RACE does matter...

Applying to College
41

<p>
[quote]
I feel like a broken record but I must say again, AA contradicts itself. It actually promotes discrimination by raising/lowering the bar for different types of people.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I completely agree. It doesn't make sense for so many URMs to expect total racial equality, and then expect special treatment when it comes to college admissions.</p>

<p>There are two types of racism: favoring all other groups above one, and favoring one group above all others. Affirmative action falls into this second category.</p>

42

<p>

I completely agree. I mean, with admit rates of 8%, obviously all qualified applicants get into Ivies, right???</p>

43

<p>
[quote]
Affirmative Action does not mean an under qualified Hispanic is going to get in. If a Hispanic got in over a white person, it's because he earned it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The top schools could fill their classes multiple times with highly qualified and deserving students. Unfortunately, they can't. Just because someone gets in over someone else doesn't mean she deserves it more or has worked harder for it. This is why affirmative action is such a big deal in top schools. Because almost all of the applicants are capable and qualified, race becomes a bigger issue and a greater deciding factor.</p>

<p>Furthermore, are you implying that the white student who was rejected deserved an acceptance less than the Hispanic? Maybe she should have been rejected, but race should not determine whether she is deserving or not, should it?</p>

44

<p>Well, if AA is justifiable then maybe there should be more white ppl in the NBA.
sure african americans are probably more qualified but we need a proportional representation of society in jobs right. maybe the white guy can't jump as high but thats cause "society" forced him to study bio instead of practice bball.
or maybe we need more white rappers, even though they may have no rythm.
honestly, what is the point of giving someone an opportunity if they aren't as qualified. they aren't going to do as well. </p>

<p>i totalaly agree with the previous post. it should be based on economic situation as supposed to the color of your skin. </p>

<p>and actually i know urms who are supper hard working and good test takers and would have gotten into colleges without AA.
if you aren't qualified( regardless of race) you don't deserve the opportunity</p>

<p>btw: poster on pg 2 why is it wrong for berkely to have 50 % asian population?</p>

45

<p>
[quote]
Well, if AA is justifiable then maybe there should be more white ppl in the NBA.
sure african americans are probably more qualified but we need a proportional representation of society in jobs right.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That made me smile :D</p>

46

<p>lol, im super bored</p>

47

<p>You need to look at the whole picture here. Just looking at statistics from the census can tell you alot about the problems that minorities are facing in this country. The percentages of hispanics, blacks, and native americans living below the poverty level is above twenty percent, more than one in five. Whereas the percentage of whites and asians living below the poverty level is less than ten percent.</p>

<p>Now as a Alaskan Native student at Dartmouth I can give you my own personal views on the issue. I am an active member of NAD(native americans at dartmouth) and can tell you that very few of these students have come from an affluent background. I heard a very disturbing statistic from a few years ago when there was a Native women support group at Dartmouth that over half of the native women at dartmouth had been sexually abused as children. </p>

<p>The Native American class of 2010 arrived on campus early for a Native American orientation. The main fear of many of the Native American students was that they were addmitted by accident, somehow someone made a mistake. These are some of the brightest students that I know and they were afraid that they were not good enough to be at Dartmouth. It makes me angry that other people will put down a whole race of people so much that it will actually effect the self-esteem of these kids.</p>

<p>Sure many of these minorities may not have the highest SAT scores, the best EC or even the best grades but there is something that sets them apart. They all have the same drive that all Ivy league students have, the drive to succeed. These students did not have the same oppurtunities as many of their classmates. Many live below the poverty level (such as me), many went to the worst schools, have alcoholic families, and yet they manage to overcome all of this. I myself was the first to even graduate from highschool in my family.</p>

<p>Finally I just want to say that the addmission committee is not stupid. They can see the background that you came from. They can tell the "minority on paper" from the "minority in real life".</p>

48

<p>Josh_AK you make a great point but I still don't understand the point. I understand why someone who is from a disadvantaged economic situation/etc. would be accepted over someone from a more advantage situation (if both had similar/equivilant stats or whatever). Yet, URMs are not the only people from disadvantaged backgrounds so whats the point of (sorry for being a broken record again) a, per say, poor URM getting into a college over a poor white or asian? If they both come from similar economic/etc lives, what makes the URM better? Because of their skin color? Because of their nationality?</p>

<p>I'm sure that many whites or asians with disadvantaged backgrounds (when accepted to a top institution such as yours, Josh) feel a mistake has been made or like they have no hope at the college. </p>

<p>Again, I think this statement puts it the best way: AA contradicts itself. It supports discrimination because it raises/lowers the bar for different types of people.</p>

49

<p>
[QUOTE]
I completely agree. I mean, with admit rates of 8%, obviously all qualified applicants get into Ivies, right???

