Affirmative Action Sends Blacks To Schools Too Advanced For Them

[senseamp]

The biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action are whites who take places that would have gone to Asian applicants in a race neutral admission process. And with the demographic shifts and migration patterns, this will be even more of a case down the road. I am looking forward to hearing the crowd that is so against Affirmative Action because it benefits blacks over whites complain that they are discriminated against in favor of Asians.

 

[Bitek]

Affirmative action is merely a short cut to fixing generations of discrimination. It's extremely difficult to bring blacks up to white standards because (on average) they lack the same educational and financial background. By allocating some educational opportunities and even jobs to blacks who don't objectively deserve them, we ensure that their kids and grandkids start out on a level playing field. Thus we do in one or two generations what might otherwise take a century or two. (Obviously this still takes decades because only a small number of blacks can benefit from affirmative action each generation.) Sure, it's not fair to those discriminated against (who are mostly Asian, not Caucasian) but life isn't fair. It's also not fair that some kids are born to parents who are poor and uneducated because that was official government policy. Having been denied the right to even apply for a job due to my skin color, I can tell you absolutely that is the side of the equation I want to be on even with that minor setback.

Neither of my parents made it past high school, yet my father retired owning his auto parts store outright and my mother retired as the county financial director. My paternal grandfather started the auto parts store and spent most of his life paying off the rich man who bankrolled him. My maternal grandfather had to drop out and go to work at twelve (oldest of twelve kids when his father died) and he died with a farm valued at near a million dollars. All that was the result of very hard work and long hours, but you know what else they all had in common? None of them were prohibited from attending the "normal" schools, nor prohibited by government from having any jobs they could land, nor seriously discriminated against by society due to their skin color.

With all the inequities inherent in life, affirmative action is one of the most benign. I don't think it's fair to call it racism, it's just racially based discrimination to overturn the effects of government sanctioned racism.

Good post.


I would also say in part its grading on a curve. Govt has typically underinvested in these communities, so expecting them to perform on the same level is not realistic.

But the cycle of poverty needs to be broken. That includes pushing opportunities to get kids from these communities in college, get them quality employment, and improving their wealth and productivity. This then carries into the next gen, who should need less help than the first.

Fine idea in principal, have no objections. Not sure how successful it's been, but I think the "harm" to whites has likely been minimal and overstated by opponents.

I would only object only if it was ineffective. But the choice should be a change in policy by the legislature, not questionable ideological rulings from the courts.

 

[shady28]

My apologies then if he was misquoted.

There is actually some thought and substance to what the SC is doing.

It's the stupid clickbait headlines and piss poor journalism, meant to get shares / likes / tweets, that we see all over these days. The SC actually doing something thoughtfully and logically doesn't get clicks.

 

[alcoholbob]

The biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action are whites who take places that would have gone to Asian applicants in a race neutral admission process. And with the demographic shifts and migration patterns, this will be even more of a case down the road. I am looking forward to hearing the crowd that is so against Affirmative Action because it benefits blacks over whites complain that they are discriminated against in favor of Asians.

It's been a trend that's been going on since the early 1990s. For example in the Ivy League schools the % of Asians peaked in 1993-1994 and has been steadily declining since, even though the Asian population has exploded since then. Which basically means test scores and grades of Asians admitted into the Ivy League are rising increasingly compared to the rest of the population because of this admissions bottleneck--decreasing slots for Asians due to affirmative action, and rising numbers of Asians due to immigration. In 20 years you might have to score a perfect 1600 on the SAT to get into an Ivy League school if you are Asian

 

[Capt Caveman]

The biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action are whites who take places that would have gone to Asian applicants in a race neutral admission process. And with the demographic shifts and migration patterns, this will be even more of a case down the road. I am looking forward to hearing the crowd that is so against Affirmative Action because it benefits blacks over whites complain that they are discriminated against in favor of Asians.

As an Asian, affirmative action assisted me. And I was able to be a tutor to minority students to help them graduate. Providing a support system when they get to the University/College level, similar to those given to athletes of sports teams can give those that may have not been given the proper educational foundation prior to college to succeed.

 

[glenn1]

But Thomas has no standing to complain about affirmative action.

Unless he ad an opportunity to opt out of the affirmative action that benefitted him, then of course he has standing. Hell, by your standard progressives wouldn't have standing to complain about the low tax rates they take advantage of but think should be raised. Or maybe Thomas is just calling it a "collective action problem" like they always do.

 

[werepossum]

Just last week, friends in Dallas sent me this link about the incident in Mesquite (just outside of Dallas). Numerous mob fights second year in a row at the annual family Christmas light festival. It happened last year, it happened again this year, who says it will not happen again next year? Multiple fights at a family religious gathering for all? Seriously?

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2015/12/07/...at-the-park-brings-criticism-to-city-leaders/

Self-inflicted problems and not from racism/evil whiteys/other excuses. What's that old saying? Something about if you want others to respect you, you must respect yourself and behave properly first.

You have a point, but not for this issue. We aren't talking about blacks who engage in gang fights, we're talking about the kids who busted their asses in school, kids who do respect themselves and society. The brief from which Scalia quoted points out a real problem: if by accident of birth one is a poor ghetto kid (which statistically means one is much more likely to be black) then one is likely far less prepared for an advanced university STEM curriculum.

It's also worth pointing out that this very real issue seems to have nothing to do with this case, which as far as I can tell has no merit. That may be the point; if the court intends to uphold affirmative action, then plaintiffs with no case might be a good platform.

Wow really?

Let's think about what this supposedly right-wing ultra-conservative Supreme Court has ruled on recently.

6-3 they supported Obamacare

6-4 they supported gay marriage



They upheld an Obama legal notion that proof of bias in housing discrimination lawsuits was not necessary, requiring only that harm to minorities was caused.


And the title of this thread is extremely misleading. Scalia was asking about the validity of a brief concerning the case, it doesn't mean he believes it.

I guess the Supreme Court can't ask questions anymore now?

Once again, Political Correctness run amok. Fortunately, the Supreme Court is a life job so they don't give a flip what the press or politicians say.

Excellent points, thanks. Progressives so hate Scalia and Thomas that honesty gets thrown out the door.

But Thomas has no standing to complain about affirmative action.

Maybe he's bringing his own version of rich Latina cultural insight.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The amicus was filed by theUSCCR which is a Government agency formed by the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Source? From the clickbait OP article:

In his comments Wednesday, it appears that Scalia was referencing this amicus brief written by UCLA law professor Richard Sander, who has also co-written a book called "Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It’s Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won’t Admit It."

And some more background on the current state of amicus briefs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/02/u...sources-of-some-supreme-court-facts.html?_r=0
Including some quotes from Scalia himself:

But “Supreme Court briefs are an inappropriate place to develop the key facts in a case,” Justice Scalia wrote. “An adversarial process in the trial courts can identify flaws in the methodology of the studies that the parties put forward; here, we accept the studies’ findings on faith, without examining their methodology at all.”

The net result, he said, is “untested judicial fact-finding masquerading as statutory interpretation.”

 

[Exterous]

you will have a lot of Asian students. Diverse student body right there.

Apparently that doesn't count. I was on the campus of a top 20 University not too long ago and they were having official discussions on diversity and the student body. A presentation and subsequent discussion was that there were too many whites (63%) and Asians (12.7%) and not enough blacks (4%) because blacks were under represented and asians over represented compared to the demographics of the US. During the presentation slides were used from the BLS and collegescorecard.ed.gov. Hispanics were not mentioned. I have no idea how actionable the University views the discussion but I wonder if there is a shift from 'Asians not counting as minorities' to grouping Asians and Caucasians together. I was very surprised by the complete exclusion of Hispanics from the discussion. (maybe they had their own somewhere else? That would seem odd to segregate the two discussions though...)

I guess I am just used to the top 10 as being advanced. Top 50 is only advanced for a provincial university.

So being in the top 0.9% of colleges in the US doesn't count as advanced? Ok dumbass

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Excellent points, thanks. Progressives so hate Scalia and Thomas that honesty gets thrown out the door.

