When will it be the time to stop dividing Americans by race and gender? Will that time ever come?
“It’s not the time.” “We’re not there yet.” “There’s still more to be done.” “Band-Aids are still the color of white people.” “Nude pantyhose are the color of white people.”
These are actual points brought up by supporters of race/gender affirmative action in America. As vague or absurd as these statements are, they beg a much more important question which opponents will not answer: When will it finally be “time” to stop dividing human beings by race and gender?
According to opponents, America need more of the poison that’s killing us, driving us apart, and making us suspicious of each other—the spoils system that divides us and makes us look at each other with suspicion and resentment. The time will never come unless we make it come.
The proponents of slavery thought it wasn’t the time to end slavery either. America ended it anyway.
WHAT IS ‘INSTITUTIONALIZED RACISM’?
Affirmative action based on race is the ultimate institutionalized racism. It is our own government’s legally choosing between us by race. It is legally required racism.
We can’t stop racism until we stop our government from dividing us by race. The only way to stop doing something is to stop doing it.
HOW SHOULD AMERICANS BE ‘RANKED’ ACCORDING TO
RACE AND GENDER?
Our opponents should make their positions clear: give us a ranking system for preference: should black women take precedence over Latino men? Should white women be favored over American Indian men? Should an Eskimo get favor over a black because there are fewer of them? Should a white girl majoring in math get into college before an Asian boy majoring in science?
What is your system to put human beings above other human beings?
Ask them.
WHAT DOES AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ENSURE?
It ensures that those “preferred” will not be part of the economic future of this country. They are used as tokens, fronts, faces, headcounts, but not taken seriously in the business world.
Our opponent David Waymire claims that the CRI movement “ignores racism.” This is incorrect. The State Civil Rights Initiatives demand that the state governments ignore race. That is the opposite of racism.
ARE GENDER PREFERENCES NECESSARY FOR GIRLS TO
GET AHEAD IN MATH AND SCIENCE?
Our opponents say that gender preferences are needed to help encourage girls to go into math and science. That didn’t help Jennifer Gratz, a high-scoring math major. She was denied admission to the University of Michigan because she was white, in favor of lower-scoring minority applicants. Race trumps gender.
Gratz about the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative:
“The people of Michigan believe that we should be treated without regard to skin color. Public employment, contracting and education decisions should be based on merit, character, experience and accomplishments, not on race or gender.” Jennifer Gratz
Should a white boy who needs help in math or science be denied that help because he’s male and white?
How about if we just treat them like students and not like colors or sexes, and give help to those who need help? Should American parents vote to help their daughters, but not their sons? Parents should not be forced to divide their own families by gender, offering tax-payer-funded educational services to females, but not males. Students at public-funded colleges and universities should be treated as individuals, not as colors or genders.
On tax-payer supported campuses, gender-specific educational programs should end, except when common sense dictates otherwise. However, there can still be gender-specific programs if offered equitably to both sexes. If a program is offered as a “women’s” program or service, then a comparable service should be offered to men. For instance, there will still be women’s sports teams, as long as men’s sports teams also exist. The Civil Rights Initiatives do not affect reasonable separations of sexes, such as sports, residences, study of male or female anatomy, diseases, sociology, anthropology, etc.
The same goes for race-specific programs and services if funded by taxpayers. Private colleges, companies, and individuals can do as they please. That is their Constitutional right.
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS HURTS MINORITIES BY PUTTING THEM IN COLLEGES WHERE THEY ARE DOOMED TO FAIL
There are 3000 colleges in the U.S., plenty for each of us to find an institution where we can compete and from which we can come out with a diploma. Colleges don’t care whether minorities graduate, as long as their faces can be counted as “minority admissions.”
Before the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, as many as 41% of black students fail to graduate from the University of Michigan. Their faces were counted as “diversity,” but they did not graduate. After being somebody else’s token, they failed and disappeared. The “Domino effect of mismatching” has caused “many minority students with all the prerequisites for success (to be) artificially turned into failures because of this pervasive mismatching” of a student to the academic level of the college.
