Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is reverse racism real?

SuzzaneO
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 3:17:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Reverse racism is racism.

The term "reverse racism" is patently retarded.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 3:19:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

Not because they have to fill a quota, but racism against whites (just like sexism against men) is very real.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 3:20:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

You mean racial quotas and do they exist? Do white people, or those external to where the quotas are at each moment, not get hired? Sure, particularly in government and academia.
Extremely-Far-Right
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 8:30:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

Look at something called affirmative action. It is very close if not the very thing you are looking for. And yes unfortunately it is alive and rampant in the world today.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2011 8:45:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Ya Government contracts tend to go to minority owned companies.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 12:31:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

I strongly oppose Affirmative Action. People should be hired on their merits, not because of political correctness bullsh!t.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Extremely-Far-Right
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 9:48:34 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 12:31:19 AM, tvellalott wrote:
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

I strongly oppose Affirmative Action. People should be hired on their merits, not because of political correctness bullsh!t.

Agreed.
But you do realize that political correctness is different than affirmative action right?
SuzzaneO
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:08:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
The best people qualified should be hired. PERIOD! It shouldn't matter their race. If you're black and more qualified than me, you should get the job. If I'm white and more qualified, I should get the job. IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!
Extremely-Far-Right
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 10:10:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:08:15 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
The best people qualified should be hired. PERIOD! It shouldn't matter their race. If you're black and more qualified than me, you should get the job. If I'm white and more qualified, I should get the job. IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!

On the other hand, I do think that you should be allowed discrimination in the private sector. Whether it is racial profiling or affirmative action, I think it should be allowed in private business.
Rob1_Billion
Posts: 1,300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:10:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 10:10:18 AM, Extremely-Far-Right wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:08:15 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
The best people qualified should be hired. PERIOD! It shouldn't matter their race. If you're black and more qualified than me, you should get the job. If I'm white and more qualified, I should get the job. IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!

On the other hand, I do think that you should be allowed discrimination in the private sector. Whether it is racial profiling or affirmative action, I think it should be allowed in private business.

Nonsense. If the Klu Klux Klan leader opens a business then he should be forced to hire half of his staff as black people. Then they will hug.
kfc
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 11:15:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:10:05 AM, Rob1_Billion wrote:
Nonsense. If the Klu Klux Klan leader opens a business then he should be forced to hire half of his staff as black people. Then they will hug.

Lol. Also, what Cosmic said (there is no such thing as "reverse" racism -- only racism).
President of DDO
Extremely-Far-Right
Posts: 248
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 2:37:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/31/2011 11:10:05 AM, Rob1_Billion wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:10:18 AM, Extremely-Far-Right wrote:
At 3/31/2011 10:08:15 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
The best people qualified should be hired. PERIOD! It shouldn't matter their race. If you're black and more qualified than me, you should get the job. If I'm white and more qualified, I should get the job. IT SHOULD BE THAT SIMPLE!!

On the other hand, I do think that you should be allowed discrimination in the private sector. Whether it is racial profiling or affirmative action, I think it should be allowed in private business.

Nonsense. If the Klu Klux Klan leader opens a business then he should be forced to hire half of his staff as black people. Then they will hug.

Now that... I don't think should be allowed. Forced integration is a bit wrong in my book. I don't think you should force anyone to hire someone they feel uncomfortable hiring. Even if the reason that they didn't hire the person goes against many others standards. If it is a prive business, then they should have the right to discriminate in a private atmosphere right? Ya know...the Rand Paul doctrine.
Also, do you think the African Americans that he is employing will like having him as their boss? It would also cause problems for the blacks as well.
reddj2
Posts: 239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/31/2011 9:27:16 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:15:38 PM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Do you think it's possible for a white person to not get hired because a company has to fill a certain quota of minority people. So, even if you're more qualified as a white person, you don't get the job because the company has to hire someone black, asian, mexican, etc?

Thats just racism, also i thought reverse racism was being overly nice to people who you secretly hate (The Animal (2001)

Also im white/black and i think affrimitive action is stupid and outdated .
Korashk
Posts: 4,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 3:44:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Yes. It's a phrase used to describe racism that benefits rather than harms.
When large numbers of otherwise-law abiding people break specific laws en masse, it's usually a fault that lies with the law. - Unknown
Chrysippus
Posts: 2,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/1/2011 3:48:32 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/1/2011 3:44:05 PM, Korashk wrote:
Yes. It's a phrase used to describe racism that benefits rather than harms.

