It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Where Are the Most Segregated Schools? In Liberal States!, Of Course!

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:34 PM
reply to post by generik

You might try reading the articles and study to see whether community, income, prejudice or ethnicity played a part; they ALL discuss them at varying lengths.

Doesn't anyone here read or think for themselves?

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:37 PM

reply to post by Willtell

And it's also the other way around. Having lived in GA for a few years, I can tell you that many of the African-American's who reside in that state are also equally as ignorant as you and other racists. It's a two way street, and unlike whites, African-American's have laws on the books that help them with racism leaving the road for "reverse racism" clear to be abused.

Anyone with the least bit of interest in truth can review facts and see the truth of the matters asserted in the study.

Look at state and local governments for more evidence of "reverse racism" if you want to see; even the Whitehouse is not immune.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:44 PM
reply to post by Auricom


About what?
Those blacks have double the unemployment rate of whites.
Whites have over 100 thousand dollars net wealth to blacks 5 thousand dollars!

And every other statistic is generally the same in this wonderful country of race fairness and equality.

The reality of the racism of America is clear…north and south. Those who deny it are the delusional AND ignorant.

The thing about reverse racism is that black people in America in general are rarely in power enough to exert racism and there is no statistics to demonstrate of a problem of reverse racism where whites are oppressed of course only in some folks delusional mind.

posted on Mar, 27 2014 @ 11:49 PM
This about the north being more prejudice that the south is confirmation of the fallacy of what many of the people on this forum scream about:


This study seems to contradict that.

If the “liberal” north is discriminatory and segregationist and the south is “better” than we are in a world of trouble!

I think this subject will fade away cause it doesn’t meet the preconceived notions of people on this forum about racism and segregation

(post by sheepslayer247 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:03 AM

I'm not surprised that, in evidence of OP not comprehending their very elementary logical mistakes, they attacked and tried to deflect what they didn't understand in the first place

The UCLA authors conducted an in-depth analysis of data from objective sources; they had no comprehension problem, as those who reject the findings out of hand seem to.

UCLA Civil Rhights Project - New York Schools

... so I'll make it simpler:

The assertion that the condition of "segregation" in these States is directly attributable to the way they vote in Presidential elections ... is ludicrous.

It appears you and your friends are the only ones making that "ludicrous" assertion!
The UCLA Civil Rights Project analyzed state and local government, school district governance, and community associations; they made hardly any reference to national politics at all!

Your prejudice is all in your own heads and hearts.

It's a matter of population distribution ... but that's inconvenient to a anti-liberal harangue.

NOW we're getting "ludicrous!"
You assert that political affiliation or liberalism/conservatism are factors of the make-up of segments of population?
Did majorities and minorities "inherit" their innate beliefs and values?
These are cultural artifacts that have nothing to do with presidential voting preferences.

There's plenty of factual material to damn either side of the false dichotomy of the US political spectrum with ... we don't have to fabricate or willfully misinterpret the facts.

No, you don't; and trying to transform personal value sets in to political choices proves your "false dichotomy" assumption wrong on its face.
How else would you explain conservative minorities and liberal majorities? You can't, so don't pretend it's real.

PS: Auricom, the "laws that protect African Americans" protect all Americans. You're just repeating garden-variety racist clap-trap. Demonstrate any laws that you wish that benefit ONLY African Americans.

You do not need "laws" to perfect "reverse racism;" witness Eric Holder's insistence the DoJ Civil Rights division serves only "black" discrimination; or Obama's "My Brother's Keeper" outreach SOLELY to young, black males. Go to any state civil service department run by a minority member, and look at the make-up of the new-hires. Or, consider the VA benefits officer recorded telling a white applicant to get out because "we own this."

Deny ignorance.


(post by jdub297 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:13 AM
reply to post by jdub297

Macro Remedial solutions to centuries of pernicious and conscious racial discrimination are not reverse racism. That’s your subjective conclusion and assumption.

Being human of course some might abuse something just as numerous white Americans abused their freedom to discriminate against minorities in this country's history.

Because of some people who might abuse a right doesn’t make it reasonable to deny solutions to institutional racism.

edit on 28-3-2014 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:16 AM
reply to post by jdub297

Just checked the stats and still no mention on the broadcast networks or MSNBC, although Bloomberg and several foreign outlets have taken up the story and study.

