English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

who agrees that affirmative action is reverse racism? if a law is made to require a business to hire on the basis of the color of one's skin, is that not discrimination? if you want to accuse me of using the race card, just look at democrats. is it right that a black doctor who was educated at the Somalian Medical Institute gets a job at John Hopkins instead of a white guy who was educated at Emory or Mount Sinai JUST because of a discrimination law?

2006-10-17 03:20:32 · 15 answers · asked by kunta kinte 2 in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

Yes it is.

The assumption of affirmative action is that a section of people based on race just can't do the job unless given privileges or help or or or .

Essentially it is the way the government says you are dumb and you are lazy but here have this job we lowered the standards for you so you ought to be able to do it now

As for the wording reverse racisim - WOW - It's either racist or it's not ! The use of the term with the meaning it has "reverse racisim" implies if not blatantly states that only whites are capable of racisim ......

If a black is racist - he is racist .......reverse racisim implies that the black guy is otherwise incapable of it Racisim is the property of the white - Think about how the launguage is being used here .

2006-10-17 03:36:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I can't stand that word reverse racism... racism is racism no matter who is discriminating.... so I think we definitely need to do away with that word... on affirmative action.. people have been trying for years to get rid of it because it does hold white males back - which isn't fair - it isn't needed anymore and everyone should be given jobs and go to the college of their choice on merit - but they won't because if they try African Americans will claim that we are hoping the pathway for us to repeat our past... so unfortunately no matter how much it is not needed it will still be.. look at the Voting Rights Act that they renewed not to long ago.. the government was going to let it expire.. they didn't feel it was necessary anymore but the ACLU, NAACP and others fought it, so they renewed it...The Act isn't hurting us to have it by any means... so it doesn't compare to affirmative action I'm just using it as an example to show that there will be to many people fighting it, so therefore the government will give in and keep it..

2006-10-17 03:58:24 · answer #2 · answered by katjha2005 5 · 0 0

You see, Affirm. Action. came during a time when a black PHD couldn't get a job if a white illiterate came along to take the job. Companies HAD to hire minorities and women where as before they could discriminate, only hire women to type and minorities to clean and let the white men live in their fantasy world of entitlement and greatness.

Is it still needed, YES, but not so much racially or for the work force, but there should be consideration for economic disadvantage when applying to college. How can you compete against a guy getting into UC Berkeley with a 4.6 gpa when they don't even have AP classes in your school district???????

2006-10-17 03:35:32 · answer #3 · answered by Lotus Phoenix 6 · 0 1

To talk of reverse racism is to accept that there is racism.

1. Email me to accept that America is a racist society as I have always asserted.
2. Affirmative action, as you put it, is to counter your acceptance that there are racists in America who do not offer the same opportunities to all irregardless of Race.
3. In implementing Assertive Action, the job should not be offered to anyone with lesser abilities than would be required to achieve the goal, Thereby bringing into disrepute the whole idea of fairness and equality.

I hope I have enlightened you on this rather contentious issue.

2006-10-17 04:35:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes. It ensures that skin color will be the deciding factor in determining employment. And that is just the opposite of what Martin Luther King, Jr. and other civil rights leaders were working for. If people were truly judged on the content of their character, however, Bill Clinton could NEVER have been President and Ted Kennedy would have been drummed out of the Senate years ago.

2006-10-17 03:41:37 · answer #5 · answered by mikey 6 · 0 0

it is actual ordinary, if me and a white guy of equivalent qualification pass right into a room and the corporation is white (that's the case ninety seven% of the time) ninety seven% of the time the black guy won't get the activity because of the fact white human beings basically like white human beings extra effective. it quite is not constantly the case yet whilst a white guy sees a black and a white guy he's conscious no longer something approximately the two he will usually prefer the different white. this could be actual in each race as you element out, yet i do no longer locate that somewhat actual among the black race. especially because of the fact maximum black human beings have a team of white acquaintances while maximum white human beings have a million black buddy. Plus black human beings are no longer racist like that throughout favouring their own race. look on the background, has black people who run considerable companies have all black workers or distinctive places of artwork. Even adult adult males like Dr. dre hire rappers like eminem or jin, non black adult adult males. with out affirmative action the only way for a black individual to get a job from a white corporation is to be ridculously over qualified, meaning that black human beings could desire to constantly settle for jobs under the place they could desire to be. this means that education is not any longer the great equalizer in the country and all of capitalism will become at hazards once you have communities who're going to be maximum persons (black and latin) who're habitually denied jobs they are qualified for. this means that they are going to declare this technique is broken and that they'll start to look someplace else as we've already seen those 2 communities are dispropotionately socialist than others. The purpose of affirmative action is to circumvent the latter yet extra importantly to get rid of itself. whilst blacks and whites are the two employed in the workplace, the races somewhat white would be much less racists and we can get rid of affirmative action You do enhance some intresting factors.

2016-10-19 21:10:05 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Affirmative actions was enacted by LBJ to take " affirmative action" against racism in the workplace. Somehow it got misinterpret as "giving free handouts to minorities". It is racist and it makes minorities seem less than white people because they're going to think we can't do it ourselves.

2006-10-17 08:43:59 · answer #7 · answered by cynical 6 · 0 0

Any law or policy which puts one skin color ahead of another is RACIST .
Individual merit is what made America great .
I don't care what someones color is , his charactor and ability are what counts .

2006-10-17 03:33:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is, IMHO

True equality means to be judged only by your own abilities, history, and actions... lowering standards to push up others only leads to more discrimination....

2006-10-17 03:34:18 · answer #9 · answered by DiamondDave 5 · 0 0

"Affirmative action" (=quotas by another name) is discriminatory & always be. As Shakespeare said (sort of) "That which we call a rose, by any other name, has thorns".

2006-10-17 05:48:39 · answer #10 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers