Maybe it wont happen, but as far as whether if should or shouldn't is highly subjective. I'd suggest that it's your opinion that it shouldn't. Not necessarily a fact.

Absolutely - nothing more nor less than my opinion. As it should be.



(disclaimer: I am referring to the U.S. situation - not Australia)

The programs failed because they are flawed from the beginning. We tried to help people of color by integrating them into white institutions. The only way to help them is to allow them to create their own institutions. Stop allowing whites to create programs to help blacks, most white people have no perspective on how to help people of color, the only people that can do that are people of color. I have met some people that have some much better ideas then the ones implemented right now....I wonder why.

And who's putting up the money for these "black institutions"?

No PH, the programs are currently failing because they are being abused.

I am all for equal opportunity for all, regardless of color, based purely on merit. Not advantages for some, because of color.

I'm not quite exactly sure but I doubt there would be much more funding.

Having black children taught by black teachers and run under a black administration won't cost much more.

Yes, because they are set up in such a way that many people's rational decision is to abuse the system.

I'm not sure that returning to segregation is the best way forward, however it is certainly beneficial for children to relate to their teachers.

I don't like segregation either but integration has failed, we are still mostly segregated by race. I doubt America would fully segregate again anyways, we would have to learn to live with each other.

There's nothing wrong with having black and white teachers in schools, just as there should be black and white students. I don't think affirmative action is the answer, but I definitely think that headmasters (or whoever does the hiring) should consider the cultural needs of the children when making staffing decisions. Kids don't necessarily need same culture teachers all the time, but it's good if they do some of the time. That creates a greater learning environment for all students and teachers.

not for everyone.

What??? Do you have any idea how much has changed in that last few generations???? And you want to go back to separate but equal? :headshake

Holy shit - PH you have no idea how far we have come in just the last 20 let alone 50 years! Failed???? Not by a long shot! As a country, we are learning to live with each other and integrate more and more all the time. If anything, there need to be less programs so that stigma is also removed.

And then there is this in today's news:

Anti-English sentiment 'as big a threat to Scots as sectarianism'


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...sm-783540.html

No reparations in the US. None. Nada. It ain't going to happen. Our gene pool is to diluted to prove much more than we are a big mix of dna. Only the smallest minority of blacks could prove they were direct descendents of slaves. Only the smallest minority of whites could prove they were slave owners. I don't think we need to be paying anyone for the minority errors of a minority.

I worded that really badly.

We have made many great improvements in the United States but we are still a segregated country. Most schools are either a black/Latino or white school and the integrated schools are usually divided by the students.

Separate but equal is obviously something that should be avoided because it is unrealistic but ideas such as the Afro-centered schools and what not should be encouraged in my opinion.

Rest assured, you are continuing to word it badly.

So which is it, pierce? Are we too segregated, or not segregated enough?

Your line of thought via your wording seems to be flawed - that is unlike you. Based upon what you are typing - I totally disagree.

My logic is based on an idea that seems to be a paradox, that segregation can be integration.

Here are my premises for my logic:

• Separate but equal will fail and go in favor of whites
• We are two integrated for complete segregation
• We are still mostly segregated by neighborhoods and schools
• Black children perform better under black institutions
• Forcing white and black children to go to school together does not mean integration or they get the same benefit out of school

My argument is based off of these premises.

As of now, we are segregated by neighborhoods and schools. Inner city schools are mostly black and Latino, rural schools are usually whites, well off suburban schools are usually white, and not as well off suburban schools are more mixed, but a lot of times the children segregate themselves anyways. Throughout the United States, there is a disparity in education levels of whites and blacks in their respective segregated schools, and even in mixed schools, white children tend to do better than black children. To counter this, I agree with the proposals that we stop forced integration and allow the mostly black schools to become more afro-centric, run by black teachers under a black administration. This will then put more black children through high school, college, and finally higher paying and more powerful jobs. This split, while segregating, will eventually force integration on a larger level that has not been seen before in the United States. When more blacks get higher paying and powerful jobs, they will be able to move out of the cities and mostly black areas to other areas that have been formally occupied by whites, further forcing integration and tolerance. We can not completely segregate anyways, so that shouldn't be a large problem.

Though, if blacks do perform self-determination, there can be some drawbacks. First, allowing blacks to have self-determination will be a big obstacle, which can be seen through the heavy resistance to the afro-centric school in Toronto and my idea right now. Second, if blacks do become powerful and start representing a non-white agenda, there will be a power struggle and closet racists will come out of their shell because they will start to feel threatened.

That is my idea, it is obviously very controversial but could work effectively if a power struggle does not follow.

I withhold judgement because I do not understand the underlying logic - the reason 'why' - behind that conclusion. It leaves me to believe I neither understand piercehawkeyes45's conclusion nor grasp the logic in his underlying reasons.

If segregation creates a better educated black population, it also encourages a racist white one. A better educated population also raised with a 'them vs us' perspective - are they really better educated?

Most whites go to almost all white schools anyways so I don't see how it would change anything.

But I find it funny that the biggest obstacle against this is what white people think when it really doesn't affect them.

Bullshit. We all live in this world together, you can't pretend that this wouldn't affect everybody. Including hispanics and asians... and by the way, where do they go to school? Do they have their own school too? But, surely none of this would affect anybody at all.

What I find "funny" is this:
So...you've already decided that the only reason to disagree with your plan would be racism? "If you don't like it, you're a racist!"

Like, I could propose a new tax reform law, and stipulate that "If you disagree with this, it is because you are a stinking commie bastard!" ...

Doesn't really affect them? Are you high?

What is the difference between an afro-centric school and a mostly black school?

The difference is that you're a racist-ass whitey. Didn't you read that part?

shut up flint. you're just a racist who living a sheltered white life. if you were intellectually honest you would admit the best way to bring about racial harmony and equality is to separate people along racial lines and... wait... oh nevermind, that's complete bullshit.

No no, see, the point is not getting all black students into one school, it's getting them all black teachers. And obviously, they must only have mostly-white teaching staffs now because of racist hiring policies, since there is a huge demand among all teachers to be allowed to work in inner-city schools.

We should just force more black college graduates to be public school teachers.

It's worse than that, even. I think the black teachers we have aren't black enough.

They're teaching this "let's all get together and try to get along" stuff instead of a strong black agenda.

So then this is good news I guess?

ph, have you changed your opinion with regard to this issue at all after the comments above?

i highly doubt that aliantha. pierce's view of life would prevent any possible changing of ideas on the matter.

Don't be so quick to judge lookout. He's still young and still forming his ways of viewing the world. You could be wrong.

I'll be interested to know what PH has to say for himself before I say much more about it myself.

Reminds me of this I saw earlier today.

lol...very funny glatt.

yeah, my comment does come off more harshly than i intended. It wasn't meant as a judgment of his rightness/wrongness or ability to learn. But with his starting point on social/economic topics it would be difficult for him to change his opinion regardless of the comments he reads.

Maybe, but there's hope for us all yet. Hold on to that and try not to be such a cynic. ;)

I don't see how I put off a "you either agree with it or you're a racist" ultimatium.

I still stand by both of these statements to a point. The first statement was pointing out how I believe some liberal whites will feel threatened if blacks get power and will become open racists. The idea that some white liberals want to help out people of color as long as whites remain supreme is not an invalid observation. Many white liberals do treat people of color like children who can not be successful without white people's help. That is still racism, but that obviously does not apply to every white person or white liberal so it wasn't an absolute statement. It also just talked about a reaction to what I am proposing, it has nothing to do with disagreeing with the initial plan.

The second statement depends on how detailed you want to go. For me, how an inner city school is run does not directly affect my life or my education. If you disagree with me or if it does affect you in a direct way, then say something instead of asking me if I'm high or throwing in satire.

I am not advocating forcing anything, separating society any more than it is, making anything absolute, or do anything radical. There are people within those communities that are more than qualified in solving those problems, I am saying we let them decide what to do with their schools. There was controversy on the afro-centric school and I agree with that type of reform, it isn't radical, it isn't forceful, it is just making the best out of the situation they have, and I do not disagree with what they are doing.

What is my view on life lookout123?

But this is obviously false. Who is it that is setting up the afro-centric school in Canada? The existing, white school board. They are receiving some resistance--from people who, it should be noted, resist the idea because they truly believe it isn't going to help, not because they want to see black kids oppressed--but it's still going to happen, and they will have a chance to see if it works. You act as if there are all these individuals in the community who are being kept from implementing their ideas, yet the number one complaint from struggling schools is lack of community support, especially from parents. If, as you implied, you have "met" lots of black people who have better ideas about how to run local schools, by all means encourage them to go into public education! If they are even moderately successful they will rise to a position of power very quickly, because as it has been pointed out, most professionals in these urban areas burn out and quit after a single year. Or encourage them to go into politics and change policies from that angle. The reality is there is nothing stopping them, except perhaps their own false belief that the 'white man' will somehow keep them from doing it.

Wow. Can I put my foot in my mouth, or what? Anyway, to answer your question you first I need you to understand that, to my way of thinking, your view isn't "wrong" or "inferior" in any just because it is different than mine. If we all had the same perspective on life then the world we live in would be REALLY screwed up as we all ignore the same things to focus on our own hot topics.

My observations suggest to me that you see a lot more victims in the world than I do. You see downtrodden, victimized people where I see people who are living with the consequences of their decisions. You see people with nearly insurmountable odds stacked against them, I see people with great potential and opportunity, just waiting to make a decision.

I'm not saying you're wrong and I'm right. I think we're both a bit wrong and right.

OK, with regard to what PH is proposing, indigenous people in Australia had their own governing body for a while. It was set up in an anglo saxon form, but was run by indigenous people for the benefit of indigenous people. There were elections and referendums. There were news letters and all sorts of other stuff. Web pages and the like. The list goes on. The point of the body was to improve indigenous lifestyles and to give indigenous people in this country a voice.

Unfortunately, not enough indigenous people actually participated in the process. There simply wasn't any interest - or so the word is anyway - so it was closed down a few years ago.

I think this body was a fantastic idea and should have been workable. I hope that it is reinstated now that we have a new government, and I believe it will be. But like what happened here, sometimes even the people they're designed to help don't want to get involved.

anyway, I just thought I'd share that with you so you can ruminate on it.

BTW PH, have you changed your views at all?

Why would you want it to be reinstated if it failed the first time due to non-involvement? If it were brought back to fail a second time, wouldn't that just make them feel worse about themselves? And, if they wanted it back, wouldn't they be calling for that? I mean, you can't make them want it.

Because I think it has a better chance of success now. The atmosphere in Australia has changed towards indigenous people and the governing body is likely to have more support, not just among indigenous people, but non indigenous as well.

Many indigenous people have been protesting since it was closed in the first place citing racist attitudes by our previous government.

There's a lot more to it than what I've written here. You can find more info at this site if you're interested.

My views are constantly changing and being redefined. The question is how much have my views changed.

Right now, I'm not exactly sure where my ideas fall under the realistic or idealistic area because of a lack of experience and knowledge of the area. I have talked to people that truly believe that they can make reforms, and people that have views more similar to Clod where the situation is so bad that one type of reform won't accomplish anything.

Until the true problems are found, if they already aren't, there isn't much that can be done and I firmly believe that what will help the most is a major change in the social forces in the area. This will not only come from parents, but from peers and other role models as well, which I am 99% sure is strongly lacking as of now. The idea of having black institutions or at least the appearance of black institutions is that it will hopefully spark something that will make the social forces in favor of education stronger in those communities. Will it work, I have no idea.

I agree. On topics such as socio-economics I firmly believe there is no wrong or right, but just personal preference and what is realistic according the situation at hand.

With reference to what you just said, I tend to see people more influenced by social forces than being a true representation of who they are as individuals.

Rap and Hip Hop don't help, either.

Rap and hip hop was decent until it become commercialized. The underground stuff is much better.

Let me rephrase that.... Rap and Hip Hop artists examples of attitude don't help either. Hardly good role models.

I know what you meant. The commercialized hip hop is horrible in that respect, underground isn't as bad, a lot of it is actually very good, but some are pretty extreme and nationalistic for many tastes.