Is white the new minority? [Archive]

Boost

06-02-2007, 04:13 PM

With current issues on the table such as immigration reforms, and practices that hire races other then white non-Hispanic, are white males quickly becoming the new minority in American society? I can say for certain the the U.S. government awards contracts to companies that are owned by non-white or women owners before awarding them to white-male owned companies. Do any of you think this is a proper way to do away with previous discrimination tactics or is this simply switching discrimination to a different race?

TheNoNamedOne

06-02-2007, 06:36 PM

I think it is a tacit way of recognizing that our past policies officially sanctioned by the U.S. that put minorities at a disadvantage, and short of paying reparations, is a sort of racial subsidy we have installed to try and catch 'them' up and to somewhat atone for those crimes.

Would you rather the taxpayers pay reparations to a particular race with one fell swoop and get it over with, which could be quite a painful financial burden to bear, or pay little by little over time with advantages that are kind of subsidy-like in nature? Or, do we owe absolutely nothing? Fate accompli?

But, I think it is a good point you have brought up.

bokuwa

06-03-2007, 09:19 AM

With current issues on the table such as immigration reforms, and practices that hire races other then white non-Hispanic, are white males quickly becoming the new minority in American society?

Since about the 60's when it became more acceptable for whites to be with people other than white, not that there was a lot of it or that people still didn't have a problem with it, the mix of different races has been on the up swing. When the world got smaller with better communicatons, international mixing has been on the up swing. So I would say yes, that kids of recent years are more likely to have blood of different races making them non-white in the traditional sense .

I can say for certain the the U.S. government awards contracts to companies that are owned by non-white or women owners before awarding them to white-male owned companies. Do any of you think this is a proper way to do away with previous discrimination tactics or is this simply switching discrimination to a different race?

It should not be based on race, government contracts, jobs, promotions, school and the list goes on. All of it should be done on the qualifications of the company or person. It does not happen this way, I know, but it should.

THE PROSECUTOR WROTE;
Would you rather the taxpayers pay reparations to a particular race with one fell swoop and get it over with, which could be quite a painful financial burden to bear, or pay little by little over time with advantages that are kind of subsidy-like in nature? Or, do we owe absolutely nothing?

If this is the case or the way things should be done, reparations, then why don't we take it all the way. We took care of the Japanese held in camps during WWII, right. Okay now let's take care of the Chinese and Irish who were very badly discriminated against. And just keep adding to a list that will be pretty big.

Or in America, we can and have just acknowledge the wrong doings of the past and try to prevent them from taking place again in the future. Work for a better tomorrow by doing things right today.

I am sorry, but there is too much of this type of behavior in the world today. The kid is 40 years old and blames his life on things that happened to him as a small child. Get over the past and move forward with life. We all or most of us had something bad or something done to us wrongly as a child, so you discuss it with whomever and than move on in life.

P_chan

06-03-2007, 10:22 AM

People always dwell on the past and look for an easy way out. Is the white male the minority? By numbers, no I don't believe so.

I do agree with bokuwa though. Things like scholarships, jobs, contracts, and promotions shouldn't be based on race, they should be based on qualifications. People in the states care too much about what others think about them. "Oh I should hire him/her because he/she is of X race and if I don't he/she might think I'm racist." Even though candidate B is more qualified to do the job at hand.

Should we deport all illegal immigrants? No that would just be plain stupid. I do believe that they should have to apply for citizenship if they want to stay in this country. Because of all this immigration reform it will be more expensive for me to bring my wife back to the states on a visa.

TheNoNamedOne

06-04-2007, 12:12 PM

It should not be based on race, government contracts, jobs, promotions, school and the list goes on. All of it should be done on the qualifications of the company or person. It does not happen this way, I know, but it should.

bokuwa, if two candidates for a position or contract, be it individual or company, are equal in virtually all aspects of the position looking to be filled, but one of the parties is part of a group that has been historically discriminated against, not only by individuals within society, but as a policy of the state to keep them disenfranchised and at the service of the majority, then why would you not give the nod to the one that has been more at a disadvantage through time to receive the position or contract?

Remember, all other qualifications between the parties applying for the position are equal in this thought exercise.

Tempestuous

06-04-2007, 01:54 PM

Not all people of particular races have "suffered" discouraging lifestyles commonly known to their nationality. Some are raised and afforded the same opportunities the rest of the occupants in the community in which they reside. To say we should offer the job to this particular person on the basis that their ancestors or or their race in general may have suffered such n' such fate is not accurate either.

