It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

What can we do to address race-relations and solve racism?

page: 15
2
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:03 AM
link   
Well, let me be the first to apologize to you for getting half of your identity wrong. I am Black. And yes, I am familiar with South Central. I have relatives who live there in the vicinity.

I am also familiar that there are people who are trying to do their best there--especially with Magic Johnson, Bernard Parks and others trying to build up the area. There are people who are trying to change things in L.A.--from the small things like picking up garbage and catching taggers to the large things--trying to create new opportunities in downtown L.A. and trying to change the culture of the LAPD (despite the fact that the LAPD doesn't "truly" change).

I also know that despite the fact, that downtown L.A. has been built up considerably--especially with the push to clean up around the garment and jewelry districts.

Not to mention the new park that was built in Boyle Heights recently.

So, Mayor Villalagrosa is trying very hard to make a difference in the city.

On the larger issues, we do need to talk about racism. But where we disagree is how it is to be done. And I don't truly think we should sweep acts of racism under the rug just because a segment of our population will be "resentful".



[edit on 24-8-2006 by ceci2006]




posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Ahh yes, Magic Johnson and Bernard Parks doing practical and effective things. Magic Johnson has taken areas that looked blighted and seemingly turned them around in a few years. I see Starbucks, movie theaters, and other businesses popping up in areas other entrepreneurs will not touch. After he started investing in these areas, and with the help of the community and clean up crews, the areas start attracting big anchor tenants in shopping centers, etc. Its a model that can be followed, I believe, anywhere.

Ceci, no harm and no foul about my race. You made a reasonable inference based on the content of my posts.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Thank you for saying that. It goes to show you that people make mistakes. And I am not immune to doing so. That is why we need to discuss these matters in an honest light so we can understand each other. I started the thread on that behalf.

So, I truly apologize for being rather skeptical of your post. For the posters who know me, I am a very tough debator on many issues.

But trying to better race-relations is something that is near and dear to my heart even though there are others who would not believe it. And I understand what you are trying to say. And perhaps, we should take a step back and find a middle ground in trying to make things better for everyone.

That means examining all the issues--no matter who stands where.



[edit on 24-8-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
What makes jsobecky think that people of color and women are "less qualified"? That is a problematic statement in itself. He won't admit it. But he doesn't see the apparent bias in his words.

Re-read the post before you go shooting your mouth off again, ceci. I intentionally said "possibly less-qualified" because I anticipated you going off half-cocked and deliberately twisting my words.

And I never mentioned women. Once again, an example of your cognitive dissonance.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blarney63
My understanding is that the EEOC and companion state statutes exempt small businesses. My proposal was to consider affirmative action being implemented in businesses already found guilty under antidiscrimination statutes that we agree do not target small businesses.

Well, if a business has been found guilty, it is subject to penalties, including:

The "relief" or remedies available for employment discrimination, whether caused by intentional acts or by practices that have a discriminatory effect, may include:

back pay,
hiring,
promotion,
reinstatement,
front pay,
reasonable accommodation, or
other actions that will make an individual "whole" (in the condition s/he would have been but for the discrimination).
Remedies also may include payment of:

attorneys' fees,
expert witness fees, and
court costs.

www.eeoc.gov...

So, if these don't break the financial back of the offending business, then I guess a boycott might be worth a try. However, I don't agree that a boycott is the right thing to do if legal recourse has shown claims of discrimination to be unfounded. Then, all that is being done is to unfairly punish the business owner.


The restaurant I worked in was not boycotted - but we changed the hiring practices. You make a compelling argument that as a small business owner the state should not be allowed to come into your business and tell you who you can or cannot hire. Likewise, a small business cannot tell the public what small business they must or must not patronize. A boycott is not the state telling a business what they must or must not do - it is private citizens choosing where they want to conduct business.

No argument here.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:41 AM
link   
first off great post,

i honestly dont think we can mend the gap from racism. it seems the more we try, the larger it becomes. almost to the point that as long as 2 people are left on this planet there is always going to be racism and discrimination. its almost like its in our nature.
i hate to word it like that but thats been teh track record throughout human history. if we havent gotten it right in 2000 years, i dont think we ever will.

[edit on 24-8-2006 by oubliette]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Sorry, jsobecky, it is not "half-cocked". You haven't given a reason otherwise. Not unless you meant that it is those of "your ilk" that are possibly less qualified and intelligent than people of color. Now that would bring the house down.

Please make yourself clear instead of pussyfooting around the issue. It would do us all a service, would it not?

But it wasn't cognitive dissonance. Not in the least. You've told me once where you stand. And that's all I have to go by.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
Sorry, jsobecky, it is not "half-cocked". You haven't given a reason otherwise. Not unless you meant that it is those of "your ilk" that are possibly less qualified and intelligent than people of color. Now that would bring the house down.

Sure it was "half-cocked". You were caught and now you try to squirm out of it by using incendiary terms like "your ilk".:shk:


Please make yourself clear instead of pussyfooting around the issue. It would do us all a service, would it not?

Yeah, I'd be glad to. What issue? And to be frank, I don't give a damn if it does you a service or not.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Ceci:

When a candidate for a job is chosen partly because of his/her race, the chances of getting a less-qualified candidate increase. That is true whether the racial factor intruded because of the business owner's bigotry or because of pressure from outside in the cause of racial balance.

It is undeniably true that a particular black, Hispanic, or Asian job candidate may be less qualitified than a particular white candidate, just as the reverse is true. And when the business is required to choose (or elects to choose) an employee based on race, it is entirely possible they may end up with a less-qualified employee.

I believe that is all that Jsobecky was saying, and that you have misinterpreted what was said.

(BTW -- I also noted that Ceci referred to Jsobecky with a masculine pronoun. I have always assumed that the "jso" portion of the name refers to something I don't have a clue about and that "Becky" is the poster's name, and hence that the poster is female. Which of us is right?)



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   
The best solution to race issues is to stop bringing up race issues.

Most of them are figments of peoples imaginations.

When we get down to it, everybodies just human beings on a small, insignificant spec of dust in the vastness of a universe, driven by an instinctual need to survive and procreate.

Race isn't important.

Now on a more down to earth (no pun intended) scale, I think alot of the problems is that theres double standards in our society which fuel racism on both sides.

If we eliminate them, I would say that the racism would probably subside greatly.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Two Steps Forward
I believe that is all that Jsobecky was saying, and that you have misinterpreted what was said.

(BTW -- I also noted that Ceci referred to Jsobecky with a masculine pronoun. I have always assumed that the "jso" portion of the name refers to something I don't have a clue about and that "Becky" is the poster's name, and hence that the poster is female. Which of us is right?)

Good summary of what I meant.


jsobecky
Resident cracker-crat, according to ceci.

100% red-blooded, not guilty, unapologetic American MALE

[edit on 24-8-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
100% red-blooded, not guilty, unapologetic American MALE


JSO that just pretty much sums my bio too man, next time I go to an interview, I’m adding that to my resume.
Thanks.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Be my guest, WestPoint23, as long as I can tape a pic of your avatar inside my locker.


Ah, well, gotta maintain a sense of humor around here, no?



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Well, if we're finished patting each other on the back for being insensitive, I'd like to get back to the topic.

Blarney63: Welcome to ATS! You've made some thoughtful contributions to this thread. I especially liked your real- life anecdote about hiring practices in that restaurant, and how you went about changing them. Good work!
I look forward to reading your posts.

I wanted to address the point you made about affirmative action and how it makes some/all/a lot of whites resentful. Affirmative action, contrary to popular belief, doesn't get you the job. It gets you the interview. The only thing affirmative action does is give you a chance, one foot in the door. White people, and yes, I'm painting with a broad brush here, as long as they're dressed right, and can form a decent sentence, get the interview, because its assumed that, if they showed up, they're qualified. At the end of the day, they might not get the job, but they got the interview without too much trouble.

OTOH, no matter how I look, dress, or speak, in order for me to get an interview, I'm asked, "Where did you go to school? What year did you graduate?" I'm quizzed, to see if I'm lying.

So, although I may be better qualified than 70% of the other applicants, black, white, or whatever, I still have to do a whole song and dance, just to get the interview. And, I have to be pleasant while I do it, like I don't know that I'm being asked to jump through extra hoops. The whole process is demeaning. It makes me resentful of white privilege. If its that difficult for me, an over-qualified professional, imagine how it feels for people of color trying to get a job that doesn't require a particular skill set. Between racism and illegal immigration, they don't stand a chance.

I just felt the need to clear that up. People are making it sound like, if you're black, they just hand you the job without any thought to your qualifications. Ha! Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Anyway, I also wanted to mention my take on the 'Magic Johnson model.' Here in Harlem, on 125th st, he opened a movie theater and a Starbucks. I was intially pleased, until I realized that attracting investors to a community precedes the gentrification of said community, thereby driving up real estate and "pricing-out" the original residents. So, yeah, I see where it looked like a good plan, but it doesn't work out too well for the population it claims to benefit.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by HarlemHottie]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
HH: Not to mention, that Magic Johnson also didn't forget about the high priced tickets for his theaters. And of course, for the Starbucks, you'd have to pay an arm and a leg for a espresso.

So, who actually benefits in the end? Magic Johnson? Starbucks? Or the consumers of South Central or Harlem?



As of "labeling people" around here, jsobecky,I already know that you are a male and I already know your position about "reparations", "Black politicians" and "Black people" in general. I'd be hard pressed for you to say anything about how less qualified White people are--unless you are ready to spill out how that is.

As for the word "cracker-crat", you're the one who made a big stink about it. And you are bringing it up here again. So, if you call yourself one, that is on your head. Not mine. So enjoy being one if that's what you want. I've washed my hands of the matter. It just seems that you have not, and that's your problem. But because you keep on mentioning this affair, it keeps on coming back as a sticky mess. And like Br'er Rabbit, it's stuck to you like crazy glue.

