Very insightful comment!

I had recognized that many of the extracurricular qualifications were a back-door method for old wealth to get in, and exclude market-focused minorities (asians, jews, etc.). I had not realized the defense aspect of affirmative action, but it makes a lot of sense.

I recommended your comment to Seerov [1].

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/04/24/obama-and-urban-coin.html#comment-64365

You are correct in assessing the two priveleged groups in the US. The missing part of your analysis is how desperately the first group fights for the priveleges of the second group.

In the early days of AA in the late 1960s, the socioeconomic elite figured that they would give their chosen genetic beneficiary group benefits of exemption from merit based selection similar to the legacy placement slots in elite educational institutions that they and their children enjoyed.

What has happened since then is that the intense competition for merit based admission to elite institutions has resulted in some extremely competent individuals becoming the norm for the student body of elite educational institutions. The obvious gap in abilities between students admitted on merit and legacy admissions would prove embarrassing if not for the the Affirmative Action admission students who’s primary function is to prevent the legacy students from being the dumbest people on campus.

Thank you for your comment.

Again, you have not demonstrated your claim.

I have provided you with sources, which demonstrate the weakness of your analogy. The analogy is based upon an ahistorical stereotype of the Second KKK. Historians who have examined membership lists of the Second Klan have demonstrated that the membership was far from uneducated. See the books I footnoted in my previous comment. You can probably find both books at Love Library.

Your contention, “Historians who have examined membership lists of the Second Klan have demonstrated that the membership was far from uneducated,” is granted, as I implied above [1].

Dan wrote: False, in response to “It [the analogy in comment 23] is constructed in a vacuum and pays no attention to historical context.”

Obviously, my statement is true. Your analogy is based upon a textual comparison that fails to pay attention to historical context and provides no evidence for its veracity. The evidence you attempt to provide, a Wikipedia article, does not support the analogy.

You made a very strong assertion (that it was constructed in a vacuum), and have yet to demonstrate this.

You can strengthen your analogy by providing evidence to support it. For instance you could provide evidence of a “white value system” that members of the Second Klan produced and enacted.

I assume you will grant that the Second Klan was a racist organization, so I will not support that claim.

I assume you will also grant the social progressive aspect of the Second Klan, though information is available on it in any easy-to-read medium.

Therefore, I assume you grant the existence of a “white value “system,” similar in its racist and progressive aspects to the Black Value System of TUCC.

What, then, are you arguing?

“Or, you could contextualize your implication that the Trinity United Church of Christ is a racist organization, like the second Klan. You could do this by providing evidence that demonstrates members of Trinity United Church of Christ run white people out of their neighborhoods, burn crosses in white neighborhoods, murder white people because of their race, lynch white soldiers returning from war, murder whites who attempt to vote, assassinate political enemies, and control educational and employment opportunities for whites”

As many klaverns of the Second Klan were non-violent, there is no need to do this. Contextualization should make an analogy stronger, not weaker.

Now, if you’re argument is that TUCC cooperates and cross-promotes with racist-progressive organizations that do use violence, or espouses paranoid or violent theories about the identity, purpose,nature of federal policies, those are much easier to demonstrate.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/03/05/barack-obama-should-denounced-affirmative-action-and-race-based-politics.html#comment-59454
[2] http://www.reason.com/news/show/34134.html

I found your comments interesting, and for the most part, I agree with you. And it is interesting how for many, if you dare violate the “political correctness” orthodoxy then you are obviously ignorant, out of step, and no doubt a racist.

I have had the privilege to have many minority, and foreign, friends, and as a manager and executive, over the years I have also hired, fired, and promoted many of the same. And, let me tell you that if you are a well educated minority with a first class mind, the world is yours. Virtually every company is looking for you and has a place for you. And I might add, in most of these companies, when a job or promotion is available and there is a tie between a minority, especially a black minority, and a white, the black minority almost without fail wins. And the shame is, that when a black person succeeds on their own merit they are often tagged with the AA label.

