I think legacy is a big issue. People who benefited from legacy such as Al Gore Jr., GW Bush, or Paris Hilton might not have gone as far as they had. Even Bill Gates came from a wealthy family. People who didn't earn their keep but feel entitled to it are bundled with others who worked hard for their position. The truly equitable society would have to address that issue before it becomes overrun by inherited mediocrity.
The other problem with legacy in U.S. society is that we end up with a bunch of people in positions of power who are not particularly intelligent, don't have a solid work ethic, and, often, haven't developed the character strengths that come with hardship.
You can define equitable, but you can not define Just. Just for who? By whose definition and perspective???? Easy to talk about, impossible to do.
I think there’s a lot of truth to that especially in a context where one needs a lot of money to achieve political power. In that situation people with money will have the power, and they will then be tempted to make the laws that keep them and their families in money, so social movement based on merit becomes a much slower process. Paris Hilton is riding on her parents money no doubt, but I think her fame won’t last long. That kind of thing is an issue, but I think that if you ensure that everyone on the low end is given a fair chance, and you make sure your political system doesn’t require you to be rich to gain political power, then the largest part of the inequality of opportunity issues will take care of themselves. Scandinavian countries do this pretty well. It does require a somewhat higher tax rate, but you get paid back in the quality of the society that results from these programs. And they still have very large and successful businesses there too.
A sidenote regarding Native American Casinos. From my understanding of reservations in the Midwest is that most of them can and do have casinos so its not a matter of the government picking and choosing which tribes can benefit from gambling. The problem is where the reservations are located so the Mdwaketan Sioux near the Twin Cities are doing phenomenally well while the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe in Northern MN are destitute. At least in MN the more prosperous tribes have been sharing some of their wealth with other tribes but I don't think it is very much.
I agree that the term "justice" is somewhat vague but I'm using it in terms of racial justice as applied to things like affirmative action and reparations. The challenge between equality and freedom is similar but deals with a few other things. While people may use the term "justice" in regards to class and gender struggles it seems to be used much more widely in regard to racial issues. Also equality and freedom is a conflict between the individual and society whereas the way I brought up equity and justice deals with conflicts between groups within society. For US history while there have been many conflicts between individuals and society most of our history seems driven by conflicts between groups.
To further clarify what I mean by an equitable and a just society think about it this way. Does the majority owe a historically oppressed minority anything more than just to remove legal discrimination?
I certainly think a society should take care of its less fortunate, but I think trying to go back and address historical discrimination against groups of people gets tricky and sometimes even counterproductive. I think things like truth and reconciliation hearings are positive things, but if we’re talking about giving money to discriminated groups, or even often official apologies, then it starts to get tough. Lots of things that governments did 50 or 100 years ago and before weren’t fair by today’s standards, and a lot of groups were discriminated against in a lot of ways. In Canada many Japanese and Germans and a few other groups were interned during the war. The French and First Nations people were discriminated against in various ways. Various immigrant groups were discriminated against when they first arrived, including the Chinese and Ukrainians. Various regions in Canada have been discriminated against by the federal government. Some religious groups were discriminated against. You could develop an impressive list and get everyone fighting for their own piece of the pie, but I don’t think that that is going to be helpful in the long run. I think a better way to go is to help the people in society who need help now, and to look forward and try to create the kind of society that we all want to live in. Doing this would tend to bring us together as one tribe, a tribe that includes all of the citizens in a nation, (which doesn’t preclude us from also having our own sub-tribes), rather than to divide us along all these other lines get us fighting with each other for compensation for things that may have happened to our ancestors a long time ago.
Why would Native Americans want to be in our tribe? Many still want complete Indian Sovereignty. I think they should get it.
