• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Revisiting A Supreme Court Case

Should The American Poeple Bring Back Racial Segregation

  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
TurtleDude said:
So I said to John, is that the ROTC students? and he said No, those are black fraternity pledges. And I said, you have black fraternities? and he said yes. I said but you have black frat brothers in your house-and he said yes, we cannot discriminate but they can. Why I asked and he just shrugged his shoulders and said I don't know but as president of my fraternity I know we cannot discriminate against blacks but they can against whites.
Click to expand...

Guys in Ivy have no concept of social dynamics. That's just great.

See, Grip? It's not just stupid people.
 
ecofarm said:
You believe only stupid people fail to grasp those things? If that's true, then God really ****ed me in surrounding me with a world of mostly morons. I'd like to think there's not so many stupid people, it's just a concept that must be taught.
Click to expand...


It's not that they're that stupid, so much as mentally lazy. You know I'm right. We're not better, just more interested.


He can stay out of our pics. I'm poor and love the limelight, so this will work out great.
Click to expand...

Well, that's part of his problem. He can't allow outside exposure, yet he craves more diverse company, so the escape.
 
ecofarm said:
Guys in Ivy have no concept of social dynamics. That's just great.

See, Grip? It's not just stupid people.
Click to expand...


Unfortunately, TD is not completely wrong. Life is a two way sword that cuts both ways, in which the minority is capable of indiscriminate racism. It only makes us all human and that the minority should still be granted favor for their lessor numbers.
 
grip said:
Unfortunately, TD is not completely wrong. Life is a two way sword that cuts both ways, in which the minority is capable of indiscriminate racism.
Click to expand...

It's not racism if it's not oppressive. Non-oppressive racism is an idiotic "concept". That's stripping a social construct of social consideration - total nonsense.

It only makes us all human and that the minority should still be granted favor for their lessor numbers.
Click to expand...

It's not favor. It's empowerment and safe space. The majority has no need for either, thus majority-based exclusionary places, events and organizations are inherently oppressive.
 
ecofarm said:
It's not racism if it's not oppressive. Non-oppressive racism is an idiotic "concept". That's stripping a social construct of social consideration - total nonsense.



It's not favor. It's empowerment and safe space. The majority has no need for either, thus majority-based exclusionary places, events and organizations are inherently oppressive.
Click to expand...

You're making it too hard to defend against irrational people. Your goal is to be effective and sensible. I'll tell you my fathers secret formula to debating. Be as concise as possible, leaving your opponent as little room as possible to find cracks in your defense.

For example; if you tell me you're doing drugs because life is hard, my response is one word, DUMB! You can't find a way to argue with it, because it's such an effective and simple solution to a problem. DUMB is no reason to do anything and indefensible.
 
grip said:
You're making it too hard to defend against irrational people. Your goal is to be effective and sensible. I'll tell you my fathers secret formula to debating. Be as concise as possible, leaving your opponent as little room as possible to find cracks in your defense.

For example; if you tell me you're doing drugs because life is hard, my response is one word, DUMB! You can't find a way to argue with it, because it's such an effective and simple solution to a problem. DUMB is no reason to do anything and indefensible.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll try:

Whites are not a disadvantaged minority, so they get different rules.
 
ecofarm said:
Guys in Ivy have no concept of social dynamics. That's just great.

See, Grip? It's not just stupid people.
Click to expand...

maybe lots of us don't buy into fringe definitions from those who didn't get their degrees from Ivy schools?
 
ecofarm said:
Okay, I'll try:

Whites are not a disadvantaged minority, so they get different rules.
Click to expand...

really, so why did white guys with a 3.7 GPA from Yale and a 740 LSAT score have less than one of of 10 changes of getting into Yale Law in the early 80s when a black with a 3.4 from Yale and a 680 LSAT have a better than 60% chance of gaining admission?
 
ecofarm said:
Okay, I'll try:

Whites are not a disadvantaged minority, so they get different rules.
Click to expand...

THIS is within you. I've seen your greatness and you could easily crush most opponents given the right formula. Whites are a majority of prerogative assholes that like to promote their advantage, I know. I'm one of them. :lol:
 
grip said:
THIS is within you. I've seen your greatness and you could easily crush most opponents given the right formula. Whites are a majority of prerogative assholes that like to promote their advantage, I know. I'm one of them. :lol:
Click to expand...

Okay, I wanna do another one. This time regarding oppression as an essential aspect of racism:

We gotta consider the social stuff when considering a social thing.
 
TurtleDude said:
maybe lots of us don't buy into fringe definitions from those who didn't get their degrees from Ivy schools?
Click to expand...

No, it's just ignorance.
 
ecofarm said:
No, it's just ignorance.
Click to expand...

so its your learned opinion that those of us with as much education as you have-often from better or more competitive schools, who don't accept your fringe definition of racism are ignorant when in reality we have examined your definition and have rejected it as being stilted, biased and almost symptomatic of white guilt?
 
