Affirmative Action... It's a form of discrimination.

[DanceMan]

Ah, one of my favorite subjects....here are my thoughts. This is gonna be long...

First, let me address the quote that was made above:

Personally I believe it is. Two wrongs don't make a right. Let the best man (or woman) get the job

Well, to quote Sister Soljuh "Two wrongs don't make a right, but it sure makes us even."

And that, is the core of the situation.

Here's some points that I would like to address:

First, I do support Affirmative Action -- that is the pure definition of it. Which is -- given that there are two (or more) equally qualified candidates, the one that is considered 'underrepresented' should be given the nod. However, most companies and schools often don't focus on the 'equally qualified' bit, and therefore implement quotas or admit those that are under-qualified. This is the problem.

Second, why is it believed that the best person should or always get the job? That dosen't happen in real life. I'll bet that many people can point to instances such as the bosses son, or a old frat buddy, etc, and you can even find instances where these people screw up day in and day out, but still keep their job (a good example of this is our current President ), No one complains about this type of 'affirmative action'. Also, the 'qualified' pool is not about who you're currently bringing in the door. It also has to do with the 'work group' you are hiring that person into. For example, the person might not be the best candidate in the hiring group, but if they are at least a qualified as the bosses son (who academic or work performance might not be up to par) who is in the same work group, then that person should be considered for the job nonetheless.

Not every 'underrepresented' person (I don't like the term minority) is unqualified, but equally or even more qualified. No one looks at how affirmative action (as implemented) above, has helped bring many into a position to where their talents can be seen where they would not have been able to get into the door before. But, everyone like to point out the one 'screwup' that is considered to be a 'quota' hire and focus on that. Hey, there are a lot of other non 'quota' screw-ups too.

By the way, affirmative action is not always about being rich or poor, i.e. economic. It's socio-economic. You can be middle, or upper class, and still be discriminated against.

Here's something that's not well known -- the biggest beneficiary of AA has been white people -- specifically white females. And believe it or not, I support AA for any individuals that are 'equally qualified' and 'underrepresented', no matter what their race or economic status is. I also will make the point that you can not live under the 'AA' umbrella and expect to be successful or be 'given' a job based on your status. Qualified means qualified.

There are people who believe that the government should not be supportive or take part in AA. Oh please! If you have a mortgage, do you take advantage of the mortgage deduction on your taxes? Do you have kids in the local school district? Those that don't still have to pay the school taxes for those that do. We don't fight against these type of 'affirmative action' programs -- mainly because we realize they serve a greater good. And if you are of the very conservative or libertarian bent that believe that government should even be out of those programs -- well, I then believe that you are living in dream world, and under the impression that minimal or no government will best suit the people. Sorry, I just don't give my fellow citizens that kind of trust that they would look out for the greater good of all.

But, I can see a day where AA should be scrapped, and that day is when discrimination has diminished to the point where there is fair representation and selection of candidates. I don't believe we are at that point yet.

 

[DeeKnow]

it isn't just a 'form' of discrimination, it practically defines discrimination... sadly, it has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with grabbing minority votes

 

[Painman]

AA also institutionalizes mediocricy. I'm remembering a story from a while back in the Boston Globe about a (white) man who took all the requisite tests, etc. to join the Boston Fire Dept. and scored very high, but was denied the job in favor of a minority person who scored much lower than he did, in order to satisfy a quota. Now this was just RIDICULOUS. These are people who deal with matters of LIFE or DEATH on a daily basis. Do you want the best qualified people for such a job? I sure as hell do. I don't care what color they are, I pay hard-earned money to support my local emergency services/law enforcement and I want only the most qualified people in these jobs, quotas be damned!

In my view, AA was implemented to counteract racism in the public sector, but it has failed to address the issue of inferior education for minorities that pervades to this day. In fact, it even perpetuates it by subsidizing it. One form of institutionalized racism supporting another!