“The number of black students enrolled is the key, not the number who graduate. In fact there’s an element of perversity. The fewer who graduate justifies calls for greater budgets for academic support and student retention programs.” (Walter Williams, Black Students as Meal Tickets)
This explains the panicked anti-MCRI response by Michigan colleges; they get money for admitting minority students, then more money when these students fail. Colleges and universities actually have a stake in admission-then-failure of minority students.
How much DNA does it take to be an American minority and qualify as “disadvantaged”?
Members of “non-preferred” groups often get themselves “redesignated” into a preferred group. Individuals of mixed ancestry changed their self-identification into a “disadvantaged” group. Whites with traces of American Indian or black ancestry suddenly become Indians or blacks to get favors.
A person who was 1/64th Cherokee qualified for a set-aside government contract.
Chronic minority failure at American colleges with race-preference admissions policies is the unspoken cost of affirmative action. These are students who would not fail if admitted to college based on test scores instead of race in the name of “diversity.”
Race-preference admissions at colleges assume that minority students admitted without preferences would somehow be “sell-outs” who are “acting white” by excelling in scholarship.
Race Free Zone believes in the individual, no matter the color or sex. We advocate self-reliance. We believe anyone in America determined to “make it” can do so without hand-outs, leg-ups, reparations, preferences, level playing fields, or any other method of treating human beings like pets who can’t succeed on their own.
Do American women really believe they got their jobs because of affirmative action? Do they believe they didn’t earn their positions?
Ask them. Especially ask the women who went to work during World War II, long before gender-based affirmative action. If you can find a woman who believes she got her job by affirmative action, Race Free Zone would like to hear from her, and to ask, “Then you weren’t the most qualified person for the job?”
The misleading and hypocritical Debbie Dingell: Debbie Dingell, Executive Director of Community and Government Relations at General Motors Corporation, says “I can tell you I wouldn’t have my job at General Motors had affirmative action not existed.” Reality check: Debbie Dingell has her job at GM not because of affirmative action. She has her job because her husband is John Dingell, the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives (25 consecutive terms, 50 years) and he has coddled GM’s corporate interests.
Debbie Dingell’s comment implies that all women who have worked for General Motors over the past century, including thousands of women, all got their jobs because of affirmative action. How is it possible that scores of women worked at GM during WWII and continued on to have long careers there? This was before affirmative action. How can that be possible?” Jack Lifton
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION GETS CREDIT FOR ADVANCEMENT OF BLACKS, BUT IN FACT BLACKS WERE RISING ON THEIR OWN POWER BEFORE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
According to prominent race scholars and economists like Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter and Walter Williams, the American Black population was advancing themselves vigorously during the ‘40’s and ‘50’s. They had a higher per-capita employment rate, were married, had intact families, held themselves to a strong standard of civilized behavior, and generally attended church. During the real “Jim Crow” era, with no affirmative action in their favor, despite punitive laws against them, Blacks cut poverty by nearly half between WWII and the 1960’s.
Then, along came affirmative action.
ABOUT MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISES
The American OEM auto industry giants GM and Ford are so deeply enmeshed, to the tune of billions of wasted dollars, in their own affirmative action programs that they can no longer compete in the world market. They’re desperately defending race-preferences because they’re terrified that their costly minority content failure will be exposed.
Big business, big labor and big government have their noses so deeply sunk into the affirmative action web of deceit that they can’t support MCRI lest their own hypocrisy and failure be revealed. Decades of favors, fronts, phony “mentoring”, pay-offs, huge money and big contracts crossing the palms of politicians, CEO’s, bureaucrats and fake “minority-owned” businesses now force these bloated organizations to pander to race-baiting. However, the rank and file are with the Civil Rights Movements in every state where they are able to vote on them.