EquALLity wrote:
1) Would you have supported Affirmative Action in the past, when racism was much more prevalent and blatant in the country?
What have the consequences of Affirmative Action been? And what were the costs associated with the program?
I'm more concerned if something is beneficial than if it is racist.
Affirmative action is racist, but if it has done more good than harm, and been cost effective, then that's fine.
EquALLity wrote:
2) Do you agree that racism is still a major issue in the country, and while no longer necessarily perpetrated by the government, that minorities are still disadvantaged and that white privilege is prevalent and significant (this is why I support Affirmative Action)?
No, I see this as a deontological issue. I don't care if "white" people are all poor and "black" people are all rich, or if it's the other way around, of if it's equally divided.
The issue is that there are people in poverty, and a large wealth disparity. "Race" means nothing to me.
Social programs that want to address this should probably do so directly (which will make them more effective and less controversial), and not give into the race narrative or use racist policies to do so.
EquALLity wrote:
I don't think so. I see it as bringing up one 'race' to another in terms of equal opportunity.
Which is racist. You're talking about fighting fire with fire.
That may or may not be effective, but it's certainly racist the moment you base any aspect of policy on a question of race.
EquALLity wrote:
Poverty isn't the only issue, but I do think it is a major issue... which is why I think public college should be tuition free.
The main issue is multi-generational poverty, also poor prenatal care (which lowers the lifetime IQ of those children born in poverty); these affect capacity to become educated and employed.
People who suffer from multi-generational poverty are borderline retarded. Just making their education free isn't going to fix that. You can't raise adult IQ by any significant amount.
You need to make particular kinds of education free; like trade school. A retard can become a competent electrician with good training; and that makes a good salary because it's a licensed field of specialization.
These people should not be studying liberal arts, and they can not study STEM at the college level (they are inherently disadvantages by a low IQ -- largely from environmental factors, both prenatal and early childhood).
We also need to focus more on planned parenthood and contraceptive education. Women need to be educated more on nutrition and drug use during pregnancy (the biggest challenge is the first couple weeks before they even know they're pregnant when a pregnancy occurs accidentally).
And finally, there are cultural issues which are anti-education that need to be addressed. All of the free education in the world doesn't mean anything if a child or young adult is mocked by his or her peers for trying to educate his or herself.
None of this has inherently anything to do with "race"; poor whites suffer from the same problems, but nobody cares about poor white trash because there are enough rich whites to make up for it
. It's inherently racist to care about (or support) one and not the other because of race. And it's an impotent policy that assumes the source of these problems is systemic racism, rather than cultural and developmental issues stemming from poverty.
That makes no sense.