Sometimes I think we should eliminate some of the information on the application and have an individual that has not met the applicant look over the forms and interview history's that do not mention race, religion, age, or sex and pick a person based on the information provided in that format. It would be slightly more time consuming, so I would be surprised if it were ever considered a part of the application process.

You know, I also find it odd that applications ask your relational status, to include divorced.
.....When is sexual preference going to be added to the applications?

06-04-2007, 02:26 PM

I'm white and I've always been the minority. This is what happens when you grow up on Okinawa practically your entire life. I've been the outsider my whole entire childhood and adult life.

So there's no sympathy for me.

Bones

06-05-2007, 07:15 AM

With current issues on the table such as immigration reforms, and practices that hire races other then white non-Hispanic, are white males quickly becoming the new minority in American society? I can say for certain the the U.S. government awards contracts to companies that are owned by non-white or women owners before awarding them to white-male owned companies. Do any of you think this is a proper way to do away with previous discrimination tactics or is this simply switching discrimination to a different race?

This is an excellent post, Boost. And a lot of the other people who have responded as well, have posted some great replies.:)

But I seriously question if the difference between white/non-white contractors by the U.S. Government, is the issue. I think that it's more than likely, the contract will be awarded to the company can can deliver an excellent product, at the lowest possible cost.

IMHO, discrimination is not a factor. But for those who think that is, they've made some very solid points for their arguments either way.

NBTP

TheNoNamedOne

06-06-2007, 08:51 PM

To say we should offer the job to this particular person on the basis that their ancestors or or their race in general may have suffered such n' such fate is not accurate either.

I don't think it is that simple.

What if all things being equal between two applicants, why not then let that one other remaining difference (i.e. the prevalent historical and most egrecious racial disadvantage in that society) MAKE the difference in the final decision?

Why is it right to say fait accompli -- i.e. what has happened in the past is finished and of no bearing today for consideration? I think there is injustice in that. I am not saying to bend over backwards for the past wrongs done to one's grandfathers, but what I am saying is that, when things are virtually equal between two competing entities, then that entity at a disadvantage from past wrongs should be given that little extra consideration.

Somehow, the issue of justice is quite important to me, and when opportunities present themselves to affect justice, I think they should be taken advantage of. Does a child born today without any legs from a mother and father who were born right after the Hiroshima bombing have more of a claim to a government job when he is older than one who was born with all limbs but not from Hiroshima, and when all their qualifications are equal?

I think that that physical handicap should be taken into consideration. And a handicap is just that -- a handicap, be it physical, social, or psychological -- all of which can be impacted by race, too.

Boost

06-09-2007, 04:45 AM

I know it’s been a bit since I posted this, but thought I would go ahead and post my opinion on the topic.

I think it is time to do away with these policies of preferential treatment in hiring, contract awarding and so on. While there may have been a debt to pay those who where discriminated against way back when, how long do we have to continue to pay the debts of our forefathers? At this point, there doesn’t seem to be a date set when we call it square for all those involved.

For hiring practices, if both candidates are equal in everyway except for race I can understand hiring the minority. But where I am having an issue with this policy is when the minority is less qualified for the position but is still hired over the other simply because they are a minority. This I disagree with.

As for the other example I brought up about our government and the contract process, as nice as it is to believe they would award the contract based on qualification and their quote rate, it is not entirely true. I happen to work in the same office with government contract officers, so I see more of how the process works. An 8A or minority/woman owned company will be awarded the contract before the white male owned company even if his bid is slightly lower. Just the politics of the game.

On another note, though it might sound slightly discriminative, it bothers me that illegal immigrants are afforded free health care and extra educational benefits while I, a natural born citizen, pay a significant amount for health insurance that I have to fight with on who is going to pay the hospital bill, and my son cannot attend summer school to ensure he is on grade level because they are only offering it to immigrant children.

Just my thoughts on the system.

bokuwa

06-10-2007, 08:28 PM

bokuwa, if two candidates for a position or contract, be it individual or company, are equal in virtually all aspects of the position looking to be filled, but one of the parties is part of a group that has been historically discriminated against, not only by individuals within society, but as a policy of the state to keep them disenfranchised and at the service of the majority, then why would you not give the nod to the one that has been more at a disadvantage through time to receive the position or contract?