Of course, non-institutionalized racism, nepotism, cronyism etc. do exist and AA does work to counter some of that, but I still think the primary underlying problem of racial inequality rests within our educational system.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: DeeKnow
it isn't just a 'form' of discrimination, it practically defines discrimination... sadly, it has nothing to do with fairness and everything to do with grabbing minority votes

Pick any government bureaucracy, and the same theme will appear time and time again. All bureaucracies have two main goals:

A. Make politicians look good, and make it look like something is actually "getting done." Hence, the buying of votes.

B. Insure the expansion, maintainence and pay of government "jobs."

 

[Mockery]

Interesting?..The two arguments I keep seeing for why we should keep A.A. include vindictive ?eye for an eye? mindset, which is flawed unless all white people owned slaves, and the concept that this is trying to even the playing field for the underrepresented individuals that have to endure unfair competition amongst legacy, nepotism, candidates who may, or may not, have more financial influence over them. I guess that would be a fair complaint if A.A. suited everyone who didn?t have these benefits going for them (which we know it doesn?t). So basically this program puts a band aid over a far bigger problem and pushes aside a very large proportion of our society that was already at a disadvantage, and crams a few more less qualified people ahead of them in line. ?Bingo?..Problem solved!?

I think my biggest problem with A.A. is that I don?t see how blanket policies that treat people purely as a statistic can solve issues that basically boil down to a micro level struggle. Individualism has been completely scraped in the pursuit of the ?common good? here.

(Which is kind of funny if you think about it, because it should be called the ?uncommon good? since the majority are the ones that are getting the shaft by it).

 

[AcidicFury]

I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents.

First, Affirmative Action is wrong. Plain and simple. It completely disregards the system of Social Darwinism that has defined American progress for hundreds of years. Instead, it replaces it with a system that is inherently racist, claiming to be reparations for any wrongs of slavery and/or social disadvantages.

I have never thought it was fair for people who are not as qualified as me to be given more opportunities when they frankly haven't worked as hard. I was always taught by my parents to work hard and my natural intelligence would shine through. However, when we look at many minority students (with the exception of Asians), they are given the same job, a better education at a higher learning institution, and yet they still don't work as hard.

So how do we fix a system like this? The answer is to eliminate racism (a major problem in itself). Once we stop Affirmative Action, minorities are going to cry foul because they haven't had the same opportunities at life as whites. Oh boohoo. Life is unfair. Work hard, and reap the benefits.

 

[DanceMan]

Originally posted by: AcidicFury
I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents.

First, Affirmative Action is wrong. Plain and simple. It completely disregards the system of Social Darwinism that has defined American progress for hundreds of years. Instead, it replaces it with a system that is inherently racist, claiming to be reparations for any wrongs of slavery and/or social disadvantages.

I have never thought it was fair for people who are not as qualified as me to be given more opportunities when they frankly haven't worked as hard. I was always taught by my parents to work hard and my natural intelligence would shine through. However, when we look at many minority students (with the exception of Asians), they are given the same job, a better education at a higher learning institution, and yet they still don't work as hard.

So how do we fix a system like this? The answer is to eliminate racism (a major problem in itself). Once we stop Affirmative Action, minorities are going to cry foul because they haven't had the same opportunities at life as whites. Oh boohoo. Life is unfair. Work hard, and reap the benefits.

See, AcidFury speaks of the unfounded fears about AA. They say it's racist. How so, when the biggest benefit of AA goes to white people? People who rail about it being racist really refuse to admit their biggest problem which is that they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them, and resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: DanceMan

Originally posted by: AcidicFury
I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents.

First, Affirmative Action is wrong. Plain and simple. It completely disregards the system of Social Darwinism that has defined American progress for hundreds of years. Instead, it replaces it with a system that is inherently racist, claiming to be reparations for any wrongs of slavery and/or social disadvantages.

I have never thought it was fair for people who are not as qualified as me to be given more opportunities when they frankly haven't worked as hard. I was always taught by my parents to work hard and my natural intelligence would shine through. However, when we look at many minority students (with the exception of Asians), they are given the same job, a better education at a higher learning institution, and yet they still don't work as hard.

So how do we fix a system like this? The answer is to eliminate racism (a major problem in itself). Once we stop Affirmative Action, minorities are going to cry foul because they haven't had the same opportunities at life as whites. Oh boohoo. Life is unfair. Work hard, and reap the benefits.

