Nonsense. What you wrote below is actually simply a long non sequitur with respect to what I actually wrote. That is, whatever was actually true in what you wrote does not in the least negate what I actually wrote.
It's clear that the comment that affirmative action, as it actually has been implemented (not as some think it's been implemented), is the cause of "the downfall of the US" is simply a racist comment. And it's a plainly stupid comment since it would take a lot more than what even the racists thinks affirmation action is to cause "the downfall of the US".
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 9:36 PM, Wayne Bishop <email@example.com> wrote: > Nonsense. It isn't affirmative action as such; it is equating disparate > outcomes as racism/sexism/whatever. Your inclusion of non-East-Asian > students is a giveaway. Discrimination against Chinese has an illustrious > history in our country. The West Coast Japanese internment camps is another > nice indication of our collective sense of equality. Assuming that all are > equal in the sense that wildly heterogeneous classrooms (except for > chronological age, of course) is effective has been horribly destructive. > That is but one bit of ed school dogma but it is among the most most > destructive. Another is the same issue at the teacher level with pay levels > that reflect genuine competence and effectiveness. The worst example in my > memory was Garfield High running Jaime Escalante out - not in spite of his > exceptional competence and effectiveness but because of it. > > Wayne > > > At 10:44 AM 5/30/2012, Paul Tanner wrote: > > Here we go again: More comments at math-teach with racist implications > by certain individuals at math-teach. > > You're trying to have it both ways with your claim that integration is > good but affirmative action is bad. > > You blame affirmative action for an alleged beginning of "the downfall > of the US". > > Put bluntly, that's you saying that allowing all those blacks and > Hispanics and other non-East-Asian people of color "in the room" that > you claim were not qualified to be "in the room" because (as you > claim) their "being in the room" lowered standards is what "started > the downfall of the US". > > Don't you see that integration is a form of affirmative action? Don't > you see that integration is a form of allowing all those blacks and > Hispanics and other non-East-Asian people of color "in the room" that > you claim were not qualified to be "in the room" because (as you > claim) their "being in the room" lowered standards - where the room in > question in education is the formerly white college classroom and > formerly while k12 classroom? > > To see that integration and affirmative action are connected, the > reader perhaps needs to be reminded of history: > > Remember George Wallace? Remember how he literally stood at the door > at the University of Alabama and non-literally at the doors of those > four elementary schools in Alabama to try to stop the affirmative > action of those people of color from being "in the room" at > universities and in the k12 schools in Alabama? Wallace and the other > racists clearly understood that integration in education was the > affirmative action of allowing all those blacks and Hispanics and > other non-East-Asian people of color "in the room" that they (the > racists) claimed were not qualified to be "in the room" because (as > they claimed) their "being in the room" lowered standards. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace#Segregation > > Quote: > > "Wallace was elected governor in a landslide victory in November 1962. > He took the oath of office on January 14, 1963, standing on the gold > star marking the spot where, nearly 102 years earlier, Jefferson Davis > was sworn in as provisional president of the Confederate States of > America. In his inaugural speech, Wallace used the line for which he > is best known: > > ?In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth [he > is talking about American whites], I draw the line in the dust and > toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation > now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever. ? > > The line, based on a quote from Hebrews 13:8: "Jesus Christ the same > yesterday, today, forever", was written by Wallace's new > speechwriter, Asa Earl Carter. > > In a vain attempt to halt desegregation by the enrollment of black > students Vivian Malone and James Hood, he stood in front of Foster > Auditorium at the University of Alabama on June 11, 1963. This became > known as the "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door". After being confronted > by federal marshals, Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, and > the Alabama Army National Guard, he stepped aside. > > In September 1963, Wallace again attempted to stop four black students > from enrolling in four separate elementary schools in Huntsville. > After intervention by a federal court in Birmingham, the four children > were allowed to enter on September 9, becoming the first to integrate > a primary or secondary school in Alabama. > > Wallace desperately wanted to preserve segregation. In his own words: > "The President (John F. Kennedy) wants us to surrender this state to > Martin Luther King and his group of pro-communists who have instituted > these demonstrations."" > > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Robert Hansen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >> >> On May 30, 2012, at 11:30 AM, kirby urner wrote: >> >>> Bob Hansen: >>> >>>> If we were to name the "thing" that harmed the institution of education >>>> the most, it would have to be affirmative action. >>> >>> You're talking about affirmative action and not school integration >>> right? Integration and affirmative action are not the same concept. >> >> Right. Actually, they are opposites. One is anti discriminatory and the >> other is pro. >> >> >>> Opening the schools to "minorities" also brought in women, not just >>> "non white" people. >> >> And again, that wasn't affirmative action. That was anti discrimination. >> >> >>> Is affirmative action to blame w/r to any specific minority or is it >>> just the whole idea of counter-balancing advantages (scholarships >>> etc.). >> >> The idea of discrimination is to blame. >> >> I am not blaming any minorities. It wasn't their fault. It was the >> colleges that began the practice but I think colleges were caught off guard >> by the rapidity that the civil rights movement succeeded and how rapidly the >> idea of blatant discrimination became ugly to society. In a panic to >> mitigate their own ugliness they started lowering the standards everywhere, >> hiring their own graduates, etc, etc.. They mucked things up pretty good, >> didn't they. You would think this would call for an investigation, like the >> banking crisis. I still don't get what they were thinking when they started >> doing it. I think they thought they were god at some point. >> >> Bob Hansen