TurtleDude said:
really, so why did white guys with a 3.7 GPA from Yale and a 740 LSAT score have less than one of of 10 changes of getting into Yale Law in the early 80s when a black with a 3.4 from Yale and a 680 LSAT have a better than 60% chance of gaining admission?
Click to expand...

1. Leveling the playing field with consideration for disadvantage resulting from economic and racial privilege, so as to garner the best and brightest including factors other than test scores. A kid that grew up in a ghetto managing to get into Yale and score a 680 is smarter than a kid from privilege getting into Yale and scoring a 740. The kid from the ghetto started far behind the privileged kid and nearly caught up; he's smarter.

2. The value of diversity to students and the university.


TurtleDude said:
so its your learned opinion that those of us with as much education as you have-often from better or more competitive schools, who don't accept your fringe definition of racism are ignorant when in reality we have examined your definition and have rejected it as being stilted, biased and almost symptomatic of white guilt?
Click to expand...

You're just ignorant on the subject. I don't mean to say you're ignorant in general. We all have blind spots. You or the frat guy (no offense to frats, I was Sig Ep at Stetson - which has a pretty good law school, at least circa 1990) should have gone to the sociology department and asked someone (even a student) to explain it to you. Someone would have given you the basics of social dynamics and explained why there are black fraternities.

Helpful hint: Black fraternities are not racist; a white fraternity would be racist.
 
Last edited:
tl/dr...
Most people have no qualms or hesitation rejecting government sanctioned segregation until SJW enter the fray. At that point all bets are off, exactly as I've seen over and over.

WEALTHY MINORITIES enjoy all the privileges and benefits of WEALTHY WHITES but the argument SJW present is that all minorities are poor, suffering, and live disadvantaged lives and don't have what it takes without extra help. In their quest to not be racist, they engage in racism and bigotry. It's hilarious and sad. It plays out the same every time.
 
The minority wanting to live free of the tyranny of the majority is always going to be more understandable than the other way around
 
ecofarm said:
1. Leveling the playing field with consideration for disadvantage resulting from economic and racial privilege, so as to garner the best and brightest including factors other than test scores. A kid that grew up in a ghetto managing to get into Yale and score a 680 is smarter than a kid from privilege getting into Yale and scoring a 740. The kid from the ghetto started far behind the privileged kid and nearly caught up; he's smarter.

2. The value of diversity to students and the university.
Click to expand...



1. Smarter or not is debatable, but more able to overcome obstacles and higher potential, given the same opportunities in college, should be the case. But that too is questionable (see below)

2. This is also debatable. Diversity comes in many forms. What we see out of Yale these days is they prefer black kids from advantaged economic and educational backgrounds, from the same private schools. Their parents have $ and will donate and the grades from known high schools are more reliable than some school in the ghetto they've never heard of. For the same reason, they don't like to take rural applicants.

Also anyone who's attended a school that rejects tens of thousands every year can tell you this...under a quota system, the white and asian kids avoid working with the black/hispanic/native. The majority figures that there's a good chance the minority is dead weight on group projects

Along those lines, one of the big problems UMich, which took kids from the ghetto unlike Yale, had in the supreme court case was only 60% of the black/hispanic students graduated, vs 80% of white/asian. So does it really benefit someone who is academically unprepared, if it means they will drop out?
 
chromium said:
1. Smarter or not is debatable, but more able to overcome obstacles and higher potential, given the same opportunities in college, should be the case. But that too is questionable (see below)
Click to expand...

It's not debatable or questionable. It's proven.

2. This is also debatable. Diversity comes in many forms. What we see out of Yale these days is they prefer black kids from advantaged economic and educational backgrounds, from the same private schools. Their parents have $ and will donate and the grades from known high schools are more reliable than some school in the ghetto they've never heard of. For the same reason, they don't like to take rural applicants.
Click to expand...

Not debatable. Even a rich black person provides diversity unattainable by whites alone.

Also anyone who's attended a school that rejects tens of thousands every year can tell you this...under a quota system, the white and asian kids avoid working with the black/hispanic/native. The majority figures that there's a good chance the minority is dead weight on group projects
Click to expand...

I've attended more than one uni that rejects thousands per year, as a grad student. No one expressed such racist crap.

Along those lines, one of the big problems UMich, which took kids from the ghetto unlike Yale, had in the supreme court case was only 60% of the black/hispanic students graduated, vs 80% of white/asian. So does it really benefit someone who is academically unprepared, if it means they will drop out?
Click to expand...

Of course it benefits them. And it benefits the students. And it benefits the university.
 
IMO, this is a horrible trend that will lead to some crappy outcomes. We should encourage integration, assimilation and at least some semblance of belonging to the same damn country. This gradual Balkanization of the US will eventually be the death of us all.
 
When one spends all their time pondering majorities and minorities, they lose sight of the fact that they are dealing only with groups and not individuals.

