Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Has Senator Webb lost his damn mind?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:40 PM
Original message
Has Senator Webb lost his damn mind?
Via Daily Kos:

Senator Jim Webb channels his inner teabagger to debunk the "myth of white privilege." And this guy is a Democrat? -Angry Mouse


Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege

America still owes a debt to its black citizens, but government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end.

By JAMES WEBB

The NAACP believes the tea party is racist. The tea party believes the NAACP is racist. And Pat Buchanan got into trouble recently by pointing out that if Elena Kagan is confirmed to the Supreme Court, there will not be a single Protestant Justice, although Protestants make up half the U.S. population and dominated the court for generations.

Forty years ago, as the United States experienced the civil rights movement, the supposed monolith of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant dominance served as the whipping post for almost every debate about power and status in America. After a full generation of such debate, WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers. The time has come to cease the false arguments and allow every American the benefit of a fair chance at the future.

<...>

In an odd historical twist that all Americans see but few can understand, many programs allow recently arrived immigrants to move ahead of similarly situated whites whose families have been in the country for generations. These programs have damaged racial harmony. And the more they have grown, the less they have actually helped African-Americans, the intended beneficiaries of affirmative action as it was originally conceived.

<...>

The injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government have no parallel in our history, not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed. But the extrapolation of this logic to all "people of color"especially since 1965, when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.moved affirmative action away from remediation and toward discrimination, this time against whites. It has also lessened the focus on assisting African-Americans, who despite a veneer of successful people at the very top still experience high rates of poverty, drug abuse, incarceration and family breakup.

more


:wow:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DevonRex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. I'm beginning to wonder if he had a mind to begin with.
Thanks for bring this story here. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. It doesn't matter what one tries to take away from this article, this is just
boneheaded:

The injustices endured by black Americans at the hands of their own government have no parallel in our history, not only during the period of slavery but also in the Jim Crow era that followed. But the extrapolation of this logic to all "people of color"especially since 1965, when new immigration laws dramatically altered the demographic makeup of the U.S.moved affirmative action away from remediation and toward discrimination, this time against whites.

That's fucking preposterous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
2. I want to know if his poor, oppressed white kids want to
switch places with my husband. So the nation systematically oppressed people of color for hundreds of years (and still does) and since 1970 that has been completely reversed to oppress whites. Total bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. I think there's some truth to both points of view
Let's remember it alienates people whatever their skin color is to deny their own life experiences.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. It is a fact that you cannot reverse centuries of
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 02:58 PM by CBR
oppression in 40 years. Even in the small, piss poor West Virginia town I grew up in, the poor blacks had it worse than the poor whites. The per capita income difference is about $8,000 a year (in a county with an already horribly low per capita income as compared to the nation).

I am sick to death of this "class trumps all" argument. Sorry but the institutionalized racism that this nation was built on is a key basis for the current class structure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-10 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
104. + a million. Well said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. "Let's remember it alienates people whatever their skin color is to deny their own life experiences"
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 03:00 PM by ProSense
Jim Webb is a U.S. Senator. For him to write this bullshit in the wake of the Sherrod incident is not only insensitive, but also shows a complete lack of understanding of Affirmative Action, which addresses race, color, religion, gender and national origin.

Does he think all women are immigrants?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. Serious question:
Do you think that affirmative action is still needed for women, in, for example, education?

Do you think reasonable, good-faithed people can disagree about the answer to that question?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. "Do you think that affirmative action is still needed for women, in, for example, education? "
Yes, and why qualify it?

Why are we discussing equal pay? Is the gap in equal pay for equal work a myth?

Do you think there is institutionalized discrimination of whites, and we're anywhere close to that point?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #27
37. Depends on the part of education, actually.
If we're talking about getting girls into science and math programs - absolutely. Women are still vastly underrepresented in sciences, and that bears with it significant problems for future wage obtainment by women, as those are well-paying careers.

But boys are achieving systemically at far lower levels than girls, and overall, men are getting HS and college diplomas at a rapidly decreasing rate. So... it might actually be time for a discussion on affirmative action for boys/men in education.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. To the extent that Affirmative Action policies treat people differently
Based on race, then yes, there I do think there is *some* institutionalized discrimination against whites. This is a different question than whether this is an acceptable result of the goal of increased *fairness*. Such policies may be and often are entirely justifiable for a variety of reasons. However, for example, to tell a white person who is denied college admission in favor of a black person with lower qualifications, that they are not experiencing a little bit of discrimination is to not be honest with that person. At that point, you have probably become their enemy.

