U.S. Veteran: Republican congressman calls affirmative action what it is – racist and destructive to Americans

Share:

WASHINGTON, DC – Arizona Congressman Paul Gosar has publicly called for an end to the government-sanctioned discriminatory practice of affirmative action.

In a recent Gab post, the Trump-endorsed representative from Arizona’s 4th Congressional District said:

“Affirmative Action is and has been enormously destructive to America, affecting nearly every aspect of our lives.

Discriminating against Whites or Asians is wrong, as is any form of racial discrimination. It violates our laws, our Constitution, and our sense of decency. Affirmative Action as a practice is un-American and should be abolished.”

U.S. Veteran: Republican congressman calls affirmative action what it is - racist and destructive to Americans
GAB screenshot, courtesy of Paul Gosar

So, what exactly is affirmative action and why should it be abolished?

While the Cornell Law School defines it as “a set of procedures designed to; eliminate unlawful discrimination among applicants, remedy the results of such prior discrimination, and prevent such discrimination in the future,” the reality is that the federal government, or at least certain sides of it, have taken their application of the laws surrounding the practice a step further by awarding specific people groups “bonus” points for simply belonging to those groups. 

It originally appeared in its current form in an Executive Order signed by John F. Kennedy in 1961.

The EO (10925) was designed to mandate federal contractors “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.”

It was intended to keep businesses and schools from refusing to hire/admit someone because of their race, color, gender, or religion.

But it has morphed into something quite different.

Businesses and schools are now allowed, and often encouraged to consider those very categories when selecting new hires and students.

State colleges and universities have awarded admissions to less qualified students based on the color of their skin or their gender, leaving more qualified students out of the incoming class.

The Supreme Court has widely dismissed the arguments for awarded admissions for the sole purpose of skin color.

But that hasn’t stopped other entities from targeting their recruiting efforts to attract more people of color or to pass on white people in the hiring process.

A current case in point, according to the National File, involves the city of Minneapolis teacher’s union and the city’s school district, who are using affirmative action to impact layoffs.

“Recently, the district announced that if it downsizes, White teachers will be the first to lose their jobs, in retribution for alleged ‘past discrimination by the district.’

The Minneapolis teacher’s union says it hopes their anti-White, affirmative action-inspired firing model will be adopted nationwide.”

In other words, past discriminations (real and perceived) by previous generations must be atoned by current discriminations aimed at white people.

Multiple publications, while discussing the pros and cons of affirmative action, say that opponents of the practice claim it leads to reverse discrimination.

But that isn’t actually what they say, given that reverse discrimination is not an actual thing. It appears in dictionaries, but discrimination based on color, ethnicity, religion, orientation, or gender is simply discrimination. It isn’t reversed.

Swartz Swidler, a law firm based in New Jersey, says:

“While affirmative action programs are justified historically, they may inadvertently violate discrimination laws if they have a disparate impact on members of the majority group.”

Wait, so-called reverse discrimination violates discrimination laws? Wouldn’t they violate reverse discrimination laws?

Well, it might if reverse discrimination were real.

But that same law firm has illustrated that it is virtually impossible to prove that someone was a victim of reverse discrimination.

“Plaintiffs must also be able to prove the following elements:

  • The plaintiff is in a protected class;
  • Employees who are not members of the plaintiff’s protected class who are similarly situated are treated more favorably;
  • The employer discriminates against the majority or privileged groups; and
  • The plaintiff had a satisfactory job performance or was qualified for the position.”

Are white people every considered a protected class?

Not that we have been able to confirm.

And it is that very inability to legally prove that a white person is a victim of discrimination based on being a protected class, that lead many people to argue that it is impossible for people of color to be racist towards white people or for them to be discriminated against.

Again, reality is not on the side of the individuals making those arguments.

Yet, many legislative bodies make it possible to award “bonus points” for being a part of a protected class.

As just one example, the State of Texas implemented a Historically Underutilized Business program. It requires construction projects that receive state funding to set aside certain percentages of each project for firms that fit into one of the six protected categories of protected business owner classes.

Those six include business that are owned and operated at least 51% by a black, Hispanic, Asian American/Pacific Islander, Native American, woman, or service-connected, disabled veteran owned business.

There is only one of the six protected classes that are allowed to be excluded from percentage of participation requirements…disabled veteran owned firms.

We ran a piece detailing this type of legal discrimination by the Austin Independent School District.

In essence, a program intended to prevent discrimination of protected groups allows for one of the protected groups to be discriminated against.

And that is the type of thing that affirmative actions facilitates.

Time will tell whether other policy makers will join with Gosar’s efforts to remove the practice from the legal capabilities of American companies, colleges and universities.

Man arrested for breaking into the home of ex-girlfriend, desecrating the remains of her child - claims he was "blacked out"

For more on the reality of the racist practice of affirmative actions, we encourage you to check out this editorial from ouir Executive Director.

For those who are pushing for CRT in classrooms, here’s a little secret: “Affirmative action” is actually racist. Here’s why.

This editorial is brought to you by the Executive Director of Law Enforcement Today.

Google it:  “Is affirmative action racist?”

Article after article after article about how affirmative action is not racist.

That means one of two things.  Either nobody writes about it / thinks it.  Or Google is massively stacking the deck in support of a liberal agenda. (Which we know from past media coverage is in fact true.)

Here’s what we can find:

=====

rac·ism

noun

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior.

af·firm·a·tive ac·tion

noun

an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, especially in relation to employment or education; positive discrimination.

====

I’m going to break this down very simply.  Affirmative action is racist at its very core, because it is implemented on the assumption that everyone who is white is rich or maintains an advantage over someone who is not white.

I’m calling B.S.

I’ve watched people who are not white and are LESS qualified be given promotions at companies over people who are white and MORE qualified based on the color of their skin.

This is the very definition of discrimination.  It says that because of the color of one’s skin, this person should be given an advantage over someone else.

As a society, I’d suggest we are becoming MORE racist BECAUSE of the mentality that there needs to be special privileges given to one group of people over another.  WHY are colleges and universities having separate commencement ceremonies for students … or separate HOUSING for students … based on the color of their skin?  Martin Luther King Jr. is rolling over in his grave right now.  This is everything he fought AGAINST – and here we are actively working to segregate.

When I worked in television, there was a box of tapes in literally every news director’s office I have ever been in. We referred to it as “the box of broken dreams.” It was the resume tapes of the reporters and anchors that just didn’t make the cut.

I’ll never forget a meeting we had with all of the producers and newsroom management years ago. We watched the resume tapes of two reporters competing for one position. We were asked for our feedback.

The female candidate was white. The male candidate was black. Not that it should make a difference – but in this case, it did.

The consensus was that the woman was a better reporter. She had a better on-camera presence, a better resume tape, and a more engaging personality. She could have been black or white or Asian or Hispanic. It didn’t matter – she was just the better reporter. Skin color had nothing to do with it.

But the news director decided to hire the man. His explanation was simple. “He’s black and we need some more black people here.”

Was this a case of “black privilege?” One could argue that it was. Should a person be given a position over someone clearly more cut out for the position … just because of the color of his or her skin?

No, I don’t believe that person should.

If we’re serious about combatting racism, we need to understand WHAT racism is. There’s no such thing as “reverse racism.” It’s ALL racism. Discriminating against someone based on the color of skin or ethnicity – or stereotyping someone based on that – can be viewed as being racist in my book. It doesn’t matter WHAT skin color the person is.

Black people can discriminate against white people the same way white people discriminate against black people. Puerto Ricans can discriminate against Italians. The Polish can discriminate against Muslims. The funny thing about discrimination and racism is that they know no boundaries.

That’s why I struggle to understand how in a society where we’re so focused (thankfully) on eliminating racism … it’s acceptable for someone to say, “I voted for that President because he’s black.” If someone else said, “I’m voting for this guy because he’s white,” wouldn’t that person be called a racist? Help me to understand the difference.

If a channel were to launch and it was called “White Entertainment Television,” wouldn’t it be viewed as racist? It’s a fair question.

When applying for scholarships before college, I applied for one that was specifically for people of Hispanic descent. I was in the running because I’m a “Reyes.” I could not, however, apply for a scholarship for people of African-American descent. Now how are these requirements any different from the requirements if someone were to offer a scholarship only to white students? Do ANY of these requirements foster anything other than discrimination?

I’ve watched students who are not white and had lower GPAs and community involvement be given scholarships over students who are white and had higher GPAs and more community involvement based on the color of their skin.

And so let’s bring it back to my initial point.  Affirmative action is racist — period. It implies that because of the color of one’s skin, that person has what that person has.

It doesn’t take into consideration the character or history of an individual or anything about a person other than an assumption that that person is who the person is or has what the person has because of the color of that person’s skin.  It says that, based on the color of one’s skin, that individual isn’t as good as someone else and needs an advantage.

Martin Luther King Jr. said:  “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

If we’re going to truly come together to combat racism, we have to understand that it touches people of EVERY color and background. We need to think about the comments we share and the decisions we make and how they affect people. But we also need to stop thinking that racism knows and understands boundaries. It’s the only shot we have of beating it in our companies … in our families … and in our communities.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Share:
Submit a Correction
Related Posts