<p>Alright, I’ll be the one to say it, since I can’t be the only one thinking it. Black people, on average, have lower IQ scores than white people, even within socioeconomic groups. IQ scores are correlated with income and other measures of success. It’s no one’s fault, but if black people are only worse off in society “because racism,” why do Asians and Jews, for example, make more money, live longer, and enjoy more otherwise successful lives than not only black people but white people as well?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is true, but it ignores that there is similar variation within racial classifications. So it isn’t evidence of “racial” inferiority.</p>
<p>@ember You talk as if Jewish people aren’t white. Also what statistic or data do you have that proves Asians and Jews have better lives? Or are you just inferring that from what the media tells you?</p>
<p>I’m not talking about inferiority. That’a a moral decision I’m not interested in making. There is variation within racial classifications, but there also is within socioeconomic groups, variation in both IQ scores and levels of racism experienced.</p>
<p>I considered this, but I thought it’d be easier just to use Jews as a separate category. Sorry about the confusion. Here are a couple of relevant articles, though.
[Pew</a> Forum: Income Distribution Within U.S. Religious Groups](<a href=“http://www.pewforum.org/Income-Distribution-Within-US-Religious-Groups.aspx]Pew”>Income Distribution Within U.S. Religious Groups | Pew Research Center)
<a href=“http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0697.pdf[/url]”>http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0697.pdf</a></p>
<p>I find this line of thought to be perverse and repugnant.</p>
<p>First of all, there are so many false assumptions thrown out by both sides about intelligence or “the system” that no conversation can really happen, not the platform for discussion is false or not correlated or irrelevant.</p>
<p>People are people. In a moral society people treat people as having equal moral value.</p>
<p>Opportunity has nothing to do with equality. Equality is about moral worth in the eyes of a sovereign God that is no respecter of persons.</p>
<p>Ivanka Trump has more opportunity than many other white kids from rich families. Her starting line is far ahead that of most kids in the whole world but she is equal in moral value to the Creator as a homeless man on the streets of NYC.</p>
<p>So outcomes will never be equal in actuality or distribution. These are human impossibilities that will never be achieved.</p>
<p>You guys want to discuss intelligence as if that has a correlation with wealth. It doesn’t. There are plenty of poor geniuses, in fact, I personally know two Mensa members that are in the lower economic tier. Anecdotal? Yes. But not uncommon especially among those really bright kids that can’t socialize well. Education is a reliable predictor of success but so is a stable, two parent family.</p>
<p>This discussion is off the train tracks and it is unproductive. If all things in college admissions were equal, no people would be involved at. Robots would do the math, crunch the data and pick from highest to lowest until slots were filled. But who is telling the robot which data to compute, who is the program or creator of such an algorithm? Is that person free from bias and are they qualified to choose what data goes into the calculation? </p>
<p>You guys like to fantasize and spout your ignorance of human nature. When is it time to cease and desist? Make a better system. Found your own school. Be the change you want to see in the world.</p>
<p>Think about it. Guys come on here to say race should not be a part of the equation then go on to talk about nothing other than race in post after post. You can’t follow your own wishful thinking. </p>
<p>And to complain about the system is so old and tired. The system is much more color blind than any time in history. It’s too old of an argument to make when you simply be about the business of succeeding in business or science or engineering or art or anything else. Just get in with it already. Don’t let the guys complaining keep you from plowing forward. Will you hit a wall? Maybe. Wait until you get to it to worry about it though. Too many paid the price so you could get as far as you can go today which is all the way to the White House or to billionaire status or CEO status or owner of a sports team or whatever else. Just do it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um, yeah.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They still have the same skin color. :/</p>
<p>I appreciate that your rant is bipartisan, Madaboutx, but it’s still a rant. You’re basically saying that anyone who opposes racial preferences should keep silent on the matter because if he opposes the use of racial classification, then he shouldn’t talk about racial classification. That’s the same as saying that people who oppose gun rights shouldn’t talk about guns.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If I’ve straw manned you, please feel free to describe your view on how considering racial classification now will lead to a society that does not consider it in the future.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? All blacks have the same skin color?</p>
<p>[BBC</a> News - Are there more US black men in prison or college?](<a href=“http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21791038]BBC”>Are there more US black men in prison or college? - BBC News)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The idea is that not considering racial classification is synonymous with ignoring problems of race completely. Synonymous with deciding that the disproportionate representation of an ethnic group in a society’s underclass doesn’t matter since “we’re all Americans”.</p>
<p>So the problems of African Americans don’t get solved; they stop being called problems. At this point, racial prejudice is not the main problem facing the African American community, except that it’s already done its damage. It’s a dearth of cultural, social and economic capital that have synergistically worked to maintain themselves within the community to this day. </p>
<p>Ending racial consideration doesn’t and would never resolve this problem within the African American community. Only active, race-conscious efforts designed to tackle the problems specific to the African American community can make a difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>More or less. Their skin colors look more like each other’s than they look like whites’. >.></p>
<p>(Light red and dark red are all still red.)</p>
<hr>
<p>Do you think that ending affirmative action and similar programs is the same as ending racial consideration in our society?</p>
<p>Do you think that ending these programs will ultimately benefit blacks? Why?</p>
<p>Or do you just dislike the idea of considering the problems of blacks in America since that necessarily involves consideration of racial classification?</p>
<p>In other words, do you think racial inequality (and other forms of inequality, like between gender, sexual orientation, etc.) should not be addressed in policy at all?</p>
<p>I’ve opened a separate CC thread to discuss this specific news story, which mentions in passing some issues related to the main topic of this thread. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/education/scholarly-poor-often-overlook-better-colleges.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK. I disagree, as you could have already guessed. If the problem is prejudice, I am not saying that not considering racial classification means prejudice goes away instantly. But I am saying that not considering racial classification will start us on a path where the problem can be resolved, whereas considering it now will mean that we will never resolve the problem.</p>
<p>If the problem is a “dearth of cultural, social and economic capital,” it isn’t clear to me that racial preferences are the way to resolve this either. Most of the beneficiaries of racial preferences are not from poor households.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And you think racial preferences, as currently practiced, can “tackle the problems specific to the African American community”?</p>
<p>
</p>
<ol>
<li><p>“The same as”? No. A first step toward? Yes.</p></li>
<li><p>Yes. These programs have always benefited the privileged within the targeted groups. Thomas Sowell documents that this is the case no matter which country is implementing the “affirmative action”: the U.S., India, Malaysia, or Nigeria.</p></li>
<li><p>There’s nothing wrong with “considering the problems of blacks in America.” But I focus on the “problems” part, not the “blacks” part.</p></li>
<li><p>Policy should not try to impose equality of results.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Its the Middle Class or should I say the Working Class thats getting screwed every single day not the Privlidged or minorities the whole college entrance process is old and archiac and should be completely overhauled it is too biased and unfair to all people struggling in this messed up economy whether or not black ,white, purple or working class folks are being compromised by this extremist element in our society .Too many are too right or too left. where is the sensible common ground?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m on the fence. There’s data that suggests that getting into elite colleges helps black students in the long run much more than it helps whites. So it’s clear that affirmative action does make a difference, that it does change lives. But there’s nothing to show that any of these benefits trickle down to those who don’t get preferred. </p>
<p>I’m more interested in early/consistent intervention programs, economic development, and improved funding for education in impoverished districts like what needs to happen in most counties in my own home state of South Carolina.</p>
<p>The educational value of diversity, though, is [without</a> question](<a href=“http://www.k-state.edu/diversity/documents/increasing.pdf]without”>http://www.k-state.edu/diversity/documents/increasing.pdf).</p>
<p>Diversity of “race” backgrounds among students has been routine in the Big Ten for as long as the Big Ten existed (even earlier, really). The first black graduate of the University of Minnesota, for example, graduated before my grandfather was born. Yes, a college should do right by all students attending the college by not screening out students who are able to thrive in their studies just because of “race” barriers, as many, many colleges in the south did until around the time I was in elementary school. And most definitely, lousy elementary schools should be improved, whoever is attending them. But none of this makes it strictly necessary to inquire of all citizens every time they fill out an official form what their “race” is, or even for the government to have any “race” categories at all. Having race categories in law in the first place was the mistake–there need not be endless repetition of that mistake.</p>
<p>Hi from Canada. FWIW, here is my story - I am a status Indian woman, 49 years old, registered with the Federal government and affiliated with an Indian Band, Reserve, First Nation. </p>
<p>While I have always been “Indian” (funny how we don’t call ourselves, Aboriginal or Native") I have only recently acquired my Status card. To make a long story short, a recent Charter of Rights Challenge changed the laws to make status more equal (in the past when an Indian woman left the reserve she lost her status and when an Indian man married a white woman, the woman was granted status) and hence under Bill C3, I am officially recognized as Indian. </p>
<p>I truly believe there is a difference in “under represented” and “disadvantaged” and all too often that distinction gets overlooked. From the Indian viewpoint, our people were treated poorly by the colonialists and I can certainly see that in my own upbringing. My grandmother and all her siblings were sent away to Residential Schools, where they systematically lost their culture, language and to me, most importantly, lost the experience growing up in a family. My grandmother never learned those parenting skills, so my mothers own upbringing was very negative; albeit in those days women became mothers at a very young age and used whatever poor parenting skills they learned themselves. That in turn (did I mention sexual abuse in the Residential schools, and wide spread alcoholism amongst Indians?) another generation of poor parents which self perpetuated our poor family dynamics.</p>
<p>There were 4 kids in my family. 2 sisters who both got pregnant in order to marry (my mother was super nasty to them) and leave the home and are not productive members of society today, and a brother who started sniffing solvents and died at the age of 25. </p>
<p>And myself, Masters educated and gainfully employed (I credit 2 lovely high school teachers for their mentoring and compassion).I have 2 smart kids, the eldest who maybe applying to some of the Ivies/MIT and/or those that have good financial aid funding.</p>
<p>My son is in grade 11 and does not know a lot of the negative aspects of my family (why share the pain) although has seen his grandmother at her worst; and who does affiliate himself with the First Nation community and would likely tick off the box on the application form - more so to identify himself, rather than to expect preferential treatment. When the time comes to fill out that box, I will leave the choice up to my son, after explaining the pros and cons of each decision. From what I have read, researched, my son certainly has the marks to be in the running for the Ivies/MIT. </p>
<p>In 1993 when I was finishing my part time Masters, I did apply to medical school and did chose to not self identify as being Aboriginal. I did not even get an interview; but truthfully in hindsight, I don’t believe I could have survived the workload (3 year intense program and I was just diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes).</p>
<p>Anyways, cheers from Canada and Chi-Meegwetch!</p>
<p>The Supreme Court just agreed to review another case related to the topic of this thread. The decision in that case will be during the following year’s Supreme Court term. </p>
<p>[Supreme</a> Court to Hear Affirmative Action Cases That Could Broadly Impact College Admissions - ABC News](<a href=“Affirmative Action Cases Could Broadly Impact College Admissions - ABC News”>Affirmative Action Cases Could Broadly Impact College Admissions - ABC News)</p>
<p>That is the Schuette case concerning Michigan.
[Schuette</a> v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action : SCOTUSblog](<a href=“http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/schuette-v-coalition-to-defend-affirmative-action/]Schuette”>Schuette v. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action - SCOTUSblog)</p>
<p>If the Supreme Court was going to overrule Grutter in the Fisher v. Univ of Texas case, granting cert now in Schuette would make no sense.</p>
<p>So my prediction is that Fisher does not overrule Grutter, but rules for the plaintiff in a difficult-to-parse fractured decision.</p>
<p>The issues are different. In Schuette, it’s “whether a state violates the Equal Protection Clause by amending its constitution to prohibit race- and sex-based discrimination or preferential treatment in public-university admissions decisions.”</p>
<p>In Fisher, it’s “whether this Courts decisions interpreting the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, including Grutter v. Bollinger, permit the University of Texas at Austins use of race in undergraduate admissions decisions.”</p>
<p>Or, reworded, Schuette deals with whether states can ban the use of racial classification, and Fisher deals with whether a university can use racial classification.</p>
<p>Not sure if it belongs to this board but just want to share my thoughts: diversity should NOT be taken into consideration AT ALL. It’s a shame on a college who does this. ACT/SAT was designed to have some “uniform measure” across all the schools. So, it should not be matter where did you study in Detroit or Chicago: if you got the low score - that’s it regardless of race and gender. All the excuses - just a liberal nonsense.</p>