Senator Webb is a mystery to me - he certainly takes some interesting stances. Will he see any blow back from speaking his mind like this...?
There may be some reaction from the usual suspects. But, he's correct. It's kind of difficult to argue his main point: the everyone deserves equal chance and opportunity. But, like many who dare speak out about such issues, he'll have his detrators.
Not agreeing or disagreeing with Webb, but want to make this point. I still think a major point of contention in US political life is equal opportunity v. equal outcome. What constitutes equal opportunity and what constitutes equal outcome even. I remember a kid in my 9th grade Spanish class complaining about slavery. Now, I repudiate slavery, but me being born in 1976, he wanted to hold me responsible for slavery. I told hi I was violently opposed to slavery, I apologise for anything my ancestors might have done, but I had never enslaved anyone, and the fact was he and I were in the same classes getting the same education. When he got a bad grade, it was because he was black and the teacher didn't like him. I don't get that. I really don't On the other hand, I had a roommate from Kenya who was one of the hardest workers I knew (this was when I was in grad school) and he would comment on how lazy African Americans were. I told him he didn't understand the history of racism in the US. He said he didn't care. Sure racism existed, but he had an equal chance in the US to work hard and get ahead... All to say equal opportunity v. equal outcome is a massive view shift in US political life.
Not convinced that the author also penned the headline or title as he does not really argue against the idea that whiteness has historically engendered a certain degree of privilege or that such often came at the expense of blackness. Still... That was a well thought out, nuanced piece of analysis and writing that is primarily anti-discrimination with a bit of anti-immigrant, to boot, though the latter is primarily ensconced in a set of ideas that seek to end 'diversity' programs and other 'color-based' efforts that end up helping immigrants more than dusky Americans. He is notably in favor of Affirmative Action as a tool to address past injustices and the deeply seated inequalities of opportunity, etc., that have resulted from our nation's history of racism and anti-black sentiment, and he seems to think that the government still needs to have a hand in trying to level the playing field inhabited by many blacks. He rightly notes that 'white society' is not a monolith and should not be treated as such given the many hurdles that impede the success of poorer whites from traditionally impoverished areas. Bravo. You realize, of course, that he is asking not only for an end to color-based programs (and they are technically color-based, which is why non-blacks get the majority of the benefit connected with those programs), but also for the beginning of a society that sees things more clearly along lines of class. Sure, there are some laments about WASPs being shunted aside from the Supreme Court (they have hardly disappeared from the broader landscape of elite life stations), but he neither supports an argument for moving government away from the battle to create a level playing field nor from the idea that country still has a responsibility to address the wrongs perp'd from above by elites and government alike. He just wants the truer aims of our national ethos, the legislation meant to address racism against blacks, and present day reality to mesh in a way that doesn't absurdly prop up those who should not be included in the project. Worthy of discussion.
He will definitely receive some blowback on the this, from the usual suspects. However, he brings up some interesting points. While, things will never be equal on the racial front, I think a move towards helping poor people, not just poor colored people, would go a long way towards healing and evening things out. As a kid, I knew quite a few white kids poor as me or worse. I'm sure they would have loved to know where their 'white privilege' was. They caught more hell from the 'have's' than I did. We have definitely made some progress in this country, there are now plenty of blacks, who no longer need the preferred programs, that their parents and grandparents needed. The government programs need to progress also.
This isn't on topic but BrothaHorn -- did you read this: "There may be some reaction from the usual suspects. But, he's correct. It's kind of difficult to argue his main point" a couple of posts earlier before you typed this: "He will definitely receive some blowback on the this, from the usual suspects. However, he brings up some interesting points." ?
"America still owes a debt to its black citizens" Is this true, in your opinion? Is this a true statement? I think that the only thing that is owed black citizens is a level playing field, an equal opportunity to compete. But I think that is owed to all citizens.
America still owes a debt to its black citizens,[ however, excepting that], government programs to help all 'people of color' are unfair. They should end. paso, you don't think the above is the correct reading?
I read it as however. I would also then add a because to the end of sentence based upon the entirety of his essay. In context, I believe he is saying that affirmative action based soely on race is unfair. He is also, however, saying that affirmative action based upon need and poverty is still needed and I infer from his essay and his debt comment that he believes this will still disproportionately target minorities.
I don't think that you'll get many in minority communities who would disagree with your position. I still say "but" and "however" have distinctly different meanings.
Why in the conservative narrative must someone always be "pwnd", beaten or defeated? Is your insecurity so pervasive that you must declare yourselves winners even when there's no contest?
Satchel - It was a joke. Relax man....you're wound up tighter Keith Olbermann the night Scott Brown was elected.