Remember, all other qualifications between the parties applying for the position are equal in this thought exercise.

Reversed discrimination in any case, to select someone because of something other then they hold the qualifications for the position.

How you feel after paying for a college education for your kid or any schooling and the kid went to get a job that they were qualified for and they were down to two picks, your kid and another kid. The other kid is the same as your kid except his great great great great grandfather was from first pilgrims on the Mayflower and his grandfather was one of the people made to row the boat. So because his grandfather was historically discriminated against, the other kid gets the job.

TheNoNamedOne

06-29-2007, 12:19 PM

Reversed discrimination in any case, to select someone because of something other then they hold the qualifications for the position.

Someone should not be selected for a position if they do not hold qualifications for a job position.

Is there a little reverse discrimination if the two applicants are equal and then the deciding vote is based on race -- them being black? Yes, a little -- but if that were the default policy, it would only be so to equal the socio-economic playing field -- still one in which blacks find themselves at a disadvantage in.

What is wrong with reversing and compensating for errors? When you overshoot your parking space, you do use your reverse to readjust your car's position, don't you?

How you feel after paying for a college education for your kid or any schooling and the kid went to get a job ....

It is not about me or my personal situation. The problem is conceptual. In fact, not throwing your own personal relations into the mix is what allows for better and more fair judgement -- one reason why the sympol for law and justice is that of the person weighing the issues is blindfolded -- so as not to be prejudiced by the parties -- so that only the weight and merit of the arguments can be weighed, measured, and judged.

Asshat

06-29-2007, 05:46 PM

There is no such thing as reverse discrimination. There is only discrimination. That is a legal definition or answer to the word "reverse" as it applies to the law.

As far as FAR's go, the ethnic/gender ownership of a company is rarely considered, as there are too many other more important aspects of an offeror's package to look at. By the time the equation gets to that point, the obvious selection is apparent, and can stand a law suit by the non-selected company.

There are other aspects of EEO however that do harm to the government. This lays in an agency's desire that no EEO case goes to court. Obviously, the agency hopes descrimination does not occur, however the charge as such is one of perception by an employee in a "protected" group.

A protected group is not a solid race or gender. It depends upon the people involved, or their relationships and race/gender with respect to each other. In other words, a white male under the age of 40 can still be considered in a protected group.

TURN THE PAGE. And yes, I yelled it.

It's time for me to go. Probably hit a bar somewhere and be told "no gaijin" or maybe walk past someone and have to dodge the spit aimed at my sneaker.

Richard Burns

11-06-2009, 12:26 PM

Should we deport all illegal immigrants? No that would just be plain stupid. I do believe that they should have to apply for citizenship if they want to stay in this country.

Really? So people that broke the law by sneaking into the country and/or overstaying their visa should not be deported? Why the hell not?

Blues

11-06-2009, 12:28 PM

necromancing a 2.5 year old thread?

DoctorP

11-06-2009, 12:30 PM

c'mon RB, this thread is 2.5 years old~!

Mizzes V

11-06-2009, 12:31 PM

Really? So people that broke the law by sneaking into the country and/or overstaying their visa should not be deported? Why the hell not?

:scratchchin: Did my conversationg with kombu gave you this idea?:grin1:

Richard Burns

11-06-2009, 12:34 PM

:scratchchin: Did my conversationg with kombu gave you this idea?:grin1:

Nope. I knew nothing of that conversation. I figured after the shitstorms I've caused as of late I would go thread diving and look fo hot topics.

Mehi River

11-06-2009, 01:27 PM

it's hardly hot if it's been dead for 2 years or so

0341isa

11-06-2009, 02:59 PM

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 04:12 PM

Really? So people that broke the law by sneaking into the country and/or overstaying their visa should not be deported? Why the hell not?

Aint nothing wrong with necromacing that aint wrong with.... never mind...

If it wasn't for imigrants North America the Indians would would still be riding horses bareback. Let's ask them what they think about illegal immigrants...

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 04:14 PM

Wait, ok, lets differentiate terms.

now, if you post ina dead thread because you want to get it started again, that is clearly necromancing,

SO

if you post in a dead thread just because you want to get your post in it...

would that be...

Necrophilia???

Alice Cooper..... Cold Ethyl

One thing I miss is Cold Ethyl and her skeleton kiss
We met last night making love under the refrigerator light
Ethyl Ethyl let me squeeze you in my arms
Ethyl Ethyl come and freeze me with your charms
...

Spadesy

11-06-2009, 05:17 PM

Mm white certainly feels like the minority in Oki. Don't know about anywhere else though.

Sex Wax

11-06-2009, 05:19 PM

Damn Crackers.

Jrocka83

11-06-2009, 05:36 PM

Damn Crackers.

I don't appreciate that comment there, HONKEY.

SPMF#1

11-06-2009, 05:37 PM

I often feel like the minority...more in the military than the civilian side (all about geography out there)

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 05:53 PM

I don't appreciate that comment there, HONKEY.

Lighten up Jrocka. Any comment can be malitious or lighthearted. It all depends on the context it's used in. I used to work for an Aircraft Mfr and one day the big boss came down and told us we couldn't call "fabrication fixtures" jigs any more. Give me a fu&king break. If some white dude was stupid enough to call any black dude who was not a close friend a jig he would get his ass beat and that would be the end of it. Maybe even two ass whoopin's. Plus that worked both ways.

I think that people who are all offended by a word in itself are probably racists themselves but don't want to admit it. It's all about the context and the situation the word is used in that makes it offensive. And if someone wants to be a dumbass and get offensive with the way he talks to people he may be due for an ass kick'in. period! No cops, no lawyers, No other happy ass equal rights organization intervention... Just a good old fashion ass whoop'in.

IMHO

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 05:54 PM

Damn the white man and his firewater!

Sex Wax

11-06-2009, 05:57 PM

Jrocka83 just hates me.

SPMF#1

11-06-2009, 06:02 PM

The PC movement breeds inequality and racism...just not as blatant or crude IMO.

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 06:22 PM

The PC movement breeds inequality and racism...just not as blatant or crude IMO.

It's fu&king worst. Now it gives the real assholes something to hide behind.

Words of wisdom from doc in Hamburger Hill just before he dies:
"We're all niggers on this hill."

Crazysix

11-06-2009, 06:27 PM

It's fu&king worst. Now it gives the real assholes something to hide behind.

Words of wisdom from doc in Hamburger Hill just before he dies:
"We're all niggers on this hill."

it just doesn't matter

SnaFu

11-06-2009, 06:32 PM

It don't mean notth'in.... Not a thing...

Blues

11-06-2009, 06:55 PM

The PC movement breeds inequality and racism...just not as blatant or crude IMO.

Especially towards simplicity, the must believe everything has to be complicated to feel better about themselves when they have to explain how to do something. :w00t:

http://eyeofthefish.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/icon-mac.jpg

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 01:26 AM

I kind of think it's the otherway around. In my opinion the system seems to be hell bent on destroying our ability to apply conscious and critical thought to situations we encounter in everyday life. The system (or whatever you want to call it) is slowly but surely replacing our natural thought process with "flow chart logic" like decision blocks that inhibits the probability of rational reasoning based on a particular situation.

We see it in the decisions of people in positions of authority when they render rulings based on "guidlines" that are interperted as law which on the surface give no room for mitigating circumstances. It allows incompetant and irresponsible people in authorative positions to abuse that authority while hiding behind policies and guidlines.

11-08-2009, 01:28 AM

The system (or whatever you want to call it) is slowly but surely replacing our natural thought process with "flow chart logic" like decision blocks that inhibits the probability of rational reasoning based on a particular situation.

What are you trying to say?

Tanimaga

11-08-2009, 01:37 AM

What are you trying to say?

Is not flow chart logic based on rational reasoning given a particular situation?

If nothing else, we need more of this.. not whimsy, wishful thinking.

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 02:11 AM

Is not flow chart logic based on rational reasoning given a particular situation?

If nothing else, we need more of this.. not whimsy, wishful thinking.

Here is one example:

A no trespassing sign: Pretty self explanatory. Not much room for interpretation.

If you see a crime taking place in an area posted, let’s say a child being molested and you enter that posted area to protect the child. The law leaves no room for interpretation except that a judge may rule that mitigating circumstances justified you breaking that law to prevent one that caused a greater harm.

If the law were broken down to a simple 1 or 0 logical decision then there would be no room for rational interpretation.

Rational interpretation can allow for mitigating circumstances in probably every law known to man. If there were no room for interpretation there would be no need for a judicial system.

