<p>As gapyearstudent and USMC0311 mentioned the true essence has to do with a dichotomy of socio-economical status among the majority and minority. I think if an AA does exist, it needs to be on concrete factors like socio-econ factors rather than a skin color. </p>
<p>Find any text book example illustrating how huge the gap is between the top 10% and bottom 10% of income in USA. That gap is simply too large. The hierarchy of wealth distribution in the USA represents a tear drop - whereby the majority tends to be in the middle of the tear shape. People found in the middle tend to be of the dominant classes found the USA; whites and asians primarily. (A collective analysis from Poli-Sci, Sociology, Cultural Anthropology, Micro/Macro Econ and Gov’t classes) </p>
<p>I’m just looking at the Oriental assimilation into America for this example.
Someone mentioned how Asians tend to be hardcore about their studies. Essentially from what i understood in the book, Art of War; educational values are apart of mainland china’s culture and additionally into nearly all of the Oriental cultural values. (Sociology class) I would say Oriental people used to be a minority in the USA until their generation after generation continued going to school and paved the way for their future generations. You can verify this by seeing what ethnicity is mainly continuing education beyond high school, college to be exact.
The point of this example is that a particular minority was able to rise above their socio-econ status and in fact become an economically dominant race.
There are other external factors that would plague one minority compared to another but if the will power exists, you too can easily defer from “falling victim to these social pressures”.</p>
<p>I’m the first person to go to college from my family and the second person from both my mom and dad’s family combined. The first person went to college roughly 35 years ago, in Mexico.
I too was surrounded by these pressures but i have the will power to stay from that shizz and will be transferring to UCSD next year.
See you there.</p>
<p>Asian families provide the support the drive for the child to succeed. They are imbued with the notion that nothing, but perfection in school is enough and always aim to achieve it. </p>
<p>I can see definitely the case African Americans/Latino have, the fact is if there is no AA headed into the next generation we’ll be seeing 60% Asian U.C’s .</p>
<p>Truth is there is already Affirmative Action in High schools in Califorina.
ELC is already based on AA based concept. In the sense the poorer high schools that qualify for ELC already is in minority heavy neighborhoods . Which is the redeeming fact for most minorities in Inner cities. As a way they can compete against those high schools with 30+ ap classes.</p>
<p>@ Ryan you are exactly the reason I hate when these threads come up. People like you always show up with your ignorant beliefs (even though you clearly have no freaking clue what you’re talking about) and turn the conversation into stupid drivel. It’s embarrassing that people like you would consider yourself “educated” and then speak on a very important issue of which you are obviously ill informed about. Do us all a favor and read a book/research on a topic before you speak. I think I’ll take my exit now as this thread turns to crap.</p>
<p>^ Can you explain why Ryan’s POVs are ignorant? You guys want equality (equal opportunity), AA is strictly against that principle. You can argue for socio-economic inequalities but to admit people based on skin color is just plainly agreeing with the fact that some people with such and such skin color are academically challenged. I really don’t see where the argument is and is in no way a racist standpoint because I don’t think you can argue against merit. Again if the minority race thinks there is a stereotype that makes their academic performance undermined, it is time they get rid of that mentality because that will only hurt them.</p>
<p>I hear my kids and their friends talk about this issue a lot. They say “He got into X school only because he’s black. My GPA and SAT scores were much higher”. The kids know this isn’t fair and rather than promoting good feelings between the races, affirmative action only promotes bad feelings. Whites and Asians resent the fact that less qualified students going to the same school they attend are having an easier time. Of course, these motivated students only work harder.</p>
<p>And as for the comment that blacks and Hispanics do the same as others on the tests that only test how the school is doing. That’s just bunk. We in California get a report card of our school that is based on just those tests broken down by race. Whites and Asians score well. Hispanics and blacks do not.</p>
<p>^^read my earlier posts, I don’t support AA. I don’t believe the government should support race based policies in addmissions to public universities. I was responding to his multiple statements about about race and what happens under AA which are completely false. but he probably has no idea about the real contents of the debate and is just talking out of his ass. He makes those of us that do not want what has been traditional AA in public universities look bad. </p>