My guess is ABC, NBC CBS will pick it up in passing and criticize the findings or downplay them as so many ATS "progressives," who refuse to see the truth when it's in their face, have chosen to do.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:25 AM

reply to post by jdub297

Macro Remedial solutions to centuries of pernicious and conscious racial discrimination are not reverse racism. That’s your subjective conclusion and assumption.

"Centuries of pernicious and conscious racial discrimination?"
Why not "eons?"
Some here argue "tribalism" is human nature.

Being human of course some might abuse something just as numerous white Americans abused their freedom to discriminate against minorities in this country's history.

Because of some people who might abuse a right doesn’t make it reasonable to deny solutions to institutional racism.

Oh, so what was denied to be happening is now completely acceptable and understandable?
But why limit this to "white Americans," when African and Eastern slavery and discrimination predate America by "centuries," if not eons?

Face it, your "macro remedial solutions" are your way of minimizing and making palatable reverse discrimination, nothing more or less.

Deny "macro remedial" ignorance!


posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:35 AM
reply to post by jdub297

Also, “reverse racism” is an oxymoron since the intention of an act or acts has a lot to do with its reality.

The intention of macro solutions to ingrained institutional racism does not have behind it the intention of denying others rights in the process of granting rights to a historical oppressed minority.

Such an act would be folly in the extreme and only work to spoil the remedy in question.

People who constantly harp on this situation have to look into their own hearts behind their obsession with this concept of “reverse racism”

For if it is something called “reverse racism” in this country then it sure aint working.

Obama helping minorities is not racism towards whites but an attempt to rectify historical discrimination.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:38 AM
If there ever were reverse racism I would be the first one to fight against it.

With all due respect many here aren’t looking at the reality and context of the situation.

The majority powerful in this country is and has been what we call white people.

They have been the ones with the power.

In the beginning of this country ALL rights were granted ONLY to white men. Even white woman couldn’t vote.

Over the years minorities have fought for greater rights from that power group and things have changed but there is still a way to go.

Perfection will be unlikely be achieved though it should be sought for, imo.

One must view the context of any problem and the context here is the above facts.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:44 AM
Oh my ... this is merely getting sad. A few clarifications, and I'm out for greener pastures.

1. OP asserted that the findings of the UCLA study (which I linked to in my post) proved something about "liberal" states ... THAT is the faulty logic here, not the study nor anything anyone else has posted.

2. The only person that has argued that the UCLA study says something about national politics is the OP.

3. Now the OP is spasmodically trying to muddy the water by claiming that others are making the arguments that OP made.

4. My post made the claim that the "segregation" demonstrated in the study is (probably) the result of population distribution NOT that political beliefs are. Good lord: READ!

5. Member Auricom stated that there are "laws that protect African Americans." I stated that the laws protect everyone; I stand by that regardless of paltry attempts to rewrite and willfully misconstrue.

edit on 0Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:47:08 -050014p122014366 by Gryphon66 because: Taa.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:45 AM
reply to post by jdub297

Here' a surprise for critics of the UCLA study, a similar examination in 2004 came to the exact same conclusion:

New York Schools: Fifty Years After Brown
by Gail Robinson, May 17, 2004

The Manhattan P.S. 6 is overwhelmingly white and includes only a smattering of poor students. Its East Flatbush counterpart is more than 92 percent black, with almost 90 percent of its students from families with low enough incomes to qualify the children for a free school lunch.

The differences between these schools reflect the state of education in New York City public schools today, 50 years after the Supreme Court outlawed legally enforced school segregation in the United States. Despite a far greater ethnic diversity, with an increasing number of Asian and Hispanic students, New York City public schools are among the most segregated in the country. But, if integration has not been achieved, few New Yorkers seem to see it anymore as the most important goal in education.

Who would've guessed?
The ATS liberals have chosen to deny the facts or question the integrity of the UCLA study, but this project, from Harvard and the Mumford Center at SUNY found rampant de facto discrimination 10 years before:

Today, of the approximately 1.1 million students in New York City public schools, about 13 percent are Asian, 15 percent white, 32 percent black and 40 percent Hispanic. Given the makeup of the student body, one reason for segregation of New York City schools, said Pedro Noguera, a professor at New York University's Steinhardt School of Education, is that "there are no kids to integrate with."

But the population of many schools is even more skewed than the student population as a whole. Some 60 percent of all black students in New York State, including those in New York City, attend schools that are at least 90 percent black, according to a recent study by the Civil Rights Project at Harvard University; more Latinos in New York State than in any other state go to schools that are 90 percent or more Latino.

