Validity of Racism and Affirmative Action

Ok, so we can use Round 5 to discuss how exactly laws/regulations regarding race should be passed, enforced (or not), etc.? The reason I didn't see it as much of a debate is because I don't know that its so much about WHO passes (or doesn't pass) laws, etc., but more a question of how MANY laws/regs you'd see as appropriate. Anyways, let's hash it out regardless.. I think that we're basically on the same page about dogs and genes and debate styles. I cannot promise that I will strictly adhere to LD, but if thats your preference, by all means, go for it. I see what you're getting at with dogs, but I do not think segregation is necessary for any genetic means. The idea that EVERYONE will interbreed and pure lineages will be lost is no more likely or rational than human annihilation. Its not impossible of course, but the odds are slim. Also, some lineages of peoples HAVE been outbred overtime, but I'd say thats just nature-- some exceed, but others do not. Pooling of different skills-- simply what it sounds like-- allows for different people with different abilities to use those skills within the same system to accomplish one goal. If you have a whole culture of academics, I wouldn't expect to see much artisanship or many skyscrapers (someone has to build them, etc.). Mixed skills allow for specialization and ultimately progress. **Mind you, the actual distribution of skills in each society over time may vary, but this is quite specific so I'd rather speak generally* It is generally agreed (historically) that sharing ideas is beneficial to people as a whole. But yes, this could be a whole other debate. Why can't we change the constitution to establish segregation? For starters, it would violate the ideas our nation was founded on. It invalidates the reasons that brought so many people here from so many different places. Its supposed to be a melting pot. Thats the whole idea. There are countries around the world that are largely homogenous when it comes to race. The US has really NEVER been that way and was never meant to be. Of course its more different now than it ever has been, but thats all the more reason that trying to dismantle the US into several homogenous parts is pointless as well as counter-productive. Now, I'm not arguing that abiding by history is reason enough to do something. That is obviously not valid. However, the obsession with homogeny is (I think) a lost cause in the US. I argue that much of our success is credited to different peoples working TOGETHER anyways. When we come together, progress is achieved. It is when we fight each other that things drag on, don't get done, etc. Yet, you seem to prefer this? I don't think fear of people over-mixing should justify segregation. Nor should the idea that bad qualities come from certain peoples or the fact that some patterns prevail more heavily in some groups than others. Those, so far, have been your major points for segregation. And I know you requested that we treat mixed peoples as a separate category, but hopefully that does not mean that we cannot examine them-- they are certainly not considered general failures in society. They may inherit any combination of traits, but still tend to be successful and productive members of society-- by no means a deterrent from mixing. The reason I keep going back the the US is because I assume you mean segregation in the US (if not, I really would need to hear the specifics of that plan). That would necessarily limit America's options (where to live, work, learn, travel, etc.) for EVERY American. It would define "being American" differently depending on which group you were in, which jobs were available to you, etc etc. It would establish barriers, build walls. Despite how you feel a 150 year old war SHOULD have ended, I maintain that we live in a UNITED nation. One country. This isn't the EU or a coalition of nations, it is ONE nation. And under that idea alone I believe that all Americans should be afforded the same legal rights, abide by the same regulations, enjoy the same privileges, and have the same liberties. It violates rights (legal, that is), privileges AND liberties to tell people where they can or cannot live, work, learn or visit. Your proposed segregation would change the country for everyone, and for the worst. Families could be torn apart, people could lose their jobs, be expelled from school, forcibly relocated, the list goes on. This IS detrimental. A country should not harass and abuse its citizens. Not only would segregation negatively impact the individual, the family and the community, but also the country! It would be a huge step backwards, a very sorry sink of resources and a huge slap in the face to years of fighting for rights that some have not always had. Some of this may not mean anything to you because it would not necessarily affect you. However, I aim to look at the country as a whole and consider all citizens, not just those who are a certain color. About equality: you said "... talking about "equality" like it could possibly be achieved...", then later "Striving for equality is a waste of resources." I may have misunderstood your chain of logic, but my stance that equality SHOULD be strove for even if it IS impossible in its perfect form still stands. So, if your reason was not its impossibility but rather it's wastefulness, I apologize, my bad. But as I tried to demonstrate, there are many things that are not possible in their perfect forms. Yet, many are still valuable. Its interesting you say equality wastes resources, because I say that inequality wastes them. Maybe both create waste, but which produces the more VALUABLE result? I say equality. It is a founding principle of our country and the US is quite strong, with growing strength coinciding with growing equality. Perhaps coincidence, but perhaps not. Ok, thats all I am going to say on that because I would like to give you a chance to move onto the federal vs state vs people (btw, please define "people" when it comes to legal matters, judicial matters, etc, as I know what you mean but I am a little unclear about how that would work in practice).. I'll let you start because it was your idea.