Wouldn't it be better, if, instead, you acknowledged their little bit of unfairness, and, using the good faith gained by your open-mindedness, convinced them that it was ultimately for the best?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. Hmmm?
"However, for example, to tell a white person who is denied college admission in favor of a black person with lower qualifications, that they are not experiencing a little bit of discrimination is to not be honest with that person. At that point, you have probably become their enemy."

So it's more important to coddle whites than do the right thing to combat discrimination?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. So honesty = coddling?
You have a fascinating and disturbing perspective.

Is it more important to make enemies out of white people than to treat them like human beings?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Honesty?
Honesty?

You are advocating that perception, not reality dictate policy.

A person feels slighted and believes it's the result of policy (how would they know), therefore policies must adjusted based on emotion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #48
53. Let's break this down and tell me where you disagree
Premise #1: There exist, in reality, affirmative action policies that treat people differently based on race. One example might be college admissions policies.

Agree or disagree?

Premise #2: A white person adversely affected by such a policy might legitimately perceive this as racial discrimination.

Agree or disagree?

Premise #3: Such a white person will be more willing to consider justifications for this policy if their perception is at least taken seriously.

Agree or disagree?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #53
56. I disagree.
That person needs to be educated not coddled. Sure there needs to be engagement, but what does that have to do with Webb's claim that there is actually white discrimination and his call for the Affirmative Action policy to be abandoned due to that false premise?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #56
59. I don't read him as calling for an end to Affirmative Action
I read him as calling for and end to Affirmative Action policies that treat people differently based on race that have outlived their usefulness. But we can only know when that has happened when people are willing to make the case for the policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. It reads that way to me, and
it's based on a despicable premise:

Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes.

Memo to my fellow politicians: Drop the Procrustean policies and allow harmony to invade the public mindset. Fairness will happen, and bitterness will fade away.

Again, there is no institutionalized discrimination against whites, and it's obvious he is trying to rationalize a fear built on a conservative lie.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. I understand
My point of view is that I cannot agree "there is no institutionalized discrimination against whites" while there are affirmative policies that treat people differently based on skin color. That *is* institutionalized discrimination, justifiable maybe, but it is, to me, dishonest to deny it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. "That *is* institutionalized discrimination, justifiable maybe, but it is, to me, dishonest to deny"
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 04:26 PM by ProSense
That is not institutionalized descrimination. You cannot call a policy to combat the very real problem of discrimination discriminatory.

That's like saying laws to protect consumers discriminate against businesses or laws that help the poor discriminate against the rich.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #62
65. actually many laws that help the poor do discriminate against the rich
for good reason, but they do. Take progressive income tax rates. Poor people pay a lower, or often non existent, percentage of their income to income taxes while the rich pay a much higher percentage. That is discrimination, no matter how you slice it. But it is also justified discrimination. Discrimination merely means to treat one group of people differently than another. Progressive tax rates do exactly that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #65
74. " Discrimination merely means to treat one group of people differently than another." Actually,
institutional discrimination isn't simplistic. If you go by a simple definition: Medicare is discriminatory. Policies for the disabled are discriminatory. Public restroom policies are discriminatory.

Affirmative Action is designed to prevent discrimination that is inherently applied to the oppressed or powerless. The laws are an attempt to level the playing field.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. than justify them
don't pretend that some number of white people don't wind up disadvantaged by them. I think the programs are justified but they do discriminate against some white people and it is not just wrong but stupid to pretend that isn't the case, when it demonstrably is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. "don't pretend that some number of white people don't wind up disadvantaged by them."
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 05:31 PM by ProSense
"I think the programs are justified but they do discriminate against some white people..."

Preposterous. Utterly preposterous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. No it isn't
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/19/opinion/19douthat.html?_r=1&ref=columnists

Last year, two Princeton sociologists, Thomas Espenshade and Alexandria Walton Radford, published a book-length study of admissions and affirmative action at eight highly selective colleges and universities. Unsurprisingly, they found that the admissions process seemed to favor black and Hispanic applicants, while whites and Asians needed higher grades and SAT scores to get in. But what was striking, as Russell K. Nieli pointed out last week on the conservative Web site Minding the Campus, was which whites were most disadvantaged by the process: the downscale, the rural and the working-class.

This was particularly pronounced among the private colleges in the study. For minority applicants, the lower a familys socioeconomic position, the more likely the student was to be admitted. For whites, though, it was the reverse. An upper-middle-class white applicant was three times more likely to be admitted than a lower-class white with similar qualifications.

end of quote

I will say I don't agree with everything, or even much, of what this column says. But this is certainly not the first study showing that whites need higher SAT scores and GPAs to get into universities than blacks. Again, I am not saying this is unjustified, but I am saying that by any reasonable definition of the word the whites who don't get in despite having scores higher than the blacks who did are getting discriminated against. Telling them they aren't doesn't make it any less real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. Ross Douthat?
Conservative Ross Douthat?

Ross Douthat's Fear of Opining.

Misplaced White Anxiety and Misread Data?


What next climate denier's opinions to argue against climate policy?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #81
86. from your link
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 07:38 PM by dsc
And while Espenshade's data does conclude that the chances for admission improve for poorer black, Hispanic, and Asian-American students and decrease for poor white students, he doesn't believe this is a plot to deny poor whites an Ivy League education. "There aren't that many poor students applying to these schools," he explains. "The applicant pool itself tends to trend toward middle and upper-middle class. But all elite schools value diversity, both racial and socioeconomic, so maybe giving scarce finiancial aid dollars to poor black kids achieves two aims at once and they're already admitting a lot of white kids." Please note that Espenshade is not drawing a conclusion, only coming up with what could be a reasonable interpretation of the dataand there's a lot of data, little of which translates to easy answers or explanation: Espenshade's work also suggests that taking a SAT or ACT test prep course decreases your chances of admission to an Ivy school by at least 50 percent.

end of quote

Again I don't agree with his entire column. But it is an undeniable truth that more than one study has shown that the cut off score for whites is higher than that for blacks. Again, I think that is defensible, but lying about it isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #86
88. That's exactly the misread Douthat made
There aren't that many poor students applying to these schools," he explains. "The applicant pool itself tends to trend toward middle and upper-middle class. But all elite schools value diversity, both racial and socioeconomic, so maybe giving scarce finiancial aid dollars to poor black kids achieves two aims at once and they're already admitting a lot of white kids."

The fact is that there are more blacks in the lower income brackets of the black population so it's not unusual that poor blacks students who qualify for financial aid, the very few that do apply, are misconstrued as taking away a from poor white kids. They are not however taking away from white kids. That's a complete fallacy, and not what is being implied.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:13 PM
Response to Reply #88
90. I have no idea if it is poor whites or rich ones
but study after study after study has proven that the cutoff score for blacks is lower than that for whites. It is an undeniable fact. If you are a white person who scored below the white cutoff and above the black one then you did get discriminated against. Now again, I don't think that is an unjustifyable thing but it is unjustifyable to tell that person that he wasn't discriminated against, he was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #90
91. "study after study has proven that the cutoff score for blacks is lower than that for whites."
Are you trying now to argue that blacks are inferior to whites? That poor blacks are worse students that poor whites?

Get this: White people are not discriminated against. The argument is racist bullshit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #91
93. actually I think the SAT is likely biased
and GPA's are inflated by AP courses which many school which cater to wealthier students. But the point is that the cutoff for both SAT scores and GPA is lower for blacks and some other minorities than for whites. Again, I think that is defensible but lying about that fact isn't. Telling white students who know damn well that they didn't get into a school that a friend of theirs with lower SAT's and GPA did get into that that didn't happen is just plain dumb. It is the equivalent of a company paying employees different wages for the same job and thinking no one will notice. It is far better to say this is why we are doing this and go from there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. You know what's indefensible
this: "Again, I think that is defensible but lying about that fact isn't. Telling white students who know damn well that they didn't get into a school that a friend of theirs with lower SAT's and GPA did get into that that didn't happen is just plain dumb."

You can find students of all social classes that are piss poor or excellent students. I don't see anyone complaining about kids who get into schools because their parents are rich.

The fact is that blacks are a minority, and it stands to reason that many of these students will be from poor families. What you cannot claim is that white students are being denied opportunities because black student are given them. Look at the higher education as a system, not one institution, and then try to argue that black students are unfairly taking slots away from white students. That's bullshit.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #94
99. the overall numbers are irrelevent
anymore than the fact that millions of criminals are correctly arrested each year would negate the fact that innocent ones sometimes do get arrested. I think legacy students are completely indefensible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #99
100. No
"anymore than the fact that millions of criminals are correctly arrested each year would negate the fact that innocent ones sometimes do get arrested. I think legacy students are completely indefensible."