<p>@ Tatin G If your kids and their friends are talking about California schools then they are wrong, Prop. 209 not only bans AA, it does not allow universities to see race on an app. also the factors that lead to lower test scores have to do with a lot more than quality of schools but it is alo not reserved to “oh they just don’t care and don’t try.”</p>
<p>Uhh why did I come back, I couldn’t resist…</p>
<p>I agree with CBBolts. It’s one thing to make an argument for or against AA, it is another thing to make statements implying blacks and Hispanics are stupid. Going to UC doesn’t mean you have stronger brain capacity than those who don’t. It just means that you made education a priority, and worked hard.</p>
<p>No. The kids were talking about the private schools. But this also applies to certain scholarships that only go to black or Hispanic students. And they grumble when they always have to check off the ‘color’ box on every form. There are plenty of Hispanic kids at my kids public high school. Most live in the same area. But those at the top of the class are Asian and white, actually more Asian than white. These kids work extremely hard and to have them discriminated against because of their race is immoral.</p>
<p>No parent wants to see her child discriminated against based on race, even Asian and white parents. </p>
<p>I see it like Chief Justice Roberts: He said, “The best way to stop discriminating based on race, is to stop discriminating based on race”.</p>
<p>^ I agree with your last statement and I must confess my ignorance on private universities. Since they are private I don’t really pay much attention to them because they can pretty much do whatever the heck they want (within reasonable means). As for scholarships, it’s like charity; people see a problem and choose to address it with their money, that’s their choice. I could have a long winded talk about that subject but unless you’re really interested ill spare you haha. For the record this isn’t an issue of Whites and Asians vs. Blacks and Latinos either. I’m African American and you’d be surprised how many minorities I run into who also disagree with AA in university admissions. Just thought I’d give a voice to an often ignored group.</p>
<p>Again, I reiterate my point of being for socioeconomic AA, not race-based AA, but this comment is * completely * unnecessary. So what? So what if they’re * obsessed * with going to the UCs? It is their right as much as anyone else’s because they pay taxes just like everyone else. Why should they not be considered the same as everyone else who pay the * same * amount of taxes. If they’ve done better, then they should be admitted. That’s meritocracy.</p>
<p>Now, there is a concrete argument in allowing low-income families leeway because they haven’t had the same opportunities (test prep, good schools) compared to their high-income counterparts, but to give someone an edge just because of the color of their skin is a concept I fail to understand. How is one minority (black/hispanic) * inherently * expected to perform worse than another minority (asian) even if they’ve both had the same economic opportunities. I posit that the only difference between the results (SAT and grades) of blacks/hispanics and asians is due to socioeconomic factors, not race-based ones. Yes, racial stereotypes * might * come into play, but like I said before, what about gender stereotypes where females underperform on math tests. Not only are they not given some leeway, they’re penalized when applying to LACs.</p>
<p>They don’t have to legalize AA. It’s already implemented into the system in subtle ways. You have the low income students that get a leg up with financial aid, hardship scholarships…etc, and guess what? They know most low income students are minorities. Poof, there is your legal AA. Another way, simply look at the name. Do you think a last name like Laquisha, or Gomez, or Kirandeep, is not looked at? What do they just blot out the name? There’s another form of AA. No need to legalize it, we just need more opportunities and guidance for minorities in HS and CC. Perhaps a special minority council in all high schools/CC would do well to help each individual minority student (with potential, and even guidance for failing miscreants on which fast food chains are the best to work for, and which prisons have the coziest health care plan), or a yearly summit on how to improve the numbers of minorities that transfer to UC. That simple.</p>
<p>“Merits alone are not enough, we need diversity in the University system and perhaps minorities don’t do as well as the whites or asians its because they struggle with different problems, that you may not understand.”</p>
<p>So you’re saying that Asians or whites don’t struggle with problems also? It’s blatant to say that.</p>
<p>I think the UC system would benefit to have a bigger native american population on campus, or a black population or a latino population.</p>
