Race relations/affirmative action

[pondwater]

mod note: split and moved all non-Sterling-related posts to a new thread

Incorrect.  I may elect not to do business with (or to actively boycott) people that espouse such positions, or I may elect to vote them out of office, or I may campaign for them to be fired (as appropriate).

You are making the common mistake of conflating free speech for which the government will not arrest you with speech without consequences.  Sterling's speech, like most anyone else's, has consequences.

Yes, you can boycott a business or vote someone out of office. However, as noted in the previous post, those type people are a small percentage of racists, homophobes, or whoever else's opinions or positions you choose to disagree with. You can only make those high profile people suffer a little. If someone walked up to you on the street and said that they don't like you because of your race, there is absolutely nothing you can do. You can do nothing to 99.9% of the racists out there, it is their right to dislike or hate anyone they please. That is the price we pay for living in a free country.

You're rather obviously wrong; it does change things.  60 years ago, George Marshall steadfastly refused to integrate the Redskins.  Such an action would be financial suicide today.  Progress continues to be made.
Again, no one is claiming that the government should arrest Sterling, so there's no need to bring up the red herring about his perfectly legal opinion.

So you can force a company to agree with politically correct sentiment, but how are you going to make regular citizens comply? You're focused on a small percentage of high profile people. What about the rest of America?

His opinion is not acceptable to society, and you are seeing capitalism at work: his business partners have decided that he is an unwanted liability, and they are rapidly moving to disentangle themselves from him.

Aren't you normally in favor of the free market?  Why aren't you praising capitalism in this case?

The opinion of the racist that lives down the block from you is just as acceptable as your opinion on the matter, you just don't like it.

[Phishfan]

^^^ So is your point to ignore things you can have an affect on because you cannot have an affect everywhere?

[pondwater]

I wonder if Knicks’ Larry Johnson will be fined, fired, or suspended for his calls for all-black basketball league. Seems just as racist and discriminatory to exclude all races except blacks. Not only that, he said it in public and wasn't set up and illegally recorded in private. Lets see if the media crucifies him like they did Sterling.  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/28/knicks-larry-johnson-calls-all-black-nba-league/

[Spider-Dan]

Yes, you can boycott a business or vote someone out of office. However, as noted in the previous post, those type people are a small percentage of racists, homophobes, or whoever else's opinions or positions you choose to disagree with.

Yes, and by highlighting the examples of these high-profile people, three things are accomplished:

1) People with sympathetic beliefs (who are willing to publicly defend him) are also criticized
2) People with sympathetic beliefs (who are not willing to say them out loud) are driven further underground
3) Younger generations see that these kinds of beliefs are Not OK

If someone walked up to you on the street and said that they don't like you because of your race, there is absolutely nothing you can do.

Again, wrong.  I can take a picture (or video) of this person and post it on Twitter, Facebook, etc.  Social pressure can be applied, to both him personally and his employer (or business partners).

So you can force a company to agree with politically correct sentiment, but how are you going to make regular citizens comply?

Wait... who is forcing the NBA to agree?  Its players?  Its owners?  Its commissioner?  Its customers?

You say this as if all of the above would actually prefer to just ignore Sterling's racism and move on with their life, but because of the Politically Correct Police, they have to act like this bothers them.  If this is what you believe, you need to escape your echo chamber.

You're focused on a small percentage of high profile people. What about the rest of America?

As has been the case since the founding of this nation, the rest of America is progressing forward.  Just as the abolitionists drove the narrative on slavery, just as the women's suffrage movement drove the narrative on the vote, and just as the civil rights movement drove the narrative on Jim Crow, the narrative continues to be driven further, and each generation is less bigoted than the last.  (Just look at the dramatic reversals on same sex marriage in America over the last 10 years.)

Consider that when Donald Sterling was a boy, his statements wouldn't even have been notable.  In the 80 years he's been alive, we've went from an openly racist culture to one where even racists (like Donald Sterling!) have to insist that they are not racist or immediately be exiled to the fringes of society.