Bad analogy. The numbers aren't irrelevant. The more apt analogy is prison overcrowding. If a prison is overcrowded with more whites that blacks, does that mean that the population of blacks in prison isn't disproportionate?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. I don't think the other member accepts your framing
of the hypothetical scenario.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. Then they could explain why they disagree
Instead of trying to attribute bad motives to me.

This just illustrates that no "conversation" is possible. The subject is positively toxic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. of course it is.
have you checked out some of the other comments? Might be worth a trip around the nets to read other opinions as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. I was not attributing bad motives to you
I simply stated that my interpretation of that statement, which you seemed to be offering as justification for Webb's beliefs, not your own.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Schema Thing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Actually at least some of his kids aren't white.
if I'm not mistaken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. 1 is half Asian but all the white guys I grew up with in WV
would not want to switch places with my husband. Not one. White privilege forms the basis for our institutions, values, norms and language. Everything is held against that standard and for him to deny that and cry oppression for whites is gross.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
85. His kids are not all white.
His youngest child is a product of Jim's marriage to his Vietnamese wife. And his "privileged white" son is a rifleman in the US Marine Corps, and a decorated combat veteran of the Iraq war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #85
87. I can assume he would like to trade places with my black husband
who grew up dirt poor in rural Virginia and now makes nothing as a school teacher? I bet not. I respect military service growing up in a military family but that man does not want to have lived the life my husband has. I already acknowledged that he had a biracial child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #87
92. Assume away. I've know Jim for over 20 years, but I'm not willing to assume ...
whom he might wish to swap places with. I was only responding to a clear misrepresentation in your post. (And in the post to which I responded, there was no acknowledgment of Jim's biracial child.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. WTF?
????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. Remember this guy was a very active republican and switched
to Democrat to run for Senator in Virginia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
7. remember his past job.
Ever since Roosevelt, then Truman, and then Ike, we eventually ended up with complete integration, little or no racism, and equality of all in uniform. Sure, there were a few exceptions, but the policy was enforced, and what Webb saw for decades while in uniform is what leads him to this conclusion.

But America is not the military, and we don't take orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
9. Very, very ugly on Mr. Webb's part, imo...
Either he really believes this and, if so, then that is VERY worrisome in and of itself or, as it seems more likely given the timing of his op-ed, he is pandering to the racist followers of Allan, his repub opponent, of the racist "macaca" fame.

Regardless as to whether it is the former or the latter, it is, imo, ugly and divisive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Sen. Webb
has had controversial opinions in the past, this doesn't really surprise me too much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Surprise, maybe not, but are you not disturbed by this "opinion" ...
or do you feel it should simply be shrugged off? Is he, at heart, a believer in "white workers" being 'victims' or is he pandering to the racist, anti-immigrant sector of the population?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. I think he's wrong. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. thanks for your response, it is appreciated n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoePhilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
10. The most important sentence in Webb's article ....
"The old South was a three-tiered society, with blacks and hard-put whites both dominated by white elites who manipulated racial tensions in order to retain power."

Hey Jim ... WAKE THE FUCK UP YOU IDIOT ... in the sentence above, you have accurately described the current GOP and explained the rise of Mark Williams, the tea Party, Andrew Breitbart, Fox News, and the smearing of Shirley Sherrod (among others).

And Jim ... when the Tea Party and the GOP claims to want to treat all people equal, and then uses that to call for and end to affirmative action or other programs for minorities ... what they actually mean is that they want to be able to DISCRIMINATE against minorities AT WILL ... AT ANY TIME ... and that the government should have no position on that ... and if you are confused by that perspective ... call Rand Paul and he can explain it to you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
12. People need to go read the entire piece before they judge it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. There is nothing redeeming about this piece.
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 03:05 PM by ProSense
He seems to want to erase the achievements of the civil rights movement because not everyone is a direct descendant of slaves.

Affirmative Action is not reparations, and there is no institutionalized discrimiation against white people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #15
33. It was different from what I was initially expecting which was why I said people should read the
entire piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
68. k
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
14. Not that I entirely agree, but weren't we all just crowing here that we needed these conversations?
I thought the whole lesson that we were supposed to learn from the Sherrod case was that we needed to have more frank discussions about race. Well, here's one, and this is the reaction it's being met with.