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>1) We're not just talking about the Ivies
2) Even if we were, he should have no more truoble getting in than any other person (even though virtually everybody has trouble getting into the Ivies and Ivy-caliber schools).</p>

<p>As for Josh_AK's point, wouldn't that be better addressed by income/socioeconimic based affirmative action?</p>

50

<p>
[quote]
I think colleges just want equal representation of all the races in society. Just as they pick and choose among different majors and specialties, they also are trying to build a class based on race. They wouldn't want a whole class full of biology majors; they don't want a whole class full of one race.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So - in the interest of "diversity" - why do the Ivy League universities accept an overwhelming no. of Jewish applicants?</p>

<p>Jewish students are significantly more overrepresented than any other group - make up about 1.5% of the total applicant pool to universities/colleges and yet make up about 25-26% of the Ivy League student body.</p>

51

<p>k&s,</p>

<p>"Jewish" is not a race; it is an ethnicity and a religion.</p>

52

<p>
[quote]
It's disgusting how many times I've heard people say behind the backs of others, "Oh, he only got in because he's black" or even to their faces: "Why don't you give up your job to the white man who deserves it!"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This proves my point that there is an extraordinary amount of racism in this society.</p>

<p>That racism isn't going to go away when you take away affirmative action, they'll just express it in different ways (perhaps even by hiring a white person over a "more qualified" black person).</p>

53

<p>
[quote]
This proves my point that there is an extraordinary amount of racism in this society.</p>

<p>That racism isn't going to go away when you take away affirmative action, they'll just express it in different ways (perhaps even by hiring a white person over a "more qualified" black person).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Affirmative action is heightening race resentment rather than reducing it, which is the problem. It is counter-productive. AA is not eliminating racism from society, but creating more. I agree that racism isn't going to to disappear with the end of AA, but AA is not helping to end racism either. It is actually part of the problem.</p>

<p>By the way, how is hiring a black person over a more qualified white person any different (or any more legal, ethical, justified, and anti-racist) than hiring a white person over a more qualified black person?</p>

54

<p>
[quote]
Well, if AA is justifiable then maybe there should be more white ppl in the NBA.
sure african americans are probably more qualified but we need a proportional representation of society in jobs right. maybe the white guy can't jump as high but thats cause "society" forced him to study bio instead of practice bball.
or maybe we need more white rappers, even though they may have no rythm.
honestly, what is the point of giving someone an opportunity if they aren't as qualified. they aren't going to do as well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Are you for real? That's Homer Simpson logic there. You seem to know exactly what the goal of a college is. What is it? To be as academically strong as possible? Then be prepared for the Asian Invasion. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Affirmative action is heightening race resentment rather than reducing it, which is the problem.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's the worst anti-AA argument I've ever heard. I could say that desegregation heightened racial tensions and therefore should be avoided. You're basically advocating a system of appeasement for racists (not saying that all anti-AA people are racists, but chances are that there are more in that camp that in the pro-AA one).</p>

<p>My stance on AA is that it should include race AND economics. Conservatives who have too much faith in the free market assume that in our society, the only colour that matters is green. Well, every minority who has had to run into a glass ceiling knows that that is not the case. I think it's absurd when a Black kid who goes to the Collegiate School gets any kind of race-based preference over a White kid who goes to some backwater public school in Mississippi. That's a tacit racist implication that no matter how successful a Black person is, their being Black is such a scientific handicap that they still need some help. But I think it's equally absurd to assume that being poor and Black in America is the same as being poor and White, and that the only difference between them is their economic status. </p>

<p>And why are we seeing this in purely a Black-White dichotomy? What about the Asians? Are the anti-AA White people willing to accept a potential Berkeley-esque demographic if admissions become completely race-blind? Or will they concoct some BS screening process that will ensure a dominant White majority? Are they against AA, or are they only against AA that favours non-Whites?</p>

<p>Why is it that the people who are least affected by racism always insist that it's gone? I wouldn't comment on the current state of folk music b/c I don't know jack about that, but it seems to me that the sheltered Whites are always the ones most vociferous in their insistence that racism ended with the Civil Rights Act or something. Chances are they grew up in homogeneous neighbourhoods, and never felt any discrimination or discomfort due to race, so naturally, they know exactly what the state of racism is in today's society: "There's no racism anymore. Nobody I knew growing up was racist. We even had Okembe, the African foreign exchange student, in 4th grade. I gave him half my sandwich once!"</p>

