You do realize that many of the methods of finding conclusions for sociology and science are the same...

And there is a difference between recognizing something is unfair and getting all uptight about it.

IMO. we need comprehensive immigration reform to move away from our current unfair "quota" system.

The vast majority of immigration visas are currently given to persons with close family (parent/child) that are US citizens, followed by those with highly valued job skills, and then a "diversity" program based on country of origin, with more slots for Europe, followed by Asia, Africa and lastly Central/South America.

If you an unskilled Mexican/Salvadoran with no family here and little education but a commitment to hard work..good luck on getting an immigration visa, other than perhaps a temp visa to be exploited as a migratory and seasonal farm worker.

Sorry but there's far from a consensus in the professional/higher academic world about that. Take a historiography course sometime, it will show you some serious issues with sociology, typically focusing on the actual application of this so called science to the real world (problems with complex systems, etc.). Social theories are nice and all, but application thereof is very problematic and predicting the behavior of micro or macro levels of people groups is wrought with problems and is basically more unreliable than my old '81 VW. Don't get me wrong sociology can be useful but it's like Freud, take what you hear with a grain of salt.

Agreed Bullitt, and the older I get the less I believe it.

My respect for the subject ended when I had 3 semester hours left for my minor. I had a professor who refused to let me pass the course unless I wrote a paper on the minority group I'm a part of or admit I was a racist and write a paper on that. All white people are racist, ya know. of course, he couldn't recognize his own bias because in his world white people have the power so only they can be racist. I still think he's just pissed his proper little japanese sister took up with a white boy.

When did I say anything about application???

I made a single statement and was responded with an ad hominem attacking a straw man created from my argument. I don't get shit from any sociology class and even if I did, that doesn't invalidate my statement. I have already stated that I cannot prove or disprove my statement anyways.

You got all pissed off about semantics? Yes, the definition of racism for many is prejudice plus power because racism is a social doctrine (-ism) and people of color can very rarely force their prejudice onto our society while whites can much easier. Hell, everyone was calling Reverend Wright a racist but in reality, there is nothing he can do to force his prejudice on whites. And also, that definition is a major generalization.

On an indivdidal level, discrimination is the killer. Anyone can discriminate and whites do receive a large part of this. I have been on the short side of it, and so have many other people. Its life, tough shit (not directed at anyone).

On a sociological level, racism is the killer. But unfortunately it is nearly impossible to blame anyone for this since no one person controls it. It would be similar to blaming music videos for displaying sexism or Fox News for giving biased news. These happen because the sexist music videos and biased news sell more. So, blaming any particular person for this phenomena is absolutely pointless. That is what I disagree with most on the current idea of racism. That some people control it and force it down on people for their gain. No, it is something that just happens naturally. For whites to feel guilty about it won't do anything and usually ends up just making the problem worse.


To be honest, I don’t have much respect for sociology either along with many other fields. But, I do believe certain aspects of it are good, while its entirety can be generalized as absurd because there is no way to practically apply it. It is similar to philosophy, interesting and relevant at times, but overall pointless because of lack of applications. That is why I never said anything about application in my statement and admitted that it cannot be proved either way.

If I had a damm nickle for every time I have heard someone tell me that I'd complete with Soros.

Wait, I thought genetics proved there is really no such thing as race. There are certain characteristics in some ethnicities, but no actual race difference, kinda like in different breeds of cats or dogs. There is only the human race.

Well, is it really good for the country to import unskilled, illiterate people? Don't we have too many of those already?

And honestly, since we have lost so many jobs, why would we want to let more people in right now? I am all for opening the borders for more LEGAL immigrants, but not right now. After the recession is over. Right now, we need to look out for the people who are legal citizens/immigrants.

Personally, I don't think there should be ANY borders, ANYWHERE. But that will never happen.

sugar...my point was to the issue of bias (not racism) in the current immigration system (as well as the valued notion of "Give me your tired, your poor,. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. .").

Take 100 foreigners who will get immigration visas....70 or so (some might be illiterate and/or unskilled) will be eligible solely because of having a close relative here.....20 or so will have highly valued or technical job skills, 5 will have reasons of political persecution...and 5 will get in on the "diversity" lottery, with Europe, Asia and Africa each having more slots then South/Central America.

IMO, this is a biased system.

If it's so unbiased, why is it predicted that by 2050 latinos will be the dominate ethnicity? I remember reading that somewhere. I don't think people should be allowed to come simply because they have relatives here. I think political persecution should top that.

WTF?

Brazil’s leader blames white people for crisis

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ae4957e8-1...0779fd2ac.html

From the link:
Uh, yeh sure. And this guy is the President of Brazil.

I don't think you read that prediction correctly.

Its more like that by 2050, non-Hispanic Whites will no longer be the majority in the US (whites will be under 50% of the pop for the first time).

Its true that Hispanics are the fastest rising ethnicity, but nowhere near a majority by 2050...more like doubling from the current 12% to about 25%.

The Asian population in the US is expected to double during that period as well.

But should that be a basis for immigration?

Yea, damm Northern Europeans!

What about the white people with brown eyes?! Heh, what about them?