Not that I terribly disagree with it, but we can't both be immediately jumping to ask if someone's lost there mind on one hand, and then on the other say we should be more open. That's not an open environment at all, and it's certainly not one in which people can feel free to discuss race relations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. I think the reaction is an honest one. He made his case and it
does reflect how many whites feel and we are responding to the statements with how others may feel about that belief.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
25. I'm not even talking about the validity of his comments.
I just want people to look in the mirror - to look at how they're reacting to this piece put out by Webb and asking themselves if this is really the kind of response they feel welcomes a truly open discourse on the state of race in America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. I think anger is part of an honest discourse and the reaction
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 03:16 PM by CBR
to this white oppression argument (that has been around forever -- Sen. Webb is not stating anything new) is part of it. This argument is always brought out as the counter to the history of racism that people have experienced and it is used to diminish the very real racism that minorities experience in this country -- to make is equal somehow. To have a discussion about race and not expect anger is unrealistic.

What if this was an article about how male privilege or straight privilege did not exist? Would we have an open discussion then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. No - we absolutely wouldn't.
And I don't disagree with how you put it that anger is going to be a result. Unfortunately, anger is mutually exclusive with creating an open environment to have the exactly the kinds of discussions that need to happen to move BEYOND anger and into solutions.

Any discussion like this is going to put someone immediately on the defensive. If we want to move beyond that, we need to talk about what's happening NOW, what needs to change TODAY, what we need to do GOING FORWARD. Which unfortunately also can't happen because there has to be an acknowledgment of how we got to today in the first place.

I'm solely pointing out the conundrum here. We're saying we want an open environment to discuss race frankly, but we're not at all capable of doing what it takes to create that environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoNothing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
22. This is my feeling too
I do think we need to be much more tolerant of frank opinions on race.

The fact is, everyone deserves to be heard. That isn't to say everyone's opinion is equally invalid, or even has any basis in reality. But the time has come I think to make an effort to assume good faith unless proven otherwise, and part of that means at least being willing to listen to the grievances of white people who feel they have been wronged. Maybe they haven't, or maybe they are not adopting a sufficiently big-picture view, but if so, they deserve to have that explained to them without the assumption that they are motivated by anything other than self-interest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. That's it exactly.
Thanks for responding - I appreciate it. There are a lot of good, honest people out there who need to have an intellectual discourse about race, that need the opportunity to discuss the issue in complete thoughts, that likely WILL come around to the "right" point of view if you just allow it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
36. In reading it, I did not see an invitation to talk about issues of race....
No questions were asked to provoke discussion which, to me, would indicate an intent to open discussion. This op-ed was a statement, without qualifiers and, because of that, I see no attempt at bringing forth all sides, it states only one which, imo, is not conducive to open dialogue at all.

That is not to say discussion cannot happen as a result of his op-ed but that would be a by-product of an op-ed that many find offensive and not because the op-ed was written for the express purpose of generating discussion, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. I don't think that's fair.
Op-Eds don't typically contain open ended questions aimed at no one in particular, as there's no real forum for those questions to be answered. The format itself is non-conducive to what you're expecting.

Now, if Webb launched into something like this during a roundtable discussion on the issue, that'd be a different situation altogether. You'd be right at saying that the comments are not there to stoke discussion, largely because the format IS a discussion based one, and there are few places for opening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #38
49. I don't think it is unfair at all....
Had Mr. Webb "launched into something like this during a roundtable discussion on the issue", I would say the environment in which he launched his 'opinion' would be very conducive to open and honest discussion. That is what 'round table discussion' is all about.

You state "The format itself is non-conducive to what you're expecting", and that was my precise point. The format Mr. Webb chose was one that is NOT conducive to open discussion which, in essence, negates your supposition Mr. Webb published his op-ed for that reason. It stands your argument on it's head, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine1967 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
20. Seriously. WTF is wrong with him?

Oh this is bad. He's acting like race relations in this country should be treated like free trade.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OHdem10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
23. We must be fair and willing to listen to all sides. Otherwise, we
maintain the constant conflict. Unless all sides can air
their perceived grievances, whe maintain stalemate. We
will continue to throw Racism vs Reverse Racism with
no understanding. All sides should be able to speak
without being attacked.

Ms Sherrod gave us valuable understanding. It is not alwys
black v white. It is a class issue---Poor People whether
they be white or black.

