Affirmative Action - Page 2 - VGF

imported_AJ Middleton · 11-23-2003, 07:53 PM

I already have, multiple times, but as usual she twists it to her own means.

Here's a piece of history:
Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

11-23-2003, 08:27 PM

Here's my ideas on it:
http://nique.net/issues/fall2003/2003-10-31/5.html

Whatever was said by another College Republican, I agree with it too.

BTW, I'm in that picture. Guess which one it is.

imported_AJ Middleton · 11-23-2003, 08:44 PM

^No, not even a valid point of comparison. Events like that show how many people don't even understand what AA is. That's like voluntarily expressing ignorance. Pathetic.

11-23-2003, 09:04 PM

I thought that protest was done as responce to what one university actually did for AA. They had some sort of system where they gave people "points" towards being accepted and one of the questions which they gave people different points for was for their race. Blacks were given so many points, whites given so many points, ect.-jay

imported_AJ Middleton · 11-23-2003, 09:08 PM

See, that seems fine to me, as long as any race points could easily be cancelled out by other things.

Link47 · 11-23-2003, 11:04 PM

Here's something I just thought of. Blacks and other minorities have always wanted to be equal. And now that you've finally reached equality, you want more. You can have equal treatment, not special treatment. Race should not be a factor in anything (with the exception of some things). Not qualified enough for something? Too bad. Deal with it. Life isn't fair.

11-23-2003, 11:11 PM

Well there was a time when it was widely accepted that a substanial IQ gap between whites and blacks explained different levels of economic and educational achievement. However, these days it's considered "racist" to insist the races differ in IQ.

Since it's now been accepted that all races are equally intelligent, any disparity that exists between them must reflect racism or unwillingness to help certain people. Many people insist affirmative action is a good way to cancel out this racism.

11-24-2003, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BoltDragoon:
See, that seems fine to me, as long as any race points could easily be cancelled out by other things.

But why have the race points at all? Why should race have any bearing on admission?
Truth is, it shouldn't.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

11-24-2003, 01:23 AM

^ Exactly. The race point system is not effective.

Lurch1982 · 11-24-2003, 01:35 AM

Take Law School for example. Someone with a higher LSAT score and a higher GPA may not get the nod because their personal mission statement is very weak (like "I want to be a lawyer because it pays well"). Diversity is a compelling state interest, and systems where grades, scores, and ranks are not used allow to create a more diverse student body. Its not the same as saying someone who has a 180 on the LSAT and a 3.9 GPA will not get in in favor of someone with a 150 on the LSAT and a 2.9...stop being stupid. Its saying that some external things, like work experience, family background, etc will play a part in admissions for hte middle and lower chunks of the admission classes. That's why you'll see exception cases in prestigeuos law schools.

Points are given for a variety of things, and race is one of the categories. Sure, I may be white, but I'm also in X income bracket, and am the first member in my household to go past undergrad work. It isn't "you're black, you're in." QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL. THEY HAVE BEEN FOR 20 YEARS. AA IS NOT QUOTAS.

Except they're not equal.

IQ gaps are false (look at some of the many brilliant non-caucasians out there) and are primarily used to convey a message of racial superiority. They were historically used to support slavery and genocide.

Because schools want a diverse student body. This doesn't mean racial diversity...it means social-economical-racial-religious-background-mission diversity.

11-24-2003, 09:21 AM

^ YES. That last sentense in your post was another post we were trying to make (see my link). Racial diversity isn't true diversity if it's the only kind you have.

Lurch1982 · 11-24-2003, 06:18 PM

Except that in point-based admissions for schools (in most cases), race isn't the only factor used.

11-24-2003, 07:10 PM

The point is that race shouldn't be a factor at all, since even if you are black/Native American/hispanic/inuit/etc., as long as you work hard enough, you should be able to do whatever you want in life (as far as scholarly and career oportunities go.).

