Patterico's Pontifications

4/24/2014

Two (OK, Three) Views on How to Stop Discrimination on the Basis of Race

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:35 am

Sonia Sotomayor:

The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race.

John Roberts:

The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.

I like Roberts’s view better. Especially since “speaking openly and candidly on the subject of race” is nothing more than an invitation to have people revile you and try to get you fired.

You know who likes Sotomayor’s view better? Eric Holder.

MANDATORY HARRUMPHING AND CAVEATS: Yes, there is still racial discrimination in this society. Of all different types, I might add. This is human nature and it will never end.

So the third view — the Patterico view — is this:

The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is . . . you can’t.

The main question is, do we trust government to engage in racial discrimination, as long as some people are convinced it’s for a good end? Me, I’m not.

52 Responses to “Two (OK, Three) Views on How to Stop Discrimination on the Basis of Race”

  1. Government should be race blind.

    Not sure how to implement that such that there wouldn’t be more “justified exceptions” than cases of strict compliance.

    Sure would be a nice principle to start from as opposed to “social justice” though.

    Dan S (00fc90)

  2. Martin Luther King, Jr. is presumably still considered a hero in the cause of civil rights, and I like his idea which is essentially that of Justice Roberts, 50 years earlier.

    But then, in many ways the Dems have encouraged the breakdown of character in society so judging people on their content of that (character) is an increasingly dim prospect.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  3. I tacitly accept that Sonia Sotomayor has seized the baton of Most Horrific Bigot on SCOTUS.

    Scott Martelle (341ca0)

  4. Affirmative action is not based on anything except a bunch of lies.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  5. Affirmative Action is government sponsored racism, straight up. The difference between today’s AA and yesterday’s Jim Crow is the skin color of the designated victims.

    ropelight (2644f4)

  6. Also, that this just reserves a percentage, and that often something that is not discriminatory by race, although possibly an unnecessary requirement (like having a high school diploma, or not having a criminal record, or allegedly too tough or irrelevant job tests, or any kind of statistical disparity that is not “explained” by some specific acceptable criteria) is to be “remedied” by discrimination according to race.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  7. As Thomas Sowell showed in “Ethnic America” so many years ago, racial discrimination done privately without recourse to the coercive power of government (i.e. the right to kill you or imprison you if you do not follow) has no impact on economic results.

    Which was why the white racists in the South had to pass Jim Crow laws. Too many “racist” whites were willing to ignore cultural racism to do business with blacks so racists had to resort to the coercive power of the state to enforce their bigotry.

    Rather like how Woodrow Wilson, that progressive icon, made the US Civil Service racist.

    iconoclast (447fa6)

  8. For once in my life, I agree with Sotomayor and Holder. There should be a discussion, though it’s probably not the discussion they have in mind.

    The inner city is a breathtakingly bigoted and dysfunctional place. There’s a race going on between Blacks and Hispanics, for goodness sake, and it has been going on for decades. And when Blacks in L.A. aren’t busy hating Mexican, they are hating Koreans and other Asians. Jews don’t fare much better. Surprisingly, garden variety White people are well down the list.

    This isn’t the same sort of hidden racism that Whites are routinely accused of. No, there’s a body count. And how do you blame an Asian shop keeper who got off the boat twenty years ago for the disfunctionality documented in the Moynihan Report, which was published in 1965? You can’t, not honestly, at least. Yet it remains a first principle of the ghetto catechism.

    What is sickening about how broken the inner city has become is that there are pundits and pols who behave in much the same way as Bull Connor, Lester Maddox, and a host of other defenders of Jim Crow. Jim Crow hasn’t died; it lives on and on and on in places like South Central, Oakland, Philly, Chicago, Detroit and New York. Anywhere there is a large Black population, there are politicians and other community leaders (not to mention “community organizers” – Nathan Bedford Forrest was nothing if not a community organizer) who fan the flames of hatred. Sonia Sotomayor and Eric Holder are among them.

    Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a brave voice crying in a vast and growing wilderness, bringing to public attention a problem that, even at the time, had been of longstanding concern. A very good place to begin a discussion of race would an honest updating of the Moynihan Report. I presume such an updating would indicate that, if anything, the dire situation in American ghettos has worsened.

