10.12.04

affirmative action

Posted in politics at 10:25 am by

One of the things about blogging regularly that frustrates me is that I, for the life of me, cannot remember all the things I’ve written about. Blogs often start out with the first month or two of posts offering doctrinal statements, establishing personal belief frameworks, and clarifying worldviews. Mine is the same in that regard.

One thing, though, that I haven’t truly tackled is why I think that Christians should support affirmative action (AA). Let me start by saying that I by no means claim to have this argument “down.” Invariably, some of you more conservative types will poke holes in my logic. You’re always free to so do…but expect me to dig deep and come back with something. All that goes by the moniker disclaimer.

So, let me start at the beginning, which is after all, the only place that one can really begin. My ethnicity: I’m dutch. I mean REALLY dutch. My mom’s parents are “off the boat” dutch, and my dad’s grandparents immigrated to this country. My maternal grandparents were Amsterdam dutch, and my paternal grandparents are from the lowlands (not to be confused with Vriesland, for crap sake.)

It also, then, follows that I’m white. I do tan well–as many of the dutch do–but my skin color is white. I’ve lived a white-culture life. By “white-culture” life, I mean that I have grown up in small mid-western towns that are fairly conservative. These places essentially propogate the myth that racism in most forms is essentially dead and gone. So, that’s where I came from.

I’ve done a number of racial healing classes, etc, the details of which I’ll spare you. Suffice it to say, they changed my life. The basis for my argument for AA is essentially begins when white people decided that they’d worked just about hard enough and decided to lessen their workload by importing free labor from Africa. We brought boatloads of slaves over to the U.S. so that white people wouldn’t have to get their white gloves dirty.

But the problem of racism goes back further than that, really. Before Columbus, before Charlemagne, even before Constantine. Peter probably wasn’t the first racist, in fact, I know he wasn’t the first. But he was convicted of his racism in a truly spectacular way. You can read about it in Acts 10.

9About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12It contained all kinds of fourfooted animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

So, slavery and racism is condemed by God, here. No one class of people has any greater standing in the eyes of God than any other. Peter was convicted. But, admittedly, this seems a big jump to assume this passage to be an argument for AA.

Let’s rejoin the slaves that have been imported. Even slaves that were treated well were treated badly. They were referred to as less than human. And here’s the kicker. They weren’t just referred to as “less than human” colloquially, but by the Constitution of the United States of America. From the dawn of this nation, our society has been slanted in the favor of white men.

It’s not just a “black and white” thing though. Native Americans–or as we referred to them in the 1700s and 1800s, savages–have been poorly mistreated and constitutionally disadvantaged as well. Not until the 1860s was the emancipation proclaimation signed by Abraham Lincoln. This freed slaves. Most folks are not quite ignorant enough to believe that this ended racism. This is good, because it didn’t. Slaves in this country were given their freedom, but little else.

A little economic theory will point out that due to the laws of economic growth, even if slaves were given the 40 acres and a mule that they were promised (which they largely were not) that they would STILL be disadvantaged in comparison to white folk. For example, if a white man starts off with 4,000 dollars and a black man starts off with 1,000 dollars it would be foolish to think that this was equal. But, you argue, that white man worked hard for his 4,000 dollars! My answer: an unequivocal bullshit. The truth is the black man worked hard for that white man’s 4,000 dollars.

If society HAD given black women and men (and all the other historically underrepresented groups that whites have disadvantaged) an equal starting point (4,000 dollars in this argument), though, it still wouldn’t be fair. Not unless the government had done the job of educating those in minority groups (sorry to use that phrase but I use it only for the sake of brevity, not because I think “minority groups” is a fair term) would that reparation for injustice have been even remotely close to fair.

The problem still remains, racism was alive and well in the US. Not until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the practice of systematic segregation outlawed. That is folks in minority groups were STILL being disadvantaged. Even if we’d shelled out each 40 acres and a mule that we’d promised…we still wouldn’t have equity…not until 1964. But, it get’s worse. The government saw such a persistent problem in systemic racism that in 1991–merely 13 years ago–that they saw fit on November 21, 1991 to sign an act that allowed them to properly punish those entities that engaged in overt and blatant racism.

