[Vision2020] Affirmative Action

[Mark Rounds]

Folks

I have been really good, not opening my mouth on a lot of these issues but I
have to make a few comments.  I think we have here, two intelligent people
who are arguing on the same side of an issue.

I don't think it is an issue at all that there is still discrimination in
this society.  I know Don agrees with that as he is a teacher in this school
district and has been defecated on by politicians on both sides of the isle.
I also think that all parties in this discussion would like to see a social
system in place that rewards merit and effort and not who you are and who
you know.

The problem comes down to whether affirmative action remedies these
problems.  In my humble opinion, it was a band aid politicians put on a
bunch of problems they didn't have the guts to solve.

Instead of asking some hard questions like:

1.      Why are the schools in rich white neighborhood so much better than
they are in poor black/hispanic ..... neighborhoods?

2.      Why, when we are confronted with two good candidates for a job, do
we pick the one most like us?

3.      Just how much advantage does the "good ole boy" network give their
constituancy?

4.      How pernicious is the glass ceiling in business for women?

Unfortunately, recognizing these problems and solving them take a lot of
work.  Instead, politicians came up with a solution that sounds good in a
sound byte and ran with it.  Does Colin Powell support it?  you bet.  Like
most military men who have been in command, he is a pragmatist and knows
that sometimes you need to swallow some things that are only half a solution
to get a job done.   

Affirmative Action got the ball rolling, got people thinking about the race
question, and wondering about what they really were.  BUT, it is inherently
ineffcient as the best people for the job don't always get it.

When all things are said and done, I believe that Colin Powell would rather
be known as "Colin Powell, a damned good general and stateman" rather than
"Colin Powell, a damned good BLACK general and stateman".

Does this mean I am AGAINST Affirmative Action?  Not really, because we are
better off than we were before, when our society ignored whole populations
of people who fit under the bell curve just like we white folk and had their
bright ones and their lame ones that could have contributed.  At least now
they are in the applicant pool and being considered and utilized.

Does this mean I am HAPPY with Affirmative Action?  Absolutely not.  It is
ineffcient and causes reverse discrimination and a resultant backlash.
There is also the feeling that is generated in capable minority folks that
wonder if its their hard work, smarts and skills that get them where they
are or Affirmative Action.  This is why a lot of then speak out of both
sides of their mouth on this issue.  Yes it got things going but it cheapens
their accomplishments.  

However, before you do away with it, I want to see what you intend to
replace it with and weigh that against the current status quo to see if
there is an improvement.

And I had been so good up till now ;-)

Mark Rounds

At 07:02 AM 2/19/2003 -0800, Don Kaag wrote:
>Rosemary:
>
>You got me.  I was operating on memory(Something an Historian should 
>obviously never do in public.), and family wisdom passed down from my 
>grandfather.  That said, I think my several times removed grandfather 
>did his bit to destroy the institution of slavery at great personal 
>risk, both societally and militarily, and that is to his credit.
>
>As for Truman, yes, his executive order was in '48, but based on the 
>Defense Reorganization Act of '47.  And of course it took time for the 
>military to comply.  But not as much time as it took the country as a 
>whole after Brown VS Board of Education of Topeka Kansas in 1954.  It 
>took the Congress and the Supremes to impliment the Civil Rights Act of 
>1964 to even get the ball rolling.
>
>I have personal experience of the lack of prejudice in the military.  
>It is truly an institution in which merit and talent count for more 
>than color.  I point to Colin Powell and Chappie White, among others.  
>Moscow is the "whitest" place I have ever lived.
>
>And I still maintain that merit instead of affirmative action is a 
>better path.  It is demeaning to people of color to suggest that they 
>aren't smart enough to compete on an equal footing with other races.  
>Plus, it's just not true.
>
>Regards,
>
>Don
>
>On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 01:49 AM, DonaldH675@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Dear Visionaries.
>> One of the most difficult issues for white people to acknowledge is 
>> that the color of their skin confers upon them a privileged status.  
>> This is particularly true in the United States and the Western 
>> European countries with colonial histories.  In my experience, those 
>> who complain most bitterly about the unfairness of affirmative action 
>> legislation base their positions on the mythology that they, and their 
>> families, are (were) free of the taint of racial prejudice. (This myth 
>> is not dissimilar in type to the argument adopted by the majority of 
>> French and German people following W.W.II.  That is, all French people 
>> were really in the underground resistance - certainly they never 
>> collaborated; and all Germans really hated Hitler and tried to protect 
>> Jews.)    I wish that I could say with such self righteous certainty 
>> as Don Kaag that my family never oppressed anyone.  Sadly, that is not 
>> the case.  And indeed, if Don Kaag were to do a little research on the 
>> ancestor he so proudly claims, Gen. George H. Thomas, he would 
>> discover that those pesky slave owners, (which were never our 
>> ancestors) in fact were - although his family clearly operated on a 
>> much grander scale than mine.  The following link  
>> <http://www.aotc.net/Life1.htm> leads the reader to a contemporary 
>> biography of General Thomas, (written in 1872).  Page 17 includes the 
>> following passage (the words "he" and "his" refer to General Thomas):
>> "His departure from Texas brought to him a perplexing problem the 
>> disposition of a slave woman, whom he had purchased in Texas when it 
>> was not practicable to hire a servant. This problem was not of 
>> difficult solution for an ordinary slave owner; but with Major Thomas 
>> it was otherwise, since, to use his own words, he "could not sell a 
>> human being." He had been accustomed to the service of slaves all his 
>> life, and felt no scruples in purchasing one, when in need of a 
>> servant. But when the question of the sale of a slave became a 
>> practical one, the nature of the transaction from this point of view 
>> was so repulsive to him that it could only be answered in the 
>> negative, and although it was against his pecuniary interest to take 
>> this woman with him to Virginia, he resolved to do it. He was a 
>> Southern man, at this time, so far as to introduce, by purchase, a 
>> slave woman into his family where she would always be treated kindly; 
>> but he revolted at the possibilities of misery and cruel treatment 
>> which inhered in the system of American slavery. He was not then an 
>> abolitionist in the northern significance of that offensive term, and 
>> doubtless he would have claimed, that, as a political matter, the 
>> institution of slavery was recognized by the National Constitution, 
>> and that any direct interference with it by Congressional legislation, 
>> or partisan efforts to free the slaves, trenched upon the rights of 
>> the Southern States. But he could not sell a human being, one that he 
>> had made is slave by purchase, a transaction which made chattels of 
>> men and women. A strong feeling obtained among the more cultured and 
>> more humane classes in the South against the sale of family or 
>> inherited slaves, and with many, as with Major Thomas, there was a 
>> strong repugnance to the sale of purchased slaves, apart from any 
>> opposition to the institution itself. In the purchase the horrid 
>> possibilities were put out of view; but in sale they would force 
>> themselves into sight. Deciding not to sell his slave, Major Thomas 
>> took her with him to his home in Virginia, and did not see her again, 
>> after going north, until as a free woman she became his voluntary 
>> servant. After the war this woman claimed for herself and her husband 
>> and children the protection of her old master, and although it was 
>> both inconvenient and expensive for General Thomas to take them, he 
>> had them moved from Virginia to Nashville, Tennessee. They afterwards 
>> caused trouble and anxiety. He tried to train them for a more 
>> independent life, and made an effort to induce them to start for 
>> themselves. But they were unwilling to leave him for an uncertain 
>> living, and they therefore remained with him until he was ordered to 
>> the Pacific coast in 1860. It being then impracticable for him to give 
>> them further personal care, he induced his brother living in 
>> Mississippi to give them employment, and with their consent, he sent 
>> them to him."
>> The point of this post does not rest on noble or abhorrent ancestors.  
>> Their actions neither exonerate nor shame us.  But, we cannot begin to 
>> address the pernicious effects of racism until we acknowledge the way 
>> in which class, color privilege, and family history shape our present 
>> opportunities and lives.
>> As a historian I can resist clarifying another point in Mr. Kaag's 
>> post.   "In February 1948, President Harry S. Truman directed the U.S. 
>> armed forces to desegregate as quickly as possible. In July, he issued 
>> Executive Order 9981 calling on the military to end racial 
>> discrimination. It would take several years-and another war-before the 
>> military actually ended segregation." 
>> <http://www.gliah.uh.edu/historyonline/integrating.cfm >. 
>> Regards,
>> Rosemary Huskey
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Rosemary:
>
>You got me.  I was operating on memory(Something an Historian should
obviously never do in public.), and family wisdom passed down from my
grandfather.  That said, I think my several times removed grandfather did
his bit to destroy the institution of slavery at great personal risk, both
societally and militarily, and that is to his credit.
>
>As for Truman, yes, his executive order was in '48, but based on the
Defense Reorganization Act of '47.  And of course it took time for the
military to comply.  But not as much time as it took the country as a whole
after Brown VS Board of Education of Topeka Kansas in 1954.  It took the
Congress and the Supremes to impliment the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to even
get the ball rolling.
>
>I have personal experience of the lack of prejudice in the military.  It is
truly an institution in which merit and talent count for more than color.  I
point to Colin Powell and Chappie White, among others.  Moscow is the
"whitest" place I have ever lived.
>
>And I still maintain that merit instead of affirmative action is a better
path.  It is demeaning to people of color to suggest that they aren't smart
enough to compete on an equal footing with other races.  Plus, it's just not
true.
>
>Regards,
>
>Don
>
>On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 01:49 AM, DonaldH675@aol.com wrote:
>
>Dear Visionaries.
>One of the most difficult issues for white people to acknowledge is that
the color of their skin confers upon them a privileged status.  This is
particularly true in the United States and the Western European countries
with colonial histories.  In my experience, those who complain most bitterly
about the unfairness of affirmative action legislation base their positions
on the mythology that they, and their families, are (were) free of the taint
of racial prejudice. (This myth is not dissimilar in type to the argument
adopted by the majority of French and German people following W.W.II.  That
is, all French people were really in the underground resistance - certainly
they never collaborated; and all Germans really hated Hitler and tried to
protect Jews.)    I wish that I could say with such self righteous certainty
as Don Kaag that my family never oppressed anyone.  Sadly, that is not the
case.  And indeed, if Don Kaag were to do a little research on the ancestor
he so proudly claims, Gen. George H. Thomas, he would discover that those
pesky slave owners, (which were never our ancestors) in fact were - although
his family clearly operated on a much grander scale than mine.  The
following link  <http://www.aotc.net/Life1.htm> leads the reader to a
contemporary biography of General Thomas, (written in 1872).  Page 17
includes the following passage (the words "he" and "his" refer to General
Thomas):
>"His departure from Texas brought to him a perplexing problem the
disposition of a slave woman, whom he had purchased in Texas when it was not
practicable to hire a servant. This problem was not of difficult solution
for an ordinary slave owner; but with Major Thomas it was otherwise, since,
to use his own words, he "could not sell a human being." He had been
accustomed to the service of slaves all his life, and felt no scruples in
purchasing one, when in need of a servant. But when the question of the sale
of a slave became a practical one, the nature of the transaction from this
point of view was so repulsive to him that it could only be answered in the
negative, and although it was against his pecuniary interest to take this
woman with him to Virginia, he resolved to do it. He was a Southern man, at
this time, so far as to introduce, by purchase, a slave woman into his
family where she would always be treated kindly; but he revolted at the
possibilities of misery and cruel treatment which inhered in the system of
American slavery. He was not then an abolitionist in the northern
significance of that offensive term, and doubtless he would have claimed,
that, as a political matter, the institution of slavery was recognized by
the National Constitution, and that any direct interference with it by
Congressional legislation, or partisan efforts to free the slaves, trenched
upon the rights of the Southern States. But he could not sell a human being,
one that he had made is slave by purchase, a transaction which made chattels
of men and women. A strong feeling obtained among the more cultured and more
humane classes in the South against the sale of family or inherited slaves,
and with many, as with Major Thomas, there was a strong repugnance to the
sale of purchased slaves, apart from any opposition to the institution
itself. In the purchase the horrid possibilities were put out of view; but
in sale they would force themselves into sight. Deciding not to sell his
slave, Major Thomas took her with him to his home in Virginia, and did not
see her again, after going north, until as a free woman she became his
voluntary servant. After the war this woman claimed for herself and her
husband and children the protection of her old master, and although it was
both inconvenient and expensive for General Thomas to take them, he had them
moved from Virginia to Nashville, Tennessee. They afterwards caused trouble
and anxiety. He tried to train them for a more independent life, and made an
effort to induce them to start for themselves. But they were unwilling to
leave him for an uncertain living, and they therefore remained with him
until he was ordered to the Pacific coast in 1860. It being then
impracticable for him to give them further personal care, he induced his
brother living in Mississippi to give them employment, and with their
consent, he sent them to him."
>The point of this post does not rest on noble or abhorrent ancestors. 
Their actions neither exonerate nor shame us.  But, we cannot begin to
address the pernicious effects of racism until we acknowledge the way in
which class, color privilege, and family history shape our present
opportunities and lives.
>As a historian I can resist clarifying another point in Mr. Kaag's post.  
"In February 1948, President Harry S. Truman directed the U.S. armed forces
to desegregate as quickly as possible. In July, he issued Executive Order
9981 calling on the military to end racial discrimination. It would take
several years-and another war-before the military actually ended
segregation." <http://www.gliah.uh.edu/historyonline/integrating.cfm >. 
>Regards,
>Rosemary Huskey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>