    To the extent you can, Patrick, and I know that you are constrained, it is time to speak truth to power when it comes to issues of race. To turn the other cheek, as most Americans have done for generations out of a sense of graciousness, doesn’t work. If American can stand up to White racists, they can stand up to Black and brown racists. Honesty works.

    ThOR (130453)

  9. Greetings:

    For too long a while now, what’s left of my mind has somewhat fixated on the idea that the implementation of “affirmative action” was the beginning of our Progressive end. When the then well-closeted Progs saw that white males were so inthralled by “The Rule of Law” concept that they would allow themselves to be designated as the subjects of overt governmental and social oppression, the former realized that they had a whole new toolbox with which to work their nefarious ways on our country.

    11B40 (6abb5c)

  10. America is a nation of cowards.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  11. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race.

    We discussed this on the other thread. To liberals, an “open and candid” discussion on the subject of race is one that leads to a predetermined and pre-approved conclusion, namely the one that liberals like Sotomayor agree with.

    And what the hell was the Court’s deliberation of not an “open and candid” discussion on the subject of race? It’s sad to see that Sotomayor is such a second-rate thinker, dependent upon the various cliches and empty rhetoric of her ideology.

    JVW (9946b6)

  12. “IF not an. . . “

    JVW (9946b6)

  13. I think that JVW’s assessment of Sotomayor as a “second-rate thinker” exposes one of the main problems of AA: it places poorly qualified people in places they should not be.

    AA also casts doubt on every competent person of color because, regardless of the fact that they achieved their position by actual knowledge and skill, the lingering question will be “Did AA put them there?”

    gramps, the original (3bbad3)

  14. 8. Comment by ThOR (130453) — 4/24/2014 @ 9:21 am

    The inner city is a breathtakingly bigoted and dysfunctional place.

    They are not all the same. Some of these places are probably alot worse than others.

    A particularly bogoted place is Detroit, where a truck driver who accidentally hit a child – not even his fault – and tried to help, was viciouisly attacked, and injured much more seriously than the child was.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/us/a-drivers-bloody-run-in-with-an-angry-detroit.html?hpw&rref=us

    The one thing you could arguue aboutis was it prejudice against white people, or was it prejudice by people who don’t drive against drivers?

    The answer is it probably was a combination of both.

    As Mr. Utash drove his pickup truck on the city’s East Side, a 10-year-old boy suddenly stepped into the street, the authorities said, and Mr. Utash’s truck hit him. Mr. Utash pulled over to check on the boy, whose leg was broken and whose mouth was bleeding. Soon after, a crowd descended on Mr. Utash, 54, beating and kicking him until he lost consciousness and was left in critical condition. That Mr. Utash is white and the crowd African-American is only part of a broader, more complicated problem of crime and violence in a largely segregated metropolitan area. As church and civic leaders condemned the attack and some in the neighborhood stepped forward to identify those involved, Detroit began searching its soul to repair the damage.

    There is no way to repair the damage without saying that people have been spewing hatred and lies for a long time. without that, this could not have happened.

    There may be some people (drug dealers?) with a self-interest in things being this way.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  15. Ted Al Clive Bundy took Sonia at her word. Giggle, snort, guffaw. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us/politics/rancher-proudly-breaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html?hp

    Patterico this deserves its own post.

    nk (dbc370)

  16. When SoSo proudly proclaims that she has benefitted from AA, it is a much more telling remark that she realizes, as dense as she is. Sad day for America, indeed!

    Gazzer (8dc6ca)

  17. There may be some people (drug dealers?) with a self-interest in things being this way.

    Democrat politicians, Sammy, have a self-interest in things being this way, especially race-hustling Democrat politicians.

    JVW (9946b6)

  18. I guess we should just accept the “good” racism of Sotomayor and Holder vs the “bad” racism of the KKK (another bunch of Democrats too)

    JeffC (8ad636)

  19. nk, what amazed me about the NTY piece that you linked to is that it actually played it pretty straight down the middle with regards to the issue of grazing rights and the federal government’s ownership of 85% of Nevada land. I thought the reporter did a pretty solid job of outlining both sides of the argument. It even helped placed Bundy’s remarks about blacks and welfare in context, rather than just sensationalizing the part about picking cotton.

    Oh, and Clive Bundy obviously learned the word “Negro” from Harry Reid Hairy Reed.