Tanimaga

11-08-2009, 02:19 AM

Here is one example:

A no trespassing sign: Pretty self explanatory. Not much room for interpretation.

If you see a crime taking place in an area posted, let’s say a child being molested and you enter that posted area to protect the child. The law leaves no room for interpretation except that a judge may rule that mitigating circumstances justified you breaking that law to prevent one that caused a greater harm.

If the law were broken down to a simple 1 or 0 logical decision then there would be no room for rational interpretation.

Rational interpretation can allow for mitigating circumstances in probably every law known to man. If there were no room for interpretation there would be no need for a judicial system.

Understood, but flow chart logic doesn't necessarily stop at 0 and 1. There's always 2,3,4,5,6. But I suppose thats more of a guided interpretation.

11-08-2009, 02:27 AM

Understood, but flow chart logic doesn't necessarily stop at 0 and 1.

No kidding...

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 02:38 AM

Understood, but flow chart logic doesn't necessarily stop at 0 and 1. There's always 2,3,4,5,6. But I suppose thats more of a guided interpretation.

My point or should I say opinion is that at a certain point there will have to be a judgment based decision. I can see a point in the future where people will be so accustomed to making decisions based on pre-determined variables that they will not be capable of making rational decisions when faced with a variable not taken into consideration.

I see it as the rules of society becoming the equivalent of a religious following so to speak where free will is replaced by “the book” of rules and decisions. The way we are being told to live our lives is based on assumptions that infrastructure and external forces which tell us what is right and wrong are a given. Without a sense of self reliance and the exercised ability of rational decision in day to day living if any of those givens break down our society will not be able to sustain its self in a civil manner.

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 02:50 AM

I equate it to a piece of test equipment similar to those I used to repair. Fully automated, and capable of examining literally hundreds of variables. In the end each variable that had to be summed for a true of false decision was based on a 0 or a 1 for each variable. Many of the variables were the sum of sub-variables. More importantly each variable was indeed a variable where a threshold was established and had to be established by calibration / alignment based on pre-determined stimuli.

This does not come close to the complex reasoning required for sustained constructive human interaction. Some may think that human interaction can be quantified in such a way. I just don’t see it.

Tanimaga

11-08-2009, 03:00 AM

My brain feels squishy at 4am thinking about anything. Unable to quantify.

Sex Wax

11-08-2009, 04:26 AM

My brain feels squishy at 4am thinking about anything. Unable to quantify.

Wuss. :w00t:

11-08-2009, 09:49 AM

My point or should I say opinion is that at a certain point there will have to be a judgment based decision. I can see a point in the future where people will be so accustomed to making decisions based on pre-determined variables that they will not be capable of making rational decisions when faced with a variable not taken into consideration.

Only if they are Gammas, Deltas, or Epsilons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World), which is acceptable.

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 10:29 AM

Only if they are Gammas, Deltas, or Epsilons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_New_World), which is acceptable.

Ok... I checked out the site.

So you think that this is a good thing?????:scratchchin:

11-08-2009, 10:51 AM

Ok... I checked out the site.

So you think that this is a good thing?????:scratchchin:

Nah. I actually think that the workers of the world are already split into Alpha, Beta, etc and that this is already sort of happening. The people at the top will always have more ability for free thought than a metal sheet cutter. The difference is we are not breeding workers yet.

SnaFu

11-08-2009, 11:20 AM

Nah. I actually think that the workers of the world are already split into Alpha, Beta, etc and that this is already sort of happening. The people at the top will always have more ability for free thought than a metal sheet cutter. The difference is we are not breeding workers yet.

OK... Then going back to the idea of the "flow chart logic" approach to society:

It seems to me that some are implying that all of our laws and reason based decisions should be based on a Boolean algebra model. That kind of thinking in my opinion grossly minimizes the human mind and consciousness to a finite mechanism with finite possibilities. I think it may very well be equated as an attempt of society’s elite ruling class to minimize their roles and responsibility as administrators of justice and to maneuver the masses into accepting a self imposed system of casteism.

In one form or another that model has been used throughout history to mold societies. But it was also the people who stepped out of that paradigm who created the technology and inventions we take for granted today. They were the creative thinkers who were in many cases ridiculed and ostracized. Some of the most ingenious concepts were conceived by people considered to be of a simple mind.