From another thread:

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archive...latest_colo.php

Catastrophe in Kansas City

The effort to integrate the Kansas City public schools is one of the most costly, misguided, and ineffectual programs ever undertaken in America in the name of racial equality. This billion-dollar effort has been so utterly a failure that only good can come of it. Catastrophe as complete as this may shake even a liberal’s confidence. This may well be the high-water mark of the astonishing efforts whites have made to build a society in the name of an illusory equality.

Kansas City came to national attention ten years ago, when federal District Judge Russell Clark ordered the school district to build and staff the best, most expensive public schools in the country—perhaps in the world. They were to be so dazzlingly good that they would both lure white students out of their safe suburbs and raise black student achievement to the white level. Judge Clark was even willing to wield dictatorial power to get what he wanted, looting both the city and the state to fund the gold-plated schools that desegregation was thought to require.

Of course, the grand experiment failed. The wondrous schools were duly built but blacks learned no more in them than before. Whites stayed in the suburbs. And now a recent Supreme Court decision will probably cut off massive subsidies from the state, leaving the city with a hugely expensive system to run and no money. If Kansas City cannot dream up new ways to make whites pay for them, the dream schools will slide back into the ramshackled mediocrity from which Judge Clark thought he had lifted them.

Separate and Equal

The Kansas City, Missouri school district first opened in September 1867, with four schools for whites and one for blacks. The state constitution, like that of sixteen other states at the time, required segregation. A law passed the following year reaffirmed segregation, but required that black schools be equal to white.

Eventually the city was operating one high school and 14 elementary schools for blacks. Almost all of these schools were north of 27th Street, which was the traditional boundary of the Negro quarter. The city also made a serious effort to make the schools equal. Black teachers were paid the same salaries as white, and in most years the city spent approximately as much on black students as it did on whites. During the 1936-37 school year, for example, it cost $79.31 to educate each white elementary school pupil (about $825 in today’s money) and $69.10 to educate a black pupil. In 1940-41, however, the district spent $118.61 on each black high school student but somewhat less—$110.43—on whites.

Even if there was rough equality in the operating budget, blacks were sometimes slighted in the capital budget. Their schools were often old and overcrowded. In 1949, parents of students at the all-black Bruce elementary school sued the city to replace rickety buildings. The Missouri Supreme Court upheld a lower-court denial of relief, arguing that although the Bruce school had no auditorium, gymnasium, or cafeteria, there were white schools in the state that were no better off. Moreover, since the curriculum at the Bruce school was equivalent to that of white schools, the black parents had no grounds for complaint.

The 1950s are now acknowledged to have been the salad days for Kansas City public schools. Sixty-nine thousand students (77 percent of them white) got what was, by today’s standards, a superb education in their segregated schools. The beginning of the end was, of course, 1954.

That year, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that segregated schools were unconstitutional. Kansas City obediently prepared to desegregate. A color-blind plan was drawn up whereby students would simply attend the schools nearest them, whether they had been all-black or all-white.

Desegregation proceeded so smoothly in 1955 that the Kansas City Star did not even write a story about it. There were no disturbances because housing in the city was so segregated that only a handful of students were affected by integration. Moreover, almost 90 percent of the 921 white children who were to have attended formerly-black schools quietly moved out of their neighborhoods over the summer. When the school year began, only 117 of them were left to integrate the black schools. Their numbers dropped very quickly, and soon voluntary desegregation in Kansas City fit the pattern found all over the country: Almost the only people who crossed the color line were the children of ambitious black parents who wanted their children to attend white schools.

Whites began to drift towards the suburbs, and in 1970 the school district lost its white majority for the first time. Most schools, however, were still either overwhelmingly white or overwhelmingly black. By the mid-1970s, two-thirds of the students were black, and the district was showing all the stigmata of a black institution: crumbling buildings, poor discipline, declining test scores.

With so few white students to go around, meaningful integration was no longer possible, and by 1977, the school board was desperate. That year, it sued everyone in sight, in the hope of dragging 18 white, suburban school districts into a single, huge district. Forced busing would then flush precious white children out of the suburbs to rejuvenate Kansas City; and the suburbs would be taxed to pay for it.

Judge Russell Clark got the case but did not make important decisions until six years later. In 1984, he let the terrified suburbs off the hook. Following a 1974 U.S. Supreme Court decision, he argued that since the suburban districts were not responsible for residential segregation they could not be forced into a shotgun marriage with Kansas City.

It was the next year, 1985, that he hit upon the final solution to the segregation problem: urban schools so extraordinary that bigoted whites would voluntarily abandon their suburbs and private schools to flock to the city and sit next to blacks.

Judge Clark was realistic enough to realize that these schools would have to be spectacular, and spectacular they are. Of the more than $1.4 billion that has been spent in ten years on this “desegregation” plan, $418 million has gone for renovation and new construction, though not always wisely. After a $1 million patch-up of Central High School did not raise it to Judge Clark’s standards, the old school was torn down and the district sank $32 million into a gleaming new one.

Paseo High was another school that Judge Clark pronounced unsalvageable. Built from a type of limestone found nowhere else in the country, it was a cherished architectural landmark. The judge didn’t care. Protesters watched in tears as the school was dynamited on his orders.

The district now has 12 brand new schools—scores of houses had to be bulldozed to make way for some of them—with equipment to make a teacher’s head swim: planetariums, olympic-size swimming pools with underwater observation windows, dust-free diesel mechanics rooms, at least one mock-United Nations wired for simultaneous interpretation, radio and television studios capable of real broadcasting, video editing and animation labs, a moot court complete with jury room and judges chambers, a model Greek village to teach participatory democracy, elementary schools with one personal computer for every two children, etc. etc. These are the famed “magnet schools” that were supposed to attract white children like so many iron filings.

Another $900 million has gone for special staff to operate these wonders, and across-the-board raises for teachers and administrators. There are German- and French-language elementary schools which, of course, must be staffed with native speakers. The former coach of the Soviet Olympic fencing team has been hired—along with an interpreter—to teach Missouri rubes the finer points of sword play. It has been, in short, an unprecedented orgy of spending, overseen by school superintendent, Walter Marks, who has been pleased to see the salary for his position leap from $75,000 to $140,000.

Where did the $1.4 billion come from? Judge Clark raised it through two astonishing acts of judicial dictatorship. In 1987, he unilaterally raised Kansas City property taxes, first from 2.05 percent to four percent and eventually 4.96 percent—the first time in American history that a federal judge has levied taxes. This breath-taking usurpation of power simply ignored an amendment to the Missouri constitution that requires a two-thirds supermajority vote to raise property taxes past 3.25 percent. Judge Clark even tried to impose a surcharge on income taxes, but an appeals court struck this down as an invasion of the province of the state legislature.

When it became clear that Kansas City could be bled no further, Judge Clark decided to pillage the state—but on what grounds? In a flourish of legal non-reasoning, he decided that the state had contributed to segregation in Kansas City by permitting such things as restrictive covenants in deeds and by doing nothing to mix up the races. In penance for these past crimes, the state has been forced to pay more than $800 million to make the city’s schools fit for suburban white people. Needless to say, the state attorney general has repeatedly contested this exaction, but until June (see below) had lost every court battle.

The astonishing thing is that ever since 1955 there has been no school segregation in Kansas City. By the time of Judge Clark’s decisions, no one was even pretending that the city or the state or the school district was discriminating. By no sane reading of civil rights laws can Kansas City be found guilty. It had bad public schools and two-thirds of the students were black. In the never-never land of Judge Clark’s mind, this was unacceptable. It could only be the result of racism, and not just any old racism; this was Government-perpetrated racism in violation of the United States Constitution.

Because he was springing to the defense of that holy document, he appointed himself school district dictator, with the power to eliminate everything he considered a “vestige” of discrimination. In a crowning act of folly, he decreed that he would continue to run the schools until the test scores of black children were appreciably the same as those of whites. So long as blacks did not do as well as whites, the segregation of ages past was still doing its evil work.

Complete Failure

What have been the results of this grand experiment? Instructional costs, not including costs of the building program, have more than doubled from $3,094 per pupil per year to $8,000 (during the same period, the state average rose from $2,470 to $3,760). Average classroom size has decreased from 38-47 to 22-27, and the number of school librarians has shot up from 13 to 56. Ten years ago the district had no “counselors” for elementary school students. Now it has 53 of them. All this luxury is lavished on only 36,350 students as opposed to a high of 69,000 in the 1950s. The overall operating budget has leapt in seven years from $142 million to $500 million while the number of students has stayed the same.

Whites have not behaved like iron filings. A comparison of the 1985-1986 school year—the first year of the “magnet” program—with that of 1992-93 shows that white attendance has continued to drop slightly, from 26.4 percent to 25.2 percent. Every year some 1,400 suburban students take the bus into town, but the white turnover rate is very high; most whites go back to suburbia after one or two years. The district has an annual “marketing and recruitment” budget of $1.8 million to lure other whites into town to take their places. Martin Luther King Middle School, which requires uniforms for all students and emphasizes the study of Latin grammar (!), has the best reputation among whites—and manages to attract only 55 students from the suburbs.

The small number of Kansas City whites who send their children to public schools have developed a recognizable pattern of patronizing only the lower grades. The racial performance gap is narrower at these ages and adolescence has not yet turned many blacks into predators and trouble-makers. When it is time to enter four or fifth grade, most white children go to the suburbs or to private school.

What effect has more than a billion dollars had on school performance? During the seven years of Judge Clark’s dictatorship, the dropout rate has climbed from 6.5 percent to 11.4 percent and the average daily senior high school attendance rate has dropped from 81.5 percent to 76.2 percent. The racial gap in achievement levels has remained unchanged, starting with a gap of several months in first grade and growing to two or three years by graduation. Test scores on standardized tests—essentially unchanged—are highest in the elementary grades, which have the most whites.

In short, nothing has turned out as Judge Clark hoped. It is probably true, as the district lamely argues, that even more whites would have fled the district were it not for fencing coaches and planetariums. The district is nevertheless more nonwhite than ever and the racial performance gap continues to yawn, just as it does in every school in every district in every city in every state.

In the white suburbs, in places like Raytown and Lee’s Summit, schools spend less than half the money Kansas City does on each student and get much better results. The Blue Springs district, for example, spends $3,403 per pupil compared to $8,000 per pupil in Kansas city. By the third grade, its students are already 70 to 80 points ahead of Kansas City on the Missouri standardized test (graded from 200 points to 595).

If anything, the school district faces its worst crisis ever. Superintendent Walter Marks, who happily spent hundreds of millions during his three years on the job, was fired in February. In 1994 he managed to find 14 reasons to leave town on school business. Worse still, during a paid leave of absence for back problems, he was filmed by a hidden Kansas City television crew carrying lumber into his new home in Florida. The crew also caught him bounding onto the airplane to come home, but by the time it got to Missouri he had to hobble off with a cane.

The search for a replacement has been hampered by a June decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that finally reins in Judge Clark, and may end the annual tribute from the state. In a 5-4 decision, in which the Clinton administration entered a motion in support of the status quo, the court invalidated most of Judge Clark’s efforts to fight “segregation.” Since the suburban school districts were not drawn along racial lines and cannot be blamed for “segregation” in Kansas City, Judge Clark did not have the authority to consider them as part of his solution. The actions he took to make the city schools more attractive to suburban students were therefore improper.

No one is going to make him tear down the luxury schools. However, he bypassed the collective bargaining procedure to grant raises to school employees in the hope of making the schools more attractive to suburban whites. The raises may be rolled back.

In a remarkable fit of common sense, the Supreme Court ruled that scores on standardized tests are a ridiculous measure of integration, and that the state of Missouri cannot be held financial hostage to poor black performance. After pouring over $800 million into this colossal blunder, the state may finally be off the hook.

Of course, Kansas City has become addicted to the $100 million or so every year that Judge Clark made the state hand over in operating expenses. The city is in a panic at the prospect of running the schools without state money. Once that money is gone, who is going to fix the video editing machine when it breaks down? Who is going to pay the security guards who keep the personal computers and machine shop tools from walking out the door? Who is even going to do simple maintenance on the huge, new, fancy school buildings?

To hazard a prediction, unless Kansas City can find fresh whites to bleed (see sidebar), in 10 years its public schools will be worse than ever. About the time the fencing coaches are laid off, the few remaining whites will lose their taste for the exotic and will clear out. The schools will become grimmer and more savage. As they do in Chicago, Newark, and the Bronx, exhausted teachers will maintain the barest facade of scholarship in what will come to resemble holding pens for young blacks and Hispanics. The only difference will be that in Kansas City, this familiar chaos will reign in what was once the most costly and ambitious school district in the country.

Of course, the Kansas City debacle has been a valuable experiment that has yielded fine data. Anyone but a dreamer could have predicted the results perfectly, but now they are clear enough to startle a liberal: (1) Not even the most opulent schools will tempt more than a handful of whites voluntarily to attend classes that are majority black, and (2) no amount of money can bridge the racial gap in academic performance.



As a KC resident I recall all the news about this. It never ends. The District is still in chaos, there is regular violence in the schools, scores are rock bottom and everyone that can makes damn sure their kids don't go to KCMO schools. KC is huge, city limits wise, and extends north of the Missouri river for 30 miles. Residents there (overwhelmingly white suburbs) were incensed that moves were being made to bus KCMO kids to their all white districts. The plan failed and resegregation is back on track. The fancy, state of the art schools built with the billions paid by taxpayers are routinely vandalized, some even burned. The only patrons of KCMO schools are those that can't get out.
The article posted and Gengi's comments afterwards illustrate what an utter disaster desegregation has been. It's not that I think that blacks should not be allowed at white schools. It's the judicial tyranny that attempted to force white kids to go to majority black schools that were not in their neighboorhood.

The original lawsuit {Brown v/s Board of Education} complained that a black kid had to pass a couple white schools to get to the black school, so why couldn't she just go to the white school. How did the brilliant judges fix this problem? By bussing white kids all over the place to achieve some ideal racial mixture.

Judges forgot that humans have free will and will not be treated as pawns for some jackass judge to achieve his perfect rainbow of colors at a given school. When faced with their children being bused to all black schools, whites either moved completely out of the district beyond the reach of judicial tyranny, or sent their kids to private schools. Meanwhile, the inner cities became more and more black, poorer and poorer.

I have personally been affected by this. For about six years I lived in a mostly white town surrounded by mostly black towns. It had one of the best school systems in the state of Illinois. Then there were some lawsuits, and the next thing you know our school system is integrated with the surrounding mostly black and far inferior school systems.

Suddenly test scores fell precipitously. There were fights, drug problems, racial tension. My son's school went from about ninety five percent white to seventy percent black.

Soon all of our friends were moving out of the town. Indeed, out of the county beyond the reach of lawsuits. After a couple of years, we followed. Moving to Indiana, to what is arguably the best school district in the state.

My son, who was one of the top ten students at his school in Illinois, tested into remedial English at his new school. He's finally back into normal English and stayed in advanced math.

Meanwhile, our old town {Crete, IL} now has one of the worst school districts in the state of Illinois.

The moral? All this concern with racial balance at schools serves only to drive all the whites completely out of the county and leaves no tax base to fund the black students that remain. Furthermore, it is a distraction from the real issues.

Students should go to school where they live.
If that means defacto segregation, so be it. Let the whites know their kids can safely go to their neighboorhood school without fear of being bussed into the ghetto, and some whites might just stay around. Then you can focus on education, not racial balance.

Also, this story puts paid to the notion that money has anything to do with education.

Forced integration simply will not work ...ever! In fact, think about it ......forced anything has never worked in almost any endeavor of mankind sicne the beginning of history. Oh, sure, maybe for a short, short time, but it was always a disaster-in-the-making ...even from the start.

Baron Max

forced anything can work if there is adequate education and familiarity. Note my conditions.

...In fact, think about it ......forced anything has never worked in almost any endeavor of mankind sicne the beginning of history....Perhaps a little over stated, but I think often this not incorrect; however, you seem to think/presume that segregation is somehow natural and "unforced." I think "segregation"* is one of he better examples of FORCED behavior being successful,** but note it is so because it is instilled at such an early age that it does not appear to be forced on you.

It seems to me that Breck (in “three penny opera” - I think) had how segregation is forced /created just about correct, or perfectly described:

"You have to be careful taught - before you are six or seven or eight - to hate all the people your relatives hate - you have to be taught, before it too late, to hate all the people your relatives hate." (or something like that in English translation for the German original.)

If you go see young children playing a orphanage or any place where the society has failed to teach much to them, including: to hate all the people your relatives hate, those ignorant (untaught) kids play together without regard to skin color or other racial characteristics.

Clearly your tacit assumption that segregation is natural and not FORCED onto children by the social indoctrination system - is false.
-------------------------------------------
* The segregation in India is not racial, but they need some help knowing who is high class (women with painted dot on center forehead) and who is not. That is also a forced segregation that, if you are non-Indian, you make more easily recognized as social force in action.
**"successful" in the Darwinian sense that it survives, not in the sense it is an aid to the society as good brains in the "wrong" bodies often fail to get developed to the detriment of the society. (However, the Baron and I have had this discussion before.)

forced anything can work if there is adequate education...I agree. note my post just made. I.e. many societies have adequate "education" to make segregation work.

If you go see young children playing a orphanage or any place where the society has failed to teach much to them, including: to hate all the people your relatives hate, those ignorant (untaught) kids play together without regard to skin color or other racial characteristics.

Clearly your tacit assumption that segregation is natural and not FORCED onto children by the social indoctrination system - is false.

As you might guess, we hear/read that bullshit often, but it's just one more idiotic ideal that doesn't and can't take into account the normal and natural ideal of the family structure.

Of course children are taught by their parents! What? ...you'd have all children taken at birth and raised by liberal doo-gooders?

No, you're making that statement with complete disregard of the basic human family structures and, I might add, the basic human rights that we all so dearly love to wave around in triumph.

So ...is this to say that you'd take away the rights of families and parents in order to FORCE your ways and methods and thoughts onto the children? And that's better?

Baron Max

I agree. note my post just made. I.e. many societies have adequate "education" to make segregation work.

Forced education? Take the kids from their parents and "teach them the "right" ways of the world"???

So ...you don't give a fuck about the parents' rights? You'd force integration education onto the little kids ......do it my way, goddammit, or we'll kill you!!!

Baron Max

As an alternative perspective, I can say that while here in South Africa there has been no forced desegregative bussing since Apartheid fell, from what I've seen the English speaking public schools have become quite well mixed and private schools are following (although more slowly). Afrikaans speaking schools more slowly yet since few black people wish to be educated in that language.

Many children are growing up without the prejudices of the previous generation.

Of course, unlike the US, blacks here are a definite majority, which might make a difference.

Once the colour barrier is breached, the largest barrier is, I think, language - mainly between whites (very few of which speak an African language, unfortunately) and those blacks who aren't proficient in English.

"You have to be careful taught - before you are six or seven or eight - to hate all the people your relatives hate - you have to be taught, before it too late, to hate all the people your relatives hate." (or something like that in English translation for the German original.)
That sounds remarkably like a song from the American Musical South Pacific (http://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/y/youvegottobecarefullytaught.shtml).

Once the colour barrier is breached, the largest barrier is, I think, language - mainly between whites (very few of which speak an African language, unfortunately) and those blacks who aren't proficient in English.

Interesting observation. And also interesting is that the blacks in America seem to be going out of their way to invent their own form of "english" as a way of defining their culture and ethicity ....instead of learning regular English as taught in schools and used in business. I.e, they're actually segragating themselves from the mainstream of American life ...doing it intentionally!

Baron Max

wht r u tlkng abt?

wht r u tlkng abt?

Very, very intelligent response, Nick! thanks,

Baron Max

...They're actually segragating themselves from the mainstream of American life ...doing it intentionally!....Baron MaxNo, you are presuming again.

The English dialect spoken by blacks has been well studied and conforms to the theory Chompsky has advance as part of man's natural linguistic genetic heritage (Its rules - internal structures, for example how a declarative sentence is converted into a question , things about how an "imbedded clause" can relate to the main part of the sentence etc - I have forgotten most of this, but it is amazing how all human languages are governed by a genetic endowment structure) A "intentionally developed" language, like Esperanto, is artificial and does not follow the "human system of languages" rules of our genes. A bunch of professor made it up, trying to make use of different language to give it international appeal - long before Chompsky totally changed what is "linguistics" (the study of language).

Typical of the true American black variant of English are structures that are wrong in Standard English but completely consistent, unlike Esperanto, with humanity’s genetic endowment. For example they will say: "He be coming tomorrow." instead of "He is coming tomorrow." Their version is no more wrong than old English of Queen Elizabeth’s time is wrong. I dare your to try to read even a page of Beowulf. - I tried once and what I could get from it was mostly due to fact I also knew German at that time.

All the modern linguists will tell you are wrong! - American black dialect or variant of English is a natural, not made up, language. Any historian of language will tell you that its roots/ structure are older than English and common to several still living African dialects.

Summary:
Your are just ignorantly presuming something that is demonstrably false. (However, you would need to understand more of what Chompsky has taught us about language to realize this.)

The English dialect spoken by blacks has been well studied and conforms to the theory Chompsky has advance as part of man's natural linguistic genetic heritage
Your are just ignorantly presuming something that is demonstrably false. (However, you would need to understand more of what Chompsky has taught us about language to realize this.)
Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.

Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.I agree. All who do not learn to speak the currently accepted version are "segregating themselves", and much worse, limiting their opportunities socially and economically. My point was they are not doing it "intentionally" -it is just a natural evolution of their African language structures adapting to living in a English dominant culture.

Have you ever been to Orakoke* Island, off the NC coast? 35 years ago (or more?) when I went camping there, I learned that scholars who want to understand the English of Queen Elizabeth’s time often come there, at least back then, as that was the only place in the world still speaking the English of Queen Elizabeth’s time. That is probably all destroyed now, with the children of these speakers working in some Hilton Hotel, speaking proper English to the guests. Ah "progress" is unstoppable!
-------------------
*spelled wrong very likely

I agree. All who do not learn to speak the currently accepted version are "segregating themselves", and much worse, limiting their opportunities socially and economically.

Okay! For all your learned bullshit in your earlier post, I see that you fully agree with me .....they're segragating themselves!!

So .....fuck 'em!

Baron Max

I always thought the purpose of busing was to get little kids used to the idea of long commutes.

I always thought the purpose of busing was to get little kids used to the idea of long commutes.
I guess that makes as much sence as the theory that black kids can't learn unless they're sitting next to a white kid.

From another thread:



The article posted and Gengi's comments afterwards illustrate what an utter disaster desegregation has been. It's not that I think that blacks should not be allowed at white schools. It's the judicial tyranny that attempted to force white kids to go to majority black schools that were not in their neighboorhood.

The original lawsuit {Brown v/s Board of Education} complained that a black kid had to pass a couple white schools to get to the black school, so why couldn't she just go to the white school. How did the brilliant judges fix this problem? By bussing white kids all over the place to achieve some ideal racial mixture.

Judges forgot that humans have free will and will not be treated as pawns for some jackass judge to achieve his perfect rainbow of colors at a given school. When faced with their children being bused to all black schools, whites either moved completely out of the district beyond the reach of judicial tyranny, or sent their kids to private schools. Meanwhile, the inner cities became more and more black, poorer and poorer.

I have personally been affected by this. For about six years I lived in a mostly white town surrounded by mostly black towns. It had one of the best school systems in the state of Illinois. Then there were some lawsuits, and the next thing you know our school system is integrated with the surrounding mostly black and far inferior school systems.

Suddenly test scores fell precipitously. There were fights, drug problems, racial tension. My son's school went from about ninety five percent white to seventy percent black.

Soon all of our friends were moving out of the town. Indeed, out of the county beyond the reach of lawsuits. After a couple of years, we followed. Moving to Indiana, to what is arguably the best school district in the state.

My son, who was one of the top ten students at his school in Illinois, tested into remedial English at his new school. He's finally back into normal English and stayed in advanced math.

Meanwhile, our old town {Crete, IL} now has one of the worst school districts in the state of Illinois.

The moral? All this concern with racial balance at schools serves only to drive all the whites completely out of the county and leaves no tax base to fund the black students that remain. Furthermore, it is a distraction from the real issues.

Students should go to school where they live.
If that means defacto segregation, so be it. Let the whites know their kids can safely go to their neighboorhood school without fear of being bussed into the ghetto, and some whites might just stay around. Then you can focus on education, not racial balance.

Also, this story puts paid to the notion that money has anything to do with education.

Segregation may end up being a good thing, if people are segregated by profession and criminal record.

However most of the time, people are segregated on appearance, and in this case it's as stupid as segregation by hair color and shoe size. To be accurate and rational with racial segregation, all tall blondes should have a state, all blonde midgets should have a state, all blonde criminals should have a state, all blonde artists should have a state. and then you can move on to the next hair color, and have all dark haired aryans in another state, seperating the talls from the short, the fat from the skinny, the smart from the dumb, the criminals from the non criminals, and then do the same with redheads, and once people are divided by hair color you can further divide people, so that all the people with clear skin and dark hair are seperate from all the people with dark skin and dark hair, and once again put everyone into their own little box, and finally divide people up by religion and culture.

The end result is, you'll only be around your kinda person, they will look as much like you as possible, they will think as much like you as possible, they will have emotions as much like yours as possible, and be about as intelligent as you are, they'll even have the same profession as you do.

So if you are a tall, thin, blonde haired blue eyed artist, who happens to be Christian, you'll have your own state and it will be for tall thin blonde Christian artists only, anyone else will require a special invitation to enter.

I guess that makes as much sence as the theory that black kids can't learn unless they're sitting next to a white kid.

Segregation will not be racial forever. When blacks and non-whites go extinct, segregation will be based on how thin you are, how tall you are, how blonde your hair is, and how blue your eyes are, among other things such as intelligence level, culture, and religion.

Genetic discrimination is genetic discrimination, you can call it race, you can call it old terms like black and white, but if there are no black people there will still be segregation, and maybe that's a good thing because obviously the majority of the world wants to put everyone into boxes, thats why race was invented in the first place.

So, if we look at the current society defined definition of beauty, tall blonde women who are thin, like say Paris Hilton, this is the master race. Segregation will work in her favor, if you look different from this, segregation will only work in your favor if you have someone lower on the ladder, like minorities, gays and others to live in the worlds ghettos and do all the difficult jobs. Race, like class, acts as a buffer, as long as there is someone a shade darker than you, or shorter than you, or with darker hair, or fatter, or in general just uglier than you by what society defines as ugly, then you gain all the advantages of society based on societies definition of beauty.

So, if you are blonde, with blue eyes, tall, thin, with a nice smile, then perhaps it actually is in your advantage to want segregation. If you don't look like this, segregation will not work in your advantage long term, because all it will do is create a ghetto for all but those who are most beautiful according to whatever society says is beautiful at the time.

Simply look at history, people who look "ugly" according to society, also happen to live in an ugly ghettofied environment. So now people associate beauty with wealth, self worth, and all of these other things. And of course it's the physical kind of beauty, so when you grow old it's all gone.

Who cares whether of not it is natural, it's not the language the rest of society speaks. By speaking a different language, whether it follows Chompsky's rules or not, blacks are segregating themselves.

Everything is white and black, black and white, up and down, left and right, one extreme or the other, 1 or 0, good or evil, right or wrong, I see right through your false binary logic here.

No one in this country speaks proper english. Arnold speaks just as bad as Kobe, who speaks just as bad as Pedro, who speaks just as bad as you do. You go to Europe, England, and you are the one who can't speak straight.

However most of the time, people are segregated on appearance, and in this case it's as stupid as segregation by hair color and shoe size. To be accurate and rational with racial segregation, all tall blondes should have a state, all blonde midgets...

I think you're viewing it all wrong! You seem to be talking of FORCED segragation, and I don't think that's the way it should be or will be.

I'm talking about VOLUNTARY segragation ...accordiing to distinct groups of people of like mind and likes and dislikes. If a group of whites form a town/city where they live as they want to live, with whom the wish to live, what's wrong with that? And if they don't want blacks or Mexicans in their town/city, what's wrong with that?

And that all goes the same for blacks ....if they want a town/city with all blacks and no whites, why shouldn't they be permitted to live as they wish to live? Why must someone FORCE them to accept people that they don't want in their town/city?

And it also goes for those whites who love blacks and blacks who love living with whites. Let them have their own mixed-race town/city, and they'll be happy and content.

If fat people want to form their own society, why should we force them to include skinny people that they don't want? And ditto for skinny people or short people or tall people or...?

Find the town/city/area that YOU like, be it mixed or otherwise, move there and be happy. What the fuck's wrong with that? Why should anyone be forced to include people that they don't like or want ....for whatever reason?

Remember .......IT'S VOLUNTARY SEGRAGATION!

Integration is nothing but FORCE applied to a people to try to make them "like" people that they don't like!

Baron Max

No one in this country speaks proper english. Arnold speaks just as bad as Kobe, who speaks just as bad as Pedro, who speaks just as bad as you do. You go to Europe, England, and you are the one who can't speak straight.
Arnold and Pedro {and my grandfather, for that matter} speak poorly because English is not their native tongue. They are immigrants. Learning to speak a new language without an accent as an adult is very difficult. Black Americans have no such excuse. They were born here and choose to speak differently from the rest of us.
Everything is white and black, black and white, up and down, left and right, one extreme or the other, 1 or 0, good or evil, right or wrong, I see right through your false binary logic here.
I do believe in right and wrong. good and evil. I admit it sometimes difficult to discern the truth, but that's not because it isn't there. A pattern of white and black lines will appear to be a uniform grey to an eye unable to resolve sufficient detail. But that doesn't make it so.

As far as segregation, you misunderstand my position. I'm simply saying that from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, desegregation has been a failure.

I believe this is due to the tactics used by judges to try to force people to do what they didn't want to do. For instance, you said:

Segregation may end up being a good thing, if people are segregated by profession and criminal record.
When I first moved to Crete, this was the case. Crete was a bedroom community of mostly upper-middle class people. Mostly, but not entirely white. It also had great schools, which is a big part of the reason that I moved there. The particular neighboorhood I lived in probably had more blacks than any other part of town. Hell, Farakhan's son lived on my street, and Bernie Mac lived down the road. There was no racial tension. Everyone got along. We all lived where we wanted to live with no judge forcing the matter.

But then some judge stepped in and merged our school district with a ghetto type school system in a nearby mostly black lower class town. The schools went to shit, and the white people all left. Most of them, including me, moved to Indiana to areas with good schools and no black areas near them for some judge to desegregate and destroy the town in the process.

People who care about their children will not stand by and let some judge turn them into political footballs being shipped all over town from the perfectly good school near there house to a crappy school in a bad neighboorhood. When faced with this situation, they vote with their feet and move beyond the reach of judicial tyranny. Leaving the minority students that much worse off. Their district, which once had some schools that were black and some that were white, but were all pretty good; are now uniformly black and uniformly bad. Who are we helping?

We should have banned laws which force segregation. Kids should go to school where they live, without regard for the racial makeup of their school. If the result is many schools remain segregated, so be it. Let them naturally desegregate over time.

Instead white people with kids immediately move out of big cities. To the point that most big cities have more cats than kids. Instead of having black neighborhoods and white neighborhoods where the kids might at least bump into each other from time to time; judges have forced whites to move to different counties or different states to avoid having their children bused into the ghetto. White kids grow up in areas with no blacks anywhere around. Still the judges continue to chase them further and further from big cities.

If black schools are bad, fix them. Trying to force white kids to go to black schools solves nothing and is counter-productive in the extreem.

...Kids should go to school where they live, without regard for the racial makeup of their school. If the result is many schools remain segregated, so be it. ...I agree with three conditions:
1) If anyone who can afford to is permitted to buy house where ever they like
and
2) If all schools have same financial support so that some do not have 20 kids / teacher and others 40 /kids per teacher etc. One have no library and others (like grade school my kids went to) more than 10,000 books in the library, lots of audio and video resources, a small animal zoo (with 7 different types of snakes, and an honored kid allowed to feed one a white mouse each week etc.) etc.
and
3) If all schools have equally well trained teachers. Perhaps achieved by:
3a) State teachers colleges etc charge zero tuition to students who agree to teach in assigned schools, which are required to achieve this equal opportunity, and
3b) Higher teacher salaries for schools in "less desirable" districts etc. AND these "extra costs" not to come out of item (2) but are supplemental federal funding.

This all no doubt will require some federal funding and over sight with standardized tests, but the administration of the schools should remain local, etc. Schools falling down on the standard test have IQs of students measured and see if this is cause of poor school averages etc. Perhaps the standard test results for the school are divided by the average IQ of the schools students and only if this index is significantly low are the teachers (who want to retain there jobs) required to go back to school themselves or take some teaching courses again etc.

Will you and the Baron agree to something like this? Or do you think the US should continue to loss by not developing all the best brains it has to their potential because some were born in districts that poorly fund their school or born in black bodies, etc. That old system of unequal schools was good for US when manual labor was more important, but now if US wants to compete it needs all the high quality brain power it can get - China is doing so and winning.

I think you're viewing it all wrong! You seem to be talking of FORCED segragation, and I don't think that's the way it should be or will be.
I never said I support forced segregation, but I also don't think most youth want to be segregated, it's usually old foreigners and natives who think in that old traditional worldview.


I'm talking about VOLUNTARY segragation ...accordiing to distinct groups of people of like mind and likes and dislikes.
I agree with this, if people want to form groups and communities I'm fine with that too. I think if segregation is voluntary it would be a good thing. Why wouldn't it be?

If a group of whites form a town/city where they live as they want to live, with whom the wish to live, what's wrong with that? And if they don't want blacks or Mexicans in their town/city, what's wrong with that?

Nothing is wrong with this, nothing at all, but if it's that simple, why don't we just do that, why don't we just give a state to the entire white supremist population? We can let each state decide if it wants to be racist or not, it's not like I'd care because I wouldn't live in one of those states anyway, and I think that would be a good thing because of the states which are segregated still have problems they won't be able to blame anyone but themselves. White people won't be able to blame the black man, and black people won't be able to blame the white man.


And that all goes the same for blacks ....if they want a town/city with all blacks and no whites, why shouldn't they be permitted to live as they wish to live? Why must someone FORCE them to accept people that they don't want in their town/city?
I completely agree.

And it also goes for those whites who love blacks and blacks who love living with whites. Let them have their own mixed-race town/city, and they'll be happy and content.

I completely agree, I think if segregation is legalized, each town should be able to define for itself, how it will segregate, what it's own definition of race and tribe is, and base it on whatever they want, not on skin color, but on whatever they want to define themselves as.


If fat people want to form their own society, why should we force them to include skinny people that they don't want? And ditto for skinny people or short people or tall people or...?


Find the town/city/area that YOU like, be it mixed or otherwise, move there and be happy. What the fuck's wrong with that? Why should anyone be forced to include people that they don't like or want ....for whatever reason?

Remember .......IT'S VOLUNTARY SEGRAGATION!

Integration is nothing but FORCE applied to a people to try to make them "like" people that they don't like!

Baron Max


Overall I agree with you, if segregation were like this, if it were based on natural forms of segregation that are voluntary and not forced, I think it wouldnt be such a bad idea. I don't support forced RACIAL segregation, but if people volunteer to join a certain tribe or a certain society, and that society has qualifications and traits they look for in the individual, fine. I think if people want to live among people like themselves it's not hurting me any.

Arnold and Pedro {and my grandfather, for that matter} speak poorly because English is not their native tongue. They are immigrants. Learning to speak a new language without an accent as an adult is very difficult. Black Americans have no such excuse. They were born here and choose to speak differently from the rest of us.

[B]You are just plain racist, as if any American speaks proper english. I can't understand what some of my brothers and sisters from the south are saying any more than I'd be able to understand what some in Canada or Europe would be saying, this is not just black and white.

I see you are only supporting racial segregation, you don't really care about the issue of it being helpful or hurtful, you so focused on black and white that you can't see the difference between intelligent and stupid. MOST Americans speak bad english.


I do believe in right and wrong. good and evil. I admit it sometimes difficult to discern the truth, but that's not because it isn't there. A pattern of white and black lines will appear to be a uniform grey to an eye unable to resolve sufficient detail. But that doesn't make it so.

As far as segregation, you misunderstand my position. I'm simply saying that from a purely pragmatic viewpoint, desegregation has been a failure.

I believe this is due to the tactics used by judges to try to force people to do what they didn't want to do. For instance, you said:

When I first moved to Crete, this was the case. Crete was a bedroom community of mostly upper-middle class people. Mostly, but not entirely white. It also had great schools, which is a big part of the reason that I moved there. The particular neighboorhood I lived in probably had more blacks than any other part of town. Hell, Farakhan's son lived on my street, and Bernie Mac lived down the road. There was no racial tension. Everyone got along. We all lived where we wanted to live with no judge forcing the matter.

But then some judge stepped in and merged our school district with a ghetto type school system in a nearby mostly black lower class town. The schools went to shit, and the white people all left. Most of them, including me, moved to Indiana to areas with good schools and no black areas near them for some judge to desegregate and destroy the town in the process.

People who care about their children will not stand by and let some judge turn them into political footballs being shipped all over town from the perfectly good school near there house to a crappy school in a bad neighboorhood. When faced with this situation, they vote with their feet and move beyond the reach of judicial tyranny. Leaving the minority students that much worse off. Their district, which once had some schools that were black and some that were white, but were all pretty good; are now uniformly black and uniformly bad. Who are we helping?

We should have banned laws which force segregation. Kids should go to school where they live, without regard for the racial makeup of their school. If the result is many schools remain segregated, so be it. Let them naturally desegregate over time.

Instead white people with kids immediately move out of big cities. To the point that most big cities have more cats than kids. Instead of having black neighborhoods and white neighborhoods where the kids might at least bump into each other from time to time; judges have forced whites to move to different counties or different states to avoid having their children bused into the ghetto. White kids grow up in areas with no blacks anywhere around. Still the judges continue to chase them further and further from big cities.

If black schools are bad, fix them. Trying to force white kids to go to black schools solves nothing and is counter-productive in the extreem.

I read your post, the reason that there are kids who speak different has nothing to do with skin color, can you understan d everything a whie kid says, or an asian kid? even if they are born in this country, there is no proper english, english is being redefined and new words are added every day. I'd say rap culture has added more new words to english than anything else, so now you have many new words created and added to the lexicon by black people, you have a more refined language, it's no longer english, it's American. What's wrong with America having it's own language? If you think only black people talk differently perhaps you should watch Eminem, or watch MTV more often, I doubt you'd understand the way youth talk these days. I consider it an evolution of language not something to attack. Are you going to attack all rappers or just bad rappers? Some rappers speak better english than we do, and can rhyme better than we can, and write better than most people, and they invent new words and expressions all the time. How many new words have you invented? You may not understand it but it's bad for this country to have.

Also, you are trying to reinforce your white and black, black and white worldview, which I don't really care for.
Hiphop is a culture not a race, as there are more white people listening to rap now than there are black people in this country. Why do you think Eminem is the best selling rapper? Because a lot of white kids listen to rap music, and it was the same with jazz, and rock, and every other type of music that black people invented. In 50 years all the best rappers will be white and you won't be talking about this anymore.

I agree with three conditions:
1) If anyone who can afford to is permitted to buy house where ever they like
and
2) If all schools have same financial support so that some do not have 20 kids / teacher and others 40 /kids per teacher etc. One have no library and others (like grade school my kids went to) more than 10,000 books in the library, lots of audio and video resources, a small animal zoo (with 7 different types of snakes, and an honored kid allowed to feed one a white mouse each week etc.) etc.
and
3) If all schools have equally well trained teachers. Perhaps achieved by:
3a) State teachers colleges etc charge zero tuition to students who agree to teach in assigned schools, which are required to achieve this equal opportunity, and
3b) Higher teacher salaries for schools in "less desirable" districts etc. AND these "extra costs" not to come out of item (2) but are supplemental federal funding.

This all no doubt will require some federal funding and over sight with standardized tests, but the administration of the schools should remain local, etc. Schools falling down on the standard test have IQs of students measured and see if this is cause of poor school averages etc. Perhaps the standard test results for the school are divided by the average IQ of the schools students and only if this index is significantly low are the teachers (who want to retain there jobs) required to go back to school themselves or take some teaching courses again etc.

Will you and the Baron agree to something like this? Or do you think the US should continue to loss by not developing all the best brains it has to their potential because some were born in districts that poorly fund their school or born in black bodies, etc. That old system of unequal schools was good for US when manual labor was more important, but now if US wants to compete it needs all the high quality brain power it can get - China is doing so and winning.

Your wording is more accurate than mine, I couldn't have said it better myself.

I think segregation is fine but it should not be based on stuff like race or class, I think people should choose their community based on who they are, not what they are.

Perhaps a little over stated, but I think often this not incorrect; however, you seem to think/presume that segregation is somehow natural and "unforced." I think "segregation"* is one of he better examples of FORCED behavior being successful,** but note it is so because it is instilled at such an early age that it does not appear to be forced on you.

It seems to me that Breck (in “three penny opera” - I think) had how segregation is forced /created just about correct, or perfectly described:

"You have to be careful taught - before you are six or seven or eight - to hate all the people your relatives hate - you have to be taught, before it too late, to hate all the people your relatives hate." (or something like that in English translation for the German original.)

If you go see young children playing a orphanage or any place where the society has failed to teach much to them, including: to hate all the people your relatives hate, those ignorant (untaught) kids play together without regard to skin color or other racial characteristics.

Clearly your tacit assumption that segregation is natural and not FORCED onto children by the social indoctrination system - is false.
-------------------------------------------
* The segregation in India is not racial, but they need some help knowing who is high class (women with painted dot on center forehead) and who is not. That is also a forced segregation that, if you are non-Indian, you make more easily recognized as social force in action.
**"successful" in the Darwinian sense that it survives, not in the sense it is an aid to the society as good brains in the "wrong" bodies often fail to get developed to the detriment of the society. (However, the Baron and I have had this discussion before.)


Here is an interesting, fair article on voluntary segregation. I think if it's done right it makes sense, colleges do it already. I think some people want to define segregation by appearance, which I don't really care about at all, while the other group wants to segregate by talent, ability, and personality/mind. I think if you look online, there is segregation even here, we don't tolerate trolls, we don't like ignorance on these sorts of forums, and we generally form groups even online, the difference is it's not based on appearance but on culture and the mind, and this form of segregation is a form almost everyone supports because we put it into practice everywhere. There are certain types of people I would not want to live around, but I don't base it on appearances. How many folks want to live around ignorant people?

Here is the article.

http://libertycorner.blogspot.com/2005/10/schelling-and-segregation.html

Tyler Cowen of Marginal Revolution, who was mentored by Thomas Schelling at Harvard, praises Schelling's Nobel prize by noting, among other things, Schelling's analysis of the economics of segregation:

Tom showed how communities can end up segregated even when no single individual cares to live in a segregated neighborhood. Under the right conditions, it only need be the case that the person does not want to live as a minority in the neighborhood, and will move to a neighborhood where the family can be in the majority. Try playing this game with white and black chess pieces, I bet you will get to segregation pretty quickly.

True, but trivial. For, like many game-theoretic tricks, Schelling's segregation gambit omits much important detail.

To begin with, blacks are not culturally homogeneous. Thomas Sowell argues, rather persuasively to this native of the North, that

[t]here have always been large disparities, even within the native black population of the U.S. Those blacks whose ancestors were "free persons of color" in 1850 have fared far better in income, occupation, and family stability than those blacks whose ancestors were freed in the next decade by Abraham Lincoln. . . .

The redneck culture [prevalent in the South] proved to be a major handicap for both whites and blacks who absorbed it. Today, the last remnants of that culture can still be found in the worst of the black ghettos, whether in the North or the South, for the ghettos of the North were settled by blacks from the South. The counterproductive and self-destructive culture of black rednecks in today's ghettos is regarded by many as the only "authentic" black culture--and, for that reason, something not to be tampered with. Their talk, their attitudes, and their behavior are regarded as sacrosanct.

The people who take this view may think of themselves as friends of blacks. But they are the kinds of friends who can do more harm than enemies.

As Sowell explains more fully in his essay "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" (from the eponymous book) Northerners were rather accepting of the blacks in their midst until the great migrations of Southern blacks to the North from the 1930s onward. Then whites began to flee the neighborhoods into which Southern blacks were moving. The "old line" blacks sought to do the same, but they had less success than whites because the "old line" blacks became identified with the uncouth intruders from the South.

It is therefore meaningless to treat segregation as a game in which all whites are willing to live with black neighbors as long as they (the whites) aren't in the minority. Most whites (including most liberals) do not want to live anywhere near any black rednecks if they can help it. Living in relatively safe, quiet, and attractive surroundings comes far ahead of whatever value there might be in "diversity."

"Diversity" for its own sake is nevertheless a "good thing" in the liberal lexicon. The Houston Chronicle notes Schelling's Nobel by saying that Schelling's work

helps explain why housing segregation continues to be a problem, even in areas where residents say they have no extreme prejudice to another group.

Segregation isn't a "problem," it's the solution to a potential problem. Segregation today is mainly a social phenomenon, not a legal one. It reflects a rational aversion on the part of whites to having neighbors whose culture breeds crime and other types of undesirable behavior.

As for what people say about their racial attitudes: Believe what they do, not what they say. Most well-to-do liberals choose to segregate themselves and their children from black rednecks. That kind of voluntary segregation, aside from demonstrating liberal hypocrisy about black redneck culture, also demonstrates the rationality of choosing to live in safer and more decorous surroundings.

Nor is segregation confined to cities. It has spread to the suburbs, as well, because black redneck culture has -- too commonly -- followed blacks there.




So you see in the article, it's not what the person or persons look like, it's their culture, it's how they think, that seperates people into the real groups they belong to. Appearance based segregation is just the lazy way of segregating, you can end up with a lot of people who look like you, but who bring your culture and society down due to how they live and think. In another example you can have people who look different from you, but who improve your society culturally and who have skills and talents, and it's always like this. There are builders, who build cultures, and then theres people who hide behind their race or appearance to blend in.

They desegregated the schools, but failed to integrate society, which is not something any gov institution can do, especially overnight, especially the Kansas school board. Why do you right wingers want to cut 'n run from the principles that made this nation great? Do you always give up the first time you try something?

They desegregated the schools, but failed to integrate society, which is not something any gov institution can do, especially overnight, especially the Kansas school board. Why do you right wingers want to cut 'n run from the principles that made this nation great? Do you always give up the first time you try something?
Nice use of the language of the right!

But, in my opinion, it is freedom that made this nation great. Freedom means you can live where you want. It means you can go to school in your own neighborhood. It does not advance freedom to ship kids around on buses to achieve a certain percentage of kids from each race at each school. The whole concept is in and of itself racist!

No race should be barred from living anywhere, but the government should not step in and ship children around based on their race. And judges shouldn't be allowed to alter the boundries of school districts or impose taxes! What happened to seperation of powers?

Nice use of the language of the right!

But, in my opinion, it is freedom that made this nation great. Freedom means you can live where you want. It means you can go to school in your own neighborhood. It does not advance freedom to ship kids around on buses to achieve a certain percentage of kids from each race at each school. The whole concept is in and of itself racist!

No race should be barred from living anywhere, but the government should not step in and ship children around based on their race. And judges shouldn't be allowed to alter the boundries of school districts or impose taxes! What happened to seperation of powers?
If a country, state, city is emerging from an era of apartheid or racial segregation as in the USA how do you even the playing field? Do you keep the race in the worst housing in their place? Of course not. This is the problem in my view; Laws made enforced segregation illegal but how did we change how and where we live? I know in most US cities this fundamental issue hasn't been addressed at this late date. Fencing in the poor in poor areas is REsegregation.

They desegregated the schools, but failed to integrate society, which is not something any gov institution can do, especially overnight, especially the Kansas school board. Why do you right wingers want to cut 'n run from the principles that made this nation great? Do you always give up the first time you try something?

The reason intergration has not worked is right and left wingers keep adding more and more new immigrants that none of us know or trust. If you just open the boarder and let everyone in all the time, with no filter, no test, no quality control, it creates a perpetual lower class. This is deliberate because people at the top no matter what their political philosophy, like having people at the bottom, even the middle class likes having people below them on the ladder. What you have to understand is, there are many minorities here who are intergrated, so intergration does happen, but it happens slowly, it takes a generation or more. Immigration is happening at a rate that is faster than intergration can happen, and the only way we will solve the intergration problem is to close the borders, at least for now.

I know that this is not politically popular as a solution, but a lot of the anger and hatred is coming from the fact that we as a country like to bring in the least educated immigrants. I'm for immigrants, I think we should keep bringing them in, but don't control who were bring in, they bring themselves in, and it's a surprise that people from other countries all around the world arent just coming into this country through mexico, or maybe they are?

Look, how are we supposed to intergrate society when we keep bringing in people faster than we can desegregate? I'd say that black people and asians are intergrating, it's happening slowly, but you have a middle class, an upper class, all the way up to millionaire, and in the case with blacks in this country it's full intergration, because there is no Africa or African country to be loyal to, as most are as intergrated as a native could be. In the Asian perspective, you have Asians who are successful going to good schools, and doing well, and while some of them may be loyal to their country of origin, there is still not a lot of them so in general they are intergrating very well.

Most people seem worried in specific about hispanics, mexicans in specific, because this group is now the second largest group in the united states, and people fear the Mexicanization of America. People fear, that too many are coming at once, people don't fear the fact that they come.

If you have been here for a few generations, usually you'll be middle class, you'll have something to lose, and you'll be loyal to this country. If you've been here less than a generation, who knows where your loyalties lie. You could be loyal to your country of origin and not to the American collective.

Race, at least to me has nothing to do with the issue, I don't care what they look like, when a lot of foreign people come into a country, that can cause trouble and usually problems for the people already established. That's all it is, it's the natives vs the foreigners, and the natives being the middle class, and in some cases the upper class, the middle class exists because there is immigration so they favor immigration, but the middle class favors controlled immigration, so there can be quality control and to avoid inviting criminals, or just people with the wrong psychological profile or backround. It also helps if we invite people who actually have a degree, because to be honest, there wont be enough jobs for uneducated people, and they'll just end up in ghettos commiting crimes and hustling, and we already have a big enough uneducated class. So in my opinion, we should invite the educated classes only, if you want to go to school here you can come here, if you can at least get an associates degree, you can stay here. This way a person would have to learn english, and would have to come here with the intent to work.

We should reward people who come here for the right reasons, we should welcome immigration, and in my opinion instead of ignorantly segregating by race, or by excluding entire neighborhoods, we should have cultural segregation. Look, if you want to go to school and you want to be successful, you should be able to live with others who want to be successful and make this country better, but if you want to isolate yourself, and be among your own, and never learn the language,
why would we trust this group we cannot even communicate with to know why they are here?

So my take on immigration, it should be slowed or stopped altogether until the war on terrorism is over, it makes no sense to be fighting the war on terrorism with the border wide open. The advantage should go to legal immigrants, and people who have been here for at least two generations. If your family is a known family, who has been here for a long time, the advantage should go to you, and the longer your family has been here, the bigger your advantage should be, because if your ancestors built this country, of course you should have a greater stake in this country than someone who comes here from an unknown land through Mexico (notice I say through Mexico). At this point, the current way we handle immigration only increases Xenophobia, the issue is worse than the gay marriage issue which increases Homophobia, I'm for civil unions, not only do I think gays should be able to marry, I think men and women should be able to have multiple wives. I'm consistant, but I call it civil unions because gay marriage is the absolute worst way possible to frame it, and it's not really benefiting anyone, not gays, not polygamists, not polyamorists, or any of the others who might support increasing marriage rights but who are religious and conservative. Gay marriage makes it seem like gay couples want to hiijack the Christian religion, or religion itself, with the priest involved in the church and thats something I could never support, because the bible itself says it's wrong.

Simple, support quality over quantity in immigration, support increased marriage or union rights, a person should be able to marry as many people as they can legally afford to. Two men should be able to marry, or two women, or a collective of men and women if they choose.

If a country, state, city is emerging from an era of apartheid or racial segregation as in the USA how do you even the playing field? Do you keep the race in the worst housing in their place? Of course not. This is the problem in my view; Laws made enforced segregation illegal but how did we change how and where we live? I know in most US cities this fundamental issue hasn't been addressed at this late date. Fencing in the poor in poor areas is REsegregation.
You help the minorities by treating them like everyone else. Same rules, not special treatment. Over time, things will sort themselves out.

Programs designed to accelerate the natural process have had the opposite effect. Special rules and special treatment for minorities reinforces the notion that they are inferior and dependent of the massa for everything. It creates a culture of dependency.

Here's a great article that amply demonstrates why no sane person would ever want his children bused into an inner city school.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_1_how_i_joined.html
That hell hole is what my son's school was turning into after forcible integration. Conversely, the school he's at now is the epitome of order and learning. Disruption of class is not tolerated. Students who cause trouble are shipped out to a reform school. First temporarily, then permanently.

Let's be honest, most of the problems at inner city schools have nothing to do with money. As the article at the begining of this thread points out. The problems are mostly self imposed. Out of control kids, a total breakdown of the family unit, no respect for authority. A culture that considers getting good grades to be "acting white".

You help the minorities by treating them like everyone else. Same rules, not special treatment. Over time, things will sort themselves out.

Programs designed to accelerate the natural process have had the opposite effect. Special rules and special treatment for minorities reinforces the notion that they are inferior and dependent of the massa for everything. It creates a culture of dependency.

Here's a great article that amply demonstrates why no sane person would ever want his children bused into an inner city school.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_1_how_i_joined.html
That hell hole is what my son's school was turning into after forcible integration. Conversely, the school he's at now is the epitome of order and learning. Disruption of class is not tolerated. Students who cause trouble are shipped out to a reform school. First temporarily, then permanently.

Let's be honest, most of the problems at inner city schools have nothing to do with money. As the article at the begining of this thread points out. The problems are mostly self imposed. Out of control kids, a total breakdown of the family unit, no respect for authority. A culture that considers getting good grades to be "acting white".Trans-generational poverty and maintaining segregation era divisions of class & race are the problem, as I mentioned. A family that has never seen success will have no clue as to how they can break out of state imposed ignorance. Those with means moved away from the problem they themselves created for other people. Something with dire consequences for generations. If one thinks getting good grades in school equals success, inside the ghetto, they are badly mistaken. An overhaul of how we live and where we live is needed in most US cities. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Americans lived in 3rd World squalor before Katrina even hit is evidence enough for the world to see that the USA, mightiest, wealthiest nation on Earth (behind UAE, Bahrain, Oman and Qatar) still economically enforces a caste system.

The article which is posted at the beginning of this thread was an article I posted in another thread. In actuality, the article isn't really about segregation, it was about the folly of a liberal judge who thought he could improve the educational results of poor performing Blacks by spending a gazillion dollars on education.

Ironically in another article that can be found on amren.com there is a Black Nebraskan state senator that wants to reintroduce segregation in the belief that it will improve Black education performance.

The article which is posted at the beginning of this thread was an article I posted in another thread. In actuality, the article isn't really about segregation, it was about the folly of a liberal judge who thought he could improve the educational results of poor performing Blacks by spending a gazillion dollars on education.

Ironically in another article that can be found on amren.com there is a Black Nebraskan state senator that wants to reintroduce segregation in the belief that it will improve Black education performance.Two bad ideas don't equal a good idea.

The article which is posted at the beginning of this thread was an article I posted in another thread. In actuality, the article isn't really about segregation, it was about the folly of a liberal judge who thought he could improve the educational results of poor performing Blacks by spending a gazillion dollars on education.

Ironically in another article that can be found on amren.com there is a Black Nebraskan state senator that wants to reintroduce segregation in the belief that it will improve Black education performance.

How is it that the word segregation, education, and black are always used in the same paragraph when racists discuss segregation? Can we ever talk about real segregation, or is segregation, just a black thing now?

How is it that the word segregation, education, and black are always used in the same paragraph when racists discuss segregation? Can we ever talk about real segregation, or is segregation, just a black thing now?

It's probably used in the context of Blacks because White parents don't have to worry about their kids being robbed and attacked when they send their kids to schools full of Japanese kids.

http://www.jtf.org/america/america.whites.go.to.black.school.htm

Ken and Lisa Brown relocated their family from a small Oklahoma town to Brooklyn, New York because they wanted their children to experience "racial diversity." What their two young sons experienced was vicious black racism, jealousy and violence.

Lisa, 33, placed her two sons, Sloan, 12, and J.T., 13, in the Ebbets Field Middle School in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.

As soon as her sons arrived, the black "security guard" who is paid by the taxpayers to protect the children in school said, "Oh my gosh, we are going to have fun this year."

Sloan was beaten mercilessly by black students who called him "cracker" and "white boy." He was eventually chased into traffic by his new black "classmates."

- snip -

You help the minorities by treating them like everyone else. Same rules, not special treatment. Over time, things will sort themselves out.

Programs designed to accelerate the natural process have had the opposite effect. Special rules and special treatment for minorities reinforces the notion that they are inferior and dependent of the massa for everything. It creates a culture of dependency.

Here's a great article that amply demonstrates why no sane person would ever want his children bused into an inner city school.
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_1_how_i_joined.html
That hell hole is what my son's school was turning into after forcible integration. Conversely, the school he's at now is the epitome of order and learning. Disruption of class is not tolerated. Students who cause trouble are shipped out to a reform school. First temporarily, then permanently.

Let's be honest, most of the problems at inner city schools have nothing to do with money. As the article at the begining of this thread points out. The problems are mostly self imposed. Out of control kids, a total breakdown of the family unit, no respect for authority. A culture that considers getting good grades to be "acting white".


You don't know much, I went to inner city schools, or whatever you want to call schools are are in poor neighborhoods. I can say the main reason these schools arent any good is because all of the schools generally suck, it has nothing to do with the race of the students or the culture when 50% of all students who go to school in certain states drop out, thats not the student, thats the system. If we had 50% unemployement and we blamed employees for it, thats how ridiculous it would sound.

Unless you have gone to one of these schools, and managed to graduate, I don't think you are qualified to make any comment on this topic. You went to an elite private school, or an elite public school, so what would you know?

Also, don't group entire cities, or entire schools by culture, thats a bit ridiculous. There is no single culture of any group, so to say that a certain group thinks this or thinks that, is just racist, it's as racist as someone claiming that all whites agree with the holocaust, or that all whites support homosexuality. Just because some do, it does not mean that the entire group does, and if you cannot see the culture has nothing to do with race, you are not qualified to comment on this subject.

Did you even read the URL I posted? It clearly seperates race from culture, you have redneck culture, the white trash version and the black trash version, then you have those who are acting white by going to college as opposed to acting white by going to prison. Let's face it, theres not a single human in this country who is success at anything who isnt acting white, if you like money you are acting white, if you speak english you are acting white, and the idiots who say that getting an education is acting white, are simply acting stupid. You have white people who say the same sorts of things, equally stupid things, and you know what I'm talking about so why pretend like it's the skin gene that makes people stupid suddenly? It's simple, if someone said to you to stop acting black, they are a racist. If someone says to you to stop acting white, they are a racist. It's that simple. That's not the majority of the people in inner city schools, or the majority of people living in inner cities, it's the few.

The main problem in any school is not the students, sure there are students who have problems, emotionally, or cultural problems, but columbine happened in a public school too and these were two white kids. So you have to understand that culture has nothing to do with the school, or even the parents, and it has more to do with the media.

The truth is, the reason kids (white/black/whatever), don't value school is because they aren't learning how to survive. If you live in a ghetto, highschool teaches you nothing of value, it does not teach you how to make money, it does not teach you how to avoid the gangs, the drugs, all the traps of life that you'll have to deal with that a rich elitist will never face. It does not tell you anything about real history because you'll only get a very European point of view. It does not teach you anything you want to learn, and most of the teachers clearly hate you guts and want to pressure you to drop out. In this environment, even a brilliant student can be convinced that society does not want him or her. Combine this with the media, do you see a lot of non-whites on TV doing anything besides making music, sports, or acting? Do you see any women on TV in positions like CEO? Sure you can name Martha Stewert, and Oprah, but to be honest, there are millions of Martha Stewerts and Oprah's, yet still in 2006, all kids see on TV is skinny tooth pick model looking women who only value themselves as sex objects, you see rappers who still live in the ghetto bragging about it, and none of it is reality.

In reality, the average black person works a day job, gets up every morning and drives to work, or perhaps delivers mail, or maybe is a doctor, lawyer, ceo, professor, programmer, you get the point. You have women who are also doctos, lawyers, ceos, professors and programmers. Yet somehow the media chooses to display women like objects, like they aren't even human, to the point where women don't even control the clothing designs they wear. The source of this is all down to PR, marketing, image control, and whoever controls the image, has control of the self esteem.

There are two groups, the group that has very few family members who are doctors, lawyers, professionals with college degrees, masters degrees, phds, etc, and then you have the other group, the group where everyone in the family has at least a bachelors degree, masters degree or phd, and everyone who has two parents with a bachelors expects their kid to get a masters, and everyone who has two parents with a masters expects their kid to get a phd, and everyone with two parents with a phd expects their kid to get a phd and a bachelors, and it just goes on and on, and this is the opposite culture, and it has nothing to do with race because if you go to college, or university, most of the people there, also had parents who went there or who were there. That's just how it is.

The fact that you have black people with phds, and who have kids with phds, yet you never see them on TV, don't you think something is wrong with this image? There are literally millions of these people, yet everytime you see someone on TV with any sorta degree they happen to usually be, white and male. Accident?

It's not just college achievement, Collin Powell is black, many politicians are black, many politicians are women, many airforce pilots (actually the best pilots), are women. So there is no black culture, or white culture, there is a ghetto and or trailer culture, and this group of people exists in every race, yours too.

You cannot help the people who just have the ghetto/trailer inside them, but you can help the people whom you know have potential and who simply lack a self esteem, especially when they are teenagers or kids, if these kids are feeling like this it's your fault because the youth are your responsiblity as an ethical member of society. If you just keep ignoring a problem it's not going to go away, it becomes a columbine, it becomes a situation where you have to pay all this money to keep people in prison when you could have paid to put them in college. What are you going to do about it, besides complain? I'd suggest if you want to fix this, first recognize that the media brainwashes a lot of kids into thinking school is for whites, and thats because every professor or educated person in a suit and tie you see on TV happens to be white, so it's not difficult to see these pictures and come to that conclusion. It's more difficult if there are more faces on TV, more diverse faces. I'm sure there are women who think that a woman can never be president, before Martha, women thought they couldn't be CEO, there was a time when women couldn't even work.

It's probably used in the context of Blacks because White parents don't have to worry about their kids being robbed and attacked when they send their kids to schools full of Japanese kids.
Send the kid to Chinatown and see if the kid gets scammed out of money, robbed, etc. Japanese don't even make up 1% of the population, so try choosing the biggest group of Asians at least if you want to discuss this group. If we only had 1% of the population black, and only the blacks who were most successful, then you'd send your kid to school with Bill Cosbys son and it wouldnt be a big deal. However, what makes you think that Bill Cosbys son would want to go to school with your racist kid, or with the kid who is ghettofiid? By the way, Bill Cosbys son was killed by a white male. He never was a gang member, but a college student, what say you of this?


http://www.jtf.org/america/america.whites.go.to.black.school.htm

Ken and Lisa Brown relocated their family from a small Oklahoma town to Brooklyn, New York because they wanted their children to experience "racial diversity." What their two young sons experienced was vicious black racism, jealousy and violence.
Delete the word "black" and just say they experienced vicious racism and violence. Have you ever been to Japan? If you sent your kid to school in Japan they will experience vicious racism and violence. The Japanese are racist too, surprised?

Lisa, 33, placed her two sons, Sloan, 12, and J.T., 13, in the Ebbets Field Middle School in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.

As soon as her sons arrived, the black "security guard" who is paid by the taxpayers to protect the children in school said, "Oh my gosh, we are going to have fun this year."

Yeah so? The white security guard would have done the exact same thing to a random black kid if the situation were reversed. Racists think alike, it's not like it matters how they look.


Sloan was beaten mercilessly by black students who called him "cracker" and "white boy." He was eventually chased into traffic by his new black "classmates."

People get bullied everywhere, black kids get bullied by black kids and I dont' see you defending the victim then. You don't care about kids, or victims, you just care about the look of a persons skin.

- snip -


I can see from this post and your weak arguement, that you don't care about humans, you don't care about people, you just care about race, in specific, skin, in specific, clear skin, because there is no such thing as a white anyway.

Trans-generational poverty and maintaining segregation era divisions of class & race are the problem, as I mentioned. A family that has never seen success will have no clue as to how they can break out of state imposed ignorance. Those with means moved away from the problem they themselves created for other people. Something with dire consequences for generations. If one thinks getting good grades in school equals success, inside the ghetto, they are badly mistaken. An overhaul of how we live and where we live is needed in most US cities. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Americans lived in 3rd World squalor before Katrina even hit is evidence enough for the world to see that the USA, mightiest, wealthiest nation on Earth (behind UAE, Bahrain, Oman and Qatar) still economically enforces a caste system.

It's true, I've been to Europe, the ghettos in the US were among the most brutal that I've seen.

Look, a lot of people, racist people,they don't care about the human condition, and it does not matter if you are black white or asian racist. Many people just don't care about people, humans, or anything of this sort, they don't care that people live in ghettos, they don't care that people live in misery, they don't care about people in Africa dying of aids, or people in America dying of poverty, or people right next door to them. That's the simple truth, people don't care about people, people care about appearance, and it's more important to look good on the outside than to be a good person. It's simple, it's a lack of compassion, an empathy deficit that causes this. If you can feel empathy, then you'll know that the world does not have to be a giant misery engine.

The only thing that matters ultimately is the human condition. The condition of the least among us, the condition of the lowest on the ladder, it reveals our character as a country, and to be honest, it makes us look ugly to have people living in ghettos in the richest country in the world. Sadly, people don't seem to care about how America as a country looks, do we? Physical beauty can only take you so far, it cannot defend the soul of a nation, and it cannot earn the respect of the world or win the moral high ground. Katrina did not reveal the ghetto, most of the world already knew about ghettos and poverty just by listening to gangster rap, Katrina, it showed our soul as a country. Some people will view Katrina as something positive, some people will view it as something negative, but it's out there at this point and it was seen all around the world.

Originally Posted by Count Sudoku

It's probably used in the context of Blacks because White parents don't have to worry about their kids being robbed and attacked when they send their kids to schools full of Japanese kids.

Send the kid to Chinatown and see if the kid gets scammed out of money, robbed, etc. Japanese don't even make up 1% of the population, so try choosing the biggest group of Asians at least if you want to discuss this group.

Even when Chinatown was poor, in most cities it was a relatively safe place to be. I'll give you a choice of being dropped off in the middle of Chinatown or the Blackest part of town in any city. Which would you choose to go to?

If we only had 1% of the population black, and only the blacks who were most successful, then you'd send your kid to school with Bill Cosbys son and it wouldnt be a big deal.

That's right!, if Blacks were as successful and law abiding as Jews most people would have no problem sending their White kids to a Black school. However, that isn't the case, which proves us "racists" don't care about skin color, we care about the stupidity and violence of people who just happen to have Black skin.

However, what makes you think that Bill Cosbys son would want to go to school with your racist kid, or with the kid who is ghettofiid? By the way, Bill Cosbys son was killed by a white male. He never was a gang member, but a college student, what say you of this?

I'd say there's a first time for everything.

http://www.jtf.org/america/america....lack.school.htm

Ken and Lisa Brown relocated their family from a small Oklahoma town to Brooklyn, New York because they wanted their children to experience "racial diversity." What their two young sons experienced was vicious black racism, jealousy and violence.

Delete the word "black" and just say they experienced vicious racism and violence. Have you ever been to Japan? If you sent your kid to school in Japan they will experience vicious racism and violence. The Japanese are racist too, surprised?

No, I know all about racist Asians and Blacks for that matter. Apparently it's only a big deal when Whites are racist. Part of that "White privilege" I hear about so often. As for the Japanese, while they may be openly racist to Blacks in public, they don't usually physically attack anyone. Of the cases where an American soldier rapes a Japanese woman, guess the race of the soldier most of the time.

Lisa, 33, placed her two sons, Sloan, 12, and J.T., 13, in the Ebbets Field Middle School in Crown Heights, Brooklyn.

As soon as her sons arrived, the black "security guard" who is paid by the taxpayers to protect the children in school said, "Oh my gosh, we are going to have fun this year."

Yeah so? The white security guard would have done the exact same thing to a random black kid if the situation were reversed. Racists think alike, it's not like it matters how they look.

No, it's not the same. A few Blacks in an all White school are far safer than a few Whites in an all Black school.

Sloan was beaten mercilessly by black students who called him "cracker" and "white boy." He was eventually chased into traffic by his new black "classmates."

People get bullied everywhere, black kids get bullied by black kids and I dont' see you defending the victim then. You don't care about kids, or victims, you just care about the look of a persons skin.

Trust me, when a White person gets attacked by a minority, (which happens way more often than the reverse), it makes my fucking blood boil. It would be more than my pleasure to dispense justice to the perpatrators.

I can see from this post and your weak argument, that you don't care about humans, you don't care about people, you just care about race, in specific, skin, in specific, clear skin, because there is no such thing as a white anyway.

Dickhead, if you think I am "racist" simply because of skin color, you are even dumber than I thought. I judge Black people by their actions, not their skin color and as Katrina and the LA riots demonstrated, a lot of Black people have been found wanting. Furthermore, I don't consider all Black people to be stupid degenerate criminals. Bill Cosby for example is not the problem.

I can see from this post and your weak argument,

What argument? I just made a few statements.

that you don't care about humans, you don't care about people, you just care about race, in specific, skin, in specific, clear skin, because there is no such thing as a white anyway.

That is total bullshit and even Blacks know better than that. Next time there's a race riot and Blacks go attacking every White person they can find and they find you, tell them there's no such thing as race or White people and see how well that works.

...It's simple, it's a lack of compassion, an empathy deficit that causes this. If you can feel empathy, then you'll know that the world does not have to be a giant misery engine....That is probably true, but not the only reason for trying to extend an equal opportunity to all of your society / nation.

Some people are so well trained in the childhood to look down upon (even hate) and distrust some groups that they will never be capable of feeling "empathy" for the group they have been conditioned against. Often the dynamics of the society (lower quality education and less good jobs, even less pay for same job) makes the average member of the disadvantage group more likely to full fill these expectations (be they "women are not good at science" or "blacks are lazy thieves /drug dealers," etc.)

I grew up in the Deep South and was so conditioned, but in college I began to realize the cost to society of these self-fulfilling conditioning. This cost is most obvious in the crimes and resulting prison expenses, etc. but my main concern now is the lack of full utilization of the available potential brainpower.

Imagine if the society did not allow women (or redheaded men) to go to college. - That would really hurt society. Not providing equal opportunity to all - hurts all.

You do not need to have "empathy" to be against discrimination that is focused on a group instead of each individual, regardless of their group. Intelligent discrimination is to be encouraged and if this is done, the stupid “group form” now so common will be reduced.

All that is required to achieve this is intelligence* - to produce the understanding that you, yourself will be better off if all brain power available in your society is extended the same opportunity to develop its full potential.

A couple of generations ago, this was not true. Then it was a good idea (from the POV of the society, not the afflicted individual) to deny good educational opportunity to many as society needed many low-cost hands to till the earth, dig the minerals, work in sweat shops, etc. but now what will make or break the US economy is brain power, not mussel power. It is now a question of national survival, not "empathy," that demands we get ALL the brains developed well, regardless of the color or sex of the body they happen to be in. Because of my early childhood conditioning, I do not feel much "empathy," for those being discriminated against - Now, now that I understand what modern society needs (brain power) my main concern is for my grandchildren still trapped in the already declining (wrt to Asia) US and somewhat for #1 (but I am safely in rapidly growing / improving Brazil.)
-----------------------------------------------
*Unfortunately, judging by many posting here, there seems to be a lack of this intelligence also.

[QUOTE=Billy T]That is probably true, but not the only reason for trying to extend an equal opportunity to all of your society / nation.

Some people are so well trained in the childhood to look down upon (even hate) and distrust some groups that they will never be capable of feeling "empathy" for the group they have been conditioned against.

Or more likely they started having enough bad experiences to get in tune with reality.

Often the dynamics of the society (lower quality education and less good jobs, even less pay for same job) makes the average member of the disadvantage group more likely to full fill these expectations (be they "women are not good at science" or "blacks are lazy thieves /drug dealers," etc.)

I grew up in the Deep South and was so conditioned, but in college I began to realize the cost to society of these self-fulfilling conditioning.

i.e. some liberals brainwashed me with bullshit.

This cost is most obvious in the crimes and resulting prison expenses, etc. but my main concern now is the lack of full utilization of the available potential brainpower.

Yeah right, Black people commit gangrape because the "full utilization" of their brainpower isn't being used.

Imagine if the society did not allow women (or redheaded men) to go to college. - That would really hurt society. Not providing equal opportunity to all - hurts all.

Having women in college and the workforce in general is causing a demographic deathspiral which will spell the end of our civilization.

As for "equal opportunity", Blacks have more than equal opportunity. Colleges would be tripping all over themselves to discriminate against Whites if they could find Black students whose educational achievements were even close to Whites.

You do not need to have "empathy" to be against discrimination that is focused on a group instead of each individual, regardless of their group. Intelligent discrimination is to be encouraged and if this is done, the stupid “group form” now so common will be reduced.

Tell me, are you practicing general or specific discrimination when you refuse to walk through Detroit in the middle of the night?

All that is required to achieve this is intelligence* - to produce the understanding that you, yourself will be better off if all brain power available in your society is extended the same opportunity to develop its full potential.

Well no shit, but you assume Blacks and Whites are intellectual equals which is not true which is why you will never be able to square that circle.

A couple of generations ago, this was not true. Then it was a good idea (from the POV of the society, not the afflicted individual) to deny good educational opportunity to many as society needed many low-cost hands to till the earth, dig the minerals, work in sweat shops, etc. but now what will make or break the US economy is brain power, not mussel power.

This is actually something I do agree with. The average job of modern society is requiring higher and higher IQ while average IQ is no doubt getting lower because of societal dysgenics.

It is now a question of national survival, not "empathy," that demands we get ALL the brains developed well, regardless of the color or sex of the body they happen to be in. Because of my early childhood conditioning, I do not feel much "empathy," for those being discriminated against - Now, now that I understand what modern society needs (brain power) my main concern is for my grandchildren still trapped in the already declining (wrt to Asia) US and somewhat for #1 (but I am safely in rapidly growing / improving Brazil.)

I wouldn't say Brazil is improving. I would say that China is going to kick our ass because they don't believe in this multicultural bullshit and the average Chinese is going to be a lot smarter than the average "American" of the future.

To Count Sudoku"

Nothing in your "reply" merits comment, but I will correct one misunderstanding:

I agree many colleges would give preference to a qualified black applicant - exactly my point - there are too few as they (generally speaking) went to inferior schools and are not well qualified. I was mainly speaking of the educational opportunities in the primary and secondary levels not college.

It may be true that the native IQ potential of blacks is slightly less than white's native IQ, by about the same mount that white IQs on average are less than oriental ones. The difference between these groups is so small compared to the spread within each that it is almost impossible to demonstrate with 100% confidence it is real.

Thus, it is stupid to discriminate on the base of race or any other group characteristic such as hair color. At least the top 49% of blacks are gifted with greater innate IQ than half of all whites. Some are very gifted. For example, the head of pediatric surgery at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Bengime Carlson, (at least a few years back when I was often helping doctors at JHU Hospital with technical problems) is a black man. He tells how his illiterate mother tricked him by making him read and write for her a book report each week - often she would point at a section of the text he had just read to her and say: "Can you explain this better.", "Why did you include this?" etc. (He only learned she could not read years later.)

In the four grade he was considered by his teacher, all his classmates and himself to be "the class dummy." One of the books he chose read (lots of pictures and few words) was about rocks/geology. One day the teacher held up a piece of obsidian and asked if anyone in class knew what it was. No one put up their hand, so for the first time ever, he did. The whole class began to snicker and some even laughed. One said: “This ought to be good - let’s hear what the dummy has to say.” It was just one timid word: “obsidian.” Even the teacher was stunned and in surprise said: "Why that's right Ben!!"

If he is still at JHU hospital and you go to his office, you will see that piece of obsidian on his desk. - Because of it, he first realized he was not absolutely stupid and because of it, hundreds of white children he has operated on, now live normal lives.

That illustrates what I was saying about THE COST OF LOSSING GOOD BRAINS just because they are in black bodies. etc. is too high.

Billy you are right, but the Count is a lot more emotional than he is rational. In the end, it really is a situation as you described.

To Count Sudoku"

Nothing in your "reply" merits comment, but I will correct one misunderstanding:

I agree many colleges would give preference to a qualified black applicant - exactly my point - there are too few as they (generally speaking) went to inferior schools and are not well qualified. I was mainly speaking of the educational opportunities in the primary and secondary levels not college.

And what was the original article in this thread about? It was about giving some Black students the best possible schools imaginable and even when this happened nothing changed.

It may be true that the native IQ potential of blacks is slightly less than white's native IQ, by about the same mount that white IQs on average are less than oriental ones.

Black 85, White 100, Asian 105. There is a huge difference between Black and White, the difference between Asian and White is relatively small.

The difference between these groups is so small compared to the spread within each that it is almost impossible to demonstrate with 100% confidence it is real.

That is nonsense. Even the difference of 5 points between Asians and Whites is real and significant.

Thus, it is stupid to discriminate on the base of race or any other group characteristic such as hair color.

Right.

At least the top 49% of blacks are gifted with greater innate IQ than half of all whites.

Wrong. Only 16% of Blacks have an IQ of 100 or greater. 50% of Whites have an IQ of 100 or greater.

Some are very gifted. For example, the head of pediatric surgery at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Bengime Carlson, (at least a few years back when I was often helping doctors at JHU Hospital with technical problems) is a black man. He tells how his illiterate mother tricked him by making him read and write for her a book report each week - often she would point at a section of the text he had just read to her and say: "Can you explain this better.", "Why did you include this?" etc. (He only learned she could not read years later.)

No one denies that there are some intelligent Black people. It's the percentages that matter.

In the four grade he was considered by his teacher, all his classmates and himself to be "the class dummy." One of the books he chose read (lots of pictures and few words) was about rocks/geology. One day the teacher held up a piece of obsidian and asked if anyone in class knew what it was. No one put up their hand, so for the first time ever, he did. The whole class began to snicker and some even laughed. One said: “This ought to be good - let’s hear what the dummy has to say.” It was just one timid word: “obsidian.” Even the teacher was stunned and in surprise said: "Why that's right Ben!!"

If he is still at JHU hospital and you go to his office, you will see that piece of obsidian on his desk. - Because of it, he first realized he was not absolutely stupid and because of it, hundreds of white children he has operated on, now live normal lives.

That illustrates what I was saying about THE COST OF LOSING GOOD BRAINS just because they are in black bodies. etc. is too high.

No one denies that there are some smart Black people. However, most of them are not smart.

Billy you are right, but the Count is a lot more emotional than he is rational. In the end, it really is a situation as you described.

Funny, I was going to say the same thing about you.

I'm going to post this as I came across it recently and thought it describes what has happened on another thread, (and will eventually happen on this thread as well) it's a lexicon some guys are building and some of the definitions are hilarious...

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_little_lexicon/#comments

correlation vs. causation short for “correlation is not causation,” common equalitarian ostrich-tactic intended to circumvent Occam’s Razor and Common Sense.

cognitive dissonance what equalitarians experience at the hands of realists.

equal rights equal outcomes; a mandate for authoritarianism

color-blind blind to European interests and problems

immigrant alien aggressing against European economic, land and genetic resources

two-party system one-party system

war on terror popular belief among certain European peoples that Apache attack helicopters in Lashkargah will save them from what Moslems do in bed in Brussels and Bradford

diversity political buzzword for the decivilisation of European societies, often applied to specific localities (opp of “hideously white")

white flight Orwellian term blaming whites for their own ethnic cleansing

white privilege the allegedly academic theory that the poor outcomes of certain minorities are caused not by their own failings but by the skin colour of Europeans

Traditionalist

1. A person who realises that society in general is going downhill quickly and wishes a return to a better time.

non-racist or environmental determinist

Wild-eyed fanatic who seeks to deny all racial and gender differences in order to prop up a tabula rasa worldview and justify endless social engineering projects. Demonstrate a decided unwillingness to deal with objective reality instead of their subjective picture of what reality should be.

white privilege the battery of excuses given for turning whites into kulaks via legal, institutional, cultural, economic, and other means.

Main Entry: rac•ism
Pronunciation: ‘rA-"si-z&m-
Function: noun

1. Any person, despite skin color, religious beliefs, cultural background, political party affiliation, or sex, that oppose or protest against the mad suggestions of the ongoing dismantling of their own country and culture, in mass national suicide, endorsed by the political correct elite and their few followers, are racist.

People labeled as racist by their cultural elites are to be avoided, shunned and persecuted at all cost; great comfort should also be felt by any common people who take it upon themselves to persecute racists; as their acts will be held in high regard and their actions (eg assault or denial of employment) will be excused in their pursuit of this authorized noble cause.

Those common people that do not automatically show the expected pavlovian dog reaction are to be regarded as extremely suspect, as also racist.

Authorized Historical Analogies:- see witch trials/Stalinist anti-revolutionary trials.

Note also: Theoretically applies to all, but is generally only enforced against white, heterosexual, males who challenge t