The racists lost the culture war.  They lost badly, and they lost absolutely.  The only way they are even allowed to play the game any more is to say, "Listen, I'm no racist, but..."

The opinion of the racist that lives down the block from you is just as acceptable as your opinion on the matter, you just don't like it.

It sounds like you're saying that you find racism "acceptable."  Not "regrettable," not "unavoidable," not "legal"... acceptable.

[Spider-Dan]

I wonder if Knicks’ Larry Johnson will be fined, fired, or suspended for his calls for all-black basketball league. Seems just as racist and discriminatory to exclude all races except blacks. Not only that, he said it in public and wasn't set up and illegally recorded in private. Lets see if the media crucifies him like they did Sterling.  http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/28/knicks-larry-johnson-calls-all-black-nba-league/

Have you heard that there is an organization called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?  How incredibly racist is that?!  I can only imagine the media firestorm that would surround a National Association for the Advancement of White People.  But the lamestream liberal media happily ignores this clearly racist organization because it doesn't fit their narrative.  They actually treat this group of racists like a respectable, mainstream organization!

You also never hear from the media about the race-baiting Black History Month and Hispanic Heritage Month, but if you even mention creating a White History Month, suddenly everyone is calling you a racist!

Will no one stand up for the oppressed majority?  Or will this just be another repeat of the war on (the overwhelming majority population of) Christians in this nation?

[Fau Teixeira]

Have you heard that there is an organization called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?  How incredibly racist is that?!  I can only imagine the media firestorm that would surround a National Association for the Advancement of White People.  But the lamestream liberal media happily ignores this clearly racist organization because it doesn't fit their narrative.  They actually treat this group of racists like a respectable, mainstream organization!

You also never hear from the media about the race-baiting Black History Month and Hispanic Heritage Month, but if you even mention creating a White History Month, suddenly everyone is calling you a racist!

Will no one stand up for the oppressed majority?  Or will this just be another repeat of the war on (the overwhelming majority population of) Christians in this nation?

i see what you did there

[CF DolFan]

Why is it ok to oppress the majority? I mean ... eventually white Christians will not be the majority so will it still be ok to bash them at every turn? Wouldn't it be far more positive and effective to unilaterally stop anything that segregates our society?

[Fau Teixeira]

Why is it ok to oppress the majority? I mean ... eventually white Christians will not be the majority so will it still be ok to bash them at every turn? Wouldn't it be far more positive and effective to unilaterally stop anything that segregates our society?

Show me a single instance of the majority being oppressed and not the oppressor.  And who's bashing white christians anyways?

contrary to what you've probably heard .. a teller saying "happy holidays" rather than "merry christmas" isn't a "war" on christmas

[Cathal]

Can't we all agree that if a white person did/said the same thing as a minority, he'd be in trouble? I don't remember if there was any repercussions for Sean Combs when he yelled "Black Power" during the NBA All-Star games. I'm sure if Larry Bird yelled "White Power" he'd be crucified. Besides, won't white people be a minority in a few years anyway? So we can finally pull the race card in that instance? 

P.S. Most of this is a joke but some isn't.

[Spider-Dan]

Why is it ok to oppress the majority?

The majority isn't being "oppressed."  Certain political elements have seen the success of various civil rights movements, and have decided to co-opt their language.  This is why you see anti-gay bigots complaining about the intolerance of people who insist they treat homosexuals like normal humans.  "Religious freedom" is the new "states' rights;" no one bought it as an excuse for racism in the '60s, and no one buys it as an excuse for homophobia today.

Wouldn't it be far more positive and effective to unilaterally stop anything that segregates our society?

I think more work still needs to be done to protect those who are vulnerable to the majority and/or the powerful.

[CF DolFan]

Can't we all agree that if a white person did/said the same thing as a minority, he'd be in trouble? I don't remember if there was any repercussions for Sean Combs when he yelled "Black Power" during the NBA All-Star games. I'm sure if Larry Bird yelled "White Power" he'd be crucified. Besides, won't white people be a minority in a few years anyway? So we can finally pull the race card in that instance? 

