“Race, class and opportunity: John A. Powell
October 4, 2009
A very good 4 part series on race, class and opportunity done by the Real News Network. Part 1 is below.
Bio
John A. Powell: Professor and Williams Chair in Civil Rights and Civil Liberties at the Moritz College of Law at the Ohio State University and Executive Director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, john powell is an internationally recognized authority in the areas of civil rights, civil liberties, and issues relating to race, ethnicity, poverty, and the law. He was previously national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, founder and director of the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota, and a co-founder of the Poverty and Race Research Action Council. He formerly taught at law schools including Harvard and Columbia University. Professor powell serves on the board of several national organizations. He holds a J.D. from the University of California Berkeley, and a B.A. from Stanford University.”
http://todayshottopic.com/2009/10/04/race-class-and-opportunity-john-a-powell/
No doubt, part of the ‘national standards’ inherent in Race to the Top funding: itself, an unfunded mandate that makes W’s K-16 initiative a piker.
“Disparate Impact - Education Law
Actions that negatively affect individuals in particular groups as defined by race, color, religion, sex, or national origin are referred to as having a disparate or disproportionate impact. The concept of disparate impact flows from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the large amount of litigation it fostered. Much of the litigation surrounding disparate impact is based on statistical proof of the discriminatory effects of employment practices.
In Griggs v. Duke Power Company (1971), the U.S. Supreme Court explained that the purpose of Title VII was to remove unnecessary barriers that inadvertently discriminated on the basis of impermissible classifications. In Griggs, the Court held that facially neutral employment practices may be included under Title VII if they led to the disproportionate representation of individuals based on race, ethnicity, or gender. The Court also ruled that actions that had an adverse effect on employees in protected classes, even if there was no intent to harm certain groups, was a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Yet, in 1976 the Court held in Washington v. Davis, a dispute over the hiring of police officers, that discriminatory intent must also be proven in order for a plaintiff or plaintiffs to prove a constitutional violation.
Under the law of disparate impact, parties claiming that comparable or similar actions have led to an unconstitutional discriminatory effect must show that the actions disproportionately caused them harm. As such, a discriminatory effect within a disparate impact case stems from what is referred to as facially neutral policy. This simply means that there was no overt, deliberate intent to discriminate in a policy, but the policy’s implementation had a discriminatory effect on individuals based on race, ethnicity, or gender.
Disparate impact cases are based on statistical data that demonstrate the extent to which the implemented neutral policy negatively impacted a particular demographic group, E. W. Shoben has pointed out. The results of this negative impact are referred to as adverse impact. Adverse impact is a substantially different rate of selection in hiring, promotion, or other employment decisions that may disadvantage members of a particular racial, ethnic, or gender group, Shoben notes. A selection rate for any group that is less than 80% is deemed adverse impact.
Insofar as disparate impact analysis is not a heavily used theory of discrimination, many questions remain unanswered. For example, it is unclear how disparate impact theory can be used to help institutions, whether in K–12 or higher education settings, to prevent or deter adverse impact on protected groups. Further, even though disparate impact theory has not been applied often to K–12 or higher education, it does reveal great promise for addressing discrimination and inequities in the educational arena, both for employees and students.
Paul Green
See also Affirmative Action; Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka and Equal Educational Opportunities; Title VII”
http://lawhighereducation.com/253-disparate-impact.html
I don’t see anything wrong with this if it’s all volunteer, which the socialism we have to deal with isn’t. And by ‘all volunteer’ I’m not including children born into this system. I expect it would turn many people away from socialism, having to deal with its reality on a small, appreciable, personal scale. But from their name it seems this particular group of socialists isn’t really content with socialism just being in their immediate circle either.
This is retarded.
seriously.
Twentieth Motors Kibbutzim in small.
Do you really think having to get permission from other people to buy a shirt makes any sense at all??
I need a lot. Please send ASAP.
“an East Midlands group called Snowball, which opposes capitalism and consumerism”
Maybe someone should explain to these pinheads that the only reason aren’t resorting to cannibalism is because they’re smack in the middle of capitalism.
Snowballs chance in..heck
Idiots!
TRAGEDY_OF_THE_COMMONS_PING!
So they can't even scrounge together $50 for a basic DVD player? Yeah, they're really living the high life.
But the group does believe that income-sharing alone is a powerful tool for social change. Wood says: "If the 6 million or 7 million people who supported the striking miners in 1984 had income pooled with them, then each individual's income would have dropped by just a penny - and the strike never would have been broken."
6 million x 1 pence = 60,000 pounds per month. So either they only had a couple dozen miners on strike or someone failed second grade math class.
Reminds me of the Hutterites(religious group) series on tv. They all had to pool their money and decide what to spend it on.
The problem is when idiots attempt to apply the principal to a larger social unit. Then the disaster expands and the sky is the limit for how bad it gets.
Next comes "The Lottery" (Actual story at the link)...
I agree that too much of a consumerist culture is bad, but a consumer culture also enabled the rapid developments in technology.