Red trumps green and white
This week, the great basketball coach and pioneer Red Auerbach passed away. In 1950, Auerbach selected the first black player in the NBA draft. During the 1963-64 season, his team was the first to feature five black starters. In 1966, he named Bill Russell as his successor and hired the first black coach for a major American professional sports team.
While talking about Auerbach, Boston Celtics coach Doc Rivers said, “Red did all that, but he wasn't doing that because he was trying to break ground. His response was always: 'I'm trying to win a game and that's who I think gives us the best chance.'"
Ability not color determined who played for Auerbach. His focus on ability propelled him to the top of the coaching ranks. Tom Izzo could learn a thing or two from Red.
Ability over color. Vote Yes on Proposal 2.
[Letter to the Editor - The State News. Submitted 10/31/2006.]
4 comments:
California had much more diversity and integration before prop 209 in 1996 it would be very difficult to transform California into a bastion of white racists.
However, it is very easy for Michigan to become the bastion for white racists because it pretty much already is.
Michigan is the most segregated by race in at all socio-economic levels of all of the states in the United States.
The Detroit metro area is the most segregated of all metro areas in the United States.
For many years, the leader of the KKK lived in Livingston County. That is only to say that proportionally, Michigan is a place where white racists feel comfortable.
Classic! I never called you a racist or even implied that you are.
I do not even know what your race or ethnicity is. All I know is that you are a male that lives in Farmington Hills Michigan that is planning to vote yes on prop 2.
As far as I am concerned how you experience race can have nothing to do really with your position. Unless you think it does.
Fairness should be fairness, if you are a person committed to fairness your various group affiliations shouldn't matter.
It may help inform your decisions, but you should be able to stand away from your relative privilege or disadvantage to understand a few things about global white male privilege.
A person committed to fairness would understand that 30 years of a quota free (again the supreme court struck down quotas in the 1970s) program that does consider race, and sex in admissions, government contracting, and employment interviewing (again entities may have diversity goals, but affirmative action only says they must consider a qualified candidate of color it does not require that they hire one) does not come close to balancing the scales for people of color.
30 years can only be enough time if white males agree that a wrong has been done and are willing to share the prosperity of opportunity that resulted from their privileged positionalities.
Regardless of whether or not a persons family was slave holding, many people (some of them people of color) have benefited from the white skin privilege of their ancestors. The same why wealth and poverty is inherited and passed down so is the privilege of being white.
All white people have unfairly benefited from the oppression and discrimination of people of color. Even if that benefit is simply having the option to exist in a world that is void of people different from them.
If you don't think there is privilege in being white (if you are white) how much would you charge to give up being white to become exactly the same, but only black?
The legacy of white male privilege is seen today in Farmington Hills, Michigan, a suburb I should add where I once lived.
If you are opposed to prop 2 because you believe in fairness and you think sufficient gains have been made, then ask yourself why is it that the people of color that purchase homes in Farmington Hills Michigan average a higher education level and income than their white neighbors.
Why does a person of color need more education and/or more wealth/money to purchase and live in the same neighborhood as a white person on every socio-economic level?
People of color are still working to overcome the legacy of the 400 years of bondage and the 98 years of American Apartheid (Jim Crow) that immediately followed.
Additionally, women only got the right to vote 86 years ago, the past he past 30 years of affirmative action programs have benefited women, especially White women the most.
However, despite this, these women still earn about $0.75 to every $1 a man earns. Women still face unfairness that begins at the education level from steering them out of the sciences or to be nurses instead of doctors to environments that disregard their contributions.
Women have to have demonstrated an ability above and beyond men to even get a seat at the table.
A seat at the table of opportunity is all people of color and women are looking for.
Nobody is interested in removing white men from the table.
Affirmative action programs have served as the ‘shoulders’ of these people to help make room at the table.
Again, I reiterate, if you are committed to fairness and equality, you would not only VOTE NO ON PROP 2 but you would work with various organizations that want to improve these programs to include a larger emphasis in people from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.
However, the United States is still not color blind so it only serves to marginalize to the outer fringes people of color when an institution of higher learning (especially the elite) does not take into consideration the persons color/race etc. when attempting to educate.
It is important for a democratic society that everyone at all levels of the socio-economic class and strata be represented in elite institutions of higher learning and in all levels of government because this is where the future leaders will be educated and create policies for everyone.
I agree ability over color, unfortantely too many people in positions of power still can't see ability because they are blinded by the white.
Did you see France on fire in September of 2005? That is the result of a color blind policy in a society that is not color blind
A very similar if not worse thing will happen in about 30 years (or less) if you prematurely eliminate affirmative action programs which is what proposal 2 seeks to do.
T. Zac,
**I never called you a racist or even implied that you are.**
Your comments about colonialism and the white man’s club sounded like you were implying it. I accept that wasn’t your intention.
I’m not going to disagree with you about the privileges that whites enjoy. I am not aware of ever being discriminated against in any fashion. And that includes my definition of discrimination that covers preferential treatment. I have never been pulled over for driving black or been denied access to an apartment or job based on my color. At least I’m pretty sure I haven’t. I have no idea what it’s like to be discriminated against other than stories from other people and movies that address the issue.
My biggest disagreement comes from this statement: “you think sufficient gains have been made”.
I have not made that statement and it is not what I believe. The black community lags behind in many areas. Much of it from discrimination – past and present – and much of it from self-inflicted social upheaval. I do believe society has made many strides on the discrimination front, although it still has a way to go. I am not so confident that the self-inflicted problems are making the same strides but that’s a different topic.
Even though sufficient gains have not been made, maintaining affirmative action programs that divide us by race is wrong. I don’t accept that it’s acceptable to treat people differently in an effort to fix discrimination. If you read my blog, you will find I am a libertarian. I believe in individual freedom, free markets, and limited government. Government that follows the principles set forth in the Constitution. I do not believe in exceptions to the principles no matter what the ultimate goal is.
It is wrong for our government to treat people differently based on their race – yesterday, today and tomorrow. Plain and simple. Over forty years ago, government was allowed to segregate blacks and whites, leaving blacks with inferior services and goods. Today, government is allowed to make a distinction on a college application based on whether you are black or white. The end goal may be different, but the means are the same. At some point, the government needs to stop it. Now is as good as any.
That’s my position. Obviously, you disagree. We will have to agree to disagree because I know you won’t change my mind and you know I won’t change yours.
I’ve noticed you left some other comments. I read one about your view on vouchers and education. I think we have some common ground there. I believe education is the great equalizer. I believe what the public school system has inflicted on society is the equivalent of child abuse. I went to a Catholic school for 9 years and benefited greatly. My parents had to sacrifice to send me, but I believe it was worth it. The Detroit schools have been cheating generations of black kids and I think it’s a disgrace. And I don’t think it’s limited to Detroit schools. I think far too many schools cheat some of their students. Education has the power to equalize and overcome discrimination. Unfortunately, it is held hostage by union leaders and politicians.
If you read more of my blog, you’ll find I don’t think the answer is more money. That just gets wasted. I am a firm believer in the free market. This is the greatest invention of mankind. No, it’s not perfect but I’ll put my faith in the free market long before I’ll put it in some politician who wants to help me.
That’s my two cents. Keep the change.
Regarding your second post. The fires in France were not the result of a color blind policy. France actively discriminates against immigrants and refuses to allow them the opportunity to assimilate into the country. This has created large blocs of unemployed, frustrated people.
Post a Comment