<p>Occidental</a> Observer</p>
<p>Discuss.</p>
<p>P.S. I am in no way advocating anything this guy says or believes in (my friend sent me the link). I mean, in all seriousness, the man's a textbook racist; however, I do think some of his factual analysis of LSAT scores is intriguing, so try to look past his insane bias. Didn't bother to fact-check anything, though, so until someone does, take it all with a giant grain of salt, I suppose.</p>
<p>76 views and no replies?? Come on, surely SOMEone can at least deride the guy for his bombastic, over-the-top rhetoric or find some holes in his argument…</p>
<p>I mean, he does make a good point… and has the data to back it up. I think he’s really just highlighting the point that the field of law is so competitive, and lawyers are rewarded for their aptitude. But in regard to law school admission, there are certain people admitted (not just African-Americans, of course) who are, I’m afraid to say, not qualified. I think he’s really just making a statement about that oxymoron, and not trying to say whites are smarter and here’s some evidence (which would be a completely different story). </p>
<p>I was looking at a Law School predictor (just putting in some numbers to see what comes out), and I know that they are not 100% accurate, but I as APPALLED at how much being a URM helps in admission. I always knew that it was significant, but I almost fell of my chair when I saw the numbers. I’ve never been an advocate of Affirmative Action except in very very very select cases. Maybe that’s just me as a Caucasian Jewish male who comes from the middle class. It’s rather insulting that someone who scores significantly lower on a very important test, or didn’t perform as well in school would be able to get into a better college, solely because of their skin color. It’s amazing how a society has worked so hard for social equality over the past 60 years, breaking down social and educational barriers to try and provide an equal CHANCE for all (NOT equal results), however, we reverse discriminate against the majorities based on the color of their skin? I just don’t get it… Law is supposed to be a science of logic and justice. </p>
<p>Just for the record, I don’t consider myself a racist, and I don’t harbor any ill-feelings towards anyone of any color. It’s just that this logic (or lack thereof) seems incongruous to a legal society.</p>
<p>I think he makes a good point. But it’s not really anything any one here doesn’t know. His article, to me, is just his attempt to tell other people this so that they might get incensed at AA. But not especially revealing to me, or any one applying to law school probably.</p>
<p>I think most people accept his logic as valid and his judgement as fair. They either a) don’t care b) don’t want to be labeled racists, c) are too lazy to want to fight the system or d) they believe in AA. Oh wait, lol, or e) are currently with him in the fight to stop AA.</p>
<p>Me? I’m a mix of C and D. I think AA shafts a lot of deserving people but I also acknowledge that there’s something in the law school admissions system and in the LSAT and in our society that entirely shafts minorities. </p>
<p>I’d actually like to see AA revamped to be on a more economical base. Or maybe just adjust it so it’s not so black and white. Have it make distinctions between asians and hispanics. I don’t think your typical cuban child is going through the same things as a mexican immigrant’s child. I especially don’t think all asians are the same. A vietnamese child or a thai child has college matriculation rates and an average income that’s comparable to the URMs yet they still go under the ‘asian’ category which discriminates against them because of so many successful Chinese, Japanese and Koreans.</p>
<p>Affirmative action, at least at the professional school level, does indeed make distinctions among Hispanics. As per your suggestion, Cubans ostensibly do not receive affirmative action benefits.</p>