Asheville, North Carolina City Council: SHAME ON YOU!

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Did you read your fucking reply? From your reply:



Keyword: SURVIVORS. There are NO slaves still alive today. So we aren't paying survivors, we're paying great grandkids. BIG FUCKING DIFFERENCE.

Until the laws were changed in the United State, starting with Brown v The Board of education in 1954 which determined that "separate but equal" was uncosntitutional and culminating in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act which made racial discimination unlawful, African Americans were legislatively relegated to second class citizenship status. That up until that point, we could be legally discriminated against due to race among other characteristics that cannot be changed.

As I have previously mentioned, slavery is just where it started. Everything that came thereafter was just a more weasely way of keeping African Americans disenfranchised and there are plenty of people still alive who were deprived of full citizenship rights until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including my myself, my parents, their parents and siblings, etc. Furthermore, we can trace of history to the exact planatation where our ancestors spent their lives.

The damage done by the institution of slavery, Jim Crow, the Black Codes and every piece of legislation, that supported and kept in place the system of systemic white supremacy is cumlative. And if this were a court judgment, the judgment debtor would be entitled to 10 to 12% interest on the unpaid judgment. Think about that.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Imagine your great grandkids in the year 2180, getting money that you should have gotten now. CRAZY.

Reparations for blacks is nothing but a sleazy, low money-grab.

How is it that you can imagine a scenario like this, but it is beyond your abilities to imagine the money that the slaves were deprived of, then the freed slaves were deprived of when the government reniged on the "40 acres and a mule", and then unlawfuly tricked black property owners out of their land, etc. - how all that money should have gone to their heir but was instead stolen, but you don't think anyone should be compensated for those losses, why?

 

[protectionist]

How is it that you can imagine a scenario like this, but it is beyond your abilities to imagine the money that the slaves were deprived of, then the freed slaves were deprived of when the government reniged on the "40 acres and a mule", and then unlawfuly tricked black property owners out of their land, etc. - how all that money should have gone to their heir but was instead stolen, but you don't think anyone should be compensated for those losses, why?

Obviously, because the "anyone" you're talking about are people living today in 2020, who didn't experience any slavery.

As for money for the slaves, they were not totally deprived. While it may be true that they did not have freedom to come and go, they were given food, clothing, shelter, and medical care. So the idea that their work went unpaid, is false.

In some cases, where slaves showed an aptitude for music, they were given a musical instrument, as was portrayed by the slave known as "Fiddler" in the TV show Roots. One instrument was closely associated with slaves, who were known to have played it quite well - the banjo. Although there were homemade versions of it possessed by slaves (who taught it to their masters, Ex. Joel Walker Sweeny), in the 1830s, banjos began to be made in commercial mass production, and these often were given to slaves, who were good at it..

 

[protectionist]

Until the laws were changed in the United State, starting with Brown v The Board of education in 1954 which determined that "separate but equal" was uncosntitutional and culminating in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act which made racial discimination unlawful, African Americans were legislatively relegated to second class citizenship status. That up until that point, we could be legally discriminated against due to race among other characteristics that cannot be changed.

As I have previously mentioned, slavery is just where it started. Everything that came thereafter was just a more weasely way of keeping African Americans disenfranchised and there are plenty of people still alive who were deprived of full citizenship rights until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including my myself, my parents, their parents and siblings, etc. Furthermore, we can trace of history to the exact planatation where our ancestors spent their lives.

The damage done by the institution of slavery, Jim Crow, the Black Codes and every piece of legislation, that supported and kept in place the system of systemic white supremacy is cumulative. And if this were a court judgment, the judgment debtor would be entitled to 10 to 12% interest on the unpaid judgment. Think about that.

"Cumulative" ? Yeah ? That sounds pretty stretchy. The approximately 10,000 black employees at the Tampa VA Hospital enjoying secure, high-paying jobs, with a ton of govt benefits, aren't experiencing any "cumulative" damage.

Ask for "thinking", what I'm thinking about is the cumulative damage of 56 years of damage done to white people by the racial discrimination of Affirmative Action. And while you talk about how blacks were legislatively relegated to second class citizenship status up until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is whites who have been relegated to second class citizenship status, ever since then, including right this minute.

I don't see you showing much social justice concern about that.

 

[protectionist]

Do you know that women, including white women, are considered socially and economically disadvantaged?

And that's not how the EEOC works lol.

The EEOC is the enforcement agent of the civil rights legislations. That is how it works. What did you THINK they do all day - play video games ?

Yes, White women ARE socially and economically disadvantaged. That's because (despite a relatively minute number of them benefitting from Affirmative Action) the overwhelming majority of them suffer racial discrimination directly to themselves from race-based AA, and they suffer when their husbands, fathers and sons are discriminated against by AA.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Until the laws were changed in the United State, starting with Brown v The Board of education in 1954 which determined that "separate but equal" was uncosntitutional and culminating in 1964 with the passage of the Civil Rights Act which made racial discimination unlawful, African Americans were legislatively relegated to second class citizenship status. That up until that point, we could be legally discriminated against due to race among other characteristics that cannot be changed.

As I have previously mentioned, slavery is just where it started. Everything that came thereafter was just a more weasely way of keeping African Americans disenfranchised and there are plenty of people still alive who were deprived of full citizenship rights until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including my myself, my parents, their parents and siblings, etc. Furthermore, we can trace of history to the exact planatation where our ancestors spent their lives.

The damage done by the institution of slavery, Jim Crow, the Black Codes and every piece of legislation, that supported and kept in place the system of systemic white supremacy is cumulative. And if this were a court judgment, the judgment debtor would be entitled to 10 to 12% interest on the unpaid judgment. Think about that.

"Cumulative" ? Yeah ? That sounds pretty stretchy. The approximately 10,000 black employees at the Tampa VA Hospital enjoying secure, high-paying jobs, with a ton of govt benefits, aren't experiencing any "cumulative" damage.

Ask for "thinking", what I'm thinking about is the cumulative damage of 56 years of damage done to white people by the racial discrimination of Affirmative Action. And while you talk about how blacks were legislatively relegated to second class citizenship status up until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it is whites who have been relegated to second class citizenship status, ever since then, including right this minute.

I don't see you showing much social justice concern about that.

Just because the white race is no longer, in many cases, receiving preferential treatment as they had been for almost 150 years does NOT mean they're being discriminated against.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Do you know that women, including white women, are considered socially and economically disadvantaged?

And that's not how the EEOC works lol.

The EEOC is the enforcement agent of the civil rights legislations. That is how it works. What did you THINK they do all day - play video games ?

Yes, White women ARE socially and economically disadvantaged. That's because (despite a relatively minute number of them benefitting from Affirmative Action) the overwhelming majority of them suffer racial discrimination directly to themselves from race-based AA, and they suffer when their husbands, fathers and sons are discriminated against by AA.

Oh my gosh, EEOC stands for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission so it deals with employment discrimination, not violations of any and every civil rights law.

No, women as a class were deemed socially & economically disadvantaged because [white] men didn't want women in the workplace either but that's not where it stops. At one time divorced women could not obtain loans in their names alone, so it extended to credit and creditworthines as well:

"13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged? ​

§ 124.103 Who is socially disadvantaged?​

​

(a) General. Socially disadvantaged individuals are those who have been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias within American society because of their identities as members of groups and without regard to their individual qualities. The social disadvantage must stem from circumstances beyond their control.​

​

(b) Members of designated groups.​

(1) There is a rebuttable presumption that the following individuals are socially disadvantaged: Black Americans; Hispanic Americans; Native Americans (Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, or enrolled members of a Federally or State recognized Indian Tribe); Asian Pacific Americans (persons with origins from Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, Laos, Cambodia (Kampuchea), Vietnam, Korea, The Philippines, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Republic of Palau), Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru); Subcontinent Asian Americans (persons with origins from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands or Nepal); and members of other groups designated from time to time by SBA according to procedures set forth at paragraph (d) of this section. Being born in a country does not, by itself, suffice to make the birth country an individual's country of origin for purposes of being included within a designated group.​

(2) An individual must demonstrate that he or she has held himself or herself out, and is currently identified by others, as a member of a designated group if SBA requires it.​

(3) The presumption of social disadvantage may be overcome with credible evidence to the contrary. Individuals possessing or knowing of such evidence should submit the information in writing to the Associate Administrator for Business Development (AA/BD) for consideration.​

​

(c) Individuals not members of designated groups.​

​

(1) An individual who is not a member of one of the groups presumed to be socially disadvantaged in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must establish individual social disadvantage by a preponderance of the evidence. Such individual should present corroborating evidence to support his or her claim(s) of social disadvantage where readily available.​

(2) Evidence of individual social disadvantage must include the following elements:​

(i) At least one objective distinguishing feature that has contributed to social disadvantage, such as race, ethnic origin, gender, physical handicap, long-term residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society, or other similar causes not common to individuals who are not socially disadvantaged;​

(ii) The individual's social disadvantage must be rooted in treatment which he or she has experienced in American society, not in other countries;​

(iii) The individual's social disadvantage must be chronic and substantial, not fleeting or insignificant; and​

(iv) The individual's social disadvantage must have negatively impacted on his or her entry into or advancement in the business world. SBA will consider any relevant evidence in assessing this element, including experiences relating to education, employment and business history (including experiences relating to both the applicant firm and any other previous firm owned and/or controlled by the individual), where applicable.​

(A) Education. SBA considers such factors as denial of equal access to institutions of higher education, exclusion from social and professional association with students or teachers, denial of educational honors rightfully earned, and social patterns or pressures which discouraged the individual from pursuing a professional or business education.​

(B) Employment. SBA considers such factors as unequal treatment in hiring, promotions and other aspects of professional advancement, pay and fringe benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment; retaliatory or discriminatory behavior by an employer; and social patterns or pressures which have channeled the individual into nonprofessional or non-business fields.​

(C) Business history. SBA considers such factors as unequal access to credit or capital, acquisition of credit or capital under commercially unfavorable circumstances, unequal treatment in opportunities for government contracts or other work, unequal treatment by potential customers and business associates, and exclusion from business or professional organizations.​

(3) An individual claiming social disadvantage must present facts and evidence that by themselves establish that the individual has suffered social disadvantage that has negatively impacted his or her entry into or advancement in the business world.​

(i) Each instance of alleged discriminatory conduct must be accompanied by a negative impact on the individual's entry into or advancement in the business world in order for it to constitute an instance of social disadvantage.​

(ii) SBA may disregard a claim of social disadvantage where a legitimate alternative ground for an adverse employment action or other perceived adverse action exists and the individual has not presented evidence that would render his/her claim any more likely than the alternative ground."​

13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged?

 

[protectionist]

Just because the white race is no longer, in many cases, receiving preferential treatment as they had been for almost 150 years does NOT mean they're being discriminated against.

Of course not.
What means they are being discriminated against, is that in many venues (job hiring, job promotions, business loans, college admissions, college financial aid, etc) blacks are given the first shot at these things AHEAD OF WHITES. In many cases (as in my graduate school 43 years ago) blacks are given the ONLY shot. They were the ONLY ones who got assistantships. ALL OTHERS (including Hispanics, Asians, women) were denied).

In my own personal case (and that of millions of people), the quality level of my whole life has been reduced, by being discriminated against by Affirmative Action. And it continues to be in now in my retirement, by my very reduced Social Security payments, that come from decades of reduced income, caused by Affirmative Action, which was entirely racially discrimination based. Don't play dumb with me. I've told you about this before.

For anybody to suggest that white people are not discriminated against by Affirmative Action, is total stupidity if not total, and ridiculous dishonesty. I'm not going to debate if fish can swim, and if the sky is blue. Be honest or don't post here at all.

I said, I don't see you showing much social justice concern about racial discrimination in AA, and other favoritism, when blacks are the beneficiaries, and whites are the victims. You just confirmed that. Been to your local VA hospital lately ?

 

[protectionist]

Oh my gosh, EEOC stands for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission so it deals with employment discrimination, not violations of any and every civil rights law.

No, women as a class were deemed socially & economically disadvantaged because [white] men didn't want women in the workplace either but that's not where it stops. At one time divorced women could not obtain loans in their names alone, so it extended to credit and creditworthines as well:

"13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged? ​

§ 124.103 Who is socially disadvantaged?​

​

(a) General. Socially disadvantaged individuals are those who have been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias within American society because of their identities as members of groups and without regard to their individual qualities. The social disadvantage must stem from circumstances beyond their control.​

​

(b) Members of designated groups.​

(1) There is a rebuttable presumption that the following individuals are socially disadvantaged: Black Americans; Hispanic Americans; Native Americans (Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, or enrolled members of a Federally or State recognized Indian Tribe); Asian Pacific Americans (persons with origins from Burma, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei, Japan, China (including Hong Kong), Taiwan, Laos, Cambodia (Kampuchea), Vietnam, Korea, The Philippines, U.S. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (Republic of Palau), Republic of the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Samoa, Macao, Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, or Nauru); Subcontinent Asian Americans (persons with origins from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, the Maldives Islands or Nepal); and members of other groups designated from time to time by SBA according to procedures set forth at paragraph (d) of this section. Being born in a country does not, by itself, suffice to make the birth country an individual's country of origin for purposes of being included within a designated group.​

(2) An individual must demonstrate that he or she has held himself or herself out, and is currently identified by others, as a member of a designated group if SBA requires it.​

(3) The presumption of social disadvantage may be overcome with credible evidence to the contrary. Individuals possessing or knowing of such evidence should submit the information in writing to the Associate Administrator for Business Development (AA/BD) for consideration.​

​

(c) Individuals not members of designated groups.​

​

(1) An individual who is not a member of one of the groups presumed to be socially disadvantaged in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must establish individual social disadvantage by a preponderance of the evidence. Such individual should present corroborating evidence to support his or her claim(s) of social disadvantage where readily available.​

(2) Evidence of individual social disadvantage must include the following elements:​

(i) At least one objective distinguishing feature that has contributed to social disadvantage, such as race, ethnic origin, gender, physical handicap, long-term residence in an environment isolated from the mainstream of American society, or other similar causes not common to individuals who are not socially disadvantaged;​

(ii) The individual's social disadvantage must be rooted in treatment which he or she has experienced in American society, not in other countries;​

(iii) The individual's social disadvantage must be chronic and substantial, not fleeting or insignificant; and​

(iv) The individual's social disadvantage must have negatively impacted on his or her entry into or advancement in the business world. SBA will consider any relevant evidence in assessing this element, including experiences relating to education, employment and business history (including experiences relating to both the applicant firm and any other previous firm owned and/or controlled by the individual), where applicable.​

(A) Education. SBA considers such factors as denial of equal access to institutions of higher education, exclusion from social and professional association with students or teachers, denial of educational honors rightfully earned, and social patterns or pressures which discouraged the individual from pursuing a professional or business education.​

(B) Employment. SBA considers such factors as unequal treatment in hiring, promotions and other aspects of professional advancement, pay and fringe benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment; retaliatory or discriminatory behavior by an employer; and social patterns or pressures which have channeled the individual into nonprofessional or non-business fields.​

(C) Business history. SBA considers such factors as unequal access to credit or capital, acquisition of credit or capital under commercially unfavorable circumstances, unequal treatment in opportunities for government contracts or other work, unequal treatment by potential customers and business associates, and exclusion from business or professional organizations.​

(3) An individual claiming social disadvantage must present facts and evidence that by themselves establish that the individual has suffered social disadvantage that has negatively impacted his or her entry into or advancement in the business world.​

(i) Each instance of alleged discriminatory conduct must be accompanied by a negative impact on the individual's entry into or advancement in the business world in order for it to constitute an instance of social disadvantage.​

(ii) SBA may disregard a claim of social disadvantage where a legitimate alternative ground for an adverse employment action or other perceived adverse action exists and the individual has not presented evidence that would render his/her claim any more likely than the alternative ground."​

13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged?

1. Why do you tell me things that I just got finished telling you? Is this some lamebrain attempt to try to show you being more knowledgable than me ? Not working. I don't need you to tell me anything about the EEOC, or any other govt agency. Period.

2. You are wrong about how women are socially disadvantaged. I set you straight about that in Post # 45. And since you haven't got it, I guess I'll have to tell you AGAIN (some people need to be told twice) >>>
White women ARE socially and economically disadvantaged. That's because (despite a relatively minute number of them benefitting from Affirmative Action) the overwhelming majority of them suffer racial discrimination directly to themselves from race-based AA, and they suffer when their husbands, fathers and sons are discriminated against by AA.

3. Everything in your "13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged?
fits the victims of Affirmative Action and other racial discriminations favorable to blacks, TO A T.

1. "Socially disadvantaged individuals are those who have been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias within American society, because of their identities as members of groups and without regard to their individual qualities" - YES - AA.

2. "There is a rebuttable presumption that the following individuals are socially disadvantaged: Black Americans" - yeah, it's "rebuttable" all right. Blacks are the beneficiaries of AA et al racial-based favors, They are socially ADVANTAGED, not disadvantaged. Whites are who are disadvantaged.

3. "The presumption of social disadvantage may be overcome with credible evidence to the contrary." The credible evidence is Affirmative Action et al.

4. "An individual who is not a member of one of the groups presumed to be socially disadvantaged in paragraph (b)(1) of this section must establish individual social disadvantage by a preponderance of the evidence. Such individual should present corroborating evidence." Of course. It is Affirmative Action. (56 years of it)

5. "Evidence of individual social disadvantage must include the following elements: At least one objective distinguishing feature that has contributed to social disadvantage, such as race," - that's how race-based Affirmative Action works - just look at any AA questionnairre form. That's how other racial discriminations favoring blacks (ex Reparations) works also.

6. "The individual's social disadvantage must be rooted in treatment which he or she has experienced in American society, not in other countries" - Yes, right here in America ( all 50 states)

7. "The individual's social disadvantage must be chronic and substantial, not fleeting or insignificant; " - 56 YEARS is not "fleeting" or "insignificant"

8. "The individual's social disadvantage must have negatively impacted on his or her entry into or advancement in the business world. SBA will consider any relevant evidence in assessing this element, including experiences relating to education, employment and business history" - Affirmative Action does just that. >> job hiring, job promotions, business loans, college admissions, college financial aid, etc

9. "An individual claiming social disadvantage must present facts and evidence that by themselves establish that the individual has suffered social disadvantage that has negatively impacted his or her entry into or advancement in the business world." - every employment application, application fro college financial aid, applications for business loans........one visit to the Tampa VA hospital would cover it.

10. "Standards to be applied. In determining whether a group has made an adequate showing that it has suffered chronic racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias for the purposes of this section, SBA must determine that: The group has suffered prejudice, bias, or discriminatory practices" All one need do is look at an Affirmative Action questionnaire, or the Asheville, NC reparations resolution.

Nothing ever confirmed the fact of whites (and in some cases other non-black races) of being socially disadvantaged more than this >> 13 CFR § 124.103 - Who is socially disadvantaged?

 

[abu afak]

Keith Young, a black member of the council, said “It is simply not enough to remove statutes. Black people in this country are dealing with issues that are systemic in nature.” He didn't specify any definition of the word "systemic"

"Systemic:"
IQ
East Asians - 105
'White'/Euro - 100
African American 85 (avg: 76% sub-Saharan, 24% 'white')
sub-Saharan - 70

`

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If the voters in Ashville don't like this law, vote the city council out of office and repeal the law. Easy.

 

[jbrownson0831]

I believe Ashville is one of those diverse nouveau rich areas where Progs moved into starting a few decades ago.

Asheville is full of kooks.