Affirmative Action

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 01 Apr 2004 17:56

did we already talk about this? if so, Im sorry

Jezreel · Post by **Jezreel** » 01 Apr 2004 18:16

Like Ken mentioned in your Dem vs Rep poll, this is a ridiculous poll. You're basically forcing people to choose between two harsh contrasts. Sounds like Bush language to me (You're with us or you're against us! USA! USA!).

The issue at hand: affirmative action posits minorities are discriminated against in various ways and to counter this racism, a practical methodology was designed to try (its intentions are/were good) to increase access to opportunities by this systematically accepting applicants based on this fact.

What you're forcing us to decide between:

Good: "Minorities get a fair chance."
Bad: "Damn minorities are stealing qualified white peoples' opportunities."

What's wrong with your dual-option polls:
This is not a black-and-white issue. Ideologically, this system is well-intended (racism sucks, remember?), so how to combat this problem? Can you think of something that will help to eliminate the problem of racism affecting opportunities for minorities (to speak nothing of racism itself)? Well no one else has come up with a big bad-ass plan yet either. So that's one reason why it can be viewed as a good thing; because in theory, it should help a little bit. However! Reports of qualified white people being passed up by this system really sucks too, because that's not fair either!

Clearly affirmative action is not flawless. Otherwise everyone would be happy about it. So instead of dividing everything into two opposing camps (good/bad, dem/rep, them/us, white/black...), why not try to support a solution. Constructive criticism, not negative nay-saying.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 01 Apr 2004 18:18

dont vote in the poll, and then state your position in a post format

hah i dont even say anything and i get insulted

Do colleges discriminate on basis of race? If so then my solution is not have applicants need to say what race they are

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 01 Apr 2004 18:27

Jezreel wrote:Constructive criticism, not negative nay-saying.

Well... No, you weren't insulted, Matt. He wasn't insulting you, he wasn't insulting anything. :-p He was pointing out the obvious flaws in the poll.

And as for your solution, wouldn't that then leave the system to be affected by the economic situation people are in prior to applying to a college? I think that was the problem to begin with.

carl winslow · Post by **carl winslow** » 01 Apr 2004 18:28

some colleges have schollarships only available for white students. they are sponcered by groups in protest to affirmitive action.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 01 Apr 2004 18:30

Do you call that an insult? This is an insult...

(Shameless crocodile dundee rip off...

)

I voted yes because I think there are times when affirmative action is good. Like everything - there are situations when it is uneccessary or counter-productive.

But to use the analogy that my brother came up with. Imagine a running race. Both competitors are of equal ability. One competitor is shackled, the other is not. The race begins. Half way into it you remove the shackles. Now from this point, is the race fair?

Of course it isn't, not only has the unshackled runner gained a large headstart, the shackled runner is exausted from having to try to run with shackles.

The flaw with this arguement is that it suggests the different races are competing with one another (getting back to the real world), which they are not - but I think it demonstrates the reason affirmative action is neccessary - because even though in the US and Australia (and many other countries) we have "equal opportunities" we don't actually have equality.

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 01 Apr 2004 18:30

what about before affirmative action then?

MegaFighter_X · Post by **MegaFighter_X** » 01 Apr 2004 18:41

I think it's a good concept, but sort of a bad idea. It is used to meet status quos. In that respect, I think it's complete bullshit. Screw one guy becuase he isn't a certain race. Me saying that is a bit hypocritical (especially in history), but you get my picture I hope.

It's good, however, in the sense it gives other people of other races a chance, which I'm all for. Especially in this time and age. That way they may have the chance to live the American dream too.

the poll, I can't really answer... I go both ways.. can I cast a vote for both?

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 01 Apr 2004 19:04

Jezreel wrote: Sounds like Bush language to me (You're with us or you're against us! USA! USA!).
.

Bush 00: "I`m a uniter, not a divider"
Bush 01: "You`re either with us, or you`re with the terrorists!"

As for the topic on hand...

...Let`s take theoretical student A. We`ll call him George. George`s great-great grandfather owned a cotton plantation in Georgia back in the day. He became a very wealthy man by working his slaves really hard, and not paying them anything. As is still the case today, it was easy for George`s great-great grandfather to accumulate more wealth once he became rich. Because of his wealth, his son got into Harvard University. After meeting future business leaders and Presidents, this Harvard Graduate goes on to do well in business, because he is rich, and because he has made good contacts at a prestigious university. He contributes money to his alma mater every year. When his son is born (george`s granpa), his son gets into Harvard because his father is both an alumni, and a wealthy contributor. This son goes on to do well in life, because everything is handed to him on a silver platter.

Flashforward to george. George is a party boy, who likes drinking beer, but is a C student. When it comes time to apply to college, he applies to Harvard. Despite the high number of qualified applicants, George gets accepted anyway, because his family has attended Harvard since the days of slavery, and because they know he will pay them and continue contributing money to them. So in essence, this totally stupid, overpriveleged lazy white kid gets to go to one of Americas best colleges, because his great great grandaddy was lazy, but owned slaves.

This system is called legacy, and is still in effect in many major, prestigious universities in America, including my alma mater, Brown University.

Strange how everybody complains about affirmative action, yet nobody raises a stink about legacy.

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 01 Apr 2004 19:24

Remember George`s great-great-granddaddy? Well, when the North won the civil war, slaves were declared free by the 13th amendment. yay! Unfortunately for George`s great-great-granddaddy`s slaves, they werent told about this for a year or so. They learned in June finally, and to this day they celebrate `juneteenth` which marked the end of official slavery for them. Unfortunately, once they were freed they were given no land or money, and no compensation for all the years of free, hard labor they did during slavery.

So where did they find jobs? Luckily for them, they didnt even have to move to find a job! Yes, the very same people who enslaved them for profit, now apologetic, decided to offer them jobs working the same fields they had under slavery. Buuuuuuuuuuuuut.... those hoes and plows arent free. So, freed slaves had to work to pay to live in their old slave quarters, and to pay for the tools they used. Usually, the amount of work they did in a year wasnt enough to pay for room and board, so they kept getting into debt with their old slavemasters. This was called sharecropping.

Flashforward to Tyesha. Tyesha is descended from the slaves who worked for George`s great-great-granddaddy. Luckily for her, things got better after sharecropping. In the 1940s, her grandparents managed to find work in an automobile plant. They werent allowed to unionize because they were black, and whenever layoffs happened, they were always the first to go. But still, they managed to eke out a living. It was kinda sad though, since Tyeshas grandfather had a great mathematical mind. Of course, he wasnt allowed to attend the best universities in the country because he was black, and he was lucky to find the job in the automobile factory in the first place.

Tyesha`s parents were part of the civil rights movement. Finally, in 1965, her family got the right to vote. Now that they were truly given equal rights, things did improve for them a bit. Yet still, Tyesha`s father had trouble finding jobs. Maybe it was because his father didnt go to college with the owner of the local bank. Or maybe its because that white guy with a criminal record and straight Cs in college truly CAN do the job better than him. Whatever the case, Tyesha`s father doesnt make that much money. You know what though? Tyesha`s great grandparents worked a lot harder than George`s great grandparents, but now George has way more money and connections than Tyesha. I guess thats because Black people arent good at investing money, or maybe because they have weak ankles, so they cant footbag.

Tyesha just turned 18. Happy birthday! Now, time to apply to colleges. Now, Tyesha has no legacy to get her into colleges automatically, and she didnt have enough money to take the SATs several times, or buy a tutor. Even so, she manages to get a 1300 on her SATs.

Without affirmative action, George would definitely beat her to get into college. With affirmative action, George still beats her to get into college.

But what about Jimmy? He`s another white kid, who`s family isnt rich, but at least their family got to keep all the money they earned back in the 1800s, and their skin color made it much easier for them to get decent paying jobs throughout the 20th century too. Jimmy isnt rich, but he can afford tutors at Kaplan Test Course Prep. His initial SAT score was a 1150. But after taking the prep courses, and taking the test twice, he bumps up to a respectable 1350.

Which kid do you take?

Personally, I take the kid with more potential, everytime. Tyesha`s family and background have robbed her of several of the advantages that white students do, but she still shows lots of potential. As somebody on the admissions board, I know she can do more with the education we provide, and so I choose Tyesha, even though she has a lower SAT score.

Are there totally unqualified, stupid black kids out there? Undoubtedly, yes. If a totally unqualified, unmotivated stupid black kid applies to a college, does Affirmative Action mean that he will be picked over a highly qualified white kid? No. No it doesnt. Affirmative action gives a small boost to already qualified applicants, who historically and currently are disadvantaged due to their skin color.

Zeke · Post by **Zeke** » 01 Apr 2004 22:36

I am the affirmitive action member of CIC.

Bubbles!

sPinko-Mania · Post by **sPinko-Mania** » 02 Apr 2004 00:51

1) I dislike basically any idea of choosing based on skin colour, the whole notion is inherently flawed. The same logic that we use to shoot down regular racism can be applied to affirmative action.

2) AA would work great if all blacks were poor and all whites were rich. I just can't bring myself to agree with a system that can knowingly process a poor white person and not give them aid, but process a rich black person and give them aid or vice versa. Welfare systems of any kind should strive to be suited to individual needs as much as humanly possible. I think AA fails to do this, aid should be directed to the disadvantaged regardless of colour, it's an issue of need not race. Instead we have institutional discrimination.

3) Jeremy mentioned the counter-productive side, but I think almost all AA is counter-productive. It breeds racism in a chronic way, at least in my country but I doubt New Zealand is unique in this. Many people from the races not chosen for entitlements are going to feel angry, and it gives ammo to racists, and this has resulted in a racist backlash here against Maori.
It is also counter productive because minorities who earn their place through ability not race are always assumed that it was an affirmative action that got them there. In this way I think it does minorities a disservice. I work with a couple of really smart Maori guys and I'm sure they'll probably get scholarships and certain people who will just automatically think 'they just got it because they're Maori'. This pisses me off no end.

This issue is quite a hot topic at the moment in New Zealand, and I find it really annoying for another reason. We have the Treaty of Waitangi here that was signed by Maori to cede (a type of) sovereignty to the crown. A part of this treaty left Maori with traditional rights over their customary land. Currently people don't seem to differentiate between these customary rights and AA, which may result in the treaty (which I think is important to the governments claim to legitimacy) being scrapped altogether if the national party gets into power.

Also, I'd like to see high schools start teaching some basic facts about what 'race' is. There are a lot of myths about exactly how real race is, and I don't think it was until fairly late in high school that I did some reading myself and found that the majority of anthropoligists accept that race is essencially a social construct. I think it would benefit a lot of people if this was taught properly in high school (maybe it is elsewhere).

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 02 Apr 2004 16:19

i was going to say that homo sapien is a race, but i didnt want to get yelled at

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 02 Apr 2004 17:01

I vote against anything jeremy posts

.

I haven't read this all yet - C-Fan wrote too damn much to read in 2 seconds -hehe

full nelson · Post by **full nelson** » 02 Apr 2004 21:52

I think race is determined by the shape of the cranium. Skin color is only a secondary characteristic.

That's just what I remember from high school. I haven't read anything lately.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » 05 Apr 2004 13:47

full nelson wrote:I think race is determined by the shape of the cranium. Skin color is only a secondary characteristic. Most people are a mix of 8 or 9 different races.

That's just what I remember from high school. I haven't read anything lately.

Pshaw. You've got the frontal slope of a stage coach driver!

krawallier · Post by **krawallier** » 08 Apr 2004 04:38

in german, the word "race" has a solely negative connotation... unless you talk about dogs... this is totally different in english, but i don't think that is good at all. genetically, differences between two individuals of the same skin color are much bigger than those between "races", genetics define your skin color, but it is impossible to tell your skin color by your gens... i don't think it is a question of PC, basically the term race just doesn't make sense...

btw: i think it is amazing that those people i find interesting and nice in person, actually have similar opinions on all those topics, though i didn't talk politics or things to them much... yes, i am looking at you jeremy, ken...

HighDemonslayer · Post by **HighDemonslayer** » 05 Jul 2004 13:23

June 27, 2004

Why Black Leaders Think It’s Great That Immigrants Get Affirmative Action—And Why They Have Another Think Coming
By Steve Sailer

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/harvard_quotas.htm

Chris Hanratty · Post by **Chris Hanratty** » 06 Jul 2004 06:35

I'm going to make this short, and I didn't read the thread so it's probably already been said.

Good because it may help minority groups [re]integrate and become a help to society.

Bad because nobody deserves a job because they are a minority. The person who is best suited for the job should get it, and it's not fair to hard working [insert homeland country here] citizens(sp?) to lose jobs because of this.

I have no vote really.

dblthnk84 · Post by **dblthnk84** » 06 Jul 2004 08:52

My problem with affermitave action is that it is not affected by the person's upbringing. There is a kid that went to the same school that I did, took less challenging classes, had a slightly lower gpa, and was 4 points lower on that ACT. Why was he the one that got accepted into State when we both applied? Its not like he personally had any disadvantages, he went to the same school as me- he even lived in a nicer neighborhood (so while it is unconformed, I wouldn't be supprised if his family was richer).

modified