Poll: Affirmative Action

Recommended Videos

Pseudonym2

New member
Mar 31, 2008
1,086
0
0
Krakyn said:
Affirmative action is ridiculous. I have Hispanic and Asian friends who agree as well. My black friends however strongly support affirmative action.

Being successful in this world shouldn't be about survival of the most pitied, but the fittest.
Except it's survival of the fittest for the environment. Do you do think someone who grew up in a poor neighborhood, and has to dodge crocked cops and drug dealers on their way to underfunded school each day requires the same skills as a guy who received tutors and a private education?

I vote more for an affirmative action for class rather than race because fortunately more and more minorities are becoming richer but there's still a lot of terrible places to grow up in.
 

Nutcase

New member
Dec 3, 2008
1,177
0
0
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Nutcase said:
I'm going for a process of elimination, here. If your intention is not giving one race an unfair advantage or build up permanent victim status, why would you ever set up quotas and nudge test scores?
I'm not sure AA is done through quotas and by nudging test scores:

June 23, 2003 -- In its first ruling on affirmative action in higher education admissions in 25 years, the nation's highest court ruled Monday that race can be used in university admission decisions. But the narrowly divided court also seemed to put limits on how much of a factor race can play in giving minority students an advantage in the admissions process.

The U.S. Supreme Court justices decided on two separate but parallel cases -- they voted 5-4 to uphold the University of Michigan's law school affirmative action policy, which favors minorities. But in a 6-3 vote, the justices struck down the affirmative action policy for undergraduate admissions, which awards 20 points for blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans on an admissions rating scale.
^ By your own quote, nudging scores by race was normal practice in US education the name of Affirmative Action up to 2003. Ergo, the people running AA programs were happy to shit on equality (as long as the discrimination happened in the right direction) up to six years ago, until Supreme Court forced them to stop. While the practice might not be continuing in this exact shape, it's still completely valid as an illustration of what kind of "cause" AA is and what the motives of the people running it are.

Quotas continue to be used in plenty of places. My own local government has gender quotas.
 

Shycte

New member
Mar 10, 2009
2,564
0
0
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Shycte said:
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Shycte said:
The one with the best grades should get in first.

The end
That assumes college is a reward and not a place of learning.

Shouldn't the one who will wind up the most educated by a college experience get in first? Shouldn't school be like the pro sports draft, where no one cares if you were MVP in college, people only care about your chances of becoming MVP in the pros?

Or maybe not. Just...there's a question there I don't think you're answering of how colleges should select candidates: on the basis of their accomplishments before college, or on the basis of their potential to benefit from college?
Their accomplishments before college. College should be the reward for hard work in high school. Otherwise what is the point of studying hard in the first place if you can't get in to college.
To be able to benefit from college. The more prepared you are before college, the more you can benefit from it.

If you come in knowing calculus, you can get further in college than someone of equal ability who doesn't.

But why should you get into college over someone who doesn't know calculus, but could still go further than you by the end of college?

Think about it in sports terms--will a college recruit a kid who won the state high school championship over a kid that didn't, but has more potential to win the college national championship? Why should it be any different for academics?

This hole "race quota" thing only increses the feeling that black and white is diffrent.
Maybe, but that's a different question than whether AA is racist--that's the question of whether it's *effective*
Then the pupil who don't know anything about calculus have no-one but himself to blame. If the first one have worked hard he have the right to go to the best available college.

I see your point, maybe it would be more "fair" is the one with the most potential got in first. But the system can't work that way because that would meen that you'll have to sit down and judge every possible outcome of each students life. There is no such resources.
 

JMeganSnow

New member
Aug 27, 2008
1,591
0
0
Branovices said:
While the whole issue is sticky, you cannot deny that a young person growing up in an affluent home has far better chances at getting ahead in life compared to someone from a very poor home.
Bullshit. Making something of yourself isn't a random draw, it's a result of hard work and dedication. If you'd actually read a book that studies this issue (such as The Millionaire Mind or The Millionaire Next Door), you would learn that poor people very often go on to be quite successful because they are absolutely determined that they're never going to have to worry about money again. The children of the wealthy often end up as worthless drug-addled sex maniacs because they've never had to do anything with themselves and their values orient around maintaining a certain lifestyle instead of pursuing accomplishments.

If you want a practical demonstration, just look at the difference between my housemate and me. My parents: one has a Master's degree, one has a Ph.D. My dad is an engineer for Boeing and makes quite a lot of money. Housemate's parents: one works for Wal-Mart, one works for an ethanol plant. Minimal education, his mother had a child at 17. Me: working at K-Mart at the age of 29 while I struggle to go back to college and complete my degree after dropping out the first time. My housemate: completed his degree right after high school. He has been working as a System Admin for the biggest Credit Union in Ohio for 10 years. Owns his own house.