P.S. Most of this is a joke but some isn't.

Pretty much anything that comes out of Spike Lee's mouth or any cause Jesse or Al are making money off of is insulting to white people. If Jack Nicholson spoke like Spike Lee in reverse or did the things he did then he would have been hanged by now. I'm speaking metaphorically but literally probably isn't too far off.

[CF DolFan]

The majority isn't being "oppressed."  Certain political elements have seen the success of various civil rights movements, and have decided to co-opt their language.  This is why you see anti-gay bigots complaining about the intolerance of people who insist they treat homosexuals like normal humans.  "Religious freedom" is the new "states' rights;" no one bought it as an excuse for racism in the '60s, and no one buys it as an excuse for homophobia today.
I think more work still needs to be done to protect those who are vulnerable to the majority and/or the powerful.

So in your opinion it's OK to bash the majority because they have the upper hand. so when the tables flip whitey can then join in.  Anyone who disagrees is a bigot? Funny how one side can have opinions and yet the other side is always a negative name just because they disagree. seems to me you aren't calling individual people bigots but Jesus himself. Why sugar coat that?

I obviously disagree with you but I applaud the honesty of your opinion.

[Sunstroke]

If Jesus were actually a real person, as well as some form of "Divine" Son of God, then I believe that, if he had been around to read the finished version of the Bible, he would have either performed massive edits or just condemned the entire thing outright.

However, since he wasn't, and He wasn't, then the individual people being outed for bigotry when it comes to the Bible are the archaic people who actually wrote it...as well as those who blindly follow those archaic writers despite the fact that they are, well, archaic.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think more work still needs to be done to protect those who are vulnerable to the majority and/or the powerful.

I no longer support affirmative action.  If you asked me on Nov.  3, 2008 if I supported AA I would have not hesitated to have said yes.  But on Nov 5th, only 2 days, later I supported repealing every single program that gives a preference based on race.  

This wasn't based on being bothered by what happened on Nov 4, in fact I was thrilled with what happened on Nov 4.  

In case you are wondering what caused this radical shift in opinion, here is what happened on Nov 4th:  The vast majority of Americans decided to elect the person best suited to lead this nation without regard to the color of the skin of people running for office.  Was it 100%?  No there were some racist white democrats that voted for McCain because they didn't want to see this country run by black, and there were some racist black republicans who crossed party lines just because Obama was black (e.g. Condi Rice) But most Americans voted for to hire the person that they thought was best suited for the job and most matched their political ideology.  

For the most part people who voted for Obama did so because he matched their political views.  Yes, very few blacks voted McCain, but very few blacks ever vote Republican.  

It is time to finally realize MLK's dream.  Any organization that favors blacks over whites is just a racist as any organization that favors whites over blacks.  

This doesn't mean affirmative action was wrong or a mistake.  It served an important purpose, we would not have gotten were we are without it.  It helped us move closer to becoming a race blind society, now it is preventing us from moving further in that direction.  

[Spider-Dan]

So in your opinion it's OK to bash the majority because they have the upper hand. so when the tables flip whitey can then join in.

Yes, absolutely.  If you wanted to talk to me about the oppression of white Christians in, say, China, I'm totally receptive.  In America?  Not so much.

Anyone who disagrees is a bigot?

No, you can disagree without being a bigot.  It's just difficult to separate the two because, much like with "states' rights," the people who crowed the loudest about state sovereignty are the same people who wanted to use that sovereignty to enact racist laws.  So "states' rights" is just a convenient middleman.

Funny how one side can have opinions and yet the other side is always a negative name just because they disagree.

Are you talking about the America-hating unpatriotic socialism-loving liberals, or some other group?

seems to me you aren't calling individual people bigots but Jesus himself. Why sugar coat that?

Not that I necessarily agree with your interpretation of the Bible (are homosexuals more of a problem than shellfish or clothes with mixed fibers?), but no, I don't really have a problem with calling someone from 2000 years ago a bigot.  Racism, slavery, and rape were readily accepted customs of that era.  They are not today.