Furthermore, focusing on thoughts instead of actions is probably worse. Government institutions should not be in the business of promoting or condoning exclusions of any kind and for whatever reason.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
When one spends all their time pondering majorities and minorities, they lose sight of the fact that they are dealing only with groups and not individuals.
Click to expand...

When one considers social constructs, one must consider social stuff.
 
reinoe said:
There has recently been an upturn in college students demanding government enforced segregation of student based on race.

U-MICH students....

UCLA decided to take it one step further and is entertaining segregated housing.
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016...lack-only-university-housing-draws-criticism/

Berkeley, for once not being the forefront of inane and childish protest, finally got in on the act of demanding racial segregation...
Berkeley protesters form human chain to stop white students from getting to class - Washington Times

Evergreen College students are now in the game of one-upsmanship and decided to kick "White People" off campus...
https://10ztalk.com/2017/05/30/stud...-of-campus-segregation-why-evolution-is-true/

Plessy vs Ferguson has often been derided as among the worst Supreme Court decisions in American history due to the mental gymnastics used to justify racial segregation in the face of the 13th and 14th amendments. Starting after WW2 Civil Rights activists for for over a decade to get the decision to the SC and get it overturned. Hundreds of people lost their lives and many more countless thousands had their livelihoods destroyed as they fought to overcome this absolute evil. Martin Luther King jr made the ultimate sacrifice in the fight to stop the injustices people of color were facing on a daily basis. And Malcolm X fought as well though eventually mellowing out over time in his own quest to stop the injustice invoked by segregation. These civil rights leaders fought the good fight and were ultimately successful.

There are on civil rights leaders any more. There are Social Justice Warriors. Often aligned with liberal actors and given tacit approval by the leadership in the Democratic Party. These people often follow the trail that Civil Rights leaders blazed but in a reverse fashion: they seek to destroy and undermine the sacrifices made in the name of Civil Rights and undue all the success that took place during that time. Rarely do you see people who embrace reactionary ideologies because overall, even through trials and tribulations, things get better with time. Social Justice Warriors seek just that: to turn back time when people were not considered equal. To turn back time and separate the races based on the pettiness of skin color.

Unlike the Civil Rights movements that started nearly 70 years ago, these Social Justice Warrior eschew peaceful discourse. They reject dialog. They scorn peace. They embrace hatred and it shows in their virulent hate speech. Their motives seem almost laughable and parody but it's not a parody. They're real people. You can't parody these people. It is akin to the episode of "SOUTH PARK" where they had to have disclaimers stating "THIS IS WHAT ACTUAL SCIENTOLOGISTS BELIEVE" because people wouldn't believe it otherwise. So to is the new Social Justice Warrior. Simply describe their actions and their behavior. Describe their adamant approach to enforcing a horrid Supreme Court decision. And then simply say to them "this is what actual Social Justice Warriors Believe.

But I say no. We should not go backwards and embrace racial segregation. We should not embrace one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in American history. We should not disrespectfully disregard the blood, sweat, and sacrifice that previous activists made. We cannot embrace liberalism and the Democratic Party Agenda. The ultimate goal of the SJW movement is authoritarianism, and I think it should be opposed at every turn with every fiber of our being. We must reject the Democratic Party and their quest to re-institute segregation. Fortunately the American people have complied: Democrats have lost over 1000 seats since Obama took office. The losses must continue to pile up until either the spine of the Democratic Party is shattered forever or they reject completely and utterly the SJW movement. Americans are fed up with their embrace of open and unbridled racism and their quest to take this country backwards.

What say you: do you support racial segregation and taking this country backwards? Or do you want to reject the SJW movement endorsed by the Democratic Party?
Click to expand...

I don't really see how a pubic institution can be allowed to segregate nor how we can even contemplate allowing it to interfere in the decisions of private sector institutions anymore. To condone either you'd have to be mentally stuck in the 1970s.
 
ecofarm said:
When one considers social constructs, one must consider social stuff.
Click to expand...

Social constructs are the problem. They are reinforced by those with a vested interest in making sure they are always in force. It is as insidious as party politics--think like the group or get kicked out.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
Social constructs are the problem. They are reinforced by those with a vested interest in making sure they are always in force. It is as insidious as party politics--think like the group or get kicked out.
Click to expand...

Racism certainly is a problem. It's reinforced by those with a vested interest in making sure it's always in force. What race has a vested interest in racism? What race benefits? What race is privileged? Hint: not blacks.
 
ecofarm said:
Racism certainly is a problem. It's reinforced by those with a vested interest in making sure it's always in force. What race has a vested interest in racism? What race benefits? What race is privileged? Hint: not blacks.
Click to expand...

So are destructive cultures which regardless of race is a problem.

I would assume you don't support this nice little initiative spawned from the culture of violence:

No+snitching+sign+Jeremiah+Garcia.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom