<p>Well the whole idea behind race based admissions (other than diversity which is BS as we all know) is to help races less affluent than whitey. Black people and hispanics are still disproportionately poor compared to white people. Wealth and education is strongly correlated and the poorer people (in this case disproportionately black) are less likely to be able to get into college.</p>
<p>To my thinking you can just cut out the middle man and admit based of socio economic class instead of race. The two are basically the same anyway.</p>
<p>Racial diversity= socieconomic diversity often=cultural diversity. Racial diversity sums up all three. With all due respect, Kelexandra, affirmative action seems to be working for Asian people better than black people
Asian in Harvard: 19%
Black people in Harvard: 8%
How can asians complain with that- would they rather
Asians: 45%
Black people: - hit by the burden of racism from the prejudices of college officials -2 %
Hispanics: nonexistant?
I think if anyone should be complaining, its black people.</p>
<p>I think affirmative action should be BOTH Socioeconomic and racial because as I previously said black,hispanic people are continually judged negatively on their appearance/names before they can even open their mouths. AA levels the playing field if only slightly.</p>
<p>Okay, agreed, SAT scores are not and should not be the only measure of analysis. However, I’m going to take a real life example. I live in New Jersey and I’m in a public school system. I’m also in a region where there are several magnet schools although I don’t attend them. I know many Asians, many academically competitive Asians. And I have seen all the transcripts, A+, EC’s, a student council president, a varsity basketball captain. And yet, I do not know one Asian from my region who got accepted into MIT in the past three years. In fact, for those of you who don’t know, word of mouth can spread very quickly, and I don’t just know the results of my friends, but also my friends’ friends and their friends, and so on and so forth. Yet, one hispanics girl last year was accpeted into MIT. Her stats? Academically, nowhere as good. And EC-wise, I believe she did dance but nothing else – certainly doesn’t compare to the Asian who was student-council president and varsity basketball. Yet, the Asian didn’t get in.</p>
<p>I’m not saying this is an example that applies to all cases. I’m just saying that there’s an argument about Asians having weak EC’s, but there’s some evidence out there that shows even with similar EC’s, Asians are having a hard time getting into HYP.</p>
<p>And I would completely disagree with this. As a society are we not trying to rid of racism and bigotry? But what does Affirmative Action encourage at its core? Backwards racism? Two wrongs don’t make a right.</p>
<p>Just want to point out that 25% of Harvard’s student body is race unknown. 10% are international and 15% declined to state. So it is possible that Asians equal or outnumber Whites at Harvard. If half of the unknowns are Asian, then they account for over 30%.</p>
<p>In the 1920s and 1930s, Jewish enrollment at Harvard was deliberately kept down to preserve Harvard’s image. At around fifteen percent, their presence was certainly not insignificant. However, prior to the institution of “holistic” admissions, Jewish enrollment was higher than fifteen percent; it was almost 20%. Under your thinking, Jews should not have complained of discrimination. After all, they almost made up a sixth of the campus, how can they complain!</p>
<p>Thank you Bay, thats part of the point i’ve been trying to state- asians do have it good. They are reprsented at the higest universities in the nations near 2 times more than African Americans. If, you are right Bay, then Asians overpower African Americans nearly 4x to one. Mike, AA is not backwards racism. After all, if I’m reading you right are you seriously saying that white guys are discriminated against when they go to college? I would state facts and statistics which show that white people make up up what- at least 50% if not more of all colleges in the united States? That’s ridiculus- there is no reverse racism- in fact AA should be expanded to provide better high schools for disadvantaged black students.And Mike, let me just note that if AA and other programs such leveled the playing field and closed the black/hispanic/Native American test gap with whites and asians then AA will not be needed in the future. BTW, Mike if you would not use AA then how would you level the playing field for black people who are discriminated against just because they are born? Cross your fingers and hope the sterotypes of black people will disapear? Ask managers to hire more black people? Isn’t that AA, then?</p>
<p>Face the truth, Black people are not stealing spots from qualified white or asian people. They are simply skimping by, and getting a little space for themselves.
Furthermore, asians should not complain about AA,they should complain about negative action.</p>
<p>Wow, I didn’t know that people were a faceless mass based on their race and not individuals with names. Obviously, when one person with Asian descent gets into college, all of the other people with ancestors from the same continent benefit.</p>
<p>I’m glad you agree with me unsure, but I dislike your word “stealing” That implies that African Americans were allowed into elite colleges without minimum qualifications. It was not stealing- it was earned. I don’t understand this sometimes- in the affricanAmerican results thread all the African Americans had-pretty much
top 5% class rank or
were valedictorian of their class
took three or four meaningful E.C.s
and had SATs in 2100s+</p>
<p>How is that stealing a space?
Maybe, the rich white legacy is stealing a space but we are earning ours.</p>
<p>How arrogent to assume the “space” that anybody receives was intended for anybody other than the person who received it. Stealing…really, the sense of entitlement is disgusting. Unless you have read every application submitted, you have NO way of knowing if your space was “stolen.”</p>
<p>Nobody can steal from you what wansn’t ever yours to begin with.</p>
<p>What? What?! If we agree that without affirmative action there would be more white people and that with affirmative action there are less white people. It is a logical conclusion to assume spots that would have gone to white people are now going to black people and other races.</p>
<p>I agree with affirmative action. Why am I getting flamed because of semantics. This forum is pedantic.</p>
<p>Sadly, this is true. As specified in Bakke and Grutter, under certain conditions, racial discrimination can be legal. If those conditions aren’t met, however, then racial discrimination is illegal. See Gratz and Parents Involved for examples.</p>
<p>Edit</p>
<p>My post assumes that we understand “affirmative action” to be “positive discrimination.”</p>
<p>Edit 2</p>
<p>goblue93’s post is giving me some cognitive disonnance. I’ll do some more research on this.</p>
<p>Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance.</p>
<p>Last time I checked, these elite schools do receive federal financial assistance.</p>
What? What?! If we agree that without affirmative action there would be more white people and that with affirmative action there are less white people. It is a logical conclusion to assume spots that would have gone to white people are now going to black people and other races.</p>
<p>I agree with affirmative action. Why am I getting flamed because of semantics. This forum is pedantic.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>lol, no. Have you been reading this thread? E&C predicted no change in white enrollment if AA was removed. It’s just as logical to think that all the spots would be going to Asians instead.</p>
<p>We’re debating on an internet forum. Semantics is the whole point we’re here.</p>