Croberts Tells You About Affirmative Action

<p>
[quote]
tetra whos a whatsa i dont give a crap if you claim you have wealthy black friends or not. You dont think they feel the effects of racism huh? I propose an experiment to find out if wealthy urms experience racism. Lets go to a KKK meeting and bring some wealthy black kids. Oh i bet because their rich the KKK will welcome them with open arms! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha</p>

<p>The fact of the matter is black people encounter racism every day. Whether its direct or subtle. Abstract or concrete. Whether they know it or not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>...and how does AA help this situation? ...by perpetuating the problem?</p>

<p>I myself am a rich black and I can tell you I do not live the same life as my rich white or middle class classmates. I am constantly ridiculed by my own race to the point where I can not have any black friends since education is such a menial thing in their lives. I have to go through the countless racist jokes every day since I am the only black person in the class and no one even bothers to notice. How do I work so hard every day with so little motivation and approval? What is there to work for if my own race does not even accept me? White people dont face this every day but I do. I dont care how much money I have because that does not make the hurt of just succeeding go away. I am tortured by what everyone else thinks is the norm and that alone should give me some preference in admissions.</p>

<ul>
<li>tetra whos a whatsa i dont give a crap if you claim you have wealthy black friends or not. </li>
</ul>

<p>If you think by mocking me you are getting some kind of point across, you're dead wrong. I personally don't give a crap about the fact you exist, but I don't need to say that to make some kind of point.</p>

<p>-You dont think they feel the effects of racism huh? I propose an experiment to find out if wealthy urms experience racism. Lets go to a KKK meeting and bring some wealthy black kids. Oh i bet because their rich the KKK will welcome them with open arms! hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha</p>

<p>So in your opinion, the test for whether or not racism exists is if the KKK will accept black members? Well that is just the stupidest thing I've ever heard. The KKK is an inherrently racist organization. Their goal is to promote white supremacy. Why would anyone black attempt to join the KKK? What kind of "experiment" is this anyway?</p>

<p>-The fact of the matter is black people encounter racism every day. Whether its direct or subtle. Abstract or concrete. Whether they know it or not.</p>

<p>You're making a blanket claim that has no evidence whatsoever behind it besides your silly "experiment." And what does "Whether they know it or not" mean? Maybe I'm experiencing some subtle abstract racism that I don't know about.</p>

<p>Thanks Maize&Blue22, thats exactly what I'm trying to say.</p>

<p>stanmaster 22, I'd like to say that I understand what you're going through, but I've never been in that kind of position. Unfortunately, what you describe is not racism (with the exception of the jokes in your class - those are different) but discrimination within your own race because of your status. To some lesser degree, whites feel this too (the stereotype of the "rich snob", etc...). However, AA does nothing to fix your problem. Providing extra help in the admissions process for you will certainly do nothing to fix the problems you mention. That is why I don't support AA - it doesn't seem to fix anything because it only comes to play at such a high level. I support a system that will reinforce the importance of education and learning in disadvatanged neighborhoods at an early level, in elementary school and all the way through high school. Such a program will have a better chance to fix the "education is meaningless" attitude that stanmaster22 describes having to deal with.</p>

<p>"The fact of the matter is black people encounter racism every day. Whether its direct or subtle. Abstract or concrete. Whether they know it or not."--corbert</p>

<p>That is SO sophomoric!!!! what are your trying to say??
this thread's a waste of time</p>

<p>tetrahedr0n,</p>

<p>you say AA can do nothing to help discrimination or racism of the type stanmaster describes. I disagree. </p>

<p>One of its results, hopefully, is to make students like Stanmaster seem like less of an exceptional case, both to members of his own race and to others. It's not just giving URMs more social capital and education to keep integrating the upper ranks of society. It's also revising the opinions and expectations of sheltered white kids who've never had an intellectual discussion with someone of another race (and believe me, they are out there!). </p>

<p>You're right about fixing the pipeline issues; that's really important. But in the interim, colleges can also aggressively recruit URMs.</p>