Yeah, I see where I got the "lucky shake" there. :p
 

Krakyn

New member
Mar 3, 2009
789
0
0
Pseudonym2 said:
Krakyn said:
Affirmative action is ridiculous. I have Hispanic and Asian friends who agree as well. My black friends however strongly support affirmative action.

Being successful in this world shouldn't be about survival of the most pitied, but the fittest.
Except it's survival of the fittest for the environment. Do you do think someone who grew up in a poor neighborhood, and has to dodge crocked cops and drug dealers on their way to underfunded school each day requires the same skills as a guy who received tutors and a private education?

I vote more for an affirmative action for class rather than race because fortunately more and more minorities are becoming richer but there's still a lot of terrible places to grow up in.
I lived in what was the murder capital of the US at the time; look up Gary, Indiana. I'm a low class, poor person, and I don't want to the government or any other institutions to take pity on me for it. I don't want a free ride or to take away the chance of somebody less qualified. I probably turned out to be the smartest person to come from that god-forsaken place because I wanted to. I didn't need any help, and I don't think anybody deserves it.
 

Lukirre

New member
Feb 24, 2009
472
0
0
I personally don't see why it matters so much. I mean, yes, college and universities are supposed to be places of learning, but the more prestigious they are, the more they cost. The more they cost, the more effort you're going to put into them in order to be able to graduate with honors or whatever your goal may be. Yes, I understand that there are exceptions to this, and all of that trifle.

So if a black male/female does not have the same education as a white male/female, why should I hire them? How is that in any way more diverse, more tolerant, or the proper course of action?

If you don't have the education, if you don't have the qualification, then you don't have the career. It really is as simple as that. If we begin to lower our standards for the less priveledged then businesses will have a harder time getting the kind of work that they want done to be done.

Then again, this is just a rant from someone who grew up in the age of putting tolerance and acceptance upon people, so I'm a bit desensitized to any sort of racism claims that can be made.
 

gerrymander61

New member
Sep 28, 2008
169
0
0
Affirmative action is retarded. If any minority comes up to me whining about discrimination, I will tell him to fuck off back to the 20th century. If Barack Obama can become the most powerful person on earth, then surely anyone can get into med school.
 

KeithA45

New member
Jan 19, 2009
423
0
0
I understand why it was brought on to combat racism but the fact of the matter is that it just serves to push the negative effects of racism on different people.

I know this is probably going to stir up a bees nest, but it's the same problem as the feminist movements. Now I'm not saying women don't deserve equal pay/treatment, they definitely do, but by pushing for "women can be better than men" and "putting more women in the workplace" they actually BOLDEN the gender line, bringing gender to front of the issue. Now an employer might have to debate if a man is better at his job because he's a man, or a woman is better at her job because she's a woman, when the REAL issue is their individual work ethic, qualifications and etc. for a job.

MLK had it right. I never heard him say "African Americans are better than white Americans". Instead he pushed for equal rights and equal treatment. Affirmative action may seem like a good idea to combat racism but in reality it just BOLDENS the race line
 

vamp rocks

New member
Aug 27, 2008
990
0
0
its riddiculous in my opinion... the best person should get the job... someone shouldnt get hired just because they are a minority.. its preposterous!
 

Lullabye

New member
Oct 23, 2008
4,424
0
0
JakePwnsAtLife said:
So, I was doing my American Government class work and I had to research the Supreme Court case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. It was basically about affirmative action preventing a student from getting accepted into their medical school because his race quota was already filled and they selected less qualified students of another race rather than him. The courts decided in his favor, but affirmative action continues. I want to know your opinions on the process of affirmative action and your general feelings towards the subject. This is not a petty "racism" debate, I just want to know if, like me, you think to do away with the whole process and just select any candidate no matter what race based solely on qualifications. Let race play no part of it.
I believe it was neccessary a while ago, but now I think we can do away with it. I think gender issues are a bigger deal now. Hell, looking around my class now, the white people are a minority.
 

TheSKSpecial

New member
Mar 7, 2008
123
0
0
As long as companies offer more jobs to white convicts than black non-offenders [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905EEDB133EF934A25755C0A9639C8B63], or are 50% more likely to call an applicant back if they have a "white-sounding name" [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05E5DD123AF931A25751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2], AA will still need to exist in some shape or form.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,908
0
0
Okay, to Cheez and Nic:


1: Genocide

Yes, I am aware that some people try and extend it to include idealogy or culture. The fact that I disagree with this extension is what started the discussion on it to begin with.

As far as I go, I believe that Genocide is limited to the destruction of an ethnicity. Basically if you are going to round up all Arabs, Hebrews, Blacks, Asians, Whites, or whatever and murder them so there aren't any more left. That is the only thing that is genocide.

Otherwise, you'd basically have to start making arguements by the extended logic that by erasing racism, banning hate speech, and generally persecuting groups like say the KKK or Nazis we should all put guns to our own heads and committ suicide for crimes against humanity because we are committing genocide.

"But wait Therumancer, nobody considers hate based philosophies to be included in that. The whole idea is the law is to prevent them"... and that is exactly my point, and a concept like this has to be universal.

The fact that groups like the UN have accepted an extended definition is one of the reasons I believe they are a group of idiots that have outlived their usefulness, and that the US should leave and simply start another group (a whole differant discussion). I am just waiting for the day that someone from the KKK, Khymer Rouge Remnants, or Al Queda or whatever comes up and demands support from the UN due to being victims of attempted ideological genocide. :p

"You can't genocidally annihilate those who want to perpetuate genocide without causing genocide. Thus you should protect our right to preach and perhaps committ genocide to prevent genocide!". Uh-Huh.

-

2:

On the matter of Affirmitive action itself:

#1: The only people argueing that Obama could have been elected purely by Black support are people who want to keep racism alive for political reasons, and honestly this includes a lot of the media and those generating statistics because after all the issue, whether it truely exists or not, gets attention. These are exactly the guys with a vested interest in there never truely being an end to it.

Blacks are a minority group, there simply are not enough of them to carry a cantidate without overwhelming support from the mainstream (which are ethnically white). This is why the election of Obama is a noteworthy occurance and proves the demise of racism as a mainstream phenomena.

When it comes to the mainstream you REALLY have to look for something that addresses the issue of race in anything but presenting a message of tolerance. For the most part to try and find a sign of racism people really have to go overboard and try and claim things like RE 5 are racist (which is simply ridiculous).

Actually the easiest forms of racist material to find are pro-black, but even then it's typically indirect. Even Rap music has chilled out quite a bit in recent years. The whole "get rich or die trying", and "so coool to be a Thug" generes of Black-centric entertainment are liable to gradually die out before too long, especially if people start to seriously look at it and realize that a lot of it is very similar to what is currently being CLAIMED about games like RE5, except in reverse, and for real (as opposed to digging for a headline). But as I said that won't be immediate.

Things like KKK newsletters and such just aren't mainstream, and please note I have carefully been using the term "Mainstream" rather than saying the issue is entirely dead, because there still are guys out there running around with sheets over their heads. They are treated with scorn, and if mentioned in the media it's typically to mock them, but they are out there. The attempted "Genocide" continues but is not yet complete .


#2:

Affirmitive Action existed largely because when it started people would fire off the "N" word as frequently as they said hello when dealing with black people, and nobody would want them around. Basically there were overt acts of discrimination.

Right now such things simply do not exist. The biggest form of discrimination you see is when minorities "take care of their own" by hiring and promoting other minorities in a lot of cases. Though such is not always the case, it does happen.

Sure, somewhere down in hicksville there might be a package store where a guy keeps a pillowcase with eyeholes under the counter next to his shotgun and copy of "The Amerikkkan Warrior". But that isn't mainstream and in general there are probably a few black owned businesses that would have similar hiring practices in reverse. But none of this is MAINSTREAM.

Today when you get hired, nobody cares. In fact people care so little that like 90% of the hiring is done almost totally by computer. Your typical job, like working for Wal*Mart involves either calling their website to apply, or using the internet right there from their store. You don't even ask for an application. It's a huge conglomerate, they want disposable employee #112451 they don't care what your ethnicity is. Heck if they call you in for an interview it's typically just to make sure the information from the computer is accurate half the time.

The exception to this is of course job or hiring fairs. When I got hired to work at Mohegan Sun down here in connecticut, the "hiring process" was basically a giant line they fed all the prospetive employees though like a conveyor. Here you had an application, and you tossed it over, they double checked the information, and basically said "oh you want this job, okay, the sheet is accurate? will you work hard. Go for it, come in next week for your uniform".

Now I suppose things are a little more personal for some jobs, but this is how it is for most people, and I've been through the process (admittedly I only held 2 jobs over a period of 10 years before I became disabled and both were in Casino Security, the first one where I got hired like the above was as a Janitor though and once I had my foot in the door I went into security due to my Criminal Justice training from College).

Mom and pops stores are disappearing, and honestly the day of walking in, risking a manager giving you an application based on what you look like, and then sitting down for a serious job interview, are dead for most normal blue collar employment. Even outside of blue collar it's all about your Pedigree/qualifications since companies can consider good ones a notch in their belt.

In such situations Affirmitive action usually amounts to a company being given a quota and then telling so many white people "no" until they have the set number of minorities simply to appease the goverment, and that is how the game is played.