Paris's fame amounts to a lottery ticket in the form of endorsements and other deals. Plus, she also recieves adulation some people want. Heck, I'd want the of 15 minutes she's getting. I can live simply with that money for life. I'm definitely not advocating family breaking and estate repossession. There's parts in that theory that look attractive given where the US is heading. I'd be in favor of cycling the welfare structure. No one system is going to be the best fit for every circumstance. I don't mind interference because it's already happening. People against welfare rarely go against subsidies and tax breaks for businesses. The US could do better in helping the poor. I think one reason why class issues haven't been as influencial as it has in Europe is because of the Cold War and Communist paranoia. Plus, all things considered, the US is still a very mobile society (compared to other industrialized nations). The wealth disparities between regions promote opportunity for Americans who can't find jobs locally. There's no need to get visas or passports. Just hop on a bus or drive. Would Vegas have become a city for families if we had a stronger centralized welfare state? Maybe it didn't have to. The big gorilla influencing social perception is still the race issue. When welfare is talked about, Americans automatically have the image of minorities, even if more whites recieve welfare in number. The paranoid and cynical side in me believes this was intentional. The poor always outnumber the super rich. Have the poor spend that frustration upon each other instead of the rich. Convince the middle class they can live richer if they spend .5% less on taxes. It's not to say that addressing race issues are less important in maintaining equality, but I think we'd both agree it'd be less of an issue of class disparities were addressed first. I stand corrected. There should be mandatory revenue sharing plans if all government agreements with Indian tribes are similar. What kind of joke is it to claim they're a sovereign nation unless we find some valuable resource, like uranium, in "their" mountains? By the same virtue, reservations with the best location/real estate for casinos benefit while other Indian tribes are left ignored, yet perceived as beneficiaries by Americans. The continuing story of existing Native Americans is still a mess.
Why do Native Americans want us dot-heads to have sovereignty? And you think we should have it? Great, I wouldn't mind having more sovereignty...
The society we live in is equal in theory but not in practice. I am black and one of my best friends is white. While we are both your average all American girl in every sense of the term she benefits from white privlege in ways I do not. Ie. She knows she got into school based on merit, while I do not. She can go to a store and not be watched like a hawk, I can not. She is considered intelligent, while I am considered an intelligent BLACK woman. I go to class and only one person looks like me, the remaining 497 people look like her. I am in school and its a big milestone in my family that I can go to college and afford it, in hers college is expected. Its the little differences that really matter and white people never seem to understand that. They seem to think that racism isn't a big deal because they don't see it. My family has been screwed by this country time and time again(trust me my family is Black, Irish and Indian mostly) and people seem to think that saying "I'm sorry, my bad, but don't blame me cuz my family screwed you" is ok. It's not. Black children of all economic classes start off life at a disadvantage because people see you as black, and not as the person you are. You aren't judged by your merit or lack there of, or are judged first based solely on how you look. It's hard but it builds character, and it teaches me to judge people based on who they are and not what they look like.
So basically. . . you telling this that have been wronged i know you been wronged but dem's the breaks. .. . right and wrong are irrelevent on what is . .and what isn't so basically. . Get yours by any means necessary regardless of morality, justice or sense of fair play the ends justifies the means and if you have to kill to make you children rich do that sh*t . . because the results matter and who you stomp on . . on the way . .well . . dems the breaks Rocket River
Following along this point. I've heard many African-Americans complain that they can't be judged solely on merit and they feel that they have to work extra hard to prove that they deserve academic or professional success to white peers. This seemed to be mostly the situation during segregation when it took exceptional individuals to crack the color barrier. The argument now that many will make is that we no longer have segregation and Affirmative Action is what is causing African-Americans to not be considered on merit alone and the assumption that whites make is that many African-Americans got where they are at because of Affirmative Action. So the very program meant to level society has the opposite affect. I don't necessarily agree with that but I'm wondering as a black woman what you think about it.
I see the need for AA but it still bothers me. Some of the schools I applied to I know for sure I only got into because they need to fill a quota. Others schools I know I got into based on merit. For me the issue comes with knowing that while I was qualified to get into every school it may have been based more on skin color and less on merit. THere is however a need for AA because many people of color need it just to level the playing field.