<p>I'm ambivalent about affirmative action. I have to agree completely with hoedown's last comment though. I'm black and observe on a first hand-basis the sort of things hoedown mentioned. When I first started high-school, I spent something like two weeks breaking down the inherent prejudices of many of my peers. One of my current best friends was almost scared of me awhile because of the stereotypes that are perpetuated by our society. To this day many people haven't fully accepted me in the advanced classes I take. And I go to an extremely diverse school (something like 35%-40% minority). If I'm experiencing racism to this degree, surely it's worse elsewhere. Anyway, to get to the point, if I had not been around, many of my current friends would still be fairly racist (if not overtly so) because stereotypes in our society promote this. One needs diverse experiences to overcome prejudices. You do not overcome prejudices if you're never exposed to different types of people. Simply put, people who go to a school in which 85%-90% of the population is white, are far more likely to be harboring racist attitudes once they graduate then those who go to a school where only 60%-65% of the population is white. So diversity (of every kind, not only racial diversity) serves an important societal function. Because believe it or not, the world is made up of many different types of people. And those who spend much of their lives never experiencing these differences only perpetuate continuing separation. </p>

<p>Now, having said all that, I do believe that while racial diversity is important, so are other types of diversity. For instance, someone who plays the oboe is diverse in that they add something unique to the campus. As are athletes and people who have lived in unique places. As are the poor who have had to work to support their families. The question is I suppose, is one type of diversity more important then another? To be honest I do not know. But I do know this. In my experience there is no inherent prejudice against oboe players (although i'll admit my experience is rather limited), and very little against athletes or the poor. Will admitting these students possibly change the character and path of another's life by making them view the world more fully? Perhaps. But I would say there is a greater impetus to admit minority students. But, as I said, I'm fairly ambivalent about the whole issue. I don't really like the idea of denying someone with more competitive stats, even knowing that the cultural and environmental factors are sometimes radically varying for different groups. Well, I've said my bit. Make of it what you will.</p>

<p>hoedown,</p>

<ul>
<li>One of its results, hopefully, is to make students like Stanmaster seem like less of an exceptional case, both to members of his own race and to others.</li>
</ul>

<p>That is, I think, about the only thing I support about AA. Unfortunately, by the time Stanmaster will go to college, AA or not, the same people that discriminated him for his education will be out of touch with him. He'll be completely out of their world, and no change to their attitudes will take place. Thats why it is crucial to prevent these attitudes earlier.</p>

<ul>
<li>It's also revising the opinions and expectations of sheltered white kids who've never had an intellectual discussion with someone of another race (and believe me, they are out there!). </li>
</ul>

<p>Yes, they are out there, but by the same token, there are plenty of closed societies out there that have little contact with the outside, of almost every racial groups. It cannot be AA's purpose to change all these societies. And despite the fact that these kids still are out there, the situation is much improved over 40 years ago. I've been to a school that was 60% black and a school that was 5% black, but I learned about discrimination in both. The issue with AA is that it hurts some while helping others. Admissions is a game - for everyone that wins, someone must lose. While I'm all for the goals you've mentioned, by promoting them, you are essentially hurting someone else. Now if this someone else is one of the "sheltered white kids" you mention, I wouldn't feel bad. But there are white people out there who really deserve admission - and its them AA could be hurting.</p>

<ul>
<li>If I'm experiencing racism to this degree, surely it's worse elsewhere. Anyway, to get to the point, if I had not been around, many of my current friends would still be fairly racist (if not overtly so) because stereotypes in our society promote this.</li>
</ul>

<p>I disagree. I think that our society has gotten much better at avoiding these kinds of stereotypes. I believe that obilisk18's experiences are the exception rather than the rule. While I'm not black, my black friends tell me that stereotypes are not a problem at our school, which is diverse, but only about 5% black.</p>

<p>-The question is I suppose, is one type of diversity more important then another?</p>

<p>This is really the main point I try to come to terms with. The worst kind of discrimination you can face is being poor. Essentially everything in a poor person's life is much harder than for a person who is even moderately wealthy. Poorness is like an extreme, inherrent, constant discrimination. Of course racial discrimination is terrible (especially combined with poorness) but I believe that nothing is as bad as being poor. And theres a lot to be gained from having the rich of all races learn together with the poor. obilisk18 mentions how his friends were confused about race before he met them - it is the same, or worse with well-off people and the poor. For me, an example is clear. At my school, we have no issues with racism - but being poor is a social death sentence. Most of the kids simply don't understand what it is like.</p>

