$BlogRSDURL$>
![]() archives
03/28/2004 - 04/04/2004 |
Saturday, June 05, 2004![]() A retort.![]() ![]() It acknowledges the fundamental mistreatment of minorities. Once again, we resign ourselves to broad generalizations. Not every member of a minority group is a victim of historical crimes against his people, nor is every member of a minority group (or the white majority, for that matter) capable of great things "if only they had been afforded better opportunities". Minorities are systemically discriminated against until they can't keep up with better-schooled students. This is not because they are inferior to said students, but because they have not been given the same opportunities. And just how, per tell, do you distinguish between a student who is "a victim of their inferior education" and one who is just slow/lazy? Furthermore, not every white kid has had access to all the world's opportunities. Affirmative action, in the described manner, would benefit an affluent black student while shirking the needs of thousands of trailer trash white kids. If it's about helping the disadvantaged out, why is race an issue and not assessed financial need? Bullshit notions of artificially creating/promoting diversity, that's why. It's about time that whites feel what it's like to be shut out? You're aware that a significant portion of people living below the poverty line are white? I sympathize with the plight of the traditionally down-trodden racial minorities, but comments like this just set their cause back by antagonizing people who might otherwise be willing to help. If one wants to break the cycle of poverty, then social programs geared towards inner city kids/schools are the way to do it. My brother's music school in Regent Park did just that, and now a number of its alumni, like Thompson Egbo Egbo, are world class performers. This is the core of my point: we should be trying to provide them opportunities instead of cutting them slack for not having them. Quite frankly I don't buy the "I am a product of my upbringing/society" line, given that both of my parents came from poor backgrounds and are now quite well off. The same can be said of so many immigrants who come to the New World and work their asses off, and send their kids to college. The Italian community in America started off this way, so did the Irish, so did the Jews, and now look at them. Special treatment be damned - those sufficiently determined will prosper despite anyone's best efforts at bring-down. Lower mark cut-offs is no substitute for affording kids horizon-expanding opportunities earlier in life, because you really can't honestly say that their lower marks are because of their upbringing or their capability. Giving them the benefit of the doubt is going a little far, in my opinion - in the name of equality/equity, everyone should get the benefit of the doubt. I may have extenuating circumstances that may be far more severe than "growing up in a bad neighbourhood" and aren't as outwardly visible as a "racial handicap", and affirmative action affords me no such luxury. Affirmative action is a very simple-minded and ultimately flawed solution to a complex problem. Judgement, in academic setting, that is based on anything but merit serves to cheapen academia as a whole. Also, while it was a caricature, the bake sale was illustrative of not the marginally "good" things about affirmative action but the fundamental problem it creates. ![]() I disagree.![]() ![]() All this adds up. Minorities are systemically discriminated against until they can't keep up with better-schooled students. This is not because they are inferior to said students, but because they have not been given the same opportunities. Affirmative action aims to give disadvantaged students the opportunities that others have. The idea is that after a student goes through university, they'll be better equipped to assist their offspring and give them opportunities formerly unavailable, and the cycle continues, eliminating injustice. The problem is not the privileging of minorities over whites (cause it's about time whites feel what it's like to be shut out, quite frankly), but that systemic discrimination continues in other areas, reversing the effects of affirmative action. Besides which, any gains made will ultimitely be lost because capitalism requires a class hierarchy. In summary, affirmative action is not two wrongs making a right, the Young Conservatives' bake sale is selfish and an unfit metaphor for affirmative action, and we must recall that structural equality is very different from practical equality, especially in the post-modern world. ![]() Ahh. The Kathedral gig.![]() ![]() Jacob, amen with the diversity schpiel. Affirmative action, in my opinion, is a pile of crap. Would I feel the same way if I were something other than a white male? I'd like to think that yes, I would. In fact I'm almost sure I would. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s epic speech I Have A Dream addressed exactly what you're saying - judgement based on strength of character and not skin colour. Which way the scale is tipped is irrelevant - discrimination is discrimination. This article had me really laughing my head off. Despite the fact that the bake sale was organized by Young Conservatives and I'd hardly call myself a conservative, I'd side with them. Their little stunt does serve to illustrate the ridiculousness of affirmative action. Two wrongs don't make a right, and they never will. I think that a lot of level-headed members of racial minorities would agree with me - receiving applications from a white guy with an 80% and a black guy with a 70% and considering them equally for the same spot in university seems to be an acknowledgement that blacks are by nature inferior, and need "special treatment" in order to keep up. If you're aiming at fairness, then a student/potential employee/etc. should be judged on his merits, and his merits alone. Work goes well, that it does. So does calculus, actually. Not much to report, which is why I haven't written anything until now. ![]() Root Down![]() ![]() Track list as follows: 01 Vanilla Cigarettes 02 I'll Stick Around 03 Imitation Leather 04 The Brews 06 Flowers 07 Happy New Year 08 The Divide (plus Long Division) What was track number five? Why don't I have it? Does it exist? (T minus fifty-three minutes until I go To the Five Boroughs.) PS. Where are our womenfolk? Friday, June 04, 2004![]() Yes.![]() ![]() I've got my sister hooked on (dumb) video games. I've only got one full week left here. Garfield's gonna rock even harder than I, Robut. Yes. Thursday, June 03, 2004![]() M.I.A.![]() ![]() Instead, I sit here and play Call of Duty, aka Band of Brothers the Game. When I could be doing a million better things with my time, away from here. The sheer idiocy of this all astounds me. ARGH I WANT OUT I AM JUST GUN' RUN ![]() Back Early!![]() ![]() One of the worst was the presentation on diversity. Now just the mention of our Fun New Thought Police automatically sets me on edge. And they pretty much fulfilled my expectations. I'll summerize: We have to battle discrimination. Also, we should we should replace the old golden rule with a new one "Do unto others as they would have you do to them". Instead of "equality" we should aim for "equity", recognize inherent differences in order to properly accomodate diversity blah blah blah. Here's my question, aren't they saying that we should treat people differently based on certain characteristics. Isn't that *gasp* discrimination? And what are these variables. Well there's Region, Race, Colour and Ethnicity (Talk about redundancy). Than as we're going through Religion and Gender, we hit something really stupid. Record Of Offenses. That's right, the UHN Diversity Office actually forbids discrimination of people based on whether or not they were a rapist!. Great idea guys. I'm carrying mace to work from now on. Of course they might say that positive discrimination is necessary to right historical wrongs. There's certainly argument there (though they should pretending they're against discrimination) but certainly it shouldn't extend to quotas. Take my office. Crunching the stats we have 1 WASP, 1 Latina, 2 East-Europeans, 2 Italians, 3 Indians and 3 Chinese people. As well we have 1 male and 11 females. Clearly we are out of whack, we Do Not Look Like Canada. About half of Canadians (49.5%) are from either British and French background. Only 8.3% of our office can say that. Sino-Indians are also over-represented. 25% of our office have Indian descent and 25% have Chinese descent. Compare that to Canada which is 3.2% South Asian and 6% East Asian. And let's not forget the fact that males have only 8.3% of the office while we're about 49% of the population. Clearly we have to import a bunch of stupid white men to level the playing field. Or maybe- just maybe- we should give people jobs based not upon the colour of their skin, but on the content of their character. Maybe if some hypothetical white males might not be able to save as patients we shouldn't hire them just to conform the workplace to a rigid mathamatical model of society. Wednesday, June 02, 2004![]() ![]() ![]() Speaking of yard sales, we had ours on saturday. My dad put out 3 or 4 big boxes of vinyl LPs and sold them them for 2 dollars a pop, which I told him was silly because he could probably sell them for five or six times that amount. He couldn't understand who'd want his old records. In the boxes was some great stuff: The Clash, Led Zeppelin II, and the Beatles Blue Album (which I think we may have kept). He had some fucking twentysomething yuppy say they were very excited about STARTING their record collection. I hate yuppies. My bike got stolen and I'd like one to take a bike with me to cadet camp, so if anyone has a large men's bike that they'd like to sell, me gimme a shout. Leo- If you're done watching The Codfather I'd like it back, my uncle's asking about it. Tuesday, June 01, 2004![]() Flim, you heard me, flim.![]() ![]() Also, I'm sure y'all know Adaptation, one of my all-time favourite films. Remember the seminar Donald the hack keeps pressuring Charlie to attend? It's by a guy named Robert McKee. Robert McKee is real and I'm pretty sure he plays himself in that film. Anyways, I just was lent a copy of Robert McKee's Story from the man I'm writing a script for. My first response was, "ha, ha, he's Donald and I'm Charlie." Then it was, "This book sickens me". Then it was "this is where my (largely disliked) prof gets all her ideas from." Now it's, "Okay. Wow. Insightful. So that's what's wrong with everything I do." mixed with only occasional disgust. HOWARD WITHERS McKee says- LEO I don't want to hear it! Jacob - hands down funniest post in ages with "I Love the Economist" Monday, May 31, 2004![]() I love The Economist![]() ![]() But the main reason I love it is that it makes me feel important. As I read it all the ads are like "Please, invest in our country!" and the classifieds are like, "Wanted, proconsul for Kosovo". Clearly, it's not aimeed at my demographic but I can pretend it is. Plus there's that subtle throw-away snobbery they have. I remember in article they were discussing trade policy and casually mention "This is the greatest threat to free trade since the British Corn Laws of 1864 (Which this newspaper of course opposed at the time)". ![]() Another retarded post.![]() ![]() To quote the Economist today: Mr Bush is sufficiently worried about loss of support within his own party - remember that it was Republican defections, as much as anything else, that cost his father his re-election in 1992 - that he took the unusual step of travelling to Capitol Hill on May 20th to rally his allies. He duly got his standing ovations, but the speech produced a worrying bit of symbolism. He likened the handover to taking the training wheels off a bicycle: "It's time for [the Iraqis] to take the bike and go forward." A few days later Mr Bush fell off his own bike in Texas, badly scraping his face. Heh, heh, heh. And now, a special Memorial Day treat. ![]() Weekend over then.![]() ![]() Baz Luhrmann's Moulin Rouge is nuts. It must cut every two seconds. It's really hard to watch. But Roxanne is a great sequence. Sunday, May 30, 2004![]() Asimov is rolling in his grave.![]() ![]() In order for the trailer to even make sense, the robots would have to be ones that were specially designed to ignore part of the first law of robotics. They would be forbidden from killing people directly, but allowing people to come to harm would be okay. Then they would be placed on or near a destructive reactor or something. Then they would carefully set up a series of circumstances in which the reactor would blow up, or douse the area in radiation or something, which would kill all the humans, leave the robots unharmed and be entirely allowed by the fragment of the first law. Either that or the movie won't make any sense. Maybe an unusual number of people will have been crushed by falling crates that mysteriuosly dropped from the darkness of the warehouse ceiling. And then Will Smith will be sent to investigate, because it's a shit job and Will Smith's character is too cool for the rest of the cops, and they hate him for it. I've just made myself really depressed. ![]() Kill the producers, man.![]() ![]() Touch this "Illa-Fifth Dynamite". It makes no sense at first, but the rest of the album is peppered with references to The Roots as the (Ill) Fifth Dynasty. Neil, good call on No Return, it is a great song. Canibus thinks up three inventive ways for himself to be killed. One, a chunk of the exploding earth hits the space station he's escaped to before he, wounded, can transfer the shield codes to another operative. Two, killed by the Taliban in a convenience store. Three, as some kind of special has-mat team, he gets sent into a flaming building where he tries to rescue a woman and is killed by fiery debris. All these outlandish deaths got me through some tough yard work. But Neil, if you went to that "GW" convention, I really shoulda had you handing out fliers for selling my old miniatures. Boo to you for not mentioning it to me. Also, is this Dune book something I should be getting my hands on? Before Ender's Game, another SF I've been told to read? PS - Lizardmen army for sale. Damaged, cheap. ![]() Garbage men and Hollywood screenwriters... first against the wall.![]() ![]() A few odd/humourous things I witnessed today.
I'm not anti-union, not in the least, but when people give in to really stupid demands on the part of their workers, it pisses me off and hurts society at large. Their job is to take away refuse, and if that involves a little bit of folding (oh me oh my!), well, tough shit. We're not asking you to fight to the death with a cobra, we're asking you to break/fold boxes. This is especially bad given that as far as city employees go, sanitation workers get paid quite handsomely. Is it so much to ask that they do a good job of it and not whine about the little things? Sadly, it's the same story with the TA union at the University of Toronto - they've got such a chokehold over the place that they can get away with murder and still keep their jobs. But that's another story. I'm going to go put some more ice on my hand. ![]() Speaking about corpse-fuckers...![]() ![]() 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. The basic theme that runs through all the stories is that robots will be able to make life better for all the world, that robots are tools that can help enrich humanity. Many characters share the belief that robots are better than humans because of their tirelessly and unselfishness. These efforts to bring robots into everyday life however are resisted by ignorant people caught in the grasp of irrational robophobia (Asimov terms it "the Frankenstein complex"). Now the movie is completely the opposite of Asimov's philosophy. It's the standard robots-rebel-against-their-creators-and-must-be-destroyed idea that Asimov battled so hard against. It's not just a perversion, it's a betrayal. |
![]() |