Lurch1982 · 11-24-2003, 07:40 PM

Except that a well rounded student body is much better than a carbon copy one. If you take the top X% of applicants just on grades, you may get booksmart people, but people who are unmotivated, or are only doing this for money, or some other undesirable trait. By looking at a wide array of traits in admissions, you can bring in the students that weren't as great on GPAs and tests, but may actually be more productive to the academic environment. It is far more desirable to have people in the school that weren't as highly qualified, but have more motivation or better personal goals than people who were qualified but do nothing but regurgitate what was in the textbook and do not think.

imported_AJ Middleton · 11-24-2003, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by [px] Link47:
Here's something I just thought of. Blacks and other minorities have always wanted to be equal. And now that you've finally reached equality, you want more. You can have equal treatment, not special treatment. Race should not be a factor in anything (with the exception of some things). Not qualified enough for something? Too bad. Deal with it. Life isn't fair.

Hey idiot! AA works for minorities in any given situation! That means that a caucasian male would have the advantage when applying to a mainly African-american girl school. So shut your bigoted hole.

Race means diversity, and as I think on it more, it IS an important factor in a community.

11-24-2003, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Lurch1982:
Except that a well rounded student body is much better than a carbon copy one. If you take the top X% of applicants just on grades, you may get booksmart people, but people who are unmotivated, or are only doing this for money, or some other undesirable trait. By looking at a wide array of traits in admissions, you can bring in the students that weren't as great on GPAs and tests, but may actually be more productive to the academic environment. It is far more desirable to have people in the school that weren't as highly qualified, but have more motivation or better personal goals than people who were qualified but do nothing but regurgitate what was in the textbook and do not think.

Essays.
Volunteer work.
Job experience.
Recommendation letters.
Counselors' comments.
Etc.

There are plenty of ways to tell what a prospective student is like aside from book-smarts. Race doesn't seem like it'd be one of them.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Lurch1982 · 11-24-2003, 11:07 PM

Except they're also taking into consideration things like race, family educational history, income, work experience, etc. Its an entire list of things that add up to a student, and race certainly does factor in there somewhere.

imported_AJ Middleton · 11-24-2003, 11:18 PM

^Relatives who were alumni, etc.

11-25-2003, 08:19 PM

Not that it matters, but I read somewhere that boys are in a significant decline in colleges... For some reasong percentages of girls are just getting higher and higher. And so the article goes on to actually mention the words affirmative action. Whatever for this time? To help the boys.

[ November 25, 2003, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: KirbyKing ]

11-25-2003, 10:06 PM

I 100% agree it's good to get people that are the best applicants overall. There are numerous factors that determine who is the best. Not just academics. We want people that are creative and can contribute the most to society. That's important.

I just don't understand how a student body that's 27% Asian, 4% Hispanic, 1% Native American, 3% black, and 65% white caucasian is more motivated and selfless than a 80-90% white causian student body. From what I've seen, whites generally tend to be the most concerned with making a difference in society anyway. Look at how overwhelmingly white the membership of environmentalist organizations is. Not that I'm saying non-whites aren't concerned.

However, what we think doesn't really matter. Affirmative action will exist as long as inequality exists between the different ethnic groups. It will never go away. Since that's a cerain reality, I think the best form of affirmative action is the points system.

Anyway affirmative action can be though of as an entitlement program that taxes one group to support another. We have entitlement programs like welfare that tax the advantaged rich and give the money to the disadvantaged poor. We have entitlement programs that tax the working people and give the money to the retired people. We have entitlement programs that tax the suburban areas to fund development in the rural areas. Affirmative action is simply another entitlement program that taxes a certain group to help another group. Of course this entitlement is both unconstitutional and unfair to a certain group of people, but so are a lot of other government programs as well.

It's not too bad for whites anyway. Opportunities exist for everyone. Even intelligent whites denied admissions to Harvard will probably to a regional university and major in the same field. He might make less money, but he'll still be successful. Affirmative action essentially lowers the possible income level of whites to raise the average income level of non-whites. This may be wrong, but is no worse than the heavy taxes on the middle class that are needed to support programs for the poor.

I'm not saying I support affirmative action, but that it isn't as unusual as people seem to think. It's just how politics works in today's increasing diverse and multi-cultural society where every group believes it needs the government's help to fight discrimination.

If Canada is wise, they'll make sure that "diversity" doesn't get out of control like it has here.

[ November 25, 2003, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: Mushroommarioman ]

11-23-2003, 07:53 PM	#21
imported_AJ Middleton Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 222.00 Bank: 0.00 Total Points: 222.00 Donate	I already have, multiple times, but as usual she twists it to her own means. Here's a piece of history: Regents of the University of California v. Bakke

11-23-2003, 08:27 PM	#22
PenguinMan26 Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	Here's my ideas on it: http://nique.net/issues/fall2003/2003-10-31/5.html Whatever was said by another College Republican, I agree with it too. BTW, I'm in that picture. Guess which one it is.

11-23-2003, 08:44 PM	#23
imported_AJ Middleton Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 222.00 Bank: 0.00 Total Points: 222.00 Donate	^No, not even a valid point of comparison. Events like that show how many people don't even understand what AA is. That's like voluntarily expressing ignorance. Pathetic.

11-23-2003, 09:04 PM	#24
Perrin Aybara Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	I thought that protest was done as responce to what one university actually did for AA. They had some sort of system where they gave people "points" towards being accepted and one of the questions which they gave people different points for was for their race. Blacks were given so many points, whites given so many points, ect.-jay

11-23-2003, 09:08 PM	#25
imported_AJ Middleton Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 222.00 Bank: 0.00 Total Points: 222.00 Donate	See, that seems fine to me, as long as any race points could easily be cancelled out by other things.

11-23-2003, 11:04 PM	#26
Link47 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: USA Posts: 8,377 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 22,609.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 23,109.00 Donate	Here's something I just thought of. Blacks and other minorities have always wanted to be equal. And now that you've finally reached equality, you want more. You can have equal treatment, not special treatment. Race should not be a factor in anything (with the exception of some things). Not qualified enough for something? Too bad. Deal with it. Life isn't fair.

11-23-2003, 11:11 PM	#27
Mushroommarioman Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	Well there was a time when it was widely accepted that a substanial IQ gap between whites and blacks explained different levels of economic and educational achievement. However, these days it's considered "racist" to insist the races differ in IQ. Since it's now been accepted that all races are equally intelligent, any disparity that exists between them must reflect racism or unwillingness to help certain people. Many people insist affirmative action is a good way to cancel out this racism.

11-24-2003, 01:23 AM	#29
PenguinMan26 Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	^ Exactly. The race point system is not effective.

11-24-2003, 01:35 AM	#30
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Katrinaland, USA Gender: Posts: 9,118 Thanks: 119 Thanked 187 Times in 121 Posts Points: 25,467.70 Bank: 138,943.96 Total Points: 164,411.66 Donate	Take Law School for example. Someone with a higher LSAT score and a higher GPA may not get the nod because their personal mission statement is very weak (like "I want to be a lawyer because it pays well"). Diversity is a compelling state interest, and systems where grades, scores, and ranks are not used allow to create a more diverse student body. Its not the same as saying someone who has a 180 on the LSAT and a 3.9 GPA will not get in in favor of someone with a 150 on the LSAT and a 2.9...stop being stupid. Its saying that some external things, like work experience, family background, etc will play a part in admissions for hte middle and lower chunks of the admission classes. That's why you'll see exception cases in prestigeuos law schools. Points are given for a variety of things, and race is one of the categories. Sure, I may be white, but I'm also in X income bracket, and am the first member in my household to go past undergrad work. It isn't "you're black, you're in." QUOTAS ARE ILLEGAL. THEY HAVE BEEN FOR 20 YEARS. AA IS NOT QUOTAS. Except they're not equal. IQ gaps are false (look at some of the many brilliant non-caucasians out there) and are primarily used to convey a message of racial superiority. They were historically used to support slavery and genocide. Because schools want a diverse student body. This doesn't mean racial diversity...it means social-economical-racial-religious-background-mission diversity.

11-24-2003, 09:21 AM	#31
PenguinMan26 Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	^ YES. That last sentense in your post was another post we were trying to make (see my link). Racial diversity isn't true diversity if it's the only kind you have.

11-24-2003, 06:18 PM	#32
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Katrinaland, USA Gender: Posts: 9,118 Thanks: 119 Thanked 187 Times in 121 Posts Points: 25,467.70 Bank: 138,943.96 Total Points: 164,411.66 Donate	Except that in point-based admissions for schools (in most cases), race isn't the only factor used.

11-24-2003, 07:10 PM	#33
PenguinMan26 Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	The point is that race shouldn't be a factor at all, since even if you are black/Native American/hispanic/inuit/etc., as long as you work hard enough, you should be able to do whatever you want in life (as far as scholarly and career oportunities go.).

11-24-2003, 07:40 PM	#34
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Katrinaland, USA Gender: Posts: 9,118 Thanks: 119 Thanked 187 Times in 121 Posts Points: 25,467.70 Bank: 138,943.96 Total Points: 164,411.66 Donate	Except that a well rounded student body is much better than a carbon copy one. If you take the top X% of applicants just on grades, you may get booksmart people, but people who are unmotivated, or are only doing this for money, or some other undesirable trait. By looking at a wide array of traits in admissions, you can bring in the students that weren't as great on GPAs and tests, but may actually be more productive to the academic environment. It is far more desirable to have people in the school that weren't as highly qualified, but have more motivation or better personal goals than people who were qualified but do nothing but regurgitate what was in the textbook and do not think.

11-24-2003, 11:07 PM	#37
Lurch1982 Senior Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Katrinaland, USA Gender: Posts: 9,118 Thanks: 119 Thanked 187 Times in 121 Posts Points: 25,467.70 Bank: 138,943.96 Total Points: 164,411.66 Donate	Except they're also taking into consideration things like race, family educational history, income, work experience, etc. Its an entire list of things that add up to a student, and race certainly does factor in there somewhere.

11-24-2003, 11:18 PM	#38
imported_AJ Middleton Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 222.00 Bank: 0.00 Total Points: 222.00 Donate	^Relatives who were alumni, etc.

11-25-2003, 08:19 PM	#39
KirbyKing Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	Not that it matters, but I read somewhere that boys are in a significant decline in colleges... For some reasong percentages of girls are just getting higher and higher. And so the article goes on to actually mention the words affirmative action. Whatever for this time? To help the boys. [ November 25, 2003, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: KirbyKing ]

11-25-2003, 10:06 PM	#40
Mushroommarioman Guest Posts: n/a Points: 0 Bank: 0 Total Points: 0 Donate	I 100% agree it's good to get people that are the best applicants overall. There are numerous factors that determine who is the best. Not just academics. We want people that are creative and can contribute the most to society. That's important. I just don't understand how a student body that's 27% Asian, 4% Hispanic, 1% Native American, 3% black, and 65% white caucasian is more motivated and selfless than a 80-90% white causian student body. From what I've seen, whites generally tend to be the most concerned with making a difference in society anyway. Look at how overwhelmingly white the membership of environmentalist organizations is. Not that I'm saying non-whites aren't concerned. However, what we think doesn't really matter. Affirmative action will exist as long as inequality exists between the different ethnic groups. It will never go away. Since that's a cerain reality, I think the best form of affirmative action is the points system. Anyway affirmative action can be though of as an entitlement program that taxes one group to support another. We have entitlement programs like welfare that tax the advantaged rich and give the money to the disadvantaged poor. We have entitlement programs that tax the working people and give the money to the retired people. We have entitlement programs that tax the suburban areas to fund development in the rural areas. Affirmative action is simply another entitlement program that taxes a certain group to help another group. Of course this entitlement is both unconstitutional and unfair to a certain group of people, but so are a lot of other government programs as well. It's not too bad for whites anyway. Opportunities exist for everyone. Even intelligent whites denied admissions to Harvard will probably to a regional university and major in the same field. He might make less money, but he'll still be successful. Affirmative action essentially lowers the possible income level of whites to raise the average income level of non-whites. This may be wrong, but is no worse than the heavy taxes on the middle class that are needed to support programs for the poor. I'm not saying I support affirmative action, but that it isn't as unusual as people seem to think. It's just how politics works in today's increasing diverse and multi-cultural society where every group believes it needs the government's help to fight discrimination. If Canada is wise, they'll make sure that "diversity" doesn't get out of control like it has here. [ November 25, 2003, 10:06 PM: Message edited by: Mushroommarioman ]