Please, citing those specific cases as proof of a liberal court isn't dishonest at all.

 

[werepossum]

Good post.


I would also say in part its grading on a curve. Govt has typically underinvested in these communities, so expecting them to perform on the same level is not realistic.

But the cycle of poverty needs to be broken. That includes pushing opportunities to get kids from these communities in college, get them quality employment, and improving their wealth and productivity. This then carries into the next gen, who should need less help than the first.

Fine idea in principal, have no objections. Not sure how successful it's been, but I think the "harm" to whites has likely been minimal and overstated by opponents.

I would only object only if it was ineffective. But the choice should be a change in policy by the legislature, not questionable ideological rulings from the courts.

Thanks, and agreed. I kind of like the grading curve though. If required to compete completely objectively, then attending an inner city school would mean kids had no chance to get into better colleges. By automatically accepting the top ten percent from each school, kids have a shot wherever they grow up.

As far as whites being harmed, I tried to get into TVA operator school and was denied even an application, being told that the next three classes were exclusively reserved for minorities. I made it a point to go by and look in on that first class, and not more than half were minorities. They actually meant "after we take care of our own kids, our friends' kids, and our nieces and nephews." Even when we take care of disadvantaged minorities, we are pretty good at taking care of our own first.

 

[bozack]

I am far more advanced for most of you to keep up with me.

Funniest and most ridiculous thing I have read all week, thanks for that.

 

[werepossum]

Please, citing those specific cases as proof of a liberal court isn't dishonest at all.

Wow, you totally whipped that straw man!

He never said it was a liberal court. He pointed out that it is not a right wing ultra-conservative activist court. Just look at the ACA mandate; they not only didn't overturn it, they took something admittedly un-Constitutional and found a way (as a tax) for it to be Constitutional.

 

[Ackmed]

In other words Affirmative Action selects people based on the color of their skin and not their qualifications.

I agree. Sadly this is just not for college, but also in jobs. Never should someone who is better at a job get passed over for someone who isn't, based on their skin color. Affirmative action is racism, saying otherwise is silly. But like most racism, sometimes it's "ok".

It is not even used all the time, just when convenient which is hypocritical.

 

[werepossum]

I agree. Sadly this is just not for college, but also in jobs. Never should someone who is better at a job get passed over for someone who isn't, based on their skin color. Affirmative action is racism, saying otherwise is silly. But like most racism, sometimes it's "ok".

It is not even used all the time, just when convenient which is hypocritical.

One small point of order: racism is the belief that one race is inherently, genetically superior or inferior than another. One can recognize historical discrimination and recognize affirmative action as a means of addressing the lingering effects of this discrimination without believing that minorities are racially inferior.

If you and I are running a race and you are in a hole with me standing on your head, my helping you out of the hole before we start says nothing about why you were in the hole. It simply recognizes that the guy not standing in a hole with a man standing on his head has a big advantage.

 

[Mursilis]

If my taxes are used to pay professor salaries, I want that school to have a student body that reflects the state population.

If MY taxes are used to pay professor salaries, I want that school to turn out competent graduates. When I drive over a bridge or visit an ER in the future, I'm not going to care about the skin color of the engineer who designed that bridge or the doctor who may treat me; I'm only going to care that they're competent at what they do.

 

[Ackmed]

One small point of order: racism is the belief that one race is inherently, genetically superior or inferior than another. One can recognize historical discrimination and recognize affirmative action as a means of addressing the lingering effects of this discrimination without believing that minorities are racially inferior.

If you and I are running a race and you are in a hole with me standing on your head, my helping you out of the hole before we start says nothing about why you were in the hole. It simply recognizes that the guy not standing in a hole with a man standing on his head has a big advantage.

I know what racism is, dealing with it almost every single day.

rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
-prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

What is discrimination?

Discrimination is treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing is perceived to belong to rather than on individual merit.

By definition affirmative action can be racism. Having two identical applicants, or even if one is better than the other on paper, then picking one over the other because the color of their skin is wrong, and racism.

I understand completely why affirmative action exist. Because there once was a day when selecting whites over blacks or other races was common and something needed to be done about it. I believe though that someone should be taken on their own merit, and not given special chances that someone else earned.

 

[jackstar7]

Nice to see the semantic pedantry is spreading.

Everyone likes that in a discussion.

 

[senseamp]

Unless he ad an opportunity to opt out of the affirmative action that benefitted him, then of course he has standing.

Of course he had an opportunity to opt out. He could have at any time said, I am not the best qualified to be a SCOTUS justice, I will stay on as a Monsanto lawyer instead. Instead he sits on the bench afraid to open his mouth to ask a question for fear of looking like an idiot.

 

[werepossum]

I know what racism is, dealing with it almost every single day.

What is discrimination?

By definition affirmative action can be racism. Having two identical applicants, or even if one is better than the other on paper, then picking one over the other because the color of their skin is wrong, and racism.

I understand completely why affirmative action exist. Because there once was a day when selecting whites over blacks or other races was common and something needed to be done about it. I believe though that someone should be taken on their own merit, and not given special chances that someone else earned.

You ended your bolding too quickly, dude.

Quote:

rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
-prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.​

If someone is supporting affirmative action in the belief that blacks (or Hispanics, etc.) are inferior and therefore will always need such support, then sure, that is racism. For most of us though, affirmative action is a temporary measure designed to mediate centuries of systemic and systematic discrimination.

I too believe that everyone should be taken on her own merit and not given special chances that someone else earned. I just recognize that due to circumstances of birth, some people have an enormously harder time earning what comes easier to others due to their own birth circumstances. That will always be a constant of life, but it's a very bad thing to have it collocated with a particular minority group as it tends to be self-perpetuating.

 

[Ackmed]

I too believe that everyone should be taken on her own merit and not given special chances that someone else earned. I just recognize that due to circumstances of birth, some people have an enormously harder time earning what comes easier to others due to their own birth circumstances. That will always be a constant of life, but it's a very bad thing to have it collocated with a particular minority group as it tends to be self-perpetuating.

We're going to have to agree to disagree then. I am not the only one here who thinks picking someone over another just because of their race is racism.

I do agree that who you are born to plays a huge factor in many things. Life sucks sometimes, but giving someone a spot in college or a job over someone who is more qualified is wrong. Taking race into account is even more wrong. As I said, I understand how bad it once was and am under no illusion it still doesn't go on. Something needed to be done. I know of no 100% fix for this, and is far better than how it was. But as I said, life sucks sometimes. Just gotta get over it and go on.

 

[glenn1]

Of course he had an opportunity to opt out. He could have at any time said, I am not the best qualified to be a SCOTUS justice, I will stay on as a Monsanto lawyer instead. Instead he sits on the bench afraid to open his mouth to ask a question for fear of looking like an idiot.

Please do elaborate on the reasons he so lacks qualifications. I'm sure this will be entertaining, plus it will be interesting to hear you explain why it applies to Thomas but not Obama since he clearly had the least "qualifications" of any POTUS we've ever had.

 

[Moonbeam]

Funniest and most ridiculous thing I have read all week, thanks for that.

You're most welcome. It's the least I can do for a primitive imbecile like you. Jerks are the easiest to kick in the knee.

 

[senseamp]

Please do elaborate on the reasons he so lacks qualifications. I'm sure this will be entertaining, plus it will be interesting to hear you explain why it applies to Thomas but not Obama since he clearly had the least "qualifications" of any POTUS we've ever had.

Obama was elected, not selected. Also Obama even if Obama benefited from racial preferences, he is not then turning around and bashing them. But nice try.

 

[Vic]

Please do elaborate on the reasons he so lacks qualifications. I'm sure this will be entertaining, plus it will be interesting to hear you explain why it applies to Thomas but not Obama since he clearly had the least "qualifications" of any POTUS we've ever had.

There have been lesser "qualified" POTUS in the past, including a few that had little if any formal education.