<p>In what ways would they benefit? UC system is a public institution, therefore race has no significance in improving the status of the institution. UC’s however, could benefit from accepting students who perform superbly rather than those who drag down academic standards (AA students).</p>
<p>Ethnic diversity in colleges is desirable. There is no doubt about that. And it probably would not occur if the admissions process was solely dependent on the qualifications of the applicant. But at what cost do we want ethnic diversity in our colleges? Do we value diversity over equality? How is it justified to have a policy where a black of today is helped by punishing a white of today for what a white of yesterday did to a black of yesterday? Even if affirmative action was not a violation of justice and fair play, was not a zero-sum game, was not racially polarizing, it is a poor cover-up for the real work that needs to be done. No person, black or white, Hispanic or Asian, should have to endure the suffering and consequences of the sins of yesterday’s white man. Nor should any person, black or white, Hispanic or Asian, should reap the benefits and receive compensation for the sins of yesterday’s white man. The UCs are research universities. It doesn’t matter if a black, white, mexican, or asian is conducting a research. The only thing that matters is the potential to gain new knowledge with all this research. And the only way we can achieve this is by allowing only the best applicants to be admitted to the UC system, based on merit, not race.</p>
<p>I am saying that there is a disportionate amounts of minorities such as Latinos, Blacks and Native Americans have these social and economic problems with greater frequency than Whites and Asians. Whites and Asians do not have trouble with upward mobility as do the other minorites.</p>
<p>It is ignorant to think that the UC system only benefits from merits and 4.0’s.
the UC system would most definitely be better with a diverse population because the UC is an ambassador to the world and problems affecting the world, especially third world countries can be seen right here in California and are experienced by American born first generation students. </p>
<p>There are students who would offer solutions to discrimination because they have faced it from first hand experiences and can offer research based on their experiences in majors and departments that have to do with social science. They have a unique perspective that is not Anglo based. </p>
<p>More over like you said the UC is public system and is funded by institutions that want to see more minority participation.
I also think the UC system may consider Affirmative Action because of the hard economic times and the UC knows that Federal money is readily available to many minorities given their backgrounds. </p>
<p>if you’re going to say my opinion is “■■■■■■■■” i would like to at least see a formulated response that adds to the discussion. petty name calling is childish.</p>
<p>Trying to even things out based on income makes more sense than race. For example, people assume that Native Americans are all poor. But the tribes that own profitable casinos dole out incredibly huge sums to families within their tribe. </p>
<p>And of course there are wealthy black families in neighborhoods of LA like Baldwin Park and there are well to do Hispanic families as well. </p>
<p>To discriminate in favor of the child of a black doctor against a poor white child from one of California’s rural communities makes no sense at all.</p>
<p>And it doesn’t really help a student to admit him/her to one of the UC’s when they can’t cut it there. They only get discouraged and drop out.</p>
<p>edmfanatiq, who do you think you’re trying to work over, a pack of wild chimpanzee’s? What type of scandalmonger tactics are you trying to employ here?</p>
<p>“UC system is a public institution, therefore race has no significance in improving the status of the institution.”</p>
<p>This therefore that, you therefore gay, Jew therefore paper cut, as usual. No examples, no specific correlations, just broad generalizations. Do you people get my other “non-sense” post now?</p>
<p>“UC’s however, could benefit from accepting students who perform superbly rather than those who drag down academic standards (AA students)”</p>
<p>How? Give me an example, perhaps steering away from the “superhuman” incentives put forth by the Nazi Arian race, and of course mistakenly interpreted in Nietzsche’s Beyond good and evil, of how UC’s could benefit from simply higher test scores rather than individual characteristics, or what some would christen virtues.</p>
<p>**
So you’re saying that Asians or whites don’t struggle with problems also? It’s blatant to say that.**</p>
<p>lol. It’s blatantly what? If you claim it’s blatant, you’re not supporting any claim other than the blatancy of the phrase, which does not support anything other than blatancy itself. Is there some sort of negative connotation with the singular use of the word blatant here? It’s not a noun, it’s an adjective or an adverb. It’s like saying “your argument is loudly,” lol. Loudly what? Finish the sentence.</p>