<p>So personally, I support replacing the AA system with a socioeconomic action system. Keep in mind that poor blacks are more likely to face discrimination than wealthy ones (at least, extra-race discrimination) so this kind of system will still carry out AA to a degree. It will also help out those who could really benefit from AA but cannot due to skin color.</p>

<p>Whenever AA is brought up there is always tension. I just think the whole system is being blown out of proportion:</p>

<ol>
<li>The effect AA has is very little. A lot of your info is based up what happen "to a friend's friend...When you look at the grand schemes of things AA helping a URM with a 1100 over a white person with a 1600 RARELY occurs. (just look at the percentage of blacks and hispanics at top schools)</li>
<li>The Supreme Court found AA to be constitutional so might as well deal with b/c unless there is an amendment to the Constitution it's legal.</li>
<li>At some schools no more than 30 years ago they were refusing minorites admission (no matter how qualified they were)</li>
</ol>

<p>
[quote]
. The Supreme Court found AA to be constitutional so might as well deal with b/c unless there is an amendment to the Constitution it's legal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually they found it to be unconstitutional. It self-evidently violates the wording and thought of the 14th amendment and several other clauses.</p>

<p>They did, however, say it was a comepelling state interest worthy of continued violation of the constitution.</p>

<p>They did this by invoking the very liberal "living document" crap. A conservative strict constructionalist or even a moderate could have the supreme court singing a very different tune very soon.</p>

<p>Public opinion is markedly anti-AA (ballot initiatives - long live ward connerly), and as goes the people so goes the courts. Its only a matter of time.</p>

<p>Croberts,</p>

<p>It's been quite some time since you could get a 4-bedroom house in Pleasanton for $600K.</p>

<p>I also suspect you'd be hard-pressed to find wealthy people of any color at a KKK meeting.</p>

<p>Speaking as someone who was was rejected by Yale several decades ago, I can tell you that a lot of the sting goes out of the experience once you realize that colleges aren't simply looking at the pool of applicants and ranking everyone in order of their merit as human beings. They have certain institutional objectives they're trying to meet; those objectives change over time. To be viewed as a national institution, they like to take some people from every state, if they can manage it. (Coming from a populous state doesn't make you less worthy as a human; coming from a sparcely populated state doesn't make you more worthy. That's not the point.) Giving some preference to children of alumni helps cement inter-generational loyalty to the institution, and encourages donations to the institution. That fact that your parents matriculated somewhere else certainly doesn't make you less worthy as a human being, it only means that that facet of your history doesn't promote that particularly institutional objective. Having a student body that's ninety-eight percent white in a country that's only fifty percent white is an embarrassment to an institution. </p>

<p>Just remind yourself - rejection by a college, for whatever reason, says nothing meaningful about you as a human being. You move on, and sublimate any lingering resentment into tribal loyalty for one of the schools that accepts you.</p>

<p>Maize&Blue22,</p>

<p>The four "conservative strict constructionists" who sat on the Supreme Court when it heard Brown v. the Board of Education fifty years ago saw nothing in the Constitution that precluded the consideration of race in deciding who gets into what school.</p>

<p>Oblisk18,</p>

<p>Interesting post. I went to a high school that was probably to 98% white, and can confirm that I benefited greatly from attending racially diverse universities and the opportunity to get to know African American classmates (one of whom did me the supreme favor of marrying me and giving birth to my children).</p>

<p>I dont have to proove if well off blacks experience racial issues or not. Stan just provided us with one. his life story. Why dont you just admitt how stupid it sounds already. black people encounter racism. regardless of economic status. and Monzzei the only thing "sophmoric"( sophmoric difined as : Exhibiting great immaturity and lack of judgment: sophomoric behavior) is your blanket statement about aa. That and lack of ability to even refute the arguement.</p>

<p><Croberts,</p>

<p><it's been="" quite="" some="" time="" since="" you="" could="" get="" a="" 4-bedroom="" house="" in="" pleasanton="" for="" $600k.=""> </it's></p>

<p>Well yea, i was just trying to make a point. But you further prooved it. </p>

<p><i also="" suspect="" you'd="" be="" hard-pressed="" to="" find="" wealthy="" people="" of="" any="" color="" at="" a="" kkk="" meeting.=""></i></p><i also="" suspect="" you'd="" be="" hard-pressed="" to="" find="" wealthy="" people="" of="" any="" color="" at="" a="" kkk="" meeting.="">