    JVW (9946b6)

  20. I was more amazed that the Washington Post called Media Matters “liberal”.

    nk (dbc370)

  21. the point of the Times piece, is who is coordinating their efforts with the BLM, that’s the Soros funded Center for Biological Diversity, everything else is Squirrel

    narciso (3fec35)

  22. But Bundy’s toast, now. Just butter him up. He may only be demented, but nobody with any sense should side him. He’ll lead them to Hell.

    nk (dbc370)

  23. pro-tip for americans: squirrel makes for good eatin when your food stamps get runned out

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  24. Until they pick the next target, who will be caught jaywalking, keep your eye on the ball.

    narciso (3fec35)

  25. is it like veal, or tougher?

    narciso (3fec35)

  26. You really think Bundy’s statement is “squirrel” as in distraction and not “rabid skunk, stay away”, narciso?

    nk (dbc370)

  27. Because I got the hydrophoby skunk vibes about this guy from the beginning.

    nk (dbc370)

  28. Consider the source, which hasn’t written a news story about the subject in two weeks,

    narciso (3fec35)

  29. To liberals, an “open and candid” discussion on the subject of race consists of hectoring lectures and name-calling.

    JD (bb7248)

  30. ==AA also casts doubt on every competent person of color because, regardless of the fact that they achieved their position by actual knowledge and skill, the lingering question will be “Did AA put them there?”==

    This has been Clarence Thomas’ argument against AA for years.

    elissa (9e7de1)

  31. They sure were a lot quicker on Clive Bundy’s ill-advised comments (hats off to the reporter who drew him out!) than they were on 20 years of sermons by the anti-Semitic, America-hating Rev Wright.

    Kevin M (b11279)

  32. Recall how they said they wee ‘out of context’ as if there was any context that would justify it,

    narciso (3fec35)

  33. “pro-tip for americans: squirrel makes for good eatin when your food stamps get runned out”

    Mr. Feets – Republicans is takin food out of the mouth of people of color wif their budget according to GrannyMcRictusBotoxFace because it cuts the funding for food stamps or somethings and Obama’s worst recovery since the depression and repeated failed budgets and cowardly Senate failures to produce budgets have nothing to do wif nothing because all ur people of color belong to Democrats u see.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  34. she’s a momo

    white people eat way more than their share of the food stamps

    white people LOVES their welfare

    they eat it up and they lick the bowl

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  35. I’m just a humble motherf*cker wif a big dick.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  36. shine on lil diamond and sing sing sing your truth

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  37. They will give more attention to a Nevada rancher’s racial statements than those of a US Senator from Nevada, or a sitting US Vice President.

    JD (bb7248)

  38. I gotta be me.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  39. 18. Comment by JVW (9946b6) — 4/24/2014 @ 11:47 am

    Democrat politicians, Sammy, have a self-interest in things being this way, especially race-hustling Democrat politicians.

    Well, they do have an interest in white people, or any kind of middle class people, not moving into their districts.

    This is known as the Curley Effect:

    http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/glaeser/files/curley_effect_1.pdf

    James Michael Curley, a four-time mayor of Boston, used wasteful redistribution to his poor Irish constituents and incendiary rhetoric to encourage richer citizens to emigrate from Boston, thereby shaping the electorate in his favor.

    Now the big problem for urban black politicians would be, that if things get really bad, even the poorest black people will find a way to move out of their districts. And this hapepned, especially in New Orleans and Detroit.

    For this to work, in the case of legislators, and not kill the careers of the politicians involved, they needed the Voting Rights Act, so that their legislative districts, which lost population, would continue to annex neighboring territory.

    In the case of mayors or city councils of cities like Detroit, they had to be careful not to merge with richer surroundings.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  40. From my link:

    In his 24 years as
    mayor, Detroit’s Coleman Young drove white residents and businesses out of the city. ‘‘Under Young, Detroit has become not merely an American city that happens to have a black majority, but a black metropolis, the first major Third World city in the United States. The trappings are all there—showcase projects, black-fisted symbols, an external enemy, and the cult of personality’’
    (Chafets, 1991:177).

    Actually, the city of Washington, D.C. also had a black majority, and very fixed boundaries. Washington. D.C. by the way, is possibly on he way back, having just turned out a bad mayor. This may be the result of a number of people moving into the District.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  41. The upshot of that is, the crime(s) for which Detroit Mayor Coleman Young was convicted of, pales in comparison to the wrongdoing for which he was not convicted of.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  42. Notice how Sotomayor rejects use of the phrase “affirmative action” in her dissent, opting instead for the (allegedly) more palatable “race sensitive.” I think the Respondents’ brief used “race conscious.” So, the Left is shrewdly changing its language, because it senses the widespread public hostility towards race preferences as a matter of public policy.