Racial Resentment is not always bad or wrongheaded. Do we
on the Left leave white poor and working poor to be exploited
and used by the Briebarts of the world because we are not
willing to listen. Just a thought?

Could it be that Senator Webb is reaching out and we just
want to slap him down???? I hope not.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
31. What I hear listening to Jim Webb
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 03:21 PM by ProSense
is a Democratic Senator with some really screwed up notions about Afirmative Action and discrimination.

His article states his believe that white people are becoming unfairly disadvantaged.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
30. I don't agree with Webb, but in a sense Shirley Sherrod made a like argument.
"It's not about black and white it's about poor vs. rich." ~ Shirley Sherrod
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. No, she didn't
That is not the same thing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #34
39. "It's not about black and white it's about poor vs. rich." ~ Shirley Sherrod
I'll leave it to individual readers to decide if Sherrod said something similar to Webb, without calling for a radical change in policy.

Again, I disagree with Webb and I haven't a clue what specific programs he's suggesting we eliminate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KingFlorez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
35. I understand what he is trying to say
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 03:32 PM by KingFlorez
At some point, everything has to be truly equalized for everyone. In the next few decades, one race will not have a majority of the population and we have to be prepared for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #35
41. He's pushing the conservative/teabagger lie.
"In the next few decades, there one race will not have a majority of the population and we have to be prepared for that."

Decades?


Nondiscrimination laws should be applied equally among all citizens, including those who happen to be white. The need for inclusiveness in our society is undeniable and irreversible, both in our markets and in our communities. Our government should be in the business of enabling opportunity for all, not in picking winners. It can do so by ensuring that artificial distinctions such as race do not determine outcomes.

Memo to my fellow politicians: Drop the Procrustean policies and allow harmony to invade the public mindset. Fairness will happen, and bitterness will fade away.

There is no institutionalized discrimination against whites, and it's obvious he is trying to rationalize a fear built on a conservative lie.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. I agree.
"There is no institutionalized discrimination against whites, and it's obvious he is trying to rationalize a fear built on a conservative lie."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. I guess you just have to accept that
race is an artificial distinction to agree with Mr. Webb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
44. I`m dismayed to see this attitude from Webb
and I say this as a (black) Virginian and someone who voted for him...

I realize he`s going to have a serious challenge from a race-baiting opponent, and has to position himself before the smear commercials start running, but his assertions are filled with straight-up myths, half-truths and scant details...

For all the words, stats and history he cites, he has ZERO concrete details or examples of how his so-called "aggrieved majority" is being victimized by these programs--He doesn`t even say which programs are unjust and how...AND he of course neglects that white women have been by FAR the biggest beneficiaries of "affirmative action" (a term that needs to die anyway, since if it were such a big boogeyman I would have actioned myself to the top of some company by now)....

Even people who have legit gripes against affirmative action can cite some real evidence to support these claims...Webb is dropping some racially tainted buzzwords to strengthen his re-election and nothing more before the opposition paints him as the Obama-loving candidate of the black voters...(because, it`s not like any of us helped him get elected the last time around...)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. Good post. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #44
51. Well said! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #44
58. This is a Senator who
opposes repealing DADT, but wants to repeal Affirmative Action.

It boggles the mind.

Thanks for your insights.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butterfly77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #44
97. He needs an email from you..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
57. The "triangulation" strategy has always been to rebrand "centrist" Rs as Ds
and their policies as D policies

Since the Rs seem to become ever more extreme, blind application of the strategy could simply rebrand a number of Reaganites like Webb as Ds

Still, "triangulation" might make sense in some cases: Webb, for example, is from Virginia, which often votes R, and not so long ago it looked like Ollie North might be a Senator from Virginia. So Webb might actually be about the best we can do from Virginia

Of course, affirmative action programs do not discriminate against "whites": Webb's WASP elites have fallen by the wayside and a plethora of government-enforced diversity policies have marginalized many white workers ... Unfortunately, present-day diversity programs .. now favor anyone who does not happen to be white is the usual Reaganite bullshit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
63. Everyone loses their minds occassionaly...its HIS TURN for Gods Sake...give him a Break
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. He's already had his chance: He signed a letter endorsing PNAC's plans for Iraq. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. was it a good plan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. a piece of cake
I didn't recall Webb was a signatory on it though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. I saw it here during Webb's campaign for the Senate. It wasn't the orginal PNAC
project, but a follow-up letter from a group saying they thought it was a good plan.

