<p>^OHMonof2, okay, you don’t get it then. I saw your other post bashing standardized test. no surprise there.</p>
<p>I posted an article questioning the value of standardized tests, that is true. Still not sure what that has to do with athletes needing special help.</p>
<p>@OHMomof2, to the question “do you believe there is innate intelligence differences between races?”, many of us answered NO. But to the next question “do you think certain race should have special treatment on the basis of their race?”, a few here seem to say YES. </p>
<p>Well, a reasonable argument is you can’t have both ways - while believing all races are equal but accepting/arguing for racial preference in college admissions for certain race(s). If the argument is that minorities from poor neighborhoods and school districts are disadvantaged therefore need special treatment, I accept it as valid argument and will add that there are disadvantaged White and Asian students from equally poor neighborhoods and school districts who need help. The point is it’s a socioeconomic issue. Therefore, we must address it in a sensible class-based policy, not race-based.</p>
<p>I agree that poverty is a disadvantage and should be addressed (and is, one could argue, with financial aid). But I do not agree that it is the ONLY inequality that should be addressed. While I believe people from all races are equally intelligent, I know that opportunities are not equal even now, never mind over the past few centuries, not even for URMs who are middle or upper class. So I see AA as a way of addressing that.</p>
<p>I also see it as a way to bring people of different races together on a campus, meaning i also support the colleges’ desire to have a diverse group of students, racially, socio-economically and otherwise.</p>
<p>@OHMomof2, Okay, I respect your opinion on AA as a way of addressing inequality although totally disagree. I need your call it out specifically and unambiguously - what exactly is the inequality are you talking about besides poverty? How exactly the racism long before and during the rights movement affect the children of color in this country in this century? Please give specific examples.</p>
<p>I support diversity in campus. However, HOW to achieve it is the question. Also, do you see harms being done to other races if race-based AA is in place?</p>
<p>A few specific examples - race can adversely affect one’s ability to get a loan, a job, a place to live.</p>
<p>Its pretty clear to me we are being trolled.</p>
<p>That may be but tiger is certainly not the only one to hold these views.</p>
<p>But its taken a few nasty turns and has a self serving undertone. Caveat Emptor.</p>
<p>@OHMomof2, I don’t find it convincing based on the examples you gave. It’s more socioeconomic based discrimination than racism. Don’t get me wrong - I am not saying there is no racism. There is racism not just against black, but also against asian, latino, and even white. The question isn’t really whether or not there is racism in our society but rather is racism a material factor in preventing a kid going to school, a family moving to a good neighborhood or getting a loan. To that question, I believe the answer is NO, discrimination is more based on socioeconomic status. A rich black family is much better off than a poor white family. Do you agree? </p>
<p>AA was institutionalized when black and white couldn’t even ride on same bus. Be an optimist and look around you. We are now living in a multiethnical and multicultural world, a truly melting pot. We must look beyond AA now. If there is no unwanted consequences, I would still fully support AA. Unfortunately, AA has its dark side and negative impact on other races and racial harmony, which many proponents of it don’t even want to discuss.</p>
<p>There is no proof that there are intelligence differences between races. There is wide-spread belief, as proved by support for AA programs, that there are differences between the races with regard to opportunities for academic development. AA was designed to address unequal opportunity … not unequal intelligence.</p>
<p>“I don’t find it convincing based on the examples you gave.”</p>
<p>What would convince you?</p>
<p>@NewHope33, not sure if you read all the posts. We are agreeing on the first question - whether or not there is innate intelligence disparity between races. See the questions above, besides poverty, what are the inequality factors in this country that require AA?</p>
<p>@tigerdad -If you believe that discrimination is only based on socioeconomic status, you are wrong. You may believe the answer is no, but you obviously don’t know many successful black people. Some discrimination is more subtle than others, but it exists. Take two applicants similar stats, similar socioeconomic backgrounds etc… one of the applicants first name is Elizabeth, the other applicant’s first name is Laqueesha. See how many times the first applicant is called in for an interview versus the second applicant. This type of discrimination exists today and takes place on a daily basis. A very good friend of miine made sure that his daughter had a anglo-saxon name with an anglo-saxon spelling so that she wouldn’t be discriminated at first glance. It was a conscious decision on his part when naming his child. </p>
<p>We are conditioned to accept more readily people who look like us, talk like us etc… To say that people don’t bring their biases (sometimes racism/discrimination) to the table when it comes to loans and jobs is just ridiculous. Most of us would like to believe that we are color-blind. However, I would say that the truer statement is that most of us are color-conditioned. Ask any successful black person if they have ever had someone say to them that they don’t “act black” and you will realize that we still have quite a ways to go. </p>
<p>Furthermore, by achieving racial diversity on campus, you have an opportunity for students to meet people of all cultural/racial/socio-economic backgrounds. It is through this one-on-one contact that people lose some of the biases/racism that may exist. Will this eradicate the problem? Probably not. However, it does ameliorate the situation.</p>
<p>@momofmusician17, I do believe such discrimination exists, not only harming Blacks, but also Asians. Asians can be easily identified with distinct last names like Choi, Wang, Chen…etc. In fact, samething applies to Jews. It’s well documented in Unz’s article “The myth of american meritocracy”. It’s not just discrimination against black people. </p>
<p>I have long argued that all colleges are required by law to review college applicants on anonymity basis and race check-box should be totally eliminated (or unknown to colleges - just for stats collection reasons) . Individuals should be eval’ed on the basis of individual merits, anything but race. </p>
<p>I said again and again, diversity on campus is important, which majority people support. However, the question before us it how to achieve it. Does discrimination (AA is called positive discrimination in UK) on the basis of race justify it? That is the question.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes and examples are not hard to find if you look. Red-lining of neighborhoods by banks is not a Jim Crow era phenomenon. Telling “Laqueesha” or “Jose” that the apartment has been rented or the job filled when nether are true is not a 200 years ago slavery times thing.</p>
<p>@OHMomof2, so in your view, should AA exist forever then? Because as far as I know, racism is part of human history, like hatred, poverty, hunger, war, prejudice, and various other forms of discrimination (based on things other than race). And do you agree racism is not just unique to Black. Asians are also facing enormous racism. Pretty much in the same boat.</p>
<p>I sure hope it doesn’t need to exist forever, that would be a sad future for this country. But I firmly believe it needs to exist now. I disagree that racism is and will always be part of human history, at least not in the form it has taken here. The concept of race (as opposed to culture or ethnicity) is, I believe, only about 300 years old. “Black” people exist in so many countries…Australia, US, the Caribbean, South America, Europe, Africa, and face different challenges being black in all of those places.</p>
<p>Asians face racism in many ways as well, but I don’t think to the same degree and in the same ways. In any case, like white folks, Asians are well represented in colleges, more than their % of the population in many cases, which suggests the “leg up” of AA is not needed. I notice colleges do search for applicants from certain Asian countries, primarily from the south and poorer countries, for AA.</p>
<p>I think the entire premise of this recent conversation is erroneous. The point of considering race in college and university admissions is neither to compensate for some perceived deficiency in academic qualifications, nor is to to remedy past discrimination, nor to counterbalance present discrimination (though I wholeheartedly agree with OHMomof2 that racial discrimination, especially against blacks and Latinos, continues to be a profound and widespread problem in our country). </p>
<p>The point is to ensure diversity. Ours is a multicultural and multiracial society. College and university administrators want that diversity to be reflected in the student body. For essentially the same reasons, many private colleges and universities also want geographic diversity, and will give a little extra boost to applicants from underrepresented states like North Dakota–not because they think North Dakotans in general need extra help, nor because they’re compensating for past or present discrimination against North Dakotans, but because they don’t want the entire student body to be made up of kids from suburban New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Maryland. Or they’ll give a little boost to first-gens, because they don’t want the entire class to be made up of kids from upper middle class households headed by college-educated parents.</p>
<p>College administrators genuinely believe a diverse student body creates a better learning experience for all concerned. I’m not sure how they measure that, but that’s what they believe. And there’s no question that most major employers say they want to hire young people who have experience in diverse, multiracial, multicultural environments. So to that extent, diversity is not just for the benefit of those racial minorities who are getting an extra boost in admissions–presumably because experience has shown that without it, they will not attend in sufficiently large numbers to achieve the kind of diversity colleges, and employers, want. It’s also for the benefit of the white and Asian kids who attend those colleges.</p>
<p>But the elite colleges and universities will insist they don’t take anyone who isn’t qualified to do the work. And they aren’t as hung up as many white and Asian students and parents in thinking that marginally better grades and standardized test scores automatically mean “better qualified”–the essential and erroneous premise that undergirds most arguments that “better qualified” white and Asian students are being passed over in order to provide benefits to “less qualified” URMs.</p>
<p>And why is the complaint always about URMs? My daughter’s LAC says that 40% of the students participate in varsity athletics. By some estimates, as many as 25% of the students may be “recruited athletes,” i.e., athletes who got special consideration–a thumb on the scale in their favor–at admissions time, because a coach wanted them. Yet you rarely hear complaints about how “better qualified” applicants are being passed up in favor of recruited athletes. Nor do you hear many such complaints about legacies, or North Dakotans, or first-gens, or any of the other categories of applicants who get special consideration in the admissions process. No, it’s always the URMs.</p>
<p>Excellent, BC.</p>