Sorry, another loooong post.
AHZ:
But taking that 'perspective' does not eliminate the reality of the program. It's racial and gender discrimination.
If there was a monolithic "programme" (sorry, I know I spell some words differently but I'm not trying to be an arsehole/asshole while doing it, it's just I need to adhere to my cultural norms or I feel entirely uncomfortable, sort of non-authentic) then perhaps that would be a valid criticism. I've tried to make the point that "affirmative action" is a public policy tool that is available to be used, it's how it's used and also for what purpose it's used that are the important questions. I mean, it's not Macbeth, we're not going to get all excited about "Is this a dagger which I see before me?" Poor old Macbeth saw a dagger because the solution was murder and as the old saying goes, if the only tool you have is a dagger than the only solution you see is murder. Although I suppose an actor in the play about "the Scottish Lord" would feel a bit of a dill if he was asked to deliver the lines, "Is this a Leatherman Tool which I see before me?" Although I would think the sponsorship angle would be enhanced.
My point, of course, is ..what is to be achieved? And how is it to be achieved? If a good is to be achieved and the policy tool for achieving that good is affirmative action then does that necessarily and universally condemn the policy tool of affirmative action in all instances?
Later in the previous post I exploded with:
Well fuck me for thinking laterally eh? (rude prick I am at times)
AHZ:
Thinking laterally is not the same as using nice phrases to hide reality.
I suppose De Bono is going to sue now. No, I am aware of reality, I mentioned it in this thread. I'm not using nice phrases at all, in fact if prompted I'll be prepared to use some fairly stark phrases when it comes to issue of public policy.
Again in the previous post I snipped:
I need to be beaten back so that I follow the one truth path I suppose.
AHZ responded:
No. You need to be reminded that
labels and nice phrases do not change the reality of how a program is implemented.
Before implementation comes
rationale. Policy is "why", procedure is "how". I know you know that but it doesn't hurt to restate it. Affirmative action is one of many tools available to policymakers in determining how to get to a desired policy result. Please see my light-hearted references to daggers and Leatherman Tools.
In the previous banter I said:
Sorry, won't go there. Are Americans so twisted up about race that they can't see that the analysis has to be conducted differently?
And again in the post AHZ asked:
If you mean that racial discrimination has to be accepted as a tool of justice, I disagree wholeheartedly.
No, I didn't mean that. I meant that I was wondering if things are so bad in the States that in the public discourse any reference to race begins to unhinge things.
In the previous point I really stretched a metaphor in saying:
Tell you what, your choice, Would you like me to take the pot with the frog n it off the stove, turn the heat down or take the frog out? I don't really care which method you approve, I'm just willing to help a frog to live.
AHZ:
But punishing other frogs just because they're a different color than the one frog is not justice.
I promise to save all frogs, regardless of colour (get ready for a bout of green-ism).
Me in previous:
If you have difficulties with the frog metaphor let me know.
AHZ:
You're upside down here. You're learning from me.
I am, it's true (actuall you're on the other side of the planet and my side is upright but never mind). But my point was that I was thinking of a specific reference and sometimes I'm torn between stating it and appearing to be a patronising arsehole because the point is already well known, or not stating it and everyone thinking, "what the fuck was that about, who is this wanker?" But yes, I am learning from you.
As to my thinking ability and my moral character, yes, I am troubled by both. I constantly try to improve them but if I fail then I take comfort in the hope that in failing I seek to cause no harm to anyone else but myself.
AHZ:
But if in your malthoughts you espouse racism and sexism, you are harming others.
One thing I hate being accused of is being patronising. I have a tendency to rush in and want to spray good thoughts and comments around, it's a personal flaw I have worked long and hard to try and stop. I know I'm somewhat bigoted and I don't want to be but fuck it I'm human. I'll admit my prejudices, but not here. I can't help how I feel but I can help how I act. And one of my faults is that I tend to try and make my actions congruent with my feelings and thoughts. The good thing is that over the years of my life I've been able to synchronise them all, well, pretty much anyway and I've got to the point where if I say something which is the sort of glib stuff you'd expect a "liberal" to trot out, I really believe it. I've been working hard on my cognitive dissonance over the years and I think I'm close to the point where I can say I'm an authentic human being. Still got a few bits to sort out but for the most part I'm fairly comfortable with myself.
That's why I can say that affirmative actions isn't necessarily a bad thing. I can say that because I've been through the phase of "affirmative action is just reverse racism and reverse sexism", I really have. But I thought about things long and hard and came up with my own take on it and I'm now satisfied that in examining a policy I don't try and label it, I just look at the ends and I examine the means and work things out for myself.
Dudgeon put aside, interesting discussion.
