Affirmative action, helpful or harmful?

[protectionist]

Your first sentence has 2 parts. The first half beginning with "So" and ending at the "," is factual. You are correct that "whites and males" shouldn't be denied equal protection of the law, no one should. The problem is that you then erroneously conclude that affirmative action authorizes or makes lawful discrimination against "whites and males" which if you read the text below you can ascertain for yourselves

....requires contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment,
***without regard to their race***,
color, religion, sex or national origin." The phrase affirmative action had appeared previously in Executive Order 10925 in 1961.
​

"Without regard" means irrespective of their race, etc so that includes even EVERYONE including whites and males. This law simply does not state in any way, shape or form what you keep insisting it does

Affirmative Action preceded the Civil Rights Act

I don' t have to read anything. I was the victim of affirmative action discrimination 41 years ago, denied an assistantship by race, and force to drop out of the grad school I was in (as did 2 dozen others). Changed my whole life, and I still suffer from it, even in retirement, with much reduced Social Security payments.

I have many friends who also experienced the same thing. We lived it.

You seem to confuse words with actions.
As for what preceded what, who cares ?

 

[protectionist]

This is hilarious coming from you after the conversation we've been engaged in for the past 24 hours.

Deflection
...deflection is when something someone communicates causes someone to feel triggered and as a result, instead of taking it in, they either ignore, deny or turn away from it. Or worse, turn it back towards the other person. This is done to avoid painful memories and painful emotions and painful thoughts, but it also prevents the person from being self-aware
...
people, whose default defense mechanism and coping mechanism is denial, use deflection as a mechanism of denial
...
Deflection is a defense mechanism that is designed to preserve self-concept. It is a form of projection when it is used to deflect blame. Essentially, when the fault is in fact with us, we project the blame and fault onto someone else. We feel we cannot take responsibility or blame for something and feel positive about ourselves at the same time.
​

Have you ever wondered why you're afraid of so many things that others are not?

The only reason I don't say "that's what you do" (regarding deflection), is because you're too ignorant to know what to be afraid of. You're like the little toddler who wanders into a bear's cave, unaware of the danger.

And no, I don't wonder why I have fears that others (mostly liberals) don't. I already told you why. Because those people are attached to liberal OMISSION media, and thus are the most information-deprived (as well as brainwashed) individuals in America. I've proven that with my Islamization Quiz.

The highest grade any of the liberals who took it got, was 10%. Most got zero. Wanna take it, and find out how much you don't know ? Or would you be like some of them, and ask me >> "Islamization. What's that ?"

 

[Timmy]

No conjuring needed, simply the ability to not only read but to "read and comprehend" the written word, use an internet search engine, access historical document, request documents that exist but are not in your possession, cross reference them, compile them, if possible place the information into a computer database so that you can organize, query & analyze the data and then produce a report displaying your results and if you want to take it a step further explain what it all represents. Once you have that, you should be able to easily ascertain the veracity of statements made by people everywhere, and then show them how you obtained your results and arrived at your conclusions.

I also understand and perceive what you post from rather wild imagination >> "claim God given superiority over another whole race of people"
Wonder what hat you pulled that out of .

In their own words. I put the relevant bits in red to make it easier for you to see.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
​

They intended for this state of affairs (the forced slavery of those of African descent to the white race) to extend in perpetuity.

All moot. AA is racist, racial discrimination, banned by the 14th amendment and the 1964 civil rights act. Everyone perpetrating it is a criminal, in addition to a racist.

If it was banned in the 14th why did we need the civil rights act 100yrs later?

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

No conjuring needed, simply the ability to not only read but to "read and comprehend" the written word, use an internet search engine, access historical document, request documents that exist but are not in your possession, cross reference them, compile them, if possible place the information into a computer database so that you can organize, query & analyze the data and then produce a report displaying your results and if you want to take it a step further explain what it all represents. Once you have that, you should be able to easily ascertain the veracity of statements made by people everywhere, and then show them how you obtained your results and arrived at your conclusions.

I also understand and perceive what you post from rather wild imagination >> "claim God given superiority over another whole race of people"
Wonder what hat you pulled that out of .

In their own words. I put the relevant bits in red to make it easier for you to see.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
​

They intended for this state of affairs (the forced slavery of those of African descent to the white race) to extend in perpetuity.

All moot. AA is racist, racial discrimination, banned by the 14th amendment and the 1964 civil rights act. Everyone perpetrating it is a criminal, in addition to a racist.

If it was banned in the 14th why did we need the civil rights act 100yrs later?

Because of the Hateful Hucklefvcks hanging on to their Pro-Slavery Confederate wretched past.

 

[JQPublic1]

You're the space cadet not me. If blacks were benefitting from AA racial preferences as much as you suggest they do...why is the wealth gap between black and white families widening instead of closing? Why is black unemployment rates always more than twice that of the white unemployment rate?

Don't get me wrong. There are many successful blacks. However, Affirmative Action has not been that great of a factor in improving the economic status of the black community as a whole. But even there you begrudge any thing you percieve being done to level the playing field for your fellow black Americans.

1. Where is your protests against white women, Asians, and others who have benefitted more from Affirmative Action than blacks could ever dream of?
2. High achieving Asians are being denied admission to prestigious institutions that offer preference to less qualified Whites. Meritocracy ? What a sham...

A 2009 Princeton study showed that Asians had to score a hundred and forty points higher on the S.A.T. than whites to have the same chance of admission to top universities.

Your questions reflect the typical mindset of liberals, greatly information-deprived, as a result of watching liberal OMISSION media.

1. WHO says the he wealth gap between black and white families is widening ? I SEE it as closing sharply. Decades ago, you didn't see blacks en masse, living in nice homes, driving shiny new cars (like I SEE in my apt complex) and in WalMart parking lots. Sometimes the eyes and ears are more reliable than liberal sources (which you didn't even cite)

2. It has been long well-known (at least by conservatives) that despite AA advantage, blacks have had high unemployment due to:
a. Simple lazieness to go out and get a job
b. Unpreparedness in job interviews
c. Inability to perform on the job, and high job loss

3. I wouldn't call racial AA a leveling of a playing field for anyone. I don't totally oppose the idea of AA though >> AA based on financial need could be a leveling of playing field for the poor, as opposed to the black.

4. White women and Asians have NOT benefitted more from Affirmative Action than blacks. By far, the majority of white woman suffer loss from AA due to discrimination against them by race, and being relatives (dependents) of discriminated-against white men (daughters & wives)

5. You contradict yourself. first you say >> "...Asians ... who have benefitted more from Affirmative Action", and then you say >> "High achieving Asians are being denied admission"
You were right the second time. When I was denied an assistantship in graduate school, the only recipients were the only 8 blacks who applied. Among the AA victims ? >> 2 Asians, 3 Hispanics, 5 women.

Your eyes and ears are merely sensory devices that gather information to be processed by a demented bigoted brain. But you are not alone. You've got plenty of RW screwball friends just as psychotic and easily manipulated as you are. Thats how Trump became president. He is just as fucked up as YOU and the rest of the RW turds that fell for the empty promises and clownish BS of the immoral lying creep. Your responses to my questions are typical of low information Trump surrogates.

Nevertheless, for the sake of posterity, I will address the latests manifestation of your foibles so history will be accurately recorded in proper context and truth

1. There are myriad sources publishing this observation but the agents of the Urban Institute, who made this chart, will do for now:

View attachment 186226


2. Typically,you have contradicted yourself again. If Blacks are too lazy, are unprepared for interviews or inept, why are you so vehemently opposed to AA? AA doesn't require Managers to hire unqualified or unprepared individuals. And those Blacks without competitive SAT or LSAT scores are rejected by prestigious universities right along with most Whites or Asians who don't meet those prerequisites. But you logic doesn't explain why 75% of the Black community lives above the poverty level. It seems the majority of Blacks have overwhelmingly convinced employers that they can make money for the boss.

3. Have you ever wondered why AA was implemented at all? I'm sure you have. But somehow you ignore the pervasive discrimination and prejudices that necessitated legislative action to address a national problem. Dr. Ben Carson and General Colin Powell admit they were products of AA. There are thousands of other Black success stories owing their narratives to AA. Merit alone, though, has never been the only basis for hiring and college admission. AA removed the disqualifying stigma of Blackness and promoted more egalitarian options.

4. Yes, before 1965, White women and Asians were locked out of educational and job opportunities reserved for white males just as Blacks were.

Several studies have documented important gains in racial and gender equality as a direct result of affirmative action (Bowen & Bok, 1998; Murrell & Jones, 1996). For example, according to a report from the U.S. Labor Department, affirmative action has helped 5 million minority members and 6 million White and minority women move up in the workforce ("Reverse Discrimination," 1995).

Note that the term "minority" does include Asians.

Moreover, affirmative action programs benefit Asian American students in specific and concrete ways. Historically, such programs were critical in making public higher education available to Asian Americans in the 1960s and 1970s, before which Asian Americans had suffered exclusion and de jure segregation in public education like other people of color. So Asian Americans are already the beneficiaries of affirmative action in education, both firsthand and as the children of people who benefited firsthand and who consequently had improved professional opportunities and greater economic security.

5. There is no contradiction in recognizing that the doors of educational opportunity, closed to Asians in the 1960s, were opened by Affirmative Action, and that since then Asians are now over represented. Now, so called meritocracy is shelved to give preference to Whites who score less than Asians on admissions tests.

If your article addresses Asians so much, why are they left out of the chart?

Might this go toward understanding the differences you pose? These are the averages of SAT scores.

What Is the Average SAT Score?

I don't know where you got that chart but it isn't one from the link you provided. From your link:

View attachment 186521

Why not use the chart for average SAT in your link rather than one seemingly homemade that puts White test scores on par with Asian.But does either of your charts address the premise that Asians need to score 140 points higher than Whites to gain admission to certain universities? At first glance a casual observer might think so. But what the chart do not show is the individual scores running above the average. Obviously there are more Asians scoring higher than their average score and some of those applicants are not admitted over of lower scoring whites.

Proves the same thing! Thank you!

Here is yet another source saying exactly the same thing. How many would you like?

Fast Facts

Do you even know what you are trying to prove? Tell me how your charts disprove the fact that in some universities Asians have ti score 140 more points o. Admission tests than whites. I dare ya.

 

[Markle]

Your questions reflect the typical mindset of liberals, greatly information-deprived, as a result of watching liberal OMISSION media.

1. WHO says the he wealth gap between black and white families is widening ? I SEE it as closing sharply. Decades ago, you didn't see blacks en masse, living in nice homes, driving shiny new cars (like I SEE in my apt complex) and in WalMart parking lots. Sometimes the eyes and ears are more reliable than liberal sources (which you didn't even cite)

2. It has been long well-known (at least by conservatives) that despite AA advantage, blacks have had high unemployment due to:
a. Simple lazieness to go out and get a job
b. Unpreparedness in job interviews
c. Inability to perform on the job, and high job loss

3. I wouldn't call racial AA a leveling of a playing field for anyone. I don't totally oppose the idea of AA though >> AA based on financial need could be a leveling of playing field for the poor, as opposed to the black.

4. White women and Asians have NOT benefitted more from Affirmative Action than blacks. By far, the majority of white woman suffer loss from AA due to discrimination against them by race, and being relatives (dependents) of discriminated-against white men (daughters & wives)

5. You contradict yourself. first you say >> "...Asians ... who have benefitted more from Affirmative Action", and then you say >> "High achieving Asians are being denied admission"
You were right the second time. When I was denied an assistantship in graduate school, the only recipients were the only 8 blacks who applied. Among the AA victims ? >> 2 Asians, 3 Hispanics, 5 women.

Your eyes and ears are merely sensory devices that gather information to be processed by a demented bigoted brain. But you are not alone. You've got plenty of RW screwball friends just as psychotic and easily manipulated as you are. Thats how Trump became president. He is just as fucked up as YOU and the rest of the RW turds that fell for the empty promises and clownish BS of the immoral lying creep. Your responses to my questions are typical of low information Trump surrogates.

Nevertheless, for the sake of posterity, I will address the latests manifestation of your foibles so history will be accurately recorded in proper context and truth

1. There are myriad sources publishing this observation but the agents of the Urban Institute, who made this chart, will do for now:

View attachment 186226


2. Typically,you have contradicted yourself again. If Blacks are too lazy, are unprepared for interviews or inept, why are you so vehemently opposed to AA? AA doesn't require Managers to hire unqualified or unprepared individuals. And those Blacks without competitive SAT or LSAT scores are rejected by prestigious universities right along with most Whites or Asians who don't meet those prerequisites. But you logic doesn't explain why 75% of the Black community lives above the poverty level. It seems the majority of Blacks have overwhelmingly convinced employers that they can make money for the boss.

3. Have you ever wondered why AA was implemented at all? I'm sure you have. But somehow you ignore the pervasive discrimination and prejudices that necessitated legislative action to address a national problem. Dr. Ben Carson and General Colin Powell admit they were products of AA. There are thousands of other Black success stories owing their narratives to AA. Merit alone, though, has never been the only basis for hiring and college admission. AA removed the disqualifying stigma of Blackness and promoted more egalitarian options.

4. Yes, before 1965, White women and Asians were locked out of educational and job opportunities reserved for white males just as Blacks were.

Several studies have documented important gains in racial and gender equality as a direct result of affirmative action (Bowen & Bok, 1998; Murrell & Jones, 1996). For example, according to a report from the U.S. Labor Department, affirmative action has helped 5 million minority members and 6 million White and minority women move up in the workforce ("Reverse Discrimination," 1995).

Note that the term "minority" does include Asians.

Moreover, affirmative action programs benefit Asian American students in specific and concrete ways. Historically, such programs were critical in making public higher education available to Asian Americans in the 1960s and 1970s, before which Asian Americans had suffered exclusion and de jure segregation in public education like other people of color. So Asian Americans are already the beneficiaries of affirmative action in education, both firsthand and as the children of people who benefited firsthand and who consequently had improved professional opportunities and greater economic security.

5. There is no contradiction in recognizing that the doors of educational opportunity, closed to Asians in the 1960s, were opened by Affirmative Action, and that since then Asians are now over represented. Now, so called meritocracy is shelved to give preference to Whites who score less than Asians on admissions tests.

If your article addresses Asians so much, why are they left out of the chart?

Might this go toward understanding the differences you pose? These are the averages of SAT scores.

What Is the Average SAT Score?

I don't know where you got that chart but it isn't one from the link you provided. From your link:

View attachment 186521

Why not use the chart for average SAT in your link rather than one seemingly homemade that puts White test scores on par with Asian.But does either of your charts address the premise that Asians need to score 140 points higher than Whites to gain admission to certain universities? At first glance a casual observer might think so. But what the chart do not show is the individual scores running above the average. Obviously there are more Asians scoring higher than their average score and some of those applicants are not admitted over of lower scoring whites.

Proves the same thing! Thank you!

Here is yet another source saying exactly the same thing. How many would you like?

Fast Facts

Do you even know what you are trying to prove? Tell me how your charts disprove the fact that in some universities Asians have ti score 140 more points o. Admission tests than whites. I dare ya.

The negative impact of affirmative action.

 

[JQPublic1]

Harmful. It's discrimination based on race and/or sex.

That's the irony of so much anti-discrimination law. In order to ensure that we're all treating each other equally, government is required to treat people unequally.

Yeah brother...tell that to the Asians who were rejected by colleges favoring lower scoring whites.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

If it was banned in the 14th why did we need the civil rights act 100yrs later?

Because our laws don't change people's behavior or have the ability to prevent anyone violating them otherwise we'd have no crime just as an example. What they do is

1. Explain the prohibited behavior
2. Outline the category of the crime (felony, misdemeanor, traffic infraction, etc. and
3. State the punishment for violation of said law

For a long time African Americans had no recourse at all for having their rights violated. When the slaves were freed via the Thirteenth Amendment people of African descent though no longer slaves, were not considered citizens of the United States under the existing law, therefore they still had no rights to many of the things we all have the right to today, including the right to bring a lawsuit to address the legal wrongs done to them. That's what it means to have no rights and it is racial discrimination when one race benefits at the expense of another.

So to answer your question, even though all of these laws were passed the majority of the country still openly practiced racial discrimination thus necessitating that it was "put in writing" to

"not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin"​

 

[JQPublic1]

Your eyes and ears are merely sensory devices that gather information to be processed by a demented bigoted brain. But you are not alone. You've got plenty of RW screwball friends just as psychotic and easily manipulated as you are. Thats how Trump became president. He is just as fucked up as YOU and the rest of the RW turds that fell for the empty promises and clownish BS of the immoral lying creep. Your responses to my questions are typical of low information Trump surrogates.

Nevertheless, for the sake of posterity, I will address the latests manifestation of your foibles so history will be accurately recorded in proper context and truth

1. There are myriad sources publishing this observation but the agents of the Urban Institute, who made this chart, will do for now:

View attachment 186226


2. Typically,you have contradicted yourself again. If Blacks are too lazy, are unprepared for interviews or inept, why are you so vehemently opposed to AA? AA doesn't require Managers to hire unqualified or unprepared individuals. And those Blacks without competitive SAT or LSAT scores are rejected by prestigious universities right along with most Whites or Asians who don't meet those prerequisites. But you logic doesn't explain why 75% of the Black community lives above the poverty level. It seems the majority of Blacks have overwhelmingly convinced employers that they can make money for the boss.

3. Have you ever wondered why AA was implemented at all? I'm sure you have. But somehow you ignore the pervasive discrimination and prejudices that necessitated legislative action to address a national problem. Dr. Ben Carson and General Colin Powell admit they were products of AA. There are thousands of other Black success stories owing their narratives to AA. Merit alone, though, has never been the only basis for hiring and college admission. AA removed the disqualifying stigma of Blackness and promoted more egalitarian options.

4. Yes, before 1965, White women and Asians were locked out of educational and job opportunities reserved for white males just as Blacks were.

Several studies have documented important gains in racial and gender equality as a direct result of affirmative action (Bowen & Bok, 1998; Murrell & Jones, 1996). For example, according to a report from the U.S. Labor Department, affirmative action has helped 5 million minority members and 6 million White and minority women move up in the workforce ("Reverse Discrimination," 1995).

Note that the term "minority" does include Asians.

Moreover, affirmative action programs benefit Asian American students in specific and concrete ways. Historically, such programs were critical in making public higher education available to Asian Americans in the 1960s and 1970s, before which Asian Americans had suffered exclusion and de jure segregation in public education like other people of color. So Asian Americans are already the beneficiaries of affirmative action in education, both firsthand and as the children of people who benefited firsthand and who consequently had improved professional opportunities and greater economic security.

5. There is no contradiction in recognizing that the doors of educational opportunity, closed to Asians in the 1960s, were opened by Affirmative Action, and that since then Asians are now over represented. Now, so called meritocracy is shelved to give preference to Whites who score less than Asians on admissions tests.

If your article addresses Asians so much, why are they left out of the chart?

Might this go toward understanding the differences you pose? These are the averages of SAT scores.

What Is the Average SAT Score?

I don't know where you got that chart but it isn't one from the link you provided. From your link:

View attachment 186521

Why not use the chart for average SAT in your link rather than one seemingly homemade that puts White test scores on par with Asian.But does either of your charts address the premise that Asians need to score 140 points higher than Whites to gain admission to certain universities? At first glance a casual observer might think so. But what the chart do not show is the individual scores running above the average. Obviously there are more Asians scoring higher than their average score and some of those applicants are not admitted over of lower scoring whites.

Proves the same thing! Thank you!

Here is yet another source saying exactly the same thing. How many would you like?

Fast Facts

Do you even know what you are trying to prove? Tell me how your charts disprove the fact that in some universities Asians have ti score 140 more points o. Admission tests than whites. I dare ya.

The negative impact of affirmative action.

Are you saying preference for lower scoring Whites over higher scoring Asians is Affirmative Action?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

I don' t have to read anything. I was the victim of affirmative action discrimination 41 years ago, denied an assistantship by race, and force to drop out of the grad school I was in (as did 2 dozen others). Changed my whole life, and I still suffer from it, even in retirement, with much reduced Social Security payments.

I have many friends who also experienced the same thing. We lived it.

Is this the only incident that you believe to be discriminatory and if so why didn't all of you get together and find an attorney? I doubt the records are still available 40 years later but you'd be surprised what things get archived and show up in other places. Did none of you even file a complaint?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Are you saying preference for lower scoring Whites over higher scoring Asians is Affirmative Action?

Funny how that works huh. I always thought that was the status quo.

 

[WEATHER53]

Your first sentence has 2 parts. The first half beginning with "So" and ending at the "," is factual. You are correct that "whites and males" shouldn't be denied equal protection of the law, no one should. The problem is that you then erroneously conclude that affirmative action authorizes or makes lawful discrimination against "whites and males" which if you read the text below you can ascertain for yourselves

....requires contractors to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment,
***without regard to their race***,
color, religion, sex or national origin." The phrase affirmative action had appeared previously in Executive Order 10925 in 1961.
​

"Without regard" means irrespective of their race, etc so that includes even EVERYONE including whites and males. This law simply does not state in any way, shape or form what you keep insisting it does

Affirmative Action preceded the Civil Rights Act

I don' t have to read anything. I was the victim of affirmative action discrimination 41 years ago, denied an assistantship by race, and force to drop out of the grad school I was in (as did 2 dozen others). Changed my whole life, and I still suffer from it, even in retirement, with much reduced Social Security payments.

I have many friends who also experienced the same thing. We lived it.

You seem to confuse words with actions.
As for what preceded what, who cares ?

Two days ago I had some dipsh*t here telling me the experience I shared about my wife being discrimated against with , race as a deciding factor, was false. Living it Trumps theorizing about it.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Because of the Hateful Hucklefvcks hanging on to their Pro-Slavery Confederate wretched past.

That's all you got?

I noticed your boy still hasn't commented on me presenting what he asked for - proof that many whites believe that God Almighty Himself deemed them superior to black folks and that black people should be in servitude to them til the end of ALL time.

And if you don't understand the concept of a footrace where one of the runners is given a head start while the other runner is partially hobbled while the on-lookers regularly through obstacles in his path as he attempts to make it to the finish line then I don't know what to say other than sorry for your loss.

 

[protectionist]

If it was banned in the 14th why did we need the civil rights act 100yrs later?

Ask the people who wrote the civil rights act.

 

[dblack]

The justification for aggressive anti-discrimination laws is understandable. After the Civil War did away with slavery, our nation was left with a gaping wound. Racism toward the freed slaves was arguably an existential threat to our nation, and it's still plaguing us.

But, as the justification for suppressing racism is expanded to include other types of 'discrimination', the intrusive nature of the policy becomes more clear. Is government really there to tell us what opinions we're allowed to express? Isn't that a blatant violation of freedom of speech?

 

[protectionist]

Yeah brother...tell that to the Asians who were rejected by colleges favoring lower scoring whites.

Tell that to the whites who were denied college financial aid, favoring lower achieving blacks.

 

[protectionist]

Because our laws don't change people's behavior or have the ability to prevent anyone violating them otherwise we'd have no crime just as an example. What they do is

1. Explain the prohibited behavior
2. Outline the category of the crime (felony, misdemeanor, traffic infraction, etc. and
3. State the punishment for violation of said law

For a long time African Americans had no recourse at all for having their rights violated. When the slaves were freed via the Thirteenth Amendment people of African descent though no longer slaves, were not considered citizens of the United States under the existing law, therefore they still had no rights to many of the things we all have the right to today, including the right to bring a lawsuit to address the legal wrongs done to them. That's what it means to have no rights and it is racial discrimination when one race benefits at the expense of another.

So to answer your question, even though all of these laws were passed the majority of the country still openly practiced racial discrimination thus necessitating that it was "put in writing" to

"not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin"​

1. So by doing affirmative action discrimination, they would thus not discriminate against employees or applicants because of race, except that is exactly what they do. No change to racial discrimination practice. Only change is identity of victims and beneficiaries.

2. The term "African American" (to describe black people) is faulty. The correct better term is blacks.

 

[protectionist]

Is this the only incident that you believe to be discriminatory and if so why didn't all of you get together and find an attorney? I doubt the records are still available 40 years later but you'd be surprised what things get archived and show up in other places. Did none of you even file a complaint?

I didn't . I moved to San Jose, CA and got enrolled in a CETA job/school, and picked up a skilled trade, in the burgeoning computer industry. What the others did, I don't know. Could have been class action. Probably should have been.

Then again, the white guilt syndrome (neurosis) of southern liberals at that time was so strong, a court suit may have been shelved or defeated, as city (Memphis, Tennessee) politicians would do just about anything to avoid being called a racist (valid or not)

And of course it's not the only incident. What kind of weird question is that ? There have been millions of these incidents gone on, for 50 years.

 

[protectionist]

That's all you got?

I noticed your boy still hasn't commented on me presenting what he asked for - proof that many whites believe that God Almighty Himself deemed them superior to black folks and that black people should be in servitude to them til the end of ALL time.

And if you don't understand the concept of a footrace where one of the runners is given a head start while the other runner is partially hobbled while the on-lookers regularly through obstacles in his path as he attempts to make it to the finish line then I don't know what to say other than sorry for your loss.

Who is this "boy" you're talking about ? And where is your concern for the hobbled white guy, pushed backward by the AA obstacles in his path ?

 

[JQPublic1]

Yeah brother...tell that to the Asians who were rejected by colleges favoring lower scoring whites.

Tell that to the whites who were denied college financial aid, favoring lower achieving blacks.

You've already told them that years ago. The White over Asian preference is relatively new. So what do you call this new phenomenon, Affirmative Re-action?