I'll go see if I can find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:13 PM
Response to Reply #67
72. Its so hard these daze what with all the BS Crap flyin about....but then, thats the mission...to
dilute pollute DU in order to stifle reason sanity clarity...these dudes are nasty
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. What do you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #66
71. Some said it was "Mission Accomplished".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #71
73. what was the plan and how was it accomplished....good or bad??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. google Project for a New American Century
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #75
83. I am confused....you just said above...it was a diff plan....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #83
89. The acronym for Project for a New American Century = PNAC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 06:12 PM
Response to Original message
78. Very disappointing from Jim Webb
This is as race baiting an article I'd ever expect to read from a Senator not named Kyl, Sessions, Vitter or Cornyn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
79. Case study on how Webb is going for the "Independent" voter in Virginia
He's merely jockeying around the usual suspects. He's also been sort of a Republican in many respects over the years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VMI Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
82. Maybe he is just saying that to get elected.
Thought that was ok to do? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 07:11 PM
Response to Original message
84. Tell us, what is the authorized interpretation of Webb's op-ed?
He was a Reagan Republican. He still sounds like a Reagan Republican. That's my unauthorized leftist interpretation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butterfly77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
95. In other words...
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 08:51 PM by butterfly77
the teabaggers are right and the president and blacks are racist. He see nothing wrong with the fact that the teabaggers have lost their damn minds because their is a black President. Now,we are suppose to believe they are upset because they want their country back.

There was no outrage at any other dem pres I didn't hear anything about race except the fact that many racisys are afraid blacks wiil get something for nothing but, they have nothing to say while they give away our country to everyone else.

These people will go to some other country and find people and set them up with jobs,homes and every damn thing else but they will have a damn fit even if a black American ask for some fairness in their own country..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
96. Webb Calls For White Americans To End Government Directed Diversity Programs

Webb Calls For White Americans To End Government Directed Diversity Programs

Our guest blogger is Sam Fulwood III, a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Maybe Sen. James Webb, the Democratic senator from Virginia, didnt understand that what he was saying made him sound like a mossback from the last century. In a bizarre and unfortunate opinion article published in Fridays Wall Street Journal. Im being charitable because surely the Democratic senator from Virginia didnt mean to sound as bigoted as the article makes him seem. No, surely he wasnt arguing that white Americans suffer from federal policies that favor everyone but themselves.

Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs, Webb wrote, arguing for a retreat from those unspecified federal programs. The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.

Beyond being grossly ignorant about the current effects of what he calls present-day diversity programs, Webb is engaging in reckless racial inversion. While he carefully exculpates black Americans, whom he describes as still in need, Webb makes a scurrilous case that white Americans southerners and Baptists, in particular are being harmed by nonwhite groups who receive special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts. His solution is a call for white people to unite and end government directed diversity programs.

Clearly, Webb is unaware that affirmative actions programs have been effectively dismantled by the Supreme Court. But worse, hes oblivious to the fact that his screed treads dangerously close to the discredited divide-and-conqueror tactics of the Southern strategy. In this new formation, Webb pits the sweeping and swelling segments of Americas immigrant population against native-born Americans with the aim of rallying the nations white cultures.

If he thinks this is a necessary step toward racial healing, especially after the week the nations just had, then hes even more misguided than his article reveals. Somebody, perhaps one of his congressional colleagues, needs to tell Sen.Webb to get his head out of the last, sad epoch of covert racist talk and join the rest of America in the 21st century.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
golfguru Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
98. If skin color is still the criteria for success in America then how
Edited on Fri Jul-23-10 09:17 PM by golfguru
do you explain immigrants from India as a group have the highest per capita income
in US? Higher than whites, higher than protestants, higher than catholics, higher
than orientals from Asia, higher than jews, higher than European immigrants, higher
than latino's, higher than native Americans....etc.

And most Indians are dark brown in skin color! While it is true that the Indians who
immigrate here are the cream of the crop, it still is a remarkable achievement.

I can only surmise United States has come a long way baby!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #98
101. You know, there are a lot of variables in play
but there a lot of distortions of the facts.

People come the country with different skills, a doctor is going to earn more than cab driver and an engineer more than a cook, regardless of origin. Some also enter the country with wealth.

