are “opening the borders?” That’s news to me. I suppose you would have me believe that it’s predominantly African-American farmers, contractors, and business owners who are HIRING all of these illegal immigrants who make it across the borders we African-Americans held open for them?
Really?
““Too low. Raise those illegitimacy rates to above 70%!” (Evil White conspiracy)”
Easier Access to contraception, including affordable hormonal, prescribed birth control for women would most certainly help bring those numbers down, especially is it’s covered by the insurance she already pays for…oh–I’m sorry. Today’s Republican Party seems to have some issues with this:
http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/419537_10150559032708589_6277368588_9215109_915544033_n.jpg
You would think that a conservative movement that’s trying to hand out social security numbers to every zygote would never declare any birth ‘illegitimate”, but I digress.
But your real rib-tickler, Steve:
“Black people starting to think and act for themselves politically?”
I need to you to “go on” about this one. Please tell me what this statement means. How exactly does one “think and act for themselves politically?” And why do you think it’s “starting”, given the results of the last Presidential election in 2008?
–Cobra
LOL…so African-Americans are “opening the borders?” That’s news to me.
Cobra, it isn’t ironic if I have to spell it all out… Obviously low-skill wage competition has hurt African Americans most of all. And yet liberals (of the left and right) just cannot get enough of it.
Easier Access to contraception, including affordable hormonal, prescribed birth control for women would most certainly help bring those numbers down,
You mean relative to the 1965 numbers? Back when the government was handing out free contraceptives on every street corner and people thought babies came from storks? Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result…
Please tell me what this statement means. How exactly does one “think and act for themselves politically?
One would start by voting for what is actually in one’s own self-interests, and not what some professional race-baiting crank, usually sitting in a cushy university chair, says is one’s own interest. Blacks are bought and paid for tools of the democratic machine at least as much as social conservatives are of the GOP. They keep voting the same way, and things just keep getting worse and worse. And Obama, like both Bushes, like Clinton (the so-called “first black president”), like Reagan, like every single respectible mainstream politician in the last 30 years, wants to keep the spigot of immigration (legal or otherwise) wide open… because to not do that… well, that would just be “racist”. And look who benefits and look who suffers most? In the Jim Crow South, a black man had, in spite of legal bigotry stacked against him, a better than even chance at providing a decent living for himself and his family. After 50 years of “progress” on the issue, the black man in LA has much less of a chance today.
So go ahead, find an evil conspiracy behind every rock to explain African American dysfunction, keep demanding more rent, more liberal politics, more dependency… and watch that race commit suicide.
Steve writes:
“Cobra, it isn’t ironic if I have to spell it all out… Obviously low-skill wage competition has hurt African Americans most of all. And yet liberals (of the left and right) just cannot get enough of it.
Actually, there are two greater enemies of African-American low-skill wage labor…discrimination and outsourcing. Take Milwaukee for example:
“First, the numbers. From 1970 to 2007, the percentage of families in the Milwaukee metropolitan area that were middle class declined from 37 to 24 percent, according to a new analysis by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission…
…During the same period, the proportion of affluent families grew from 22 to 27 percent–while the percentage of poor households swelled from 23 to 31 percent. In short, Milwaukee’s middle class families went from a plurality to its smallest minority….
…The biggest culprit is the disappearance of well-paying manufacturing jobs. Despite a promising recent uptick in high-end manufacturing, Milwaukee has suffered a 40 percent decline in manufacturing jobs since 1970, when Schlitz, Pabst and American Motors reigned. Instead of shrinking, the city’s urban poverty is creeping outward toward suburbs.”
http://blogs.reuters.com/david-rohde/2011/12/15/milwaukees-middle-class-is-evaporating/
I didn’t read in this story that JUST African-Americans are affected by this, and obviously shuttered factories aren’t hiring illegal immigrants to “maintain the shutters.”