<p>Well tetra wasn't getting my point. He argued that wealthy blacks are some how safeguarded against the same racism as poor blacks. Seeing as how this was so ridiculas, i tried to give the most basic type of example where a rich black would encounter a considerable amount of racism.</p>
</i>

<p>NoelB, </p>

<p>Harvard University, Brown University, The University Of Chicago, Dartmouth College, Duke University, The University Of Pennsylvania, Princeton University, And Yale University filed their brief with the U.S. supreme court in favor of Affirmative Action because they realize that we are not there yet and the playing field is not level in the admissions process. </p>

<p>They closed their brief by saying:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/br...-17-harvard.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/br...-17-harvard.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>We are not so far removed from the days when segregation by race in education,
and race discrimination in all sorts of vital opportunities relevant to educational performance, were for many a matter of law.
</p>

<p>The major points for affirmative action in their breifs are as follows:</p>

<p>These schools collectively stated</p>

<p>Academically selective universities have a compelling interest in ensuring that their student bodies incorporate the experiences and talents of the wide spectrum of racial and ethnic groups that make up our society. Amici should be free to compose a class that brings together many different kinds of students; that includes robust representation of students from different races and ethnicities; and that prepares graduates to work successfully in a diverse nation. Indeed, highly selective universities have long defined as one of their central missions the training of the nation’s business, government, academic, and professional leaders. By creating a broadly diverse class, amici’s admissions policies help to assure that their graduates are well prepared to succeed in an increasingly complex and multi-racial society.</p>

<p>The colleges presented the following arguments</p>

<p>I- Consideration Of Race And Ethnicity In An Individualized Admissions Process Serves Compelling Interests.</p>

<p>A. There Is a Broad Consensus On The Important Educational Benefits of Diversity.
Diversity helps students confront perspectives other than their own and thus to think more rigorously and imaginatively; it helps students learn to relate better to people
from different backgrounds; it helps students become better citizens. The educational benefits of student diversity include the discovery that there is a broad range of viewpoint and experience within any given minority community – as well as learning that certain imagined differences at times turn out to be only skin deep. It is surely fitting for universities to undertake to prepare their students to live and work in a global economy within a multiracial world. The challenges of contemporary life demand that students acquire not just traditional forms of knowledge regarding science and the arts, but also techniques of bridging differences in perspective and in personal experience.</p>

<p>B. Consideration of Race and Ethnicity Grows Naturally Out Of The Needs Of The Professions and Of American Business.</p>

<p>Every major profession in this country has sought greater diversity within its ranks.4 Businesses have demanded more minority managers and executives, as well as non-minorities who can work well with colleagues from diverse backgrounds.
Leading corporations, business groups, professional organizations, and executives have repeatedly called for consideration of race and ethnicity in university admissions.5 In
adopting their admissions policies, universities are responding to “the clearly articulated needs of business and the professions for a healthier mix of well-educated leaders and practitioners from varied racial and ethnic backgrounds.</p>

<p>The Interest In Racial Diversity Cannot Be Served By Race-Neutral Reliance On Factors, Such As Economic Disadvantage, That Are Already Carefully Considered.</p>

<p>The United States urges (as one solution) that universities look to such factors as special economic hardship instead of race. See U.S. Grutter Br. 24-25. But the decisive fact is that all of the suggested race-neutral factors, and many more besides, already enter into admissions decisions. Consideration of those factors alone does not achieve the distinctly racial diversity that amici seek in their student bodies. To accomplish that goal, admissions committees must give favorable consideration to minority race in addition to those other factors, not instead of them.</p>

<p>By deliberately tilting individual admissions toward “hardship” students in the hope of thereby selecting a large enough increment of minority students to make up for the
losses that would result from race-blind admissions – would be disingenuous at best. Such an approach would in truth be a race based policy and not a race-neutral alternative at all. Indeed, such programs, if adopted to assure increased minority enrollment, would be based on race in a causal sense and would thus raise obvious constitutional questions of their own.</p>

<p>A race-neutral preference for economically disadvantaged students, for example, would admit many more whites than non-whites, because of sheer demographic realities. And, of course, the university interest in admitting minority students goes well beyond just admitting minority students from disadvantaged backgrounds.</p>