    The Left talks a lot about notions of “diversity,” but, does it ever address who the gatekeeper is who will establish the guidelines by which it will be determined who are the allegedly “victimized” races are who deserve preferential treatment? The Left doesn’t address this, because it’s a decidedly messy and inherently inequitable process, once you start dividing people up by ethnicity and race. Why do Hispanics deserve such treatment, for example, but, not a Chinese-American, or, a Russian-American?

    Actually, her words notwithstanding, what Sotomayor is advocating is the utterly illogical and fallacious premise that “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to perpetuate discrimination, with new beneficiaries and victims.” It would seem a self-evident axiom that the goal of equality is not served by promoting racial discrimination of any kind (which is exactly what a racial “preference” is tantamount to), whatever the allegedly benevolent intentions of the institutions that support this misguided and hypocritical policy.

    Does the Left believe in merit-based achievement and colorblind evaluation of candidates? It would appear not.

    That is the contradiction that is the essence of hypocrisy and abject idiocy which characterizes the “affirmative action” movement (or, as it now calls itself, the “race conscious” or “race sensitive” movement) — to achieve a truly colorblind society in which candidates are evaluated solely on the basis of merit, and not on the basis of irrelevant characteristics such as ethnicity, race, etc., means disregarding race as a factor in hiring, college admissions, contract awarding, etc. Yet, the Left consistently opposes this notion at every turn.

    Guy Jones (df6cf0)

  43. If Sotomayor really was serious about “speaking candidly” she would not speak of the desirablity of “race-sensitive” admissions policies, but would instead say “race quotas today, race quotas tomorrow, race quotas forever”.

    pst314 (ae6bd1)

  44. Sorta like trusting government to fly over my home snooping without expanding “criminal behavior” into zoning violations

    steveg (794291)

  45. 44. Comment by Guy Jones (df6cf0) — 4/24/2014 @ 3:13 pm

    So, the Left is shrewdly changing its language,

    This whole thing rests on denying that it is what it is.

    because it senses the widespread public hostility towards race preferences as a matter of public policy.

    Not just the general public – this contradicts liberal values, which is more important as to whether it stands or falls..

    Why do Hispanics deserve such treatment, for example, but, not a Chinese-American, or, a Russian-American?

    Actually, in theory, Hispanics don’t. When you include Hispanics, you have to ignore the premises upon which this is based. Or some of them, (ppast discrimination) anyway. Maybe that’s why the notion of “diversity” was thrown in.

    Now why the only kind of diversity that is important is something involving more traditional U.S. minority groups, well, they never get that deep into it, because diversity isn’t actually the motive.

    Sammy Finkelman (6ee5be)

  46. Our esteemed host wrote:

    The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is . . . you can’t.

    No, you can’t stop everybody from discriminating on the basis of race — or anything else — but you can make it illegal for the government to do so. The idea that the government can, or even should, try to stop individuals from taking their decisions based on whatever criteria the wish is repugnant.

    Some people are even claiming that wanting to date only within your own race is racist, and that’s as personal an action as you can have; heaven forfend that the government sees itself as somehow having an obligation to eliminate racism, because, depending on who is defining racism, it could extend to with whom people are willing to copulate.

    The philosophical Dana (3e4784)

  47. @14– And before this we have Reginauld Denny (sp?) who drove his concrete mixer into a part of south central LA, unaware of the ongoing “Rodney King Festival”. Just a working guy who was dragged from his truck by some of the celebrants and beaten. How dare he try to earn a living!

    All this against the background of Korean shop owners defending their livelyhoods using firearms. No wonder the libs hate the so-called assualt weapons, the damned things keep the mobs at bay.

    Those inner-city inhabitants are a feisty bunch.

    @41– In Oakland they found themselves in a Catch-22: Hiring local residents to be police and firefighters was a good idea, until it became apparent that they were using their increased earning power to move to the suburbs as soon as they saved up the down payment for a home there. The absolute drop-dead last chance timing-wise was when the oldest child was due to start school, for obvious reasons.

    Gramps, the original (3bbad3)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3030 secs.