From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Newsgroups: alt.discrimination,soc.culture.african.american,misc.education
Subject: Re: Institutional racism in education
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:55:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Oracle Corporation
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <79tk02fM2eDC01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> kls30@cd.amdahl.com (Kent L. Shephard) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.231456.7197@oracle.us.oracle.com>, mfriedma@uucp
>(Michael Friedman) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec4.231441.10829@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>
>>montas@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Hubert J Montas) writes:
>>>In article <1992Dec4.165214.27181@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com
>>(Seth Breidbart) writes:

>>>>How would you feel about a program that was very good at helping
>>>>whites who are disadvantaged, also helped whites who were not
>>>>disadvantaged, and did not help non-whites at all?  I'd consider
>>such
>>>>a program racist.  Aside from the substitution of race-names, its
>>>>description is identical to that of yours.

>>>     All AfAms are disadvantaged because of the legacy of slavery.

>>All I can say is that I wish I was as disadvantaged as Michael
>>Jackson, Eddie Murphy, Vernon Jordan, and Bill Cosby.  Heck, I
>>wouldn't even mind being as disadvantaged as all of them combined.

>They are rich but still they are black and the only reason they are tolerated 
>is because they have green.

Perhaps, but they sure as heck are not disadvantaged.

>>Also, please explain how an AfAm whose ancestors came to the states
>>after the end of slavery is disadvanatged by it.

>Check your history, recent history that is.  Rosa Parks was arrested in the 
>early 60s for not giving up he seat on the bus.  "NO BLACKS SERVED HERE", 
>"BLACK TO THE REAR", etc. does that ring a bell, or are you just completely
>clueless?  You ignore Jim Crow laws of less than 30 years ago.
>It did not end when slavery ended since laws of this nation were still 
>in effect to systematically opress black folks.

Kent, can you read?  If so, please read the statement I was responding
to... the one that specifically specifies slavery, not Jim Crow or
discrimmination.  

>>Also, please explain why a non-AfAm whose ancestors who came to the
>>US after the end of slavery should be required to bear the burden of
>>rectifying the problems caused by slavery.

>Because they benefitted from the legacy of racism that hasn't ended yet.
>If you are non-AfAm, non-Native American, Eskimo, etc. , ie European 
>ancestory and your family has been here more than 30 years it benefited from
>those laws. 

Well, my family hasn't been here more than 30 years.  So where do I
check off on the application forms to be guarnateed I won't ever lose
out because of an AA hire?

>>Finally, something I think you just don't get is that the rest of the
>>country is rapidly running out of patience with the idea that the
>>problems of today were caused by the way the great grandparents of one
>>group of people treated the great grandparents of another group of
>>people 150 years ago.  Other groups in the US seem to have avoided
>>being traumatized by much more recent events (i.e. Holocaust for Jews, war
>>and refugee camps for Vietnamese and Cambodians) and the constant
>>harping back to events from the 1800s just doesn't wash with people
>>who don't even know who their great grandparents were because war and
>>various forms of terror totally ripped apart their families in the
>>20th century, not the 19th.

>Check 30 years ago, see above.

Yes, but the mistreatment of Blacks 30 years ago was mild compared to
the way other ethnic groups were treated in the US in earlier years.
See, for example, Chinese.

>I'm getting tired of people in this newsgroup, white folks in particular that 
>ignore the fact that up until 30 years ago or so there were laws that were
>supported by the supreme court of this country that made it completely 
>legal to *FUCK* over my parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins 
>because they were black.

Quite simply, so what?  My dad and his entire family got *FUCKED* over
by the government of Romania because my grandfather was Jewish and a
member of the intelligentsia.  He didn't whine.  He came over here
with what he could fit in a suitcase and made it.  Now I'm doing my
best to do even better.

>If you can't see that the fact that slavery of 130 years, *NOT* 150 years ago
>is only part of the problem.  The real problem is for 100 years after slavery
>it was acceptable and even *LEGAL* to *FUCK* over black folks in good ole'
>ameriKKKa.

Let me make a suggestion.  Why don't you and Hubert fight it out over
whether the problem is slavery or Jim Crow and other discrimmination?
As soon as the two of you agree, drop me a mail note and we can
continue this discussion.

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of one guy saying "The problem is
slavery", responding to that, and having someone else say "You idiot!!
What about Jim Crow?!?" and then responding to that and having a third
person say "How can you ignore slavery?!?!".
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Xref: sparky alt.discrimination:5322 soc.culture.african.american:12908 misc.education:5285