Don't believe me? Check out a Wal*Mart employment center/kiosk at one of their stores, and they are one of America's biggest employers. Heck after *I* was hired the Casinos also went totally online and now they have computers out front. It's so incredibly antiseptic and impersonal nowadays that it's ridiculous. Businesses only care about you being able to fit in as a cog in their machine, they could care less about you personally.

Even when your dealing with AA situations for management and supervisory positions, it just comes down to a computer reviewing qualifications before anyone gets an interview, and the computer tells the guys in charge who their options are. If the goverment has mandated that they need so many minorities in those positions, the computer is simply going to produce minorities (and tell them why) and overall qualifications are going to be irrelevent. After all the company could care less, but does need to keep Uncle Sam off their doorstep.


The bottom line is that not only is racism dead as a mainstream phenomena, but also that the world has changed so much since such laws were conceived that it's ridiculous. The laws are an incredibly biased joke.


>>>----Therumancer--->
 

Ignignoct

New member
Feb 14, 2009
948
0
0
TheSKSpecial said:
As long as companies offer more jobs to white convicts than black non-offenders [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905EEDB133EF934A25755C0A9639C8B63], or are 50% more likely to call an applicant back if they have a "white-sounding name" [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05E5DD123AF931A25751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2], AA will still need to exist in some shape or form.
LOL...

I will vouch for the latter! One of my co-workers is from Trinidad, black, but with a really high pitched white valley-girl sounding voice.

She'd call for job interviews, and her name was Brooke Hamilton, and she sounded white, but when she went in for the physical interview, she'd get looks like, "... YOU'RE Brooke?..."

Funny gal. High-maintenance like a white-chick too.
 

Struck21

New member
Feb 28, 2009
21
0
0
I had a friend who's dad was a pilot for United and when we were in HS he told us that someone with perfect scores and years of training was shot down cause they needed more minorities in the company or some BS.

Maybe at some point it was ok but now, it just pisses people off. Ever look at a scholarship book? 8/10 of the scholarships are for some kind of minority or female; and to top it off they get a small amount of preference in admissions.
 

Ignignoct

New member
Feb 14, 2009
948
0
0
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Ignignoct said:
TheSKSpecial said:
As long as companies offer more jobs to white convicts than black non-offenders [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9905EEDB133EF934A25755C0A9639C8B63], or are 50% more likely to call an applicant back if they have a "white-sounding name" [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F05E5DD123AF931A25751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2], AA will still need to exist in some shape or form.
LOL...

I will vouch for the latter! One of my co-workers is from Trinidad, black, but with a really high pitched white valley-girl sounding voice.

She'd call for job interviews, and her name was Brooke Hamilton, and she sounded white, but when she went in for the physical interview, she'd get looks like, "... YOU'RE Brooke?..."

Funny gal. High-maintenance like a white-chick too.
Wow does this post give me Eggo deja-vu
Thank... you?...
 

Shycte

New member
Mar 10, 2009
2,564
0
0
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Shycte said:
I see your point, maybe it would be more "fair" is the one with the most potential got in first. But the system can't work that way because that would meen that you'll have to sit down and judge every possible outcome of each students life. There is no such resources.
Actually, that's exactly what most standardized tests from the SAT to the GRE to the MCAT try to do.
Yes I know. But what I'm trying to say is that you can't see into the future. You can't know what will happend to who. Maybe the one with potential will get pregnant or something. Then everything will be wasted.

Therefor it is much easier to just take the student who alredy has proven his capabilities.
 

Shycte

New member
Mar 10, 2009
2,564
0
0
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Shycte said:
Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Shycte said:
I see your point, maybe it would be more "fair" is the one with the most potential got in first. But the system can't work that way because that would meen that you'll have to sit down and judge every possible outcome of each students life. There is no such resources.
Actually, that's exactly what most standardized tests from the SAT to the GRE to the MCAT try to do.
Yes I know. But what I'm trying to say is that you can't see into the future. You can't know what will happend to who. Maybe the one with potential will get pregnant or something. Then everything will be wasted.


Therefor it is much easier to just take the student who alredy has proven his capabilities.
It's equally possible that the one who has already proven her capabilities will get pregnant or something, in which case everything will be equally wasted.
Yes, so they are equals. So why don't take the one who have earned his spot. That's the keyword, "earned". That is the major diffrence between the students, one had warked hard and one haven't. Why should someone who earned his spot lose it to someone who didn't?
 

rekabdarb

New member
Jun 25, 2008
1,462
0
0
Krakyn said:
Affirmative action is ridiculous. I have Hispanic and Asian friends who agree as well. My black friends however strongly support affirmative action.

Being successful in this world shouldn't be about survival of the most pitied, but the fittest.
in theory yes, until capitalism was invented