All racism harms. The effects of some racist thought may be more obvious than others, but there will always be consequences.
Cavete mea inexorabilis legiones mimus!
kelly224
Posts: 952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/4/2011 1:47:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:17:08 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Reverse racism is racism.

The term "reverse racism" is patently retarded.

I agree, there is no difference a bigot is a bigot.
Outspoken
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 8:44:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
On the other hand, I do think that you should be allowed discrimination in the private sector. Whether it is racial profiling or affirmative action, I think it should be allowed in private business.

Why?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 8:49:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/7/2011 8:47:20 PM, Outspoken wrote:
"Is reverse racism real?"

No. A racist is a racist. Minorities and whites are capable of racism.

of course "reverse racism" is real. But it is still a type of racism.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 8:50:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/7/2011 8:49:00 PM, OreEle wrote:
At 4/7/2011 8:47:20 PM, Outspoken wrote:
"Is reverse racism real?"

No. A racist is a racist. Minorities and whites are capable of racism.

of course "reverse racism" is real. But it is still a type of racism.

kind of like "reverse psychology" is still a type of psychology.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Outspoken
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 10:20:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/7/2011 8:50:26 PM, OreEle wrote:
kind of like "reverse psychology" is still a type of psychology.

Reverse psychology is method of manipulation. The manipulator understands a behavior or belief of their subject. This behavior or belief becomes the basis for a false claim that is positioned by the manipulator to convince the subject to react in a manner favorable to the manipulator and in situations of benevolence - the subject. The subject typically is unaware of the manipulation.

To sum it up, a behavior exists that gets particular results, it is recognized as an opportunity and a counter, false behavior is posed as ammunition to persuade a new/preferred type of behavior to which the subject (typically vulnerable and weakminded) naively reacts.

That's my basic understanding of reverse psychology. Correct me if I'm wrong.

With that being said, one cannot perform reverse psychology without understanding the "primary or basic" psychology or mindset of their subject.

Your argument is that reverse racism is similar to reverse psychology. Reverse racism implies the following:

1) Reverse is the "opposite of something." Since racism is a mindset, then we're talking about transferring a mindset of hate from one group to another. Therefore two groups are involved.
2) Group A must be inherently racist in behaviors/beliefs and hold the original position of this mindset toward Group B.
3) In asserting that, only then can the mindset truly be "reversed." so you are asserting that Group A (the inherent racist) is experiencing the behavior/belief: "racism" from Group B.

Let's be clear (and I'm trying hard not to insult this phrase "Reverse Racism"), but basically when people refer to reverse racism, they are simplifying a complex subject and insinuating that the majority: whites are inherently racist against minorities and that when a minority is racist ... the behavior becomes "reversed." Technically, (which would only be applicable to the word "reversed") this is true as it relates to this scenario. In reality, this is completely wrong. If it's not evident yet, with all due respect - LORD help us all.

But I'll belabour the subject.

What's wrong with this? lol Everything.

First of all racism is experienced between minority groups. Asians vs Blacks, Africans vs Blacks, Mexicans vs Native Americans, etc. So racism can happen between more than "two groups." With that being said, obviously you can argue that "'reverse racism' can exist between these groups too!" That brings me to my next point.

Racism is not inherent to any race. You don't pivot the mindset from one group to another citing its basis with one race and when the other race happens to be the offender now all of a sudden it's "reversed." Lol, you're confusing the definition of two words that when put together CONFLICT. A racist is a racist. Period. Whites are not innately racist. This would be a terrible misperception. Historically, whites have been inadvertently painted as "racists" in a widesweeping manner when exploring issues like slavery. And teachers never delve into the subject matter. You ever remember the history teacher stopping to say, now, let's talk about what it means to be racist? I don't think so... or maybe it's just because ::cough I went to a public school cough::. Anyway, I'd even be willing to argue (to an extent) that the practices some whites engaged in against blacks in the past were "cultural" more than they were purely malevolent and race-based. Slavery was heavily tied to business, economics, etc. I'm not justifying anything - but I'll pump my brakes. That is an *entirely* different discussion we wont have here.

Back to the point, so if racism is not inherent to any race, it is a mindset that can be taken on by any race against any race, there is no such nonsense as reverse racism. Just a poor use of the English language (semantics and such) and an oversimplified understanding of racism and the history between blacks and whites in America and the history of European culture as it related to their international exploration and views.

Okay ... lay it on me.
PervRat
Posts: 963
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 11:05:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/30/2011 3:17:08 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Reverse racism is racism.

The term "reverse racism" is patently retarded.

I believe 'reverse racism' would technically be believing other races are superior to yours.
Awed
Posts: 44
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 11:20:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Without affirmative action and such, I'd assume that places such as top universities would see 40%+ of their students being asian like in California.
PervRat
Posts: 963
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/7/2011 11:24:52 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Every time I read through a thread like this, I'm even further reminded of why I am loathe to be an American. Good gawd!

The United States, through law and force of law, had slavery for its first century and Jim Crow up until a half century ago. When slavery and Jim Crow ended, there was no magic finger snap that made everything better ... setting aside the supremacist groups that linger to this day, the basic inequity of opportunity for education and higher-wage employment remained. All the Civil Rights Acts did, basically, was to eliminate the prohibition against minorities from being allowed to apply for home loans, jobs, etc. There remained, and still remains, a terrible disadvantage in a baby being born and raised by black parents versus white parents.

For there to be true equality, every child regardless of race or the wealth of their parents should have equal opportunities in life ... but we do not have a truly equal society. Children in the United Sates born to wealthy and/or well-educated parents will start out in life with tremendous special advantages over children boorn to poor and/or poorly-educated parents.

This inequity is not erased by laws that end discrimination, because the inequity remains. Some few can get lucky in life and get a better life than their parents, but rags-to-riches are rare exceptions. By and large, the descendants of oppressed segments of our population will continue suffering the effects for many generations after the legal oppression has ended.

All these arguments about Affirmative Action being unfairly racist are ignorant of the very high damage that still lingers from state-enforced supremacism. It is even worse when the same people trying to end Affirmative Action also push to destroy social safety network programs that are needed by all economically disadvantaged people.

Minorities were oppressed through law for a long time. That was not just an "oops, sorry" ... that was immoral and anti-Constitutional. Ending the law that created the harm is not enough, the damage caused by the harm must be repaired. It is no different than finding a man who had been locked up for decades was wrongly accused and merely opening the prison cell and refusing any sort of compensation ... that man is completely disadvantaged, has not been able to earn a living nor build work experience on how to make a living, attend college nor even gained basic life skills on how to function in civil society. With the severe economic and educational disadvantages being carried from generation to generation, a counterbalance must be in place to equalize the races. It is just, because the majority race was unfairly and unjustly advantaged and statistics show that unjust advantage lingers generation to generation.

Are all you people really inept to grasp that? That makes me feel even more ashamed.
Outspoken
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2011 9:03:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/7/2011 11:05:55 PM, PervRat wrote:
At 3/30/2011 3:17:08 PM, CosmicAlfonzo wrote:
Reverse racism is racism.

The term "reverse racism" is patently retarded.

I believe 'reverse racism' would technically be believing other races are superior to yours.

No, that's a shot self-esteem. They have counseling for that, and depending on the severity of the belief - medication.
Outspoken
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/8/2011 9:12:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/7/2011 11:24:52 PM, PervRat wrote:
With the severe economic and educational disadvantages being carried from generation to generation, a counterbalance must be in place to equalize the races. It is just, because the majority race was unfairly and unjustly advantaged and statistics show that unjust advantage lingers generation to generation.

Are all you people really inept to grasp that? That makes me feel even more ashamed.

I'm going to break it to you now before the rif et raf make their way over to this thread. The argument is that in enacting such policies as affirmative action to combat the injustice you've cited, the group not covered by this policy is being mistreated. Before you jump down my throat and inadvertently hang yourself, let me be clear on how *I* stand apart from the rif et raf ;)

1) I agree that the argument is a non-argument. In fact, it's a baseless complaint.
2) I agree that the underrepresented groups have faced a deep-seeded and long-term injustice against their race and culture that can't even began to be measured.
3) I am undecided as to whether affirmative action is effectual.
4) I am seeking a solid counter argument of substance from which to make my final decision. Any takers?

Thank you - proceed.