That has nothing to do with the effects of Affirmative Action programs. That's like saying we have a black President therefore discrimination doesn't exist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
golfguru Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-23-10 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #101
102. That data is 10 years old
I have seen more current data tables where the Indians have leap frogged
over most others. But again as I said, it is because there are tons of
well educated recent Indian immigrants here. Many more business owners than
10 years ago.

Almost none of the high earners are beneficiaries of affirmative action. It
clearly shows that one can succeed in this country through education, start
a business or invest in property.

My main point is that skin color does not hold back any one any more from
financial success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Overseas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-10 12:21 AM
Response to Original message
103. Yes. //nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-10 07:39 AM
Response to Original message
105. Horrible editorial by Webb, but
he is correct that some affirmative action policies are too indiscriminate and so produce too much unfair discrimination. In the real world of individuals, sometimes diversity programs favor, e.g., the immigrant from a privileged family over the native American from an underprivileged family. It is impossible to eliminate unfairness of this sort, but it should be minimized.

That being said, the editorial was creepy and terribly lacking in specifics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #105
106. But..
Edited on Sat Jul-24-10 10:18 AM by ProSense
The but is that people are adding their own meaning to an article titled:

Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege
America still owes a debt to its black citizens, but government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end.

I've seen the point made that his article is about aid and the divide-and-conquer aspect of poor vs. rich.

The entire article is about race and attempts to justify his argument that whites are being discriminated against.

Generations of such deficiencies do not disappear overnight, and they affect the momentum of a culture. In 1974, a National Opinion Research Center (NORC) study of white ethnic groups showed that white Baptists nationwide averaged only 10.7 years of education, a level almost identical to blacks' average of 10.6 years, and well below that of most other white groups. A recent NORC Social Survey of white adults born after World War II showed that in the years 1980-2000, only 18.4% of white Baptists and 21.8% of Irish Protestantsthe principal ethnic group that settled the Southhad obtained college degrees, compared to a national average of 30.1%, a Jewish average of 73.3%, and an average among those of Chinese and Indian descent of 61.9%.

Policy makers ignored such disparities within America's white cultures when, in advancing minority diversity programs, they treated whites as a fungible monolith. Also lost on these policy makers were the differences in economic and educational attainment among nonwhite cultures. Thus nonwhite groups received special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.


Do programs like Welfare/foodstamps, financial aid, Medicaid, etc. discrimate against whites? When he talks about preferential treatment that lifts up minorities instead of whites, is he aware that the system from birth to death is stack so unfairly against minorities that the lift he claims has been afforded them has after 40 years only made a dent? Has he checked the prison population? Has he checked the unemployment rate, pay structure, etc? He seems to forget that for every minority that benefits from these programs, there are countless more disproportionately left out of the system.

People want to have a discussion about race fine, but Webb's article is unadulterated bullshit. He's talking Affirmative Action, which was designed to address institutionalized discrimination. That affects access to opportunity. Institutionalized discrimination led to things like redlining. If Webb wanted to talk about aid, he didn't need to bury so deep in a jingoistic and xenophobic commentary.




edited extra word, for clarity

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-10 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #106
107. Basically I agree with you.
I was just looking for the grain of truth in what he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hollowdweller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-10 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
108. I'm torn by his comments actually

On one hand Webb is right on a LOT of issues and certainly is way to the left of people like Lieberman or Nelson or even Lincoln.

On the other hand all the stuff he says in the article I've heard a lot of people who live in the south spout who are white and really have never thought about how it is to be a minority.

On the THIRD hand Virginia in the mountainous regions has a poor white population that has many of the same problems as minorities. Marginalized, undereducated, substance abuse, economies that are dependent on one industry like coal or timber that rape the landscape and ruin the infrastructure.

I could say this article is POLITICAL and a wink and a nod to the white voters in his state that agree with the dems on economic issues, but are prejudiced.

I don't remember how many of you remember the Reagan and Bush 1 years but because the economy was so bad the GOP made a lot of political hay by convincing voters that Blacks and other minorities were the recipients of special rights and government largesse, rather than a disproportionate share of death penalties and prison sentences.

However I have read Webb say similar stuff before that sort of makes me think that he is white, older and really believes this stuff.

In the end I think it will actually help him retain his seat in his district in a time when I guarantee the GOP will revamp the tactic of race baiting. However on the other hand it really saddens me that in a time when we should have been going beyond this crap a dem politician feels the need to perpetuate it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 15th 2021, 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC