White Resentment in Michigan

By a large margin -- sixteen percentage points --Michigan voters have rejected some forms of affirmative action. State Proposal 2 forbids the use of race and gender preferences in university admissions as well as in government hiring and contracting. It was a victory for the angry white people behind the cleverly-named Michigan Civil Rights Initiative(MCRI), headed by Jennifer Gratz, who after being rejected from the University of Michigan in 1995, cried reverse discrimination and sued the school. The U.S. Supreme Court took her side, in part, striking down the racial preference programs at Michigan's undergraduate school of Literature, Science and the Arts (my alma mater, by the way), but in a related case, the court allowed the use of race in admissions to the UM Law School. Hence Jennifer Gratz's continued campaign. You may wonder why this doesn't backfire -- why Gratz doesn't come off as a whiny, sore loser who should get over her college rejections just as the rest of us have done. But the answer lies in the hostility that so many white people have to affirmative action. This really is a tough issue to organize around .

There has also been rampant fraud in the MCRI campaign. According to an opinion by federal judge Arthur Tarnow last August, after a suit brought by pro-affirmative action group By Any Means Necessary alleging dirty tricks in the petition drive, that "the evidence overwhelmingly favors a finding that the MCRI defendants engaged in voter fraud." Voters say they were told that the petition would defend affirmative action. That's shameful and the MCRI shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. But the huge margin of Proposal 2's victory shows that a whole lot of white Michiganders don't support affirmative action. I'm just guessing, but maybe quoting Malcolm X isn't the best way to convince them.

Comments (86)

1. No,no,no, Ms. Featherstone, you must have heard wrong.

   As we've learned today, this is the "Renaissance of Liberalism". The American people by vast majorities are now fully in lock-step with a progressive agenda. Taxes will go up and be gleefully paid. Vast new programs created and will be well-managed and helpful. Corporations will come under the strictest oversight of the Federal Government, with no economic harm whatsoever.

   The evangelical conservatives are all leftists now. Air America Radio will soon be taking over all of Limbaugh's radio stations. And Fox News and the Washington Times will soon go out of business.

   I think you mis-heard or mis-read that election result!

   Posted by Mask at 11/08/2006 @ 3:58pm

2. MASK, continuing to fabricate childish "quotes" is not going to help you escape the stigma of being a LOSER, as in . . heavy-duty-cycled-and-hung-out-to-dry LOSER.

   Everyone deserves a little consolation, though, so go ahead and take smug solace in the still racist attitudes of a shrinking number of Americans.

   Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 4:09pm

3. Posted by FROMREDBIRD 11/08/2006 @ 4:09pm

   Your question is on PETER ROTHBERG's post, FRB....snap to it.

   Posted by Mask at 11/08/2006 @ 4:13pm

4. This is hell'a funny . . a compilation of all the right-wingnut bloggers saying the Republicans lost because they weren't right-wing enough. Gee whiz- I wonder why they haven't been able to figure out why Iraq wasn't the cakewalk they expected? Because they're f'n stupid, maybe?

   http://tinyurl.com/ycdtwp

   Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 4:18pm

5. Today Bush admitted he lied just a week ago.

   He said when asked why he had said Rummy would stay for two years that "I just said that to get you guys off my back".

   What a fucking leader / liar (at least now he's admitting he's a pathological liar)

   Posted by freedomplease at 11/08/2006 @ 4:23pm

6. Well, I'm confused. I thought "forbidding the use of Race or Gender Preferences" in deciding ANYTHING was a cornerstone of enlightened thought.

   Of course, I wax sarcastic: The notion of standing by such a philosophy, which liberals purport to do, and then actually rejecting it AND calling those who really act on it angry and racist is probably one of the best examples of liberal hypocricsy out there. Did it ever occur to Liza that those who oppose AA do so because (A) it doesn't help blacks in the long run and (B) IT'S RACIST.

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/08/2006 @ 4:23pm

7. He meant to fire Rumsfeld before he supported Rumsfeld but then he fired Rumsfeld after supporting Rumsfeld. That's called staying the course. Just like staying the course in Iraq- no matter how stupid it was. Now, he can cut and run and say that the Democrats made him do it. That's called steadfastness. What a running sore the Republicans are.

   Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 4:56pm

8. Mask,

   Hey, Mask, if it's any consolation to ya loser, Ahnold was reelected Governor of Cal-lee-fornia!!

   Seriously, you of all people should realize and understand that the neoconservative vison that Bush bought into was destructive to tbe nation. A Democratic Congress and Republican White House should produce excellent results.

   The balance of power has been restored and I for one am plenty glad of it............

   Posted by POSEIDON at 11/08/2006 @ 4:57pm

9. CHIP THORNTON,

   What you and angry whites don't understand or are in denial about and wish to ignore is that white people have had affirmative action in their favor from day one and still have it to this day. Networking, sucking up to the bosses, developing friendships and "connections" not to metion running family legacies that results in children living off the fat of their parents lands that result in jobs, cash incentives, admissions to ivy league colleges, internships, etc. is the largest and most currently running affirmative action program in the world. When do the lowest forms of life which you and angry whites would call minorities, get their piece of the action?

   I'll cut ya a deal. Eliminate all of the above aforementioned forms of affirmative action for whites and I will call for ending it for other races................

   Posted by POSEIDON at 11/08/2006 @ 5:04pm

10. YOU white People.. "Networking, sucking up to the bosses, developing friendships and "connections" not to metion running family legacies that results in children living off the fat of their parents lands that result in jobs, cash incentives, admissions to ivy league colleges, internships, etc. is the largest and most currently running affirmative action program in the world. "

    Like my black female boss did? AA is an insult to her and she hates to even think of all the damage lib whites have done to the black image...and a victim mentality.

    Off again...

    Posted by john maasch at 11/08/2006 @ 5:12pm

11. Quotas in public schools - Legacies in private schools

    Tomato - Tomahto

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/08/2006 @ 5:15pm

12. It's interesting how legacies don't feel victimized.

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/08/2006 @ 5:17pm

13. What you and angry whites don't understand or are in denial about and wish to ignore is that white people have had affirmative action in their favor from day one and still have it to this day. Networking, sucking up to the bosses, developing friendships and "connections" not to metion running family legacies that results in children living off the fat of their parents lands that result in jobs, cash incentives, admissions to ivy league colleges, internships, etc. is the largest and most currently running affirmative action program in the world. When do the lowest forms of life which you and angry whites would call minorities, get their piece of the action?

    I'll cut ya a deal. Eliminate all of the above aforementioned forms of affirmative action for whites and I will call for ending it for other races................

    I don't think that I could have said it better myself.

    Posted by edwriter at 11/08/2006 @ 5:19pm

14. Especially since the "Legacy Admission in Chief" is currently sitting in the Oval Office.

    Posted by edwriter at 11/08/2006 @ 5:20pm

15. If blacks would do less million-man marching, having children out of wedlock, committing violent crimes against blacks, taking destructive drugs, protesting any perceived slight, demanding government hand outs and racial preferences, and instead, like many Korean and Chinese immigrants, just work hard and pour their savings into their businesses, blacks could rapidly build up their communities and be more self sufficient and industrious. Indeed, the claim that whites are to blame for the poor economic standing of blacks is contradicted by the fact that many of the businesses that thrive in black neighborhoods are owned by hard-working minorities who may not even speak much English or had much formal schooling, e.g., the Korean grocer or Chinese restaurant owner. These immigrants didn't need racial preferences; they already had what they needed to prosper: a strong work ethic. Blacks should take the cue--build businesses in their own neighborhoods, create credit unions to finance black businesses, and cut out all the stupid self-defeating behavior.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/08/2006 @ 5:48pm

16. Posted by POSEIDON 11/08/2006 @ 4:57pm

    POSEIDON....know it escaped your notice, but I've been pretty sure of Dem House for a long time now.

    and I DO realize that...and as history has shown us, when the government is divided...we win.

    examples of failure?

    Johnson & Democratic Congress.....Carter & Democratic Congress....Clinton & Democratic Congress (1993-1994)....Bush & Republican Congress.

    Examples of success....

    Ike....Reagan....Clinton from 1994 onward.

    Posted by Mask at 11/08/2006 @ 5:52pm

17. Interestingly, on a more macro level compare Africa and China. Over the last 20 years the Chinese have developed one of the world's most thriving economies. Chinese work incredibly hard and living standards are growing. Compare with Sub-Saharan Africa, which over the same period of time has become ever-more poor, corrupt, economically dysfunctional, war-ravaged, and a black hole for foreign handouts.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/08/2006 @ 5:55pm

18. Just The Facts, you're a little selective with your facts. Ironic, eh? And on the subject of irony, apparently Jennifer Gratz has parlayed her mediocre performance in high school into a career.

    Posted by Greydon Clark at 11/08/2006 @ 6:09pm

19. We're all aware, Barry25, that you changed your moniker to "Justthefacts."

    Interesting that you feel the need to create a new name son. The old one not working for ya?

    You want just the facts? You wouldn't dare speak the views you espouse as an anonymous handle outside of the blogosphere.

    Safety in anonymity is your game.

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/08/2006 @ 6:13pm

20. Though I would tend to agree that Justthefacts' analysis is definitely overplayed, I think there's still a real problem with Liza's claim. Can there be reasonable arguments made for affirmative action? Absolutely; Edwriter made some solid ones himself. Can there be reasonable arguments against affirmative action? Absolutely. There are legitimate questions as to the effects that affirmative action has on all the groups involved, and to assume that anyone who believes those effects tend to be negative is racist is absurd. I personally tend to favor affirmative action, but the mere fact that someone disagrees with me on that does not make them a racist by any stretch of the imagination.

    Posted by Thrawn at 11/08/2006 @ 6:13pm

21. Barry25 (excuse me, sorry, Justthefacts wrote) wrote: "many of the businesses that thrive in black neighborhoods are owned by hard-working minorities who may not even speak much English or had much formal schooling, e.g., the Korean grocer or Chinese restaurant owner"

    You've been watching Do the Right Thing on HBO haven't you? I caught it a few days ago, it's a good film. But it's also a movie - you always get your social facts from fiction Barry?

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/08/2006 @ 6:15pm

22. We're all aware, Barry25, that you changed your moniker to "Justthefacts."

    Posted by URMYGYRO 11/08/2006 @ 6:13pm

    I actually don't think this is true; it doesn't really sound like him at all. For one thing, there's no exclamation points, which is a huge thing. More importantly, though, there are actual arguments there. Those arguments may be bad, based on selective evidence, etc. but they're still arguments that he's trying to make, and I think that's a strong indicator that this isn't Barry.

    Posted by Thrawn at 11/08/2006 @ 6:15pm

23. Thrawn - it's Barry, trust me. The posts are exactly as Barry would compose them, except without "son" at the end of every word. This is Barry's attempt to escape my domination of him on these threads.

    Posted by urmygyro at 11/08/2006 @ 6:17pm

24. Posted by JUSTTHEFACTS 11/08/2006 @ 5:48pm

    You don't know shit about Koreans. They are immigrants, the more entrepreneurial ones who were relatively better off in their own homeland. The only time you see a Korean is probably when you drive by a corner grocery. There are plenty of them just getting by. There are what- about 25 million blacks in this country? Lets bring in 25 million Koreans and see if they're all successful. You'd probably then be screaming to lynch the "yellow peril". You Republicans make me sick. If someone other than your own race is struggling, you heap scorn on them for lack of initiative. If they're too successful, you're jealous of them. Many Korean immigrants, by the way, are more sucessful than the average white American, too.

    Also, for your information, since you don't have enough brains to deduce it, the vast majority of Chinese live short, brutish lives. I guess it's convenient for your comparison vs. American blacks to focus on the 5% that have benefitted from the recent economic changes and also the government corruption.

    Why don't you dry up and blow away, you racist animal?

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 6:48pm

25. Interestingly, on a more macro level compare Africa and China. Over the last 20 years the Chinese have developed one of the world's most thriving economies. Chinese work incredibly hard and living standards are growing. Compare with Sub-Saharan Africa, which over the same period of time has become ever-more poor, corrupt, economically dysfunctional, war-ravaged, and a black hole for foreign handouts.

    Posted by JUSTTHEFACTS 11/08/2006 @ 5:55pm

    Interesting also, isn't it, that we've been "helping" the Africans for the last fifty years and not "helping" the Chinese?

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 6:50pm

26. A few statements:

    1. I am not Barry and do not know who Barry is.

    2. My objective is to make fact-based arguments rather than emotionally grounded arguments. I do this because it is logical, irrefutable, and more persuasive.

    3. In response to FROMREDBIRD, I state that I am familiar with both Korean and Chinese immigrants and American blacks. I grew up in the Washington Heights section of Manhattan. There were, as there are now, many Korean-owned businesses that ran shops around the main commerical area of 181st Street. I in fact worked in a Korean market on 187th Street off of Fort Washington Avenue. These immigrants were not--as you state--the better off in their country. After all, if they were better off in their country, they would have little incentive to endure the back-breaking work that many immigrants perform. Indeed, I doubt that many of the Mexicans risking death to cross the desert border are, as FROMREDBIRD asserts, the "relatively better off in their own homeland."

    4. I suspect that the strong emotional response to my comment derives from it being both true and difficult to factually counter.

    5. A final point. If blacks surmise that whites and the white dominated government is hostile to blacks, it makes even more sense to build their communities without handouts. Many well-known blacks, e.g., Malcolm X, have made this point at greater length.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/08/2006 @ 7:37pm

27. So, can any of you tell me why it's perfectly OK for Asian immigrants (who don't speak the language or have an education) to have businesses in my neighborhood when a African-American with a formal education can't even get a loan to open up one?

    I'll tell you this much, where I live now, there's not an immigrate business to be found. Before any of you talk about what you think affirmative is, walk a mile in a Black man's shoes, then you'll understand.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 7:46pm

28. Thank you JTF, my brotha, cause they ain't gettin it....

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 7:48pm

29. Indeed, I doubt that many of the Mexicans risking death to cross the desert border are, as FROMREDBIRD asserts, the "relatively better off in their own homeland."

    Posted by JUSTTHEFACTS 11/08/2006 @ 7:37pm

    I DID NOT say that you dumb shit. You are also now on the ignore list as I have no intention of carrying on a pointless conversation with a racist asshole.

    Posted by fromredbird at 11/08/2006 @ 7:50pm

30. FROMREDBIRD, what's with the language? JTF has an opinion just like you. He didn't say you said that, he was talking about the assertion you made of "relatively better off in their own homeland." JTF through Mexico in as another example.

    Relax and re-read what he said.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 8:00pm

31. ACOOK:

    I will assume that you are correct, it is difficult for blacks to obtain loans from white lenders. Does it not make all the more sense then, as many Korean and Chinese immigrants have concluded and done, to create your own credit unions and lend to yourself? This is both logical and effective.

    FROMREDBIRD: This is what you stated above: "They are immigrants, the more entrepreneurial ones who were relatively better off in their own homeland." My quote was accurate. Your ad hominem attack, as any high-school debater knows, reflects both a poor argument and weak argumentation skills.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/08/2006 @ 8:02pm

32. Well, JTF, they certainly can't open up business in the White neighborhoods, now can they? The only places they have to go are the Black and Latino areas. And, surely beleive that most of the folks on this blog don't understand that....

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 8:06pm

33. Ironically, banning race-based admissions will decrease the number of white students and dramatically increase the number of Asian students.

    I guess those "culturally biased" classes and SATS don't seem to affect them, just Hispanics and African-Americans.

    Posted by Zeddmen at 11/08/2006 @ 8:15pm

34. ZEDDMEN, so you think that huh? Well, Asian and White parents can afford private schools and the best tutors to get their kids on the fast track to success. Their schools also get more private money than public money. Blacks and Hispanics don't have that kind of luxuary. We've had to deal with low expectations from poorly paid teachers, crumbling schools, out-dated books and no high-tech anything. The cards have been stacked against us since the landmark ruling of Brown vs. the Board of Education. It's been down hill ever since.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 8:24pm

35. Posted by ACOOK 11/08/2006 @ 8:24pm

    So how come Asians were able to come to this country with nothing, not even the ability to speak the language, were able to overcome discrimination, and see their children succeed?

    Posted by Zeddmen at 11/08/2006 @ 8:32pm

36. Asian and White parents can afford private schools

    Posted by ACOOK 11/08/2006 @ 8:24pm

    And just what percentage of those who attend public universities, went to private schools?

    Posted by Zeddmen at 11/08/2006 @ 8:35pm

37. ZEDDMAN, there's money in the Asian community. They will help each other soon as they come off the boat. It is rare that any Asian will come to this country and not have some kind of help waiting for them. They do not give aid to other folks outside of their community. That's a fact...just look at all of the Chinatown's up and down the Western seaboard.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 8:38pm

38. They will help each other soon as they come off the boat

    Posted by ACOOK 11/08/2006 @ 8:38pm

    So as soon as they "come off the boat", they're given money to send their kids to private schools?

    Posted by Zeddmen at 11/08/2006 @ 8:44pm

39. Haven't you heard of community money pools?

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 9:09pm

40. ACCOK: Your point about community money pools is exactly what I advocate. Even if the pool is only modest, it can work. For example, the nobel prize was recently awarded to a Bangladeshi for his promotion of microloans among impoverished women. Poor american blacks are still richer than poor Bangladeshi women, so I believe were blacks to pool their monies they could grow their economies without the assistance of the government or discriminatory lenders.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/08/2006 @ 9:38pm

41. JTF, that's the one thing the "powers that be" will not allow. The African-American is the largest minority consumer in this country. We spend more than Latinos. Can you imagine what we could do to this economy if we withheld our "Billions, not Millions" from them?

    We are their biggest threat.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 9:46pm

42. Maybe, just maybe, discrimination is discrimination, no matter who it's practiced by , or against...or, is it ok to discriminate as long as it's against whitey?

    Posted by davebarlett at 11/08/2006 @ 9:50pm

43. I think that's a little bit of a strawman. The argument behind affirmative action is that the scales are already tipped in favor of whites. As appealing as the "discrimination is bad either way" rhetoric may be, I don't think it really addresses the substance of the clash. The question isn't whether some level of systematic equality exists, it's whether affirmative action is a practical and justified means of addressing that inequality.

    Posted by Thrawn at 11/08/2006 @ 10:17pm

44. DaveBarlett, what can I say? Slavery did a number on us. 30 years of Civil Rights can not wash away the autrocities that was imposed upon us. Do you honestly feel that the few laws passed to "appease" the African-American community will stop us from addressing all of the wrongs still being committeed by those individuals who seek to harm us?

    Can you honestly say you've been discriminated against because of the color of your skin?

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 10:21pm

45. Thrawn, it's not practical or justified. How would you feel if you were hired through "affirmative action". You're not chosen for your skills, you were chosen to fill their quota. Do you have any idea of how that makes a person of color feel? They're not chosen on their skills or character.

    Let the libs tell it, it's about diversity, when we know all along they've been blowin' smoke up our asses.

    Posted by ACook at 11/08/2006 @ 10:32pm

46. You're not chosen for your skills, you were chosen to fill their quota. Do you have any idea of how that makes a person of color feel? They're not chosen on their skills or character.

    Posted by ACOOK 11/08/2006 @ 10:32pm

    then quit, if the shame is so severe. I know of many a minority and/or women owned business that got their leg in the door because of AA that never would have gotten of the ground in the Good ol' boy days. They now thrive.

    Gratz is a crybaby, she was placed on a waiting list at UM. She did not like it and called it racism. Every person on that list got into UM, except her. Because she chose to attend another school, where she got a fine education. There were "legacy" beneficiaries that got in ahead of her as well, but there is no new law in MI doing away with the legacy affirmative action program, benefiting whites dramatically.

    The same electorate that voted NO on dove hunting, voted for Kerry and a dem guv also voted for a new discriminatory const amendment banning a particular contract between 2 adults two years ago. Michigan is split amongst itself lately.

    I have seen no societal harm from a program that seeks to undue decades of injustice. Yes, it may be reverse discrimination, but the disease is not cured yet.

    I do think Liza is being a tad harsh in her criticism of us whiteys, though.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/08/2006 @ 11:01pm

47. Taxes will go up and be gleefully paid.-MASK

    You are correct. Most bond proposals passed. People are getting tired of potholes and leaky schools. They voted themselves a tax increase.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/08/2006 @ 11:05pm

48. the stock mkt hit a new record high.

    the terrorists won.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/08/2006 @ 11:06pm

49. HEY WEBMASTER!! IS THIS THING EVER GONNA GET FIXED?? This seems to be the only page working. kinda the wrong day to have this thing go blooey.

    Posted by crabwalk at 11/08/2006 @ 11:11pm

50. Maasch,she hates to even think of all the damage lib whites have done to the black image..

    yeah, like the freedom riders. ask her about the damage white right wing swine did to her race. who was it that sicced the dogs and aimed the firehoses on protesters? who killed Medgar Evers and King? Get real.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/08/2006 @ 11:44pm

51. Apparently, JUSTTHEFACTS makes it a point to not be aware of the facts of how the US and other western powers have done everything in their power to undermine indigenous sovereignty and industry for the benefit of the international ownership class.

    Another pseudo-intellectual whose ignorance prevents him from actually making valid points grounded in reality.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 12:04am

52. good point Jorchy, we have had colonialism, post colonialism and now post post colonialism. the HAVES have more, and the HAVENOTS have less. it's that simple.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 12:38am

53. JORCHEIM: Your argument is to blame Western imperialism for the poor social, scientifically, political, and economic conditions in Africa. Tell me, how advanced economically and scientifically was Africa before Western imperialism? How did Africa compare to Renaissance Europe, for example? In short, poorly. You mistake correlation--imperialism and the poor condition of Africa--with causation. These are facts, not ad hominem attacks that you substitute for an argument.

    Posted by justthefacts at 11/09/2006 @ 12:53am

54. how advanced economically and scientifically was Africa before Western imperialism?

    actually quite advanced. it is a mistake to look at a continent and suppose any political, economic unity.

    Renaissance? that was the rebirth of greek knowledge, which had been preserved by arab scholars, it had been stamped out by the christian church,and then re transmitted to the western europeans.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 01:00am

55. "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Almost 79 million people voted in Tuesday's election, with Democrats drawing more support than Republicans for the first time in a midterm election since 1990. The overall turnout rate, reflecting a percentage of voting age population, was 40.4 percent, compared with 39.7 percent in 2002, according to an Associated Press vote count and an analysis by American University's Center for the Study of the American Electorate."

    20 plus % of eligible American voters, confronted with a power mad president and the most corrupt congress in my lifetime had enough sense to throw a monkey wrench into the Rabid Right's machinery of world domination. 19% of eligible American voters were so content with the Bush regime, they voted to stay the course. An illegal, immoral and insane war of aggression didn't shake their faith in conservative ideology one bit.

    60% of eligible voters didn't even bother to vote.

    The good news is, our quasi-democratic state has survived another year of relentless attack from the Rabid Right. The bad news is, our country has moved so far to the right, if the world was flat, we'd standing with our left foot on earth and our right foot dangling in space.

    Good luck, America.

    Posted by rabblerowzer at 11/09/2006 @ 07:36am

56. I strongly support affirmative action and oppose voter fraud, but I object to the author's constant use of words such as "resentment," "hostility," and "anger," usually introduced by "white." This is a common poisoning-the-well tactic, meant to demonize those who disagree. Isn't it possible that many people who oppose affirmative action do so because they believe in the equality of all races? Why does the mere act of voting for equality (which they think they are doing in many cases) imply that one is "hostile" or "resentful"? That the author thinks that opposing what one perceives as injustice implies anger and hostility tells us more about the author than the voters in Michigan.

    It is certain that angry white racists are happy with the voting result, but that doesn't mean that most people who voted against affirmative action are angry white racists.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 11/09/2006 @ 08:16am

57. Posted by BLUESPARK 11/09/2006 @ 08:16am

    It's a "religious" thing, BLUESPARK.

    Ms Featherstone, like many on the Left and many on the Right, believe that if you disagree with her politics....you're not only wrong, you're evil.

    Posted by Mask at 11/09/2006 @ 09:03am

58. The other odd thing is that the author focuses on the "whiteness" of the winning side, but ignores the gender aspect of the initiative. For many people that may be just as important, but I suppose that employing the phrase "angry white men" would have revealed too much of the cookie-cutter used to create the piece.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 11/09/2006 @ 09:45am

59. TO POSEIDON

    If your advocating righting the wrongs of the past by creating more wrongs in the present, then I am afraid it is you who need some understanding.

    As to when minorities get their share? The laws are all on the books now, so any can have it-those who EARN it, that is.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 09:54am

60. JUSTTHEFACTS:

    Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. In point of fact, there were numerous extremely advanced civilizations throughout Africa prior to Western imperialism.

    Don't forget, that the Renaissance was a result of the introduction of mostly Islamic science and technology into Europe and a re-introduction of Hellenic science and philosophy back into the largely (nay, completely) dark Europe.

    As for why the West has been able to maintain dominance over Africa and other regions that we now consider third world, it's pretty simple. When one power (or group of powers) have the biggest guns and the best force projection, that will typically be the overwhelming deciding factor, regardless of the quality or primacy of others' civilizations.

    Your argument simply doesn't hold water. The Chinese and Indians (subcontinental Indians, not Native Americans) were literally 500 years ahead of Europe in so many ways, yet neither ended up dominating the world the way the west has.

    Your attempt to boil down history and the current state of the world to base racial arguments is simplistic at best, and more likely racist to the very core. It's obvious that you have a profound misunderstanding and ignorance of world history and anthropology.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 09:56am

61. PLAIN BRUCE:

    You don't have to wear a white hood and burn crosses in order to be racist. Many racists wear 3piece Armanis and travel the board rooms of America, instead of the rural countryside of the antipodes of America.

    Sorry to say, 40 years of AA cannot reverse the horrible injustices of 500 years of slavery and racism. And if you think it can, you're considerably more optimistic than I am.

    You're right, CHIP THORNTON, the laws are on the books. The problem is not usually the laws, but how, if at all, they are enforced.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 10:15am

62. That will come with time, JORCHEIM. In the meantime, I think we need to realize that no matter how advanced relations between races become, there will always be A-holes like the one in Texas who dragged the black guy behind his truck. Acts by such small minded persons should not be an indictment of civil rights efforts successes, or our history. Racial fanatics who would not know what to do with themselves if they had nothing to fight about will always use incidents like that to scream that "America is a Racist Nation". Frankly, it doesn't matter as much if we are still racist as long as the laws prevent, or punish, those who stoop to their base instincts (In fact, as I say this, it occurrs to me how difficult it would be NOT to have some racist strains when one considers how diverse we are-interesting)

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 10:26am

63. CHIP THORNTON:

    Implicit in your first sentence in response to me is acknowledgement of precisely my argument. We have not yet made up for those centuries of injustice. By virtue of the fact that, a) we need laws to ameliorate the situation in question, and b) there is insufficient enforcement of the laws we have already, that by definition implies that we live in a racist society. It has been built on the backs of African slaves, and we have barely even begun to come to grips with that reality. We certainly haven't paid the indemnity that our racist pedigree demands.

    Moreover, as a white male, I can tell you how often I hear people crack jokes about "niggers" and "kikes" and all other manner of people. I don't believe that the extreme individual acts of violence against people of color are outlying phenomena of a small proportion of our population. I believe they represent an indication of one of the basest, most fundamental aspects of white culture in this country (as is illustrated by JUSTTHEFACTS' comments earlier). Not only do we believe racism is dead, even though we perpetrate it by way of seemingly innocuous jokes and comments, we never rectified the situation in the first place. Now we have people who are under the delusion that since racism is dead, we no longer need to remedy the discrepancies extant from our ignoble history.

    The bottom line is, we are a racist society. And we have a LONG way to go before that has been reversed, and the penalties still being suffered by African Americans have been erased.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 10:44am

64. Well, I'll tell ya JORCHEIM. I'm not interested in "making up" for the past. There were too many good things that happened in our past, far outweighing the bad, to bother. The past is the past, and quite frankly there isn't anybody here now who is owed anything except respect in the present

    And lets get real about contributions: The Black population in this country, untill after 1865, contributed to the wealth of 1/2 of the eastern quarter of this country. The Indians, frankly, were too busy trying to hold us off to contribute much themselves, and what happened to them was largly a result of policies from our Gov. the same Gov that tried so hard in the 90's to make us proudly hang our heads in shame. Well not this boy

    This country was built (for the most part)through the efforts of white European men and women. Thats just the way it was. Were they predujice? Sure, like all humans: So are you and I, whether we like it or not. And so were/are the minorities.

    As I said, I accept and don't care that we are still a racist society, as long as the laws are there. And those who think we have a LONG way to go are just trying to extend the life of their negative once usefull, but now fast obsolescing crusade.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 11:29am

65. It is immoral for white people to decide when affirmative action should end. Sorry if I'm insulting your morals Chip, but that's my position. When there is general agreement among black people, then it's time. And that time has not yet come.

    That time will come. I had a conversation with my supervisor, a black woman, this morning. She takes care of her parents and we discuss it often. She was talking about taking them to vote, and during the conversation it dawned on her that there was a time when they could not vote. Enormous progress has been made. But the full meshing of European and African sensibility has yet to appear in our society.

    And I will echo Jorcheim's comment above, essentially saying that racism is alive and well in the minds of whites. I still hear the word nigger. I still see the generalized scorn and dismissal. It's not a fire any more. But the coals are still hot. I say let's make sure it doesn't start back up again.

    Posted by MyParadigm at 11/09/2006 @ 11:54am

66. CHIP THORNTON:

    I think your post just proved my point about the incessant racism plaguing our country.

    You want to get real about who built this country?

    Ok, let's get real.

    It was black African slaves who built practically all of the early infrastructure of this country, up until the Missouri Compromise. The South exists today as an economic entity because of African enslavement and, post-Civil War, freedman exploitation. Without slavery, there WOULD BE NO USA... at least not anywhere close to the form we know it.

    You are fooling yourself.

    I'll put it into perspective for you in a way that even you will surely understand.

    How about this. I come to your home, kick your ass, take all your stuff, rape your wife, throw you, your wife, your kids, and any other family members I can find in shackles, forceably remove you to my home, force you to work for literally no money, and barely enough to eat. Then 50 years from now, after working for decades for me with no remuneration, no freedom, nothing, I grant you and your family your freedom.

    Do I owe you anything?

    Damn right I do. And if were being honest with yourself and with the world around you, you'd see that this country owes descendants of Africans and Native Americans a ton. You may not want to look at history as something for which to atone, but I promise you, whichever God you worship wants you to.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 12:01pm

67. The Black population in this country, untill after 1865, contributed to the wealth of 1/2 of the eastern quarter of this country.

    What an odd, ignorant statement. First of all, the "eastern quarter" of this (current) country was the whole country for a long time. Second, the geographical size of the area where most black slaves were located is irrelevant to the question of their economic impact. Third, the economic impact of American slavery was huge, not just for American economic history but for the world's. Do you really think all that agriculture was self-contained, that the economic benefits of Southern slave agriculture were seen only in the South?

    If you are going to publicly speak of such things, learn about them first.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 11/09/2006 @ 1:08pm

68. Blues," that the economic benefits of Southern slave agriculture were seen only in the South?"

    where else was the plantation system in use? in New England? in the new territories? No on both.

    If you are going to publicly speak of such things, learn about them first.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 1:21pm

69. MY PARADIGM,

    Your points are taken, although I still hold to mine, and I'm not sure why blacks should decide when affirmative action should end, and especially at white's expense, when neither they nor we were either the beneficiaries or the victims of yesteryears societal more's I guess morality is in the eyes of the beholder. To not forget the past is important. I have found however, that some will try to initiate policies that actually antagonize relations between the races. How do you think a white will feel over preferential treatment to a black at his expense, or how a black will feel when the white resists it. And the initiator of the policy, (and the bad feeling) sits back, his purpose still intact.. These people are the New Racists, and they will keep us at each others throats for as long as we let them.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 1:38pm

70. MYPARADIGM,

    As JR will tell you, I like the occasional racial joke, which has no meaning for me beyond the content of the joke itself. I also no that whites can be the butt of racial jokes, as I've heard them during my part time work with Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc, which hired volunteers to investigate racial discrim. in housing. The jokes never meant anything to anybody, and cordiality extended far beyond the jokes.It was my first experience with where we need to be, and I belive we'll get there.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 1:47pm

71. Guilt is not hereditary, and neither is virtue. If we are expected to pay for the sins of our many-times-great grandfathers, what do we do with the black descendents of slaveowners? And if we expect payment for the suffering of our many-times-great grandfathers, who would set the limits? If I have a Celtic ancestor, can I sue the descendents of Romans for a distant relation forced to work in the salt mines?

    The solution to racism is to end discrimination based on race, it isn't to change which race gets preference.