Since this country was established, there has been no real successful attempt at justice. Steps toward it, perhaps. But we’re not there yet. We live in an injust society. That’s where AA comes in.

By no means would I argue that AA is a perfect solution. But it is A solution. My biggest problem with opponents of AA is that often they seem to overlook the fact that there is a problem at all. Christians are called to justice, I believe. To be agents of justice, renewal, and reconciliation.

It also amazes me that some folks see AA as a new program. It’s not. It’s been around for the past 450 years. It’s just that for those 450 years, it’s basically ensured that despite their competency white men were held in power. That white men were able to ascend the corporate ladder while their counterparts (people of color and white women) were left in their dust.

One significant improvement of AA as it’s being enacted now is that it doesn’t reward incompetence. I’ve never heard the argument by people of color or women that people who are less competent should get jobs over people who are more competent. Those who oppose AA legislation seem to think that this is the cornerstone of AA–awarding incompetence. If that’s not a paper thinly veiled racism, I don’t know what is. If they truly belive that, then they would be making the argument that people of color and women are truly biologically inferior to them.

AA isn’t about awarding incompetence at all. It’s exactly the opposite. It’s about blindly awarding competence. Regardles of the color, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. In fact, I’d even be happy to go so far as to say that the current system–it doesn’t have a name that I can think of, other than perhaps, “white privilige”–awards incompetence. That doesn’t mean that all white folk are incompetent. But when it’s easier for them to get jobs regardless of their skill or ability, some ARE rewarded for their incompetence.

I’m sure some of you will simply belive that this phenomena that I describe just isn’t. It isn’t real, you say. A construction of an overly imaginative mind. My question for you is, how sure are you of that? Are you willing to risk your life? Are you willing to put a damper on the growth of the Kingdom of God because of it?

I’m not.

Permalink

Trackback URL »

http://www.badchristian.com/2004/10/12/affirmative_action/trackback/

affirmative action

Posted in politics at 10:25 am by

One of the things about blogging regularly that frustrates me is that I, for the life of me, cannot remember all the things I’ve written about. Blogs often start out with the first month or two of posts offering doctrinal statements, establishing personal belief frameworks, and clarifying worldviews. Mine is the same in that regard.

One thing, though, that I haven’t truly tackled is why I think that Christians should support affirmative action (AA). Let me start by saying that I by no means claim to have this argument “down.” Invariably, some of you more conservative types will poke holes in my logic. You’re always free to so do…but expect me to dig deep and come back with something. All that goes by the moniker disclaimer.

So, let me start at the beginning, which is after all, the only place that one can really begin. My ethnicity: I’m dutch. I mean REALLY dutch. My mom’s parents are “off the boat” dutch, and my dad’s grandparents immigrated to this country. My maternal grandparents were Amsterdam dutch, and my paternal grandparents are from the lowlands (not to be confused with Vriesland, for crap sake.)

It also, then, follows that I’m white. I do tan well–as many of the dutch do–but my skin color is white. I’ve lived a white-culture life. By “white-culture” life, I mean that I have grown up in small mid-western towns that are fairly conservative. These places essentially propogate the myth that racism in most forms is essentially dead and gone. So, that’s where I came from.

I’ve done a number of racial healing classes, etc, the details of which I’ll spare you. Suffice it to say, they changed my life. The basis for my argument for AA is essentially begins when white people decided that they’d worked just about hard enough and decided to lessen their workload by importing free labor from Africa. We brought boatloads of slaves over to the U.S. so that white people wouldn’t have to get their white gloves dirty.

But the problem of racism goes back further than that, really. Before Columbus, before Charlemagne, even before Constantine. Peter probably wasn’t the first racist, in fact, I know he wasn’t the first. But he was convicted of his racism in a truly spectacular way. You can read about it in Acts 10.

9About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12It contained all kinds of fourfooted animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. 13Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14“Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

So, slavery and racism is condemed by God, here. No one class of people has any greater standing in the eyes of God than any other. Peter was convicted. But, admittedly, this seems a big jump to assume this passage to be an argument for AA.