See, AcidFury speaks of the unfounded fears about AA. They say it's racist. How so, when the biggest benefit of AA goes to white people? People who rail about it being racist really refuse to admit their biggest problem which is that they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them, and resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field.

a very poorly drawn conclusion

Because, in your words, AA IS racist, whites are wrong in saying that it iss racist because it benifits them? hmm k.

And where does the "they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them" come from? you must be pretty sheltered or something, because ive never met anyone that feels this way, and ive been all over the country. and what does this have to do with AA? where in AA does it say anything about superiority/inferiority?

"resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field." umm, why would whites be FOR a level playing field if we are AGAINST AA? your really not making any sense here.

 

[DanceMan]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: DanceMan
See, AcidFury speaks of the unfounded fears about AA. They say it's racist. How so, when the biggest benefit of AA goes to white people? People who rail about it being racist really refuse to admit their biggest problem which is that they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them, and resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field.

a very poorly drawn conclusion

Because, in your words, AA IS racist, whites are wrong in saying that it iss racist because it benifits them? hmm k.

And where does the "they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them" come from? you must be pretty sheltered or something, because ive never met anyone that feels this way, and ive been all over the country. and what does this have to do with AA? where in AA does it say anything about superiority/inferiority?

"resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field." umm, why would whites be FOR a level playing field if we are AGAINST AA? your really not making any sense here.

No, you are having problems comprehending. I did not say AA is racist. He did. And he really brought the point home by the 'reparations and slavery' comment. That puts it in the realm of focusing on race, specifically the African-American race. So, I refuted that by saying the people who benefited the most from AA have been white people, hence not people who wanted or needed 'reparations and slavery'. Now, do you understand my point a little better?

As for the 'superior to anyone else' comment, well people (of all races) won't come out and say it, so that's why you don't met anyone. Most know better to keep that kind of thing to themselves. However, it does exist, or else discrimination would not exist. Granted, there are different levels of bias in everyone, but that bias exists in everyone. It's just a natural part of life. The point is does the this bias rise to the level in which it starts affecting others?. If so, this is where AA steps in. It addresses the discrimination, and that discrimination stems from feelings of 'superiority/inferiority'.

I really don't understand your last paragraph was saying either. You again are trying to put words into my mouth. I didn't say whites were for or against a level-playing field. Read my last paragraph again to see if it becomes clearer to you.

 

[AcidicFury]

So DanceMan, you don't think that giving people jobs based on race rather than personal qualifications is OK? You don't think that you need to work hard in order to succeed? While I would categorize myself as pretty liberal, I happen to believe that people shouldn't be given anything like jobs or a better education because they are either of a different race or a different socio-economic class.

Another thing. You talked about how AA helps white people most? Please explain that because I would like to hear your flawed logic.

 

[Mockery]

Originally posted by: DanceMan
See, AcidFury speaks of the unfounded fears about AA. They say it's racist. How so, when the biggest benefit of AA goes to white people?

Explain?.I do not see the benefit of often being more qualified for a position but failing to get the job, promotion, or acceptance spot, purely because of your exterior skin color.
Explain to me how white people receive the biggest benefits from A.A.

Originally posted by: DanceMan
People who rail about it being racist really refuse to admit their biggest problem which is that they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them, and resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field.

Uhhh?.yeah?..interesting conclusion. It might be applicable if people who were equally, or better qualified, were the only ones benefiting from A.A.. In the majority of cases it is not and has not been this way, however.

How about this one for size, I think you refuse to admit that A.A. is a racialist, discriminatory, policy that bases acceptance based purely on physical characteristics, and not merit, because deep down you like race based programs that happen to go your way.

 

[DanceMan]

Originally posted by: AcidicFury
So DanceMan, you don't think that giving people jobs based on race rather than personal qualifications is OK? You don't think that you need to work hard in order to succeed? While I would categorize myself as pretty liberal, I happen to believe that people shouldn't be given anything like jobs or a better education because they are either of a different race or a different socio-economic class.

Another thing. You talked about how AA helps white people most? Please explain that because I would like to hear your flawed logic.

First of all, you need to be better educated about AA. It is not focused on giving jobs based on race. You're getting this confused with 'quotas'. Rather, AA is focused on giving jobs to those that are 'underrepresented', and that are 'equally qualified'. Since they are equally qualified, then mathematically, it should not matter who you choose, so then if there is an 'underrepresentation' you go with the underrepresented one. I know I am not defining such terms as 'equally qualified' or 'underrepresented' here, and I am avoiding that here to save space, but if folks would like me to, I can in more length define this. However, here is an example. If the makup of a company was largely African-American, and white males are considered to be 'underrepresented' in both the company and the surrounding community, then if this company was interviewing two candidates, one African-American male, and one white male, and they were both 'equally qualfied', then consideration should be given to the white male for the position. And of course, I do believe people do have to work hard to succeed, and I have said so previously. I also believe, that if they do work hard, that they deserve the same equal chance to succeed as others.

As to how white people mostly benefit from AA, a little known fact is that white (or any) females are covered by AA guidelines. This is a very important concept to understand. There are slightly more females than males in the U.S. population, therefore AA actually applies to the majority of the population -- not just some small minority segment, as many people believe. Secondly, having women (white or otherwise) in the workforce has had a profound impact on our economy and society. It has been said that women have been an integral part of the 80's and 90's economic boom. Working women have allowed families to afford (and spend more) with two-incomes rather than one, and all of the benefits (and as some point out, drawbacks) that that entails. And, very recently we have now seen a crop of women CEO's that have done well leading Fortune 500 companies. Well, although they might be very talented and capable, they owe a lot of success to AA. Finally, realizing this, this should squelch the feeling that many white males have that they will be passed over for employment, promotions or education for an un-qualfied minority. They would be more statistically likely to be passed over for a white female than any other AA-represented person.

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Tabb
Why do we have it anyway? Why should colleges or other educational institutions care? Hell, if I was the cheif admissions officer, I'd take the brightest students and go down. I don't care if you're african american, native american, asian or austrilian. All I care is that you've got good grades...

Well its not really like that. Its "all other things being equal, hire/accept the minority". So if John is a white kid with a 1300 SAT, in the top 5% of his class, has X activities and so on, and Joe is black and has the same exact credentials, Joe is accepted.

Granted, it doesn't always work like that, but that's the original intention. As has been said, quotas (you have to accept X% of minorities) were ruled unconstitutional.

It really seems like most of you are ignorant as to the TRUE definition of AA. Reread my example. AA is NOT the same as quotas, which were rightfully (in my opinion) ruled unconstitutional.

 

[DanceMan]

Originally posted by: Mockery

Originally posted by: DanceMan
See, AcidFury speaks of the unfounded fears about AA. They say it's racist. How so, when the biggest benefit of AA goes to white people?

Explain?.I do not see the benefit of often being more qualified for a position but failing to get the job, promotion, or acceptance spot, purely because of your exterior skin color.
Explain to me how white people receive the biggest benefits from A.A.

Uh, I said nothing about the more qualified NOT getting the job. Again, only those that are underrepresented AND qualified should be given consideration. As for how white people receive the biggest benefit of AA, see my explanation to AcidicFury above.

Originally posted by: DanceMan
People who rail about it being racist really refuse to admit their biggest problem which is that they feel themselves superior to anyone else who does not look like them, and resent it greatly when others who might be equally or even better qualified are given a chance to compete on level-playing field.

Uhhh?.yeah?..interesting conclusion. It might be applicable if people who were equally, or better qualified, were the only ones benefiting from A.A.. In the majority of cases it is not and has not been this way, however.

I'm not convinced in the 'majority of cases' it really is. If you have some data besides anecdotal, I would really like to see it. But, they should be applied using AA principles, not quotas. But, let's say that your conjecture is true, that some are not qualified. Even in that case, however, I still say there have been other non-underrepresented candidates (boss's son, alumni legacy, family or friends, well connected, etc) that are even more unqualified. Or are you saying to me the only unqualified applicants are those that come through AA?

How about this one for size, I think you refuse to admit that A.A. is a racialist, discriminatory, policy that bases acceptance based purely on physical characteristics, and not merit, because deep down you like race based programs that happen to go your way.

Here we go round and round, round and round, round and round....

No, I do not believe AA is. Quotas are, however, and I have said as much above. You can have an effective AA program without quotas. And deep down, what I believe is that everyone, if they work hard, deserves the same chances to be successful as anyone else.

 

[Mockery]

Originally posted by: DanceMan
Uh, I said nothing about the more qualified NOT getting the job. Again, only those that are underrepresented AND qualified should be given consideration. As for how white people receive the biggest benefit of AA, see my explanation to AcidicFury above.

I agreed with a lot of what you wrote in that reply. The one thing I found interesting was where you said that if whites were the underrepresented minority in certain scenarios you would favor them being a beneficiary of this program too. I respect that you kept consistent with your outlook. Many I talk with about this topic are not. Can you list me an example where A.A. has ever worked in the opposite direction? Perhaps in regards to sports, etc?.. I heard about an example where something like this almost happened in Hawaii, but the article never concluded to the final verdict.

Originally posted by: DanceMan
I'm not convinced in the 'majority of cases' it really is. If you have some data besides anecdotal, I would really like to see it. But, they should be applied using AA principles, not quotas. But, let's say that your conjecture is true, that some are not qualified. Even in that case, however, I still say there have been other non-underrepresented candidates (boss's son, alumni legacy, family or friends, well connected, etc) that are even more unqualified. Or are you saying to me the only unqualified applicants are those that come through AA?

No?I am absolutely not saying that. To me it seems like this program is a crutch to match up with the unfair advantages of the boss's son, alumni legacy, family or friends, well connected. In theory that sounds great, but not everyone who has to endure these disadvantages gets to receive the benefits of A.A.. So in essence, to me, it seems like it is cramming a few more ?less qualified? applicants ahead of these people and in many situations escalates the prior problem substantially.

Regardless of whether quotas should be allowed (I agree with you that this is A.A.?s biggest problem) they are usually implemented in one form or another. Take the recent Supreme Court ruling in Michigan for example. That was a fine illustration of a quota based system that gave a significant advantage to unrepresented students, usually at the direct expense of more qualified ones. In one example a student that scored around a 1350 S.A.T., was the schools valedictorian, and had a 3.8 G.P.A., was turned down for admittance to that very school, but later found out that a friend of his (ranked #9), with a significantly less scholarly résumé, was admitted for the same major/same term that he applied for. Examples like this, which are not rare from what I have seen, are what perturb me about this program.

Here we go round and round, round and round, round and round....

No, I do not believe AA is. Quotas are, however, and I have said as much above. You can have an effective AA program without quotas. And deep down, what I believe is that everyone, if they work hard, deserves the same chances to be successful as anyone else.

Me too, I just have a different belief of how we should be going about it. I believe that cases of racism and/or favoritism should be handled as they come up and openly indicted against. I do not see A.A., not as it?s supposed to be in theory, but how it is practiced, doing anything more than increasing this problem. Quota systems are the downfall of Affirmative Action, and without proper incentives being established to discourage against them they are going to continue on as they have been.

 

[tec699]

Affirmative action will end in 50 years due to the rising minority population. Within this time the minorities will greatly outnumber white America so there will be no need for affirmative action.

 

[OMG1Penguin]

On college apps (mainly) and other forms, I "Choose not to respond" because I am a caucasian male. I figure because of AA, I have a better chance that way.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: HamSupLo
So shouldn't legacy be banned too? Isn't that a form of discrimination?

Shurely you should know, legacy often helps the more affluent of us, and predominantly of the superior white race, hence it is great and not discrimination.

Zephyr

 

[Turgon]

The decline of the 2 parent family in the African American community is a huge problem. Close to 70% of births in the African American community happen in a single mother situation. This is not a situation that encourages the children to do well in school. We wonder why the education system is such a joke. It begins with the family. You can throw as much money as you want at the situation.... it won't do anything.

 

[hdeck]

i agree that it is a form of discrimination.