    Posted by Snarfangel at 11/09/2006 @ 2:02pm

72. You hit the nail on the head, Snarfangel

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 2:36pm

73. Snarf, an absurd example, which casts an unflattering light on your argument.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 2:46pm

74. JOHANNESROLF Snarf, an absurd example, which casts an unflattering light on your argument.

    Then where would you set the limits? How far back can we go in order to claim preference?

    Posted by Snarfangel at 11/09/2006 @ 2:49pm

75. SNARFANGEL:

    I agree that the goal is to have a race-neutral society. However, as I said earlier, to intimate that the effects of slavery and racism are not still holding African Americans back, and that we as a nation don't owe them a great deal is a farce.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 2:50pm

76. As far as progeny paying for the sins of their forefathers, Roman and Celtic societies no longer exist, and it is unclear what, if any, negative effects can be divined now as adversely affecting those of Celtic persuasion. The same cannot be said for people of black African persuasion here in the US.

    Posted by jorcheim at 11/09/2006 @ 2:53pm

77. Not me.:)

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 3:00pm

78. JORCHEIM: I agree that the goal is to have a race-neutral society. However, as I said earlier, to intimate that the effects of slavery and racism are not still holding African Americans back, and that we as a nation don't owe them a great deal is a farce.

    I can agree with the effects of racism, but what effects of slavery (other than racism) do you mean? I come from a long line of women, but if I claimed discrimination based on my ancestors suffering sexism, people would just laugh at me.

    As far as progeny paying for the sins of their forefathers, Roman and Celtic societies no longer exist, and it is unclear what, if any, negative effects can be divined now as adversely affecting those of Celtic persuasion. The same cannot be said for people of black African persuasion here in the US.

    Yet many of those of African persuasion in the U.S. are also descended from white slaveowners. Do we punish them or compensate them?

    Posted by Snarfangel at 11/09/2006 @ 3:04pm

79. Snarf, I don't have an answer to this narrow question. let me add however that Germany has been paying reparations to Israel and jews for some time.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 3:08pm

80. I don't know about slavery reparations, but I do know black ghettos, where the trash isn't picked up and banks redline, I know about substandard schools for blacks, I know about legal discrimination that has filled our prisons, I know about backs being the target of voter suppression, and much, much more. to address these ills is NOT reverse discrimination.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 3:12pm

81. Not me.:)

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 3:29pm

82. Sorry people, ignore the last, went to a meeting and lost track

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 11/09/2006 @ 3:30pm

83. Can we all please remember that legal discrimination against Black people ("Jim Crow") only ended approximately 40 years ago, within the lifetimes of many of us! And let us not forget that housing discrimination against Blacks, Jews, Latinos and other people of color was written into deeds and contracts up until 30 or 40 years ago, too. Or that race riots against Blacks took place in Detroit during World War II when Black families tried to move into a White neighborhood (and Chicago in the 60's, I believe).

    A young Black woman at work, an economic conservative, when asked by a co-worker why she was so serious about voting, only half tongue in cheek replied, "Well, people got beat up and died for me to have this right, so..." And she wasn't talking about the Civil War or Reconstruction, she was talking about the Civil Rights Movement.

    This is not all about ancient history. Affirmative Action is also about recent history and, most importantly, countering ongoing discrimination with opportunity. A number of news programs over the years have performed an experiment, sending out job applicants, one White and one Black, with either comparable qualifications or where the Black candidate was clearly better qualified. Invariably, the White candidate got the vast majority of the job offers.

    My problem with AA is that it primarilly benefits the Middle Class, not the Working Class. If we hadn't allowed our elites to crush unions in this country and around the world for the last 30+ years, I think there would be far more Black and White folk in better economic shape, and therefore less resentment among the White Working Class over AA.

    Posted by cka2nd at 11/09/2006 @ 3:42pm

84. Interesting, isn't it?

    We MUST continue affirmative action, due to "the years of oppression of their ancestors from Jim Crow".

    Yet someone from Jamaica or Ghana, who immigrated LAST YEAR, can benefit from it as well...though THEIR ancestors weren't even in this country then.

    And the children, even grandchildren of people like Bill Cosby, Colin Powell, Robert L. Johnson (BET founder) MUST get it too, else it's not about race...but class.

    AND if it's about class...then why are poor whites left out of it?

    Posted by Mask at 11/09/2006 @ 4:04pm

85. CK, well said, especially the part about unions.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 11/09/2006 @ 4:13pm

86. Giving preference in college admissions to underprivileged students regardless of race is probably the most defensible method of Affirmative Action. It certainly has a greater appearance of fairness than the current method. I'm kind of torn between this and simply doing all admissions on the basis of pure merit, but I do recognize that college should depend less on where you are and more on how far you'll go.

    Posted by Snarfangel at 11/09/2006 @ 4:52pm