Steve writes:
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result…”
Oh no, I would never accuse today’s GOP of wanting to do the “same thing” on the issue of birth control…
Santorum: “Birth Control Harms Women and Society”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MBO9tNNejo
Romney: “Planned Parenthood? We’re gonna get rid of that.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLM_nDczR2g
The Republican Controlled State Legislature of Arizona:
“The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 6-2 Monday to endorse a controversial bill that would allow Arizona employers the right to deny health insurance coverage for contraceptives based on religious objections.
Arizona House Bill 2625, authored by Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, would permit employers to ask their employees for proof of medical prescription if they seek contraceptives for non-reproductive purposes, such as hormone control or acne treatment.”
http://www.statepress.com/2012/03/12/senate-judiciary-committee-endorses-controversial-contraceptive-bill/
Steve writes:
“In the Jim Crow South, a black man had, in spite of legal bigotry stacked against him, a better than even chance at providing a decent living for himself and his family.”
You were making a much more respectable argument with the Black vs. Social Conservative voting trends.
86% of all non-white families in Mississippi lived below the poverty line in between 1955-1965. Access to higher education? Health care? Equal Justice under the law? Come on, Steve. You’re going nowhere with the “good old days were better” argument, there.
Truth be told, you and I would probably agree on a lot of subjects, because you seem to understand that the game is rigged, and the Ivory Tower money-changers are the ultimate puppeteers. As far as the survival of African-Americans are concerned? We’re pretty resilient folks. Centuries of slavery, Jim Crow Apartheid, discrimination and degradation…and we’re still here, much to the chagrin of the tailor-suit eugenics crowd.
–Cobra
I recall somewhere back there in the late ’60s somebody in the Beltway said they expected we would need AffAction for maybe 7-10 years. Then just about the time those years were over, in the mid’70s, it was “diversity” that required AffAction. Now recently a Supreme Court Justice (O’Connor, I think) has said in an Opinion or obiter dictum that things should be OK to end it by “2038” or so.
And of course, things have gone from Race to Gender to ‘Minority’ such that now most of the country qualifies as ‘minority’ and requires AffAction.
It’s been half-a-century and to hear people tell it, things are just as bad or even worse. If a program that has cost billions if not trillions hasn’t work in half-a-century then you have to ask yourself if it is really working.
On top of all that, you have to wonder: “dominant” and “oppressive” and “hegemonic” are all terms taken right out of Italian Communist Antonio Gramsci’s early-2oth century ideas on how to undermine Western cultures and polities in order to insinuate Marxism-Leninism into them; his thought was that you couldn’t simply have a Russian-type October Revolution in the more civily competent and robust polities of Western Europe the way they pulled it off in “the East” (meaning in Russia).
No, ‘civil rights’ and ‘gender’ advocates didn’t invent these terms; they took Gramsci’s ideas for their own and decided to try his game-plan here. The Dems, and later the Republicans for their own purposes, signed-on. Initially it was embraced by the Beltway for the ‘demographics’: to replace the New Deal voting-groups alienated by the Civil Rights legislation of the mid-1960s with new Identity groups – and Identity Politics was the result, as each Identity’s self-proclaimed ‘advocates’ became just another ‘interest-group’ that could do deals with the eager Beltway pols.
Radical feminism (different from moderate feminism) spear-headed the justifications for all this by simply substituting ‘women’ for ‘proletariat’ in all the old Marx-Lenin tomes and declaring Year One of a new ‘revolution’ over here. And so it has gone on since at least 1972, when the Dems declared themselves the Party of Women and got whacked 49 States to one in the presidential elections of that year.
Now we have a government that has embraced first principles from a truly Alien and even anti-American Universe and who can be surprised that the politics and Constitutional machinery of the American Framing Universe don’t work well any longer?
But when most of The People ‘just don’t get it’ then why have a democracy or a republic or a Constitution at all? Thus too, if the Constitution is just a ‘text’ that anybody can have ‘feelings’ about that trump whatever the author(s) originally intended, why can’t the President ‘read’ the Constitution that way? Thus Obama turns out as dangerous as Bush 2.
And the beat goes on.
More ideas about this on the Chez Odysseus site.