<p>"Well I'm not going to rehash all the posts I've written on this thread but ina nutshell: because just like legacies (who you seem to have no problem with) add money, and buildings, minorities add diversity."</p>
<p>Sorry I had to do this:</p>
<p>Check out the bottom right corner.</p>
<p>Well last time I checked blondes, and fat people weren't hung from trees, or put into internment camps. Colleges want the diversity of a rich <em>changing the race</em> hispanic kid, and a poor hispanic kid because both of them present a valuable diversity that have been earlier discriminated against.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well last time I checked blondes, and fat people weren't hung from trees, or put into internment camps
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Last time I checked, neither were blacks. You win. AA for all blacks who lived in the south and are over the age of 93.</p>
<p>No college kid has experienced this. No college kid's parents experiened this. Very, very few black people in 1933 experienced this. Very weak.</p>
<p>Asians had the same experience. They were institutionally discriminated against and killed. Why are they left out?</p>
<p>The southern yokels who were hanging blacks at the turn of the century were also hanging catholics and jews. Why leave them out?</p>
<p>I am black and I think that affirmative action is wrong. I consider myself liberal but enough is enough! When you look at the stats of some of my friends who got into some of the top colleges in the country, you would be suprised. The list is as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Black girl, upper middle class, 850 SAT, Smith</li>
<li>Black girl, single parent household, 1130 SAT, UNC Chapel Hill</li>
<li>Black male, middle class, 1250 SAT, Yale</li>
<li>Black male, 1130 SAT, Georgetown</li>
<li>Hispanic male, 1220, Columbia</li>
</ul>
<p>I know that SATs aren't everything, but I would find it hard for a white female to be admitted to Smith with a 850!</p>
<p>Actually my grandmother experienced this...she wasn't even able to go to the nursing school near her town because she wasn't white, and this was in 1964. Yeah she could've gone to one of the HBCU's...but she didn't have the opportunity because of other reasons</p>
<p>Oh and Urbansocrates thats funny that a black male got accepted to Georgetown with that SAT score, one of my black friends had a 1300 and was rejected</p>
<p>Asians experienced the same stuff. They may have had it worse because they didn't even have historically Asian colleges to fall back on.</p>
<p>Why exclude them?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually my grandmother experienced this
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Unless she died and is reincarnated as you, I fail to see how this is relevant. How, exactly, did this effect you? Was there a grandmother clause at your school? Did they say, "if your grandmother didn't go to college you can't?"</p>
<p>i don't think they should be excluded, and what happened to her did affect me because i grew up with her always telling me "you can't do this because you're black, you can't do that because you're black" it really affected my mom's psyche and mine.</p>
<p>You don't see a problem with that? At one point or another every group has been discriminated against.</p>
<p>Including (but not limitied to)
The Jews had it MUCH worse during the 20th century.
Catholics
Irish
Italians
Chinese
Japanese
Germans
Polish</p>
<p>It's all or nothing. You want to just give AA to everyone?</p>
<p>Look Maize&Blue, I'm just trying to say that there is a good point to AA. Why do you think African Americans have such low SAT scores????Schools weren't even integrated until Brown v. Board. Sure maybe I wasn't alive then, but it still affects me, we are still progressing as a people.</p>
<p>With exceptions to the Chinese and Japanese, the rest of those groups are white and felt the pressure of dealing with being immigrants to a new country for a short period of time until they were finally assimilated and there was a new group to harass, blacks. And the only group that may still feel the pressure are jews, but there's a difference between being a religious minority and a racial minority. Basically, the racial prejudice they faced was not as recent as forty years ago.</p>
<p>BTW, I know a black with a 1300 that was rejected from Columbia, I guess AA didn't work for him huh?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Look Maize&Blue, I'm just trying to say that there is a good point to AA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Couldn't agree more. I just have a problem with its implementation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
BTW, I know a black with a 1300 that was rejected from Columbia, I guess AA didn't work for him huh?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You make the case that this is exceptional, now pause and ask yourself what chance an asian kid with a 1300 would have had. If you guessed zero, you'd be correct.</p>
<p>umm Maize how do you do the quote thing lol</p>
<p>So Maize&Blue, you agree that there's a good point to AA, but have a problem withits implementation, so what would you change about it?</p>
<p>I've said this a million times. I would base it on the relevant factors.</p>
<p>If a kid overcame poverty he should get the boost regadless of his race. If he worked three jobs in highschool to feed his little brother he should get the boost regardless of his race etc. IF you base it on factors like these you won't have the abominations and abuses you see today. You won't see the black kid from the suburbs with all the same advantages getting in to Harvard with a 1200. You won't see someone 1/16th American Indian enrolling just to claim his minority status. It would help who it was designed to help.</p>
<p>All I'm really against is giving it solely on the color of skin. It's unfair, arbitrary, and furthers prejudice. I would submit that anyone who goes to the underfunded library to teach himself because his urban school is too poor to offer the classes deserves an admissions help. The poor white kid is no different than the poor black kid living next door in the urban slum and trying to scratch out an education in these schools. Likewise, the rich suburban black kid with every advantage doesn't deserve AA anymore than his white counterpart next door.</p>
<p>Maize&Blue22 made a great point. If a white girl had a 850, people on CC would be telling her to go to community college. If you are black with the same stats, off to Smith you go!</p>