The real problem in the black community is not that there are not enough government programs and AA, but that there is a bias against education, which is often viewed as trying to be “white”. And ironically, while many blacks are hard working people, especially rural black people, many blacks in cities and the suburbs view hard work as being “taken advantage of”, and it is sometimes a problem in an educational setting. I have also at times found this attitude to be a problem in the work place with well educated blacks. I view this as a serious problem in black society and an impediment to societal progress.

On the other hand, education and hard work seem to be almost congenital in the Asian community – Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese. Of course, there are sometime societal issues among various ethnic groups. For example, I once had a programming staff with several male Chinese programmers reporting to my female Chinese programming manager. There seemed to be an inordinate amount of visible friction and upon investigating I determined the problem to be a cultural problem with the male Chinese reporting to and taking orders from a Chinese female.

As an aside, I spent several years in Chicago and I found prejudice to be considerably worse there than what I saw in the South and much worse than in the Southwest. In fact, I was continually surprised at the ethnic consciousness of everyone in the Midwest and Northeast as opposed to the lack of ethnic consciousness in the rest of the country.

Dan wrote: “Please demonstrate this.”

I did.

Dan claimed: “At least for uneducated whites, the WVS equivalent of Trinity UCC was the Second Klan.”

I have provided you with sources, which demonstrate the weakness of your analogy. The analogy is based upon an ahistorical stereotype of the Second KKK. Historians who have examined membership lists of the Second Klan have demonstrated that the membership was far from uneducated. See the books I footnoted in my previous comment. You can probably find both books at Love Library.

Dan wrote: False, in response to “It [the analogy in comment 23] is constructed in a vacuum and pays no attention to historical context.”

Obviously, my statement is true. Your analogy is based upon a textual comparison that fails to pay attention to historical context and provides no evidence for its veracity. The evidence you attempt to provide, a Wikipedia article, does not support the analogy.

You can strengthen your analogy by providing evidence to support it. For instance you could provide evidence of a “white value system” that members of the Second Klan produced and enacted. Or, you could contextualize your implication that the Trinity United Church of Christ is a racist organization, like the second Klan. You could do this by providing evidence that demonstrates members of Trinity United Church of Christ run white people out of their neighborhoods, burn crosses in white neighborhoods, murder white people because of their race, lynch white soldiers returning from war, murder whites who attempt to vote, assassinate political enemies, and control educational and employment opportunities for whites. Again, this evidence will provide context for your analogy and improve your understanding of the Second Klan and Trinity United Church of Christ. Until you provide the suggested context and evidence your analogy shall remain weak and continue to fruitlessly compare “apples to oranges.”

Your current analogy is based upon a common rhetorical strategy of tdaxp.com: one which rips words out of context in an attempt to discredit individuals or organizations that the author is ideologically opposed to [1].

Dan wrote: Argument to authority.

No, argument through metaphor.

Dan wrote: Undemonstrated.

Demonstrated.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2008/03/30/white-folks-greed-runs-a-world-in-need.html

Thank you for your comment.

“Dan, the analogy remains weak [1].”

Please demonstrate this.

“a) It is constructed in a vacuum and pays no attention to historical context.”

False.

“b) It telescopes over a half-century’s worth of U.S. history.”

If by this you mean it analogizes a racist-progressive movement in the present day to one a century ago, then trivially true.

“The French poet, René Char [2], once wrote, “Eliminating distance kills” [3] ”

Argument to authority.

“In the case of your analogy, eliminating historical context and difference kills.”

Undemonstrated.

a) It is constructed in a vacuum and pays no attention to historical context.
b) It telescopes over a half-century’s worth of U.S. history.

The French poet, René Char [2], once wrote, “Eliminating distance kills” [3] In the case of your analogy, eliminating historical context and difference kills.

[1] See comment 23 above.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren%C3%A9_Char
[3] As quoted by Paul Virilio, Open Sky (London: Verso, 2008), 22.

The point being, of course, that Obama supports racial preferences that discriminate against latinos, whites, asians, and jews relative to blacks.

That he combines this with sensible means-tested entitlements doesn’t make his support any less politically foolish, societally dangerous, or morally disgraceful.

If “A” is bad, then it remains bad even if a good “B” exists alongside it.