<p>Race-Conscious Admissions Programs Are Not Open- Ended Commitments.</p>

<p>The decision of a university as to which minority groups deserve favorable consideration in an individualized admissions process designed to foster such diverse representation, and the weight of such consideration, are necessarily and appropriately decisions to be made as a matter of educational judgment, taking into account both the university’s sense of its mission and its best estimate of the leadership needs it will address – not as a matter of conflicting “rights.”</p>

<p>"Public opinion is markedly anti-AA (ballot initiatives - long live ward connerly), and as goes the people so goes the courts. Its only a matter of time."</p>

<p>Well, I dunno about that. Maybe that's the way it will end up, but I don't want a system were 'as goes the people so goes the courts.' We rely on the courts to interpret laws, not to align them with popular opinion. I don't think we can rely on mob rule to look out for the best interests of this country. Most particularly where, say, the legal and civil rights of minorities (I don't just mean ethnic, here) are concerned. I don't mean to say that AA is necessarily a "civil and legal rights for minorities" issue, I just mean that I don't think following public opinion is the way to guarantee those things.</p>

<p>croberts532, I don't understand your points.</p>

<p>You say: I dont have to proove if well off blacks experience racial issues or not. Stan just provided us with one. his life story. Why dont you just admitt how stupid it sounds already. black people encounter racism. regardless of economic status.</p>

<p>Stan provided us with complaints about how his own race discriminates against him because of his wealth and education. This is not racism - how does it prove your point?</p>

<p>You say: Well yea, i was just trying to make a point. But you further prooved it. </p>

<p>What did he prove? And you are stupid if you think racism in society is measured if the KKK accepts black members. Does the Nation of Islam accept whites, no matter how wealthy they are? There we go, racism, so I propose AA for whites. This is basically the point you are making.</p>

<p>you say :croberts532, I don't understand your points.</p>

<p>i say : tetra this is not a difficult concept. </p>

<p>you say :Stan provided us with complaints about how his own race discriminates against him because of his wealth and education. This is not racism - how does it prove your point?</p>

<p>Stan says : I have to go through the countless racist jokes every day since I am the only black person in the class and no one even bothers to notice.</p>

<p>Well call me crazy but that sounds like <em>racism</em> to me.</p>

<p>YOU say I say: Well yea, i was just trying to make a point. But you further prooved it. </p>

<p>i DID SAY THAT, But that was in regards to the housing prices in pleasanton. He further prooved that the amount of wealth it takes to ascertain a house has increased. Thus making the area proportionally higher in income as opposed to my other example stockton.</p>

<p>you say:And you are stupid if you think racism in society is measured if the KKK accepts black members. Does the Nation of Islam accept whites, no matter how wealthy they are? There we go, racism, so I propose AA for whites. This is basically the point you are making.</p>

<p>I never said thats how racism is measured. where did i say that? again, you are not giving college level arguements when you try to quote people that have said nothing of the sort. You argued wealthy black people arnt subject to racism. I argued they were. I provided an example of how they are. And my example was a constant that would not change. Thus making my arguement that wealthy blacks are indeed subject to racism, correct.</p>

<p>If the nation of islam doesnt accept whites( i have no idea, perhaps you could show some official documentation as to what gains grounds for acceptance in that group) than yes it is racist. and that wasnt the point i was making, merley argued that wealthy blacks are subject to racism, and i was correct. But if you really want to go on a tangent heres some food for thought:</p>

<p>Why would you propose that the nation of islam has had such an adverse effect on whites that they need aa </p>

<p>where as the kkk historically not only had members of legislature on state, local, and national levels( the most resent being the late senator strom thurmand who ironically enough had an illegitamate black daughter), but even local policemen were members. there is no doubt that group (kkk) had a tremendous effect on black people and their american experience. That isnt my personal basis for why aa should be implemented, but its an example of a group that has had an adverse effect on blacks.</p>

<p>so you can stick with your origional arguement, or you can go off on tangents, but either way your not going to be correct until you start a) using facts in you reasoning
b) conduct your thought process rationally c) start using direct quotes in their correct context .</p>

<p>I got this quote from CNN.com </p>

<p>"The Supreme Court ruled Monday that race can be a factor for universities shaping their admissions programs, saying a broad social value may be gained from diversity in the classroom."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/23/scotus.affirmative.action/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/23/scotus.affirmative.action/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>that's the UM case -- it's three years old</p>

<p>I know but the Supreme Court hasn't heard anything about AA since, so that decision stands.</p>