But then again, have you not complained on another thread that you were an "Angry, White Male"? Talk about being "half-cocked" here.

So, I truly don't care if you give a damn or not. It just seems that you are so mired in your own angst that you can't get out of the tar pit. You are going the way of the prehistoric beings. Stuck and drowning in self-preservation.

And no, TSF, there isn't just "one way" of reading something. We all have different experiences afforded to the term, "less qualified". And again, whenever "less qualified" is used, what do you think it means?

And also, WestPoint, you act as if you deny that "racism happens". As for the defense of your avatar, you had none. You never did acknowledge whether it could be offensive to some on this board. Nor did you apologize. In fact, you never seem concerned about the rights of the least of us at all. So, unfortunately, there's not an accusation here. Just a plain observance about how you handle diversity and whether you are truly respectful of the rights of all, or the rights of some. It's up to you to sort it out.

Remember, other people on other threads have talked about how your avatar was. I am just one more down the line. And I used it to expose the hypocrisy of putting down a man who burned a flag in the classroom. You can't be a flag-waver and a debaser of the stars and stripes at the same time, can you?


[edit on 24-8-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
HH: Not to mention, that Magic Johnson also didn't forget about the high priced tickets for his theaters. And of course, for the Starbucks, you'd have to pay an arm and a leg for a espresso.

So, who actually benefits in the end? Magic Johnson? Starbucks? Or the consumers of South Central or Harlem?


Exactly. And, to be honest, not that many people I know in my neighborhood even drink coffee.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by HarlemHottie

Originally posted by ceci2006
HH: Not to mention, that Magic Johnson also didn't forget about the high priced tickets for his theaters. And of course, for the Starbucks, you'd have to pay an arm and a leg for a espresso.

So, who actually benefits in the end? Magic Johnson? Starbucks? Or the consumers of South Central or Harlem?


Exactly. And, to be honest, not that many people I know in my neighborhood even drink coffee.

And if a white person would have made that statement, there would be cries of "Why are you assuming that black people don't have the means to by a cup of Starbucks?" "That's an inherently racist statement you just made". "Is Starbucks another part of the White Privilege that you benefit from?"



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
And also, WestPoint, you act as if you deny that "racism happens". As for the defense of your avatar, you had none. You never did acknowledge whether it could be offensive to some on this board. Nor did you apologize. In fact, you never seem concerned about the rights of the least of us at all.


I don’t deny that racism happens, I just, unlike you, don’t think that everything that happens is because of racism. You even brought up the topic of race when talking about my avatar, and again proceeded to make racist accusations.

And as for my avatar why should I need to defend it, much less apologize? It’s perfectly fine with me and I frankly don’t care what others may think about it as long as it’s within the T&C. If it offends you then ignore me, it’s that simple.



posted on Aug, 25 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Affirmative action, contrary to popular belief, doesn't get you the job.


I pretty sure it does give you the job.

In my experience when a company's ethnic proportions aren't where they should be, they hire to get there. Not interview. In one of my last positions, there was an assistant position that was rotating door for minority employees. All the rest of the employees were white. Very weird actually considering the part of town we were located was quite mixed. But now they have a considerable amount of minority employees. I would say more than half.

I'm not 100% certain if the law uses the word hire or not; and wikipedia was not very clear.


Affirmative action seeks to increase the representation of these demographic groups in fields of study and work in which they have traditionally been underrepresented


Could someone clue me in to argument with westpoint's avatar? You can u2u me.
I'm not sure if it is its....hmmm...say 'if it is its' really fast 10 times.. the potrayal of the lady or the portayal of the american flag.



posted on Aug, 26 2006 @ 02:20 AM
link   
WestPoint, I've made my peace about your avatar and the teacher burning the flag in the classroom. But I don't have any guilt about what I said.


Furthermore, I don't have any guilt about "bringing up race" in a discussion I contribute in--if I see fit to do it. To be honest, I don't care whether you or anyone else considers it problematic to discuss race in a topic. Race is just as viable an issue as others are in any subject matter.

Too bad if you hate someone "bringing up race" at every turn. A conversation is not just hinged upon how you feel. But like so many others, there are posters who professed that they would want "racism" to die by letting it be swept under the rug. And that was said without any guilt whatsoever.

So, consider your avatar swept under the rug. And while it is under there, let others tread upon it without any inkling of feeling.

It is out of sight and out of mind.



nextguyinline, don't worry about it. Let's just continue the discussion as it is on this thread about affirmative action. That is the bone of contention that is considered problematic now. Some people like it. Others don't.

It exists. And no matter how anyone "doesn't like to bring up race" all the time, race is a part of this issue and it needs to be discussed.



Everyone else: if anyone has another way to discuss affirmative action without mentioning race at all, please do suggest it. That is quite a challenge and a worthy one to tackle.

A better question would be: when is racism viable to talk about? Or should we be told to "sweep it under the rug" so it will die--especially when it has to do with "reverse racism"?







[edit on 26-8-2006 by ceci2006]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join