<p>The truth is that our society is not colour-blind, and when it comes to intelligent discussions, it's always better to have racial diversity than otherwise. If another Rodney King incident happened and there was a discussion, the most Clinton-esque White would still be no substitute for an actual Black person. In a truly equal society, it wouldn't matter, but nobody here's stupid enough to believe that upon birth, all races start off at the same point in the starting line. </p>

<p>If AA was ended, what we would be saying is that we trust the White power structure to be fair when it comes to any selection process. Is it any coincidence that the White people are saying "Trust us!" and a lot of non-Whites are saying "Haha, seriously?" Every group is just looking out for themselves. And to put it quite frankly, many groups would rather have AA than go back to the Trust-Whitey policy that pretty was the status quo in much of American history. How did people fare in those days? Well, I'm sure you're all educated enough to know.</p>

55

<p>
[QUOTE]
This proves my point that there is an extraordinary amount of racism in this society.</p>

<p>That racism isn't going to go away when you take away affirmative action, they'll just express it in different ways (perhaps even by hiring a white person over a "more qualified" black person).

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Well, the point is that race-based affirmative action doesn't reduce racism, which is what it was meant to do. Yes, we all know there is racism, but affirmative action doesn't alleviate it. If race-based affirmative action doesn't do what it's supposed to, there's no point in keeping it. If someone hires a white person over a "more qualified" black person, what would affirmative action do? That's a violation of actual law, but affirmative action can't fix that. Race-based affirmative action wasn't designed to enforce the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which calls for equality, but to do whatever necessary to get more URMs into college and the workplace, no matter what it takes, even if the URM must be given a slight advantage. In fact, all affirmative action can do is turn the scenario around, so that a "slightly more qualified" ORM applicant is rejected to a "slightly less qualified" URM applicant. Honestly now, is the racism experienced nowadays so traumatizing that it lowers your GPA or SAT scores?</p>

<p>Notice that I always added "race-based" in front of affirmative action. I am in favor of income-based affirmative action, which would help most URMs but would also help ORMs who need help. If the claims that URMs tend to be poorer are true (which they are), then I don't see why this can't alleviate the problem.</p>

56

<p>
[QUOTE]
My stance on AA is that it should include race AND economics. Conservatives who have too much faith in the free market assume that in our society, the only colour that matters is green. Well, every minority who has had to run into a glass ceiling knows that that is not the case. I think it's absurd when a Black kid who goes to the Collegiate School gets any kind of race-based preference over a White kid who goes to some backwater public school in Mississippi. That's a tacit racist implication that no matter how successful a Black person is, their being Black is such a scientific handicap that they still need some help.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Exactly. Affirmative action is an insult to URMs and has a negative impact on ORMs.</p>

<p>Oh, and the guy you quoted was trying to use a reductio ad absurdum, but I can understand your reply, because it wasn't very good.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
Are the anti-AA White people willing to accept a potential Berkeley-esque demographic if admissions become completely race-blind?

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>First of all, Berkeley had almost Berkeley-esque demographics even when it did have affirmative action. Second of all, probably not. A lot (though certainly not a majority) are fuming over outsourcing to China and India and don't quite like us. </p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
The truth is that our society is not colour-blind, and when it comes to intelligent discussions, it's always better to have racial diversity than otherwise.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>There are fairer ways to increase diversity; for example, funding for programs that help poorer kids learn at an early age, or trying to get more URMs who have been told they can't make it to college (but really can) to apply.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
If another Rodney King incident happened and there was a discussion, the most Clinton-esque White would still be no substitute for an actual Black person.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>If there was another Balbir Singh Sodhi incident, would it not be a good idea to have an Asian in the classroom? You may say that there are already plenty of Asians in colleges, but in most of the colleges across the country, there are very few, and for the most part, their opinions are not known.</p>

57

<p>
[quote]
You seem to know exactly what the goal of a college is. What is it? To be as academically strong as possible? Then be prepared for the Asian Invasion.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>"The Asian Invasion"? Are you trying to send us back to the yellow peril days?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, every minority who has had to run into a glass ceiling knows that that is not the case.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Funny how that works, huh? My (Asian) father came to the United States with $100 and a suitcase. He had to work very hard to get where is now. Do you assume that blacks are the only race to have ever been faced with a glass ceiling? There is still anti-Asian racism at my school (from both whites AND blacks); it has not disappeared. But in general, as a race, we have worked very hard and continue to work hard to succeed. We don't have any AA to give us a boost (actually, AA often hurts more than it helps), and have now become an apparent threat to diversity in many schools.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Are the anti-AA White people willing to accept a potential Berkeley-esque demographic if admissions become completely race-blind?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>What a perfect example of what happens without the benefits of AA. But I don't see any negative effects on the students there, despite the large numbers of Asians (and supposed lack of diversity). If anti-AA whites can't accept it, then they would hypocrites (like me :)). However, most of the spots that blacks are supposedly cheated out of are not taken by whites (who are actually proportionately smaller in number in top schools) but by Asians (gasp! a minority!) which only make up 5% of the population, but 15-20% of the student population at these colleges.</p>