Let’s rejoin the slaves that have been imported. Even slaves that were treated well were treated badly. They were referred to as less than human. And here’s the kicker. They weren’t just referred to as “less than human” colloquially, but by the Constitution of the United States of America. From the dawn of this nation, our society has been slanted in the favor of white men.

It’s not just a “black and white” thing though. Native Americans–or as we referred to them in the 1700s and 1800s, savages–have been poorly mistreated and constitutionally disadvantaged as well. Not until the 1860s was the emancipation proclaimation signed by Abraham Lincoln. This freed slaves. Most folks are not quite ignorant enough to believe that this ended racism. This is good, because it didn’t. Slaves in this country were given their freedom, but little else.

A little economic theory will point out that due to the laws of economic growth, even if slaves were given the 40 acres and a mule that they were promised (which they largely were not) that they would STILL be disadvantaged in comparison to white folk. For example, if a white man starts off with 4,000 dollars and a black man starts off with 1,000 dollars it would be foolish to think that this was equal. But, you argue, that white man worked hard for his 4,000 dollars! My answer: an unequivocal bullshit. The truth is the black man worked hard for that white man’s 4,000 dollars.

If society HAD given black women and men (and all the other historically underrepresented groups that whites have disadvantaged) an equal starting point (4,000 dollars in this argument), though, it still wouldn’t be fair. Not unless the government had done the job of educating those in minority groups (sorry to use that phrase but I use it only for the sake of brevity, not because I think “minority groups” is a fair term) would that reparation for injustice have been even remotely close to fair.

The problem still remains, racism was alive and well in the US. Not until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the practice of systematic segregation outlawed. That is folks in minority groups were STILL being disadvantaged. Even if we’d shelled out each 40 acres and a mule that we’d promised…we still wouldn’t have equity…not until 1964. But, it get’s worse. The government saw such a persistent problem in systemic racism that in 1991–merely 13 years ago–that they saw fit on November 21, 1991 to sign an act that allowed them to properly punish those entities that engaged in overt and blatant racism.

Since this country was established, there has been no real successful attempt at justice. Steps toward it, perhaps. But we’re not there yet. We live in an injust society. That’s where AA comes in.

By no means would I argue that AA is a perfect solution. But it is A solution. My biggest problem with opponents of AA is that often they seem to overlook the fact that there is a problem at all. Christians are called to justice, I believe. To be agents of justice, renewal, and reconciliation.

It also amazes me that some folks see AA as a new program. It’s not. It’s been around for the past 450 years. It’s just that for those 450 years, it’s basically ensured that despite their competency white men were held in power. That white men were able to ascend the corporate ladder while their counterparts (people of color and white women) were left in their dust.

One significant improvement of AA as it’s being enacted now is that it doesn’t reward incompetence. I’ve never heard the argument by people of color or women that people who are less competent should get jobs over people who are more competent. Those who oppose AA legislation seem to think that this is the cornerstone of AA–awarding incompetence. If that’s not a paper thinly veiled racism, I don’t know what is. If they truly belive that, then they would be making the argument that people of color and women are truly biologically inferior to them.

AA isn’t about awarding incompetence at all. It’s exactly the opposite. It’s about blindly awarding competence. Regardles of the color, sex, sexual orientation, or disability. In fact, I’d even be happy to go so far as to say that the current system–it doesn’t have a name that I can think of, other than perhaps, “white privilige”–awards incompetence. That doesn’t mean that all white folk are incompetent. But when it’s easier for them to get jobs regardless of their skill or ability, some ARE rewarded for their incompetence.

I’m sure some of you will simply belive that this phenomena that I describe just isn’t. It isn’t real, you say. A construction of an overly imaginative mind. My question for you is, how sure are you of that? Are you willing to risk your life? Are you willing to put a damper on the growth of the Kingdom of God because of it?

I’m not.

Permalink

Trackback URL »

http://www.badchristian.com/2004/10/12/affirmative_action/trackback/