EPTEdit - To keep completely on topic - Yes, AA needs to be done away with. AA is state sponsored recognition of segregation IMO.
Affirmative Action in 2009 - Page 4
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
EvilTeletubby
Baltimore, USA22256 Posts
Edit - To keep completely on topic - Yes, AA needs to be done away with. AA is state sponsored recognition of segregation IMO. | ||
LosingID8
CA10828 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:28 ahrara_ wrote: i lived in missouri for 4 years. my sister and i were the only two asians in our entire school. i know what racism feels like. my high school was 90%+ white, too and i got my fair share of "ching chong". drop the condescending tone ok? I have to second what Jibba said. You'd have to be extraordinarily outofyourwits naive not to be able to see the discrimination that happens with African Americans. You don't have any idea what that is because you're chinese, or you're white, or you're some other race that doesn't benefit from AA. You only have token black friends and live in fairly diverse communities so you're woefully unaware of the racism that pervades society. Ya I'd be pissed off if I didn't get into my first pick school because a black student got an advantage because of AA. But at the same time, AA as a whole has the promise of healing those relations once and for all, so that is a worthwhile sacrifice on the whole. and i was referring to on-campus, not out in the community. i live in downtown LA, i think i know that racism is prevalent in the "real world" | ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:13 Jibba wrote: In Southern California?! Take a black friend into Abercrombie and have him go into a dressing room while you watch the clerks. Hell, take a look at the shit the Bay Area police are in right now. http://uwnews.org/article.asp?articleID=2148 That study was done with college students. An econ article I read in college measured the first price quoted to a person at used car lots. They trained a bunch of people to act the same way, wore the same clothes. They found the highest prices were given to women, then blacks, and the lowest prices to white men. But the interesting thing was, black salesmen discriminated the most against blacks while the white salesmen did so much less.  | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
 My reading list is stupidly long right now. Working on Look Homeward Angel and then a few books on Ataturk and then Proust and maybe Obama's book if I get time. D: Basically I will get none of those done this semester. My mini-library seriously goes from Peter Drucker to William Blame, though. | ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:28 ahrara_ wrote: Ya I'd be pissed off if I didn't get into my first pick school because a black student got an advantage because of AA. But at the same time, AA as a whole has the promise of healing those relations once and for all, so that is a worthwhile sacrifice on the whole. Dude are you kidding? You JUST stated you would HATE to be passed over for a less qualified black man, but you think that affirmative action will HEAL race relations? Eventually white people will learn to enjoy being passed over because they weren't the right race? I think that AA is doing more damage than good now in that it stirs up resentment and polls show the people in general do not think that AA is needed anymore so they are going to be even less tolerant of special treatment being given to certain races but not others. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:59 Savio wrote: White guilt, maybe?An econ article I read in college measured the first price quoted to a person at used car lots. They trained a bunch of people to act the same way, wore the same clothes. They found the highest prices were given to women, then blacks, and the lowest prices to white men. But the interesting thing was, black salesmen discriminated the most against blacks while the white salesmen did so much less. I believe greater percentages of women were against the Equal Rights Amendment than men. | ||
|
EvilTeletubby
Baltimore, USA22256 Posts
| ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On January 31 2009 17:04 EvilTeletubby wrote: Agreed with Savio. AA had it's place 50 years ago, but not now IMO. That doesn't mean racism or prejudice is gone by any means, don't get me wrong, but it will do more harm than good in it's current form IMO. Even though I am fairly conservative, I do think that AA did good when it was instututed probably until about the mid 90's. But it had its time and it needs to go. BTW, I feel the same about unions. They did their good, now they are causing more harm than good, but I may have just risked derailing this thread....so...if you want to debate me on unions, go to economy thread where that is being actively discussed plz. | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
On January 31 2009 17:02 Savio wrote: Dude are you kidding? You JUST stated you would HATE to be passed over for a less qualified black man, but you think that affirmative action will HEAL race relations? Eventually white people will learn to enjoy being passed over because they weren't the right race? I think that AA is doing more damage than good now in that it stirs up resentment and polls show the people in general do not think that AA is needed anymore so they are going to be even less tolerant of special treatment being given to certain races but not others. I knew I was going to get flack for taking a stance that violates people's "principles" even though there is a utilitarian benefit to the policy. The argument that AA causes resentment is the only viable one I've heard in this thread so far. But AA is not an African American policy. It is federally mandated or state mandated. Any resentment it generates is directed towards the government, unless you wear white robes on the weekends, in which case you're beyond help. Even if AA created resentment towards blacks, it is a small contribution compared to other, more significant parts of the minority stereotype -- particularly the stigma of poverty and crime. Yet the benefits of AA are much greater in magnitude. Minorities are present in colleges where they otherwise would never get a chance. I may be resentful that another person got into a college because of his race, but I won't resent HIM, I'd resent the system. If I met this person and he turned out to be a good student, that would go a long way into destroying my stereotypes of black or hispanic people. There's a lot of talk about principles in this thread. It surprises me how adamant people are to apply general principles broadly to every instance while complaining about how I make the same fallacy of hasty generalization. Because discrimination was wrong in southern segregation doesn't make it wrong in all instances. If you followed that logic, then we shouldn't give flu vaccines to people because the the vaccine actually contains a small dose of the virus. Sometimes you have to swallow the poison to get the cure. | ||
|
ahrara_
Afghanistan1715 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:55 LosingID8 wrote: i lived in missouri for 4 years. my sister and i were the only two asians in our entire school. i know what racism feels like. my high school was 90%+ white, too and i got my fair share of "ching chong". drop the condescending tone ok? and i was referring to on-campus, not out in the community. i live in downtown LA, i think i know that racism is prevalent in the "real world" For what it's worth I owe you an apology for being a condescending prick. I reacted in a knee jerk fashion to something that pisses me off. I still stand by my argument though. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
ShadowDrgn
United States2497 Posts
On January 31 2009 16:37 ahrara_ wrote: In this case, any harm done by reverse discrimination is outweighed by the advantage of solving racism. Woah, wait a minute. Solving racism? If anything, AA inflames tensions between races. The government shouldn't grant or deny any benefit based on race. If a university or employer wants to implement its own affirmative action program to promote diversity, it should be allowed to, but it shouldn't be forced. And if I need any street cred in this thread, I lived most of my life in/around Atlanta and had more than token black friends. | ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On January 31 2009 17:34 rushz0rz wrote: It is not the federal or states job to make it possible for people who didn't do so hot in school to get further, or someone who isn't as qualified enough to get the job. People should work for their prospects, they shouldn't be handed over merely because someone is a minority and is less qualified. The best and most qualified person should get accepted REGARDLESS of race. You need an equalizer when the quality of education blows, plus "qualified" is a subjective term, determined by whoever is in charge which is largely rich, white males. As someone studying for the GRE, I can tell you that the test has absolutely zero bearing on my intelligence nor on my future success in graduate school and beyond, yet it's going to have a huge effect on my entrance and the money I receive. When people say we live in a rich, white man's world, it's absolutely true. Those are the people who make the rules in most institutions, and even if they're not purposefully trying to harm you, they are still biased because of the way they live. Social mobility (being able to move from one social class to another) is an important part of the "American dream" and it doesn't exist to the extent we believe it does. People at the very top rarely move down and people at the very bottom rarely move up. | ||
|
Funnytoss
Taiwan1471 Posts
| ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
On January 31 2009 17:43 Jibba wrote: You need an equalizer when the quality of education blows, plus "qualified" is a subjective term, determined by whoever is in charge which is largely rich, white males. I see no truth to this at all. Qualified isn't as subjective as you make it out to be. Someone who has the right credentials is qualified, someone who doesn't, simply isn't qualified for the job or school. It is not the employer or University's problem if someone bombed a test, regardless if it has bearing on actual intelligence, it's all about credentials to prove yourself. There has to be some kind of standard, especially in all the different fields of expertise and jobs there is today. I hardly think the "rich white males" create "qualified". | ||
|
Savio
United States1850 Posts
On January 31 2009 17:45 Funnytoss wrote: ... what exactly is AA in the United States now anyway? The way people are talking now, it would seem like it's quotas or something. quotas are part of it and they are likely the most controversial and criticized part. Read the wikipedia article on it for a simple overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States Although it is not a very good article. Wiki said the article lacked citations and its neutrality is listed as "disputed" | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
When setting an achievement goal, you can't NOT look at it through the lens with which you were brought up. A manager with an MBA from Harvard will look at business through a Harvard-taught perspective, which means his judgment on the way business works will cater to other people who were similarly taught at Harvard. This problem is especially true in economics, with the massive differences between Chicago and Harvard and Stockholm and so on. You aren't getting hired at those schools unless you share a similar perspective, and it's not because of purposeful discrimination. You can even apply it to government. Why is there a hugely disproportionate amount of rich, white males in Congress? Because running a campaign takes $$$ and more $$$ and friends with $$$, and historically who has had the most of that? President Bush sure as hell didn't earn his stake with his terrible oil investments when he ran for governor. EDIT: I'm not saying it's a problem we can readily fix, and it's likely impossible to fix. Still, you need to at least be cognizant of it. | ||
|
rushz0rz
Canada5300 Posts
On January 31 2009 18:29 Jibba wrote: Then who does? The SAT and ACT are good standards? Highschool GPA is a good standard of intelligence? When setting an achievement goal, you can't NOT look at it through the lens with which you were brought up. A manager with an MBA from Harvard will look at business through a Harvard-taught perspective, which means his judgment on the way business works will cater to other people who were similarly taught at Harvard. This problem is especially true in economics, with the massive differences between Chicago and Harvard and Stockholm and so on. You aren't getting hired at those schools unless you share a similar perspective, and it's not because of purposeful discrimination. You can even apply it to government. Why is there a hugely disproportionate amount of rich, white males in Congress? Because running a campaign takes $$$ and more $$$ and friends with $$$, and historically who has had the most of that? President Bush sure as hell didn't earn his stake with his terrible oil investments when he ran for governor. EDIT: I'm not saying it's a problem we can readily fix, and it's likely impossible to fix. Still, you need to at least be cognizant of it. If Highschool GPA were ever to mean nothing to colleges and Universities, then what would they base acceptance on? Merely a persons good word that they know a lot, that they are intelligent? There needs to be a standard, and who is more likely to be intelligent, the guy getting straight A's or the guy getting barely C's? And which is more proof of a hard worker, who deserves his spot? There should be no catering to people who don't deserve it, and seriously, what does that say about a person if they are intelligent but too lazy to get the good grades and work for their spot. What will employers base their hiring on if they don't look at credentials? "I am more intelligent, believe me! I just got screwed by the system and I was lazy!" Give me a break. It can be fixed, yes, but there shouldn't be government intervention in this. I believe in generations there will be more diversity in government and everything else, without the help of Affirmative Action. I just don't see how you can justify reverse discrimination on the basis that it will help overcome racism. If anything it creates a whole lot of resentment, and how are black people supposed to feel proud of their accomplishments knowing that they only got there because of their skin colour? | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On January 31 2009 18:43 rushz0rz wrote: Interviews and essays, or open admission like I said before. If Highschool GPA were ever to mean nothing to colleges and Universities, then what would they base acceptance on? Merely a persons good word that they know a lot, that they are intelligent? There needs to be a standard, and who is more likely to be intelligent, the guy getting straight A's or the guy getting barely C's? That's simply a conjecture on your part. Does getting an A in AP US History mean you're a good thinker or that you even understand history well? Fuck no, it means you excel at rote memorization.There should be no catering to people who don't deserve it Again, your perception of deserving is based on your own experience of success. You live within your own paradigm but aren't paying attention to others'. You assume that what was successful in the past will be successful in the future, and that's a mistake more and more businesses are trying to avoid.and seriously, what does that say about a person if they are intelligent but too lazy to get the good grades and work for their spot. One of the principle ideas of going to college is that it will be a crucible for young people. The average human brain is still growing into the early-mid 20s, and I bet you'd find there's not a terrific amount of correlation between being lazy in highschool and lazy in college.This is what Kuhn was writing about when he analyzed the history of scientific research, and it applies to social problems as well. Your values are not universal. | ||
| ||