<p>(Although, on an interesting sidenote, despite all the squabbling the most powerful Republicans make about AA, they have no problem fixing everything up for their own often unqualified kids to attend college based on legacies and donations (a la Georgie).)</p>

<p>
[quote]
If AA was ended, what we would be saying is that we trust the White power structure to be fair when it comes to any selection process.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Many private (white-run) institutions use AA more liberally than government-run public institutions. We are already trusting much of the Ivy League and other Ivy-caliber schools to practice AA on their own, i.e. AA cannot be constitutionally forced by the government upon private institutions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And to put it quite frankly, many groups would rather have AA than go back to the Trust-Whitey policy that pretty was the status quo in much of American history.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Interesting that I catch some anti-white undertones from somebody who claims that AA is a mission to eradicate racism. But AA is not only anti-white, but anti-Asian and anti-Jew (I hope you aren't about to argue that Jews have never suffered in history).</p>

<p>Racial diversity is good, but it is coming to mean less and less. Why is it that someone who is 1/8 black and 7/8 white is considered black? Why is it that someone who can have no concept of black culture, can have been raised in white society, and yet, the fact that her skin tone is different is enough to stick the label of "diversity" upon her? The attitudes and beliefs of the black kids in my neighborhood is (as a group) no different from the attitudes and beliefs of the white kids. Please explain to me how this entails diversity.</p>

58

<p>Does any one have the numbers of how many poor whites/poor asians are hurt by AA? Does any one have numbers of how many rich blacks/mexican have benifited(sp) from AA? </p>

<p>I feel that AA is like putting a bandaid on a broken arm. It was created in response to the legacy of white supremecy-institutionalized in housing, education, health care, employment, and social life- A weak response! In education, instead of reducing intra-district inequalitites, establishing universal health care and preschool; the white majority decided to reward the few who climb out of the well of of being a minority by granting them a spot at their universitites. </p>

<p>I agree that AA has it flaws, but I also believe that this is the best system flawed society can come up with. No one is talking about how white women have benifitied from AA as well. </p>

<p>One presumption that I can infer from the posts is that people believe that the URM who benfit (sp) from AA are some how under qualified. I don't see how this is true when the graduation rates at IVY league colleges are pratically the same among all ethnic groups. In addition, what makes one qualified for college? Surely not the SAT-which is more an indicator of socio-economic status and testmanship than intelligence, certainly not APs when many urban schools have few in addition to poor facilities and overworked counselors. certainly not Extra-circulars, when many minority students can not afford to pay 3,000 to study at a university! Why can't be what one has accpomplished inspite of institutionalized barriers designed to keep you as a minority in everything but sports!? </p>

<p>THe idea that AA violates the rights of fellow citizens, is in my mind, confusing a right with an expectation. For example, in admissions one's right is to have their application seriously considered. When seriously considered and still rejectd, one's right has not been violated, but one's expectation frustrated. </p>

<p>Futhermore, at most colleges blacks make up roughly 5-7%. This is far from a black takeover. Why not look at the % of legacy students, and athletes ( crew, squash, baseball, tennis , polo) who make up the class.</p>

<p>As I stated earlier, AA is a poor response to a vicious legacy of white supremecy. A poor response, howver, is better than no response.</p>

<p>my 2 cents</p>

59

<p>
[quote]
No one is talking about how white women have benifitied from AA as well.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The amount of affirmative action towards females is significantly less than that towards URMs. Futhermore, it is hardly applied outside the realm of engineering and physics. Many schools are diminishing the use of AA for women now that the percentages of women in college exceeds that of men. Actually, some places give AA to men, especially in humanities-related fields.</p>

60

<p>Most people here seem to be ignoring the Asian anomaly. How are blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans any more deserving of AA than Asians? It is just because so many Asians have worked to hard to do well and be successful that they should be punished?</p>

<p>If anyone here has ever looked at the chances threads, they may have noticed that for an Asian applying to Harvard with a 2390, admissions is a "crapshoot" whereas a black applying with a 2390 is practically an "auto-admit". Surely these claims are backed by past experiences and evidence. Why is being Asian considered a negative in the admissions process when they have suffered setbacks, racism, and the glass ceiling as well?</p>