<p>
</p>
<p>HaHa. Thanks for the discussion. Where is your evidence that the ten richest men in America were not hiding in Tora Bora praying to ala with bin laden?</p>
<p>@tokenadult,</p>
<p>Thanks, for a very interesting article. Also, I read the first 12 posts, but have all the links.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So you take as given that “wealthy white churches” do not welcome black worshippers to the point where a request for evidence is dismissed as the equivalent of ■■■■■■■■? Hmm.</p>
<p>It saw this comment from mini in a recently closed thread (#59): </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1284334-harvard-princeton-discrimination-probe-4.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1284334-harvard-princeton-discrimination-probe-4.html</a></p>
<p>It is certainly consistent with the Blair case I mentioned earlier. So what is merit again?
I think the best definition of merit still goes to Karabel. Here is the quote from the Economist:</p>
<p>*the concept of meritocracy itself is strategic and flexible, and often in outright
conflict with egalitarian aims. “Those who are able to define ‘merit’,”
he writes, “will almost invariably possess more of it, and those with
greater resources–cultural, economic, and social–will generally be
able to ensure that the educational system will deem their children
more meritorious.”
*</p>
<p>Beautifully put.</p>
<p>The definition of merit is ultimately cultural. In terms of badminton, I am sure Indonesian has a different interpretation of merit from the Chinese, or the Koreans, another rising badminton power. This difference would be reflected in the way they recruit, the way they train, and even in the way they select athletes for international competition. Still more basic, this interpretation affects the very establishment of the national sporting apparatus itself…</p>
<p>How do we know if our interpretation is any good? How do we know we are not fooling ourselves? I would argue that international competition will keep us honest; the deluded simply dont win. We can only play lets pretend for so long.</p>
<p>I love sports.</p>
<p>I dont know if we should quote mini around here. He has his tongue firmly planted in his cheek half the time when he posts on CC and so you have to find half a dozen posts above and below to ensure he is serious in a specific post when he talks race or merit for that matter!</p>
<p>^Not if his theory is in-line with that of Berkeley professor Jerome Karabel (BA, PHD Harvard), Harvard chaired professors Lani Guinier and Christopher Avery, as well as Pulitzer Prize winning journalist (and Harvard alumnus) William Golden.</p>
<p>I always cross-reference everything anybody said on the internet with evidence and opinion from distinguished sources.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/us/pew-study-americans-more-accepting-of-interracial-marriage.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/us/pew-study-americans-more-accepting-of-interracial-marriage.html</a> </p>
<p>The latest news shows why the issues of defining and counting students are becoming more intricate.</p>
<p>Race does play a factor, however it is only really significant f you have a back story or have overcome something. A Hispanic with perfect grades but that lives in a shelter vs a Hispanic in a suburb…Shelter wins mainly because of the goals they accomplished without the same opportunities. </p>
<p>Please respond to my thread.
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-pennsylvania-2016/1291285-honors-vs-ap.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-pennsylvania-2016/1291285-honors-vs-ap.html</a></p>
<p>The Harvard Crimson reports that the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights inquiry into Harvard’s admission practices has ended, </p>
<p>[U.S</a>. Department of Education Ends Inquiry into Harvard Admissions | News | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/2/17/admissions-department-education-withdrawn/]U.S”>U.S. Department of Education Ends Inquiry into Harvard Admissions | News | The Harvard Crimson) </p>
<p>but the inquiry at Princeton continues.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court announced that it will review the U of Texas case.
Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, No. 11-345
Justice Kagan is recused.</p>
<p>Regarding [#690](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/13907253-post690.html]#690[/url]:”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/13907253-post690.html):</a> SOTUSBLOG is a good place to keep abreast of the developments on [Fisher</a> V. University of Texas](<a href=“http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/fisher-v-university-of-texas-at-austin/]Fisher”>Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin - SCOTUSblog).</p>
<p>[High</a> court accepts case over use of race in college admissions - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/justice/scotus-race-policy/index.html?npt=NP1]High”>http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/justice/scotus-race-policy/index.html?npt=NP1)
^
Article about the SC’s decision to accept the Fisher V. University of Texas case.</p>
<p>New York Times article on Supreme Court’s plan to review the Texas case: </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/us/justices-to-hear-case-on-affirmative-action-in-higher-education.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/us/justices-to-hear-case-on-affirmative-action-in-higher-education.html</a></p>
<p>I predict a 5-3 decision overturning Grutter. Both fortunately and unfortunately, I believe Justice Kennedy will not go so far as to say that there is no value to diversity, but he will remind to deaf ears that diversity is a lot more than “plurality white, not too Asian, and just enough ‘URM.’” If the supporters of racial preferences don’t want Grutter to be overturned outright, they need to recognize that they must broaden their definition of diversity. In this day and age, it cannot be so narrow and so shallow as to mean nothing more than skin color “balance.”</p>
<p>Does anyone else notice how such students as in the articles that oppose affirmative action say they get rejected because of their race and not because of some other factor like their essays, recommendations, or EC’s? What do they possibly know about what the admission committees are discussing and how they reach the decision on their application?</p>
<p>I’m not going to get “involved” in this. But just had to say something. </p>
<p>fabrizio- there’s is a WHOLE lot more difference between ethnicities than “skin color”. That’s just the “obvious” outward difference.</p>
<p>Likely the Fisher case will not result in any decision overruling Grutter. The actual main issue that the court is going to hear is whether the lower courts applied the proper judicial scrutiny test to determine whether improper discrimination took place, a procedural issue that is not likely to lead to any change in the substantive rule that race can be a factor considered</p>
<p>My main problem with using race as an admissions qualification is that it ultimately hurts more than it helps. At least in my state, the majority of students admitted to state universities (like the one I will be attending) though affirmative action programs end up flunking out (or leaving by any other means) within a year or two. By no means am I saying that all do–I know several who took the chance for everything it was worth, and did very, very well–but the majority do, which brings the entire school down.</p>
<p>While I agree that we should not discriminate anymore, and that we should make amends with those races that were harmed by discrimination, no college-aged person (18-22 years, for the purposes of my argument. I’m not saying that there aren’t people in college who are older than that, because I know there are) would have been alive while racial discrimination (in the sense of white versus everyone else) was around. So why do they still get special privileges?</p>
<p>I’ve heard people say that it’s about helping the poor. Well, where is the help for the poor whites? Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians (though, admittedly, Asians are getting less help than Blacks and Hispanics, on top of being highly represented at schools) all get help, so why not the poor whites? A “White History Month” would be a racist, white-supremacist idea, but “Black History Month” is fine. There is a sliding scale of admissions standards based on what race the applicant is. It’s still racism, it’s just against another race (via the giving of an advantage to one or more races over another race) and it’s called something that sounds more politically correct.</p>
<p>I personally would find it kind of insulting to know that the standards were lowered for me because of my race. It’s like saying that blacks and Hispanics aren’t as smart as whites, and that no one is as smart as Asians. It’s degrading every race, and pigeonholing and stereotyping each person based on their race. There are plenty of genius blacks and Hispanics, and plenty of idiotic whites and Asians. You’re race doesn’t indicate your mental capacity.</p>
<p>However, strictly speaking about the case, I think that Fisher would only really have a case if she was told, to her face, that she was rejected because of her race. She may not have been a qualified applicant in other areas. Do I think that race was a factor? Possibly. But there are many other factors to consider as well. Do I think that this case will do anything about using race as an admissions qualification (or about taking race out of the equation entirely)? Not at all. Do I wish it did? You betcha.</p>
<p>I’ve heard many times that a primary purpose of affirmative action is to repay those races who were unreasonably hurt by unjust laws and actions. But that was many many years ago, NOT the people of those races who are alive today. I hope I don’t sound racist, not my intention but do you guys get my point?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That rationale is un-Constitutional as per Bakke.</p>