Another study, this one by the Lewis Mumford Center at the State University of New York at Albany, found that Asians and Hispanics are more segregated from whites in New York schools than in any other school system in the country. For black-white segregation, New York ranks third.

The Mumford study also found that, in 2000, the typical black student attended a school where only five percent of the other students were white, a sharp drop from 1970.

Some things never change, but "progressives" can ignore them forever!

Deny ignorance.


posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:45 AM

- - NOTICE - -

The direct, personal, negative replies need to end here. This is a topic that brings out emotion and passion, and that's not a bad thing in itself. However, Please, take a moment and review the two links below.

Civility and Decorum Are Required

Go After the Ball, Not the Player

Energy in debate is great. Personally directed? It just doesn't work.


posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 12:58 AM
reply to post by Willtell

Using "macro solutions" as a euphemism doesn't alter the nature of the inherent discriminatory intent.
Sugar coat it all you want, but preferential selection is rampant in institutions of almost any nature unless stanched by higher authority.
Too many of "higher authority" are afraid, unable or unwilling to take meaningful action to prevent discrimination.

Obama helping minorities is not racism towards whites but an attempt to rectify historical discrimination.

Why not just give them $$ "reparations?"
My Brother's Keeper is NOT focused on "minorities; it is explicitly and exclusively for "young black men." Ask your president.

You can attempt to justify almost any present action by reference to "historical" facts.
Justification of present discrimination with reference to "historical discrimination" is pathetic and self-defeating.

Deny ignorance, some more.

edit on 28-3-2014 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 09:04 AM
every city is segregated to a point.

most are glaringly so, unless you are from a place like pittsburgh where its almost 85% white or portland where there just isn't a significant population of any 1 minority to really make a major impact.

there is a awesome color coded map of the U.S> by race. Find a city that has significant minority populations and it will be largely segregated. Some cities that are more dense have more distinct neighborhoods closer together, like NY and certainly there are areas that are mixed but there are way more areas that really aren't.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 10:18 AM


And many neighborhoods are segregated in large cities whether by design or economics (and no, I won't let you bus my kid across town to fill a quota).


Is it for fear that your children might not achieve the same education they would near by?

Is it they may mingle with a different socio-economic class than they would?

Or is it just down to the inconvenience in the change of distance?

Just curious.

Larger cities have natural boundaries like rivers, freeways, industrial estates, national parks and cliff tops. Usually, a factory would be built, the owners would live downtown or somewhere in the "heights" and then new housing would be built for the workers on the other side of the factory.

When a new subdivision was constructed, there would be an intended population market, either the super-wealthy with Addams family style homes, or the working class with small shotgun style homes (all the rooms in a straight line). All s

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 02:18 PM
reply to post by jdub297

The problem isn't segregation or racism. I mean, that is A problem, but not THE problem. The problem is with a lack of accountability. One of the school admins (the CEO of the charter system, no less) called the study "bogus". It was an ad hominem attack against the persons studying the report, with no data to refute its validity, or points to refute credibility. He just flatly stated it was bogus, then gave a quick buzz-blurb.

So when I ponder this i am faced with 2 possibilities:

1. He is not logically inclined, and ignores data in favor of...whatever it is he is doing. This would indicate that he is either lazy or stupid. If he is lazy, then that is one thing...but stupid is another. I would rather him be stupid, honestly, because that can be fixed. If he is lazy, then his ad hominem was just a jab meant to protect his ego and status.

2. He is executing a plan with intentions that are not what is publicized.

I can believe either. But if that is the attitude of the CEO of a charter school org, holy shirts.

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 02:25 PM
"Reverse racism".

So long as that term exists, nothing will ever improve. Lets be honest here...its racism no matter how you look at the colors and the sides. It isn't like black folks have a monopoly on being treated in a racist manner. So there is nothing reversed about it.

Yes, it may seem trivial. But it isn't. It isn't just words in this case. Those words are tipping your hand on what your mindset is.

Something else it helps to understand: you can have a negative perception about a particular race and still be a good person. It is a very human thing to do to classify people by race, and build perceptions based on experience. If every man I have ever met with 1 ear were to try to kill me, I would likely hate all men with 1 ear in the future. It is just the way humans work. The task for you will be to make sure that you keep these feelings in check. Because the role of the conscious part of you is to overcome the animal you live within.

new topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in