<p>Urbansocrates5 your story is weird...maybe some girl had those stats but most blacks could not get into smith with an 850. Also, my uncle is an admissions officer at Smith and it is definitely not a numbers school. They look at extracurriculars, and recs in great detail. A WHITE girl from my school got into Smith with a 1050.</p>
<p>Smith wouldn't take someone with an 850. Schools like diversity, but they also like maintaining their SAT and GPA averages more. Also the black kid withthe 130 and the white kid with the 1300 obiously had the same chance 'cause the black kid didn't get in.</p>
<p>I'm not so sure legacy is only about money. I know I will have a great chance of getting into the Air Force Academy just because of legacy, and this has nothing to do with money; a smart school will view legacy as a predictor of success for the prospective student, i.e. "this student was raised by one of our own which gives him a better chance of living up to our standards." Money surely is a factor too, especially for an Ivy, but I would tend to say that that doesn't even fall into a legacy category, rather, a donor category that is nearly a foot in the door of whatever college your parents donated too. The reason the two may be confused is because most donors are alumni, yet it would be hard to argue that most alumni are also donors. Let's move on.</p>
<p>I am surprised that in this day and age race is still talked about as much as it is. Society has changed from people persecuted and oppressed for their race to different minority groups trying to create their own sub-culture for the purpose of staying different. I do not include myself in this because I do not think that the color of my skin should be an indicator of who I am friends with (what color their skin is, their attitudes, type of music they listen to), the way I talk, nor the way I dress or act. WE as a nation should be passed that division by now, and the way that society still is is a good indicator of a regression in society. With this regression you could even argue that America was never ready for a civil rights group to put people on an equal level, because with the end of segregation (for the most part) society still remains segregated. I am not advocating something of this sort because I believe it is morally wrong, and I am not saying that I have denounced my Blackfoot heritage. I am proud of it, and love to study it, but I don't want to relive it. Society has taken its course, and now, legally and socially, we each supposed to be as good as any other of our peers, regardless of their skin color.</p>
<p>(While we're on the subject, I love talking about this, what could I major in that would pertain to this?)</p>
<p>But back to the topic of AA: ideally, since there are no laws binding one race from another and keeping anyone separate - and might I add that there is little way for colleges to even check that your ethnicity is valid, look at Ward Churchill and his "Cherokee by belief" scandal - Americans are no longer looked at, judged, defined, or divided by their skin color or ethnic background (legally). Yet socially they still are to some extent. So why are American colleges following a social rule rather than a legal one? Society changes; law will not (at least it won't reverse itself again on this issue). </p>
<p>Even as a conservative, I would be all for an economic affirmative action policy at colleges, because I believe there is a need for common college law to cover up for bad parenting and an economic disadvantage for college prep. I'm not saying all parents in the low tax bracket are horrible, and yet again there will be exceptions to the rule here, there is no real way to rule them out, but for the most part the 200 point gift from AA is going to be needed more for the poor than any other income class. Yes, this puts me out of the nice little AA umbrella, but there is no reason why I should be getting any better treatment than my white peers anyways. Yes, to some extent, skin color can be a good indicator of economic class (sadly), and then there is justification for the AA, but then why not just leave race out of the equation and deal with economic status only? Those who aren't in need of the gift will not get it, and more doors will open for whites in the lower class that are in the same position as URM families. I don't see anything wrong with the change, but someone prove me wrong, I'm in the mood for a debate..</p>
<p>And by the way, yes, Rufio is my name because of the awesomeness that is the Militia Group. Woohoo! I'm seeing Copeland and Acceptance this Thursday!! BTW the band Rufio is named after a sedate/rape drug, in case anyone was wondering lol</p>
<p>I think the problem most people (including me) have with AA and the argument that "adding URMs will increase diversity" is that we all have a pre-conceived notion that college admissions should be (and is) a meritocratic system. Diversity of viewpoints seems like a noble goal, but as long as the various races perform at such clearly different levels on all objective measures of merit, it is impossible to have true meritocracy and true diversity at the same time.</p>
<p>When someone gets into an elite college, for better or worse, we like to view it as a symbol of hard work and academic talent, but AA necessarily undermines this concept (to what degree is debateable). If AA-proponents want to use AA for the sake of diversity, they can do so, but they cannot then claim the benefits of meritocracy (i.e., I got in solely because of my personal skills and talent, and not for politics). They should make it clear then that they believe the primary goal of college should be proportional representation, and not merely a collection of the best and brightest. If AA-proponents would just admit this, I and likely many others wouldn't have nearly as big a problem with it as I do now.</p>
<p>"Actually my grandmother experienced this"</p>
<p>fiveminutesaday let's not even talk about your grandparents. Every race has had a difficult past. Were your grandparents ever moved from their homes to a camp during WWII? When they went swimming at swimming pools at least they get it on the 4th day, chinese and japanese only get to go before the water is changed.</p>
<p>Dont talk about history, talk about the present.</p>
<p>I hate the fact how if I get lower than 760 math, i'll be a stupid asian.
Is it my fault that I work hard, but so do many others in my race?
Is it fair to be judged on a different level just because of my skin color?</p>
