Hell, if Powell wanted to be prez, I'd say he's a shoo in after Bush, at least right now. It isn't that far off, so why cling to antiquated measures like AA?
Hell, if Powell wanted to be prez, I'd say he's a shoo in after Bush, at least right now. It isn't that far off, so why cling to antiquated measures like AA?
Originally posted by: classy
They did sue. It even made regional news. But sports? No white guy is denied the right to play any position in any sport. No minority is denied the right to play hockey either. Maybe you don't watch TV. But the more equal stuff is a joke. When are people like you going to ever wake up, walk outside, and see the real world. Preach what? Stand up? Man blacks have made many strides forward. Blacks have also contributed big time to this society. But for all we have accomplished the gap still stands wide in certain areas. Despite the fact blacks are just as educated, we are still absent in many of the places in the corporate world. We ain't asking to be the President of the US, but the oppurtunity to be presdient of a corporation shouldn't be out of reach as well. And yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, there are qualified blacks. So lets give that a rest as well.
There seems to be alot of fix it now going on here.
How many white Wide receivers or conerbacks are there? I haven't seen one Hispanic player in the NBA or NHL. That's injustice in your book. After all everything should be a representation of socity as a whole. Of course that is an obsurd idea that a sports team would be forced to put a player on there roster solely based on race, Yet you claim we should apply this to everything else.
My sister couldn't get a pell grant to save her life, got married (which hurts your chances) and then the remander of her college was paid for. Just because her last name was now of a hispanic origin. I am really sorry but that just ain't right. There is no way to justify taking a lesser qualified person over a onther based on race regaurdless of which way it goes. It isn't right to take someone solely based on race as much as it right to exclude that person. Two wrongs don't make a right.
What it comes down to is should people get something or should they earn it. I have been fairly sucessfull in my life and can honestly say that my race had ZERO IMPACT on the jobs I have held or the sucess I have had. I have gotten everything I have through hard work and a few good choices. ANd I have made some bad choices that I had to overcome. Yet Had I been black I would not have had to learn from thoose early mistakes because I would have still gone to college even with my 2.6 GPA. As it turned out I did ok but it wasn't easy.
As a whole a young black male is more likely to be involved with drugs, crime, be fatherless, be murdered. It is a tough lot to try and get through. And I admire anyone who can. To often though we say well you just can't make it on your own you need help. Be do this you create a dependance on that program. I see people that suceed with out being the TOken minority all to often and usually the are the strongest opponents of AA. Not everyone gets the opportunity that some will get. I am a firm believer in judging people by who they are and not what they are. It creates a system that benifits people for trying just enough.
As a whole the black male is less likely to Graduate High school, and in turn lss likely to attend college. To blame this on the white man is shifting the blame off thoose people who make the mistakes and onto people who didn't. Johnny died of a crack overdose and was a VICTIM. Or more likely he just failed out of school and it isn't his fault. You have to try reaaly hard not to get your high school diplomia (I know I tried). This is notsomething that can be fixed at 18 years old with a quota system or at the corperate level with that same quota system. The key is to discover WHY do blacks need that hand up to get into school. COrrect thoose social problemsand it will be a start. Laying the blame on the feet of others is not the answer. I have been in postions to hire people, I was a supervisor in the navy and I Currently am just a tech. My positions I held had nothing to do with my race. WHen I was made SHop Sup in The navy I was called all kinds of names by the guy I replaced. He said THe reason He got fired was because He was black and They liked me because I was "a white boy". The fact is the reason that E-5 was answering to an E-4 was because he was a totally ineffective leader. He tried to say that no one in the shop liked him because he was black. There was five of us. 2 white guys 2 black guys and one Mexican. I was the second most junior guy there but the hardest worker. If NAS North Island Has looked at the quotas I would have never held one of the most valuable postions I have ever held. I got the gig due to My work ethic, comunication skill and the fact I had run the shop on the boat.
Teach these young men to BE MEN not Black men but MEN. I was lucky because my father thought me to be a man, not a white man but a man. I bust my butt every day strive to suceed, perhaps that is the answer. I know that if I want to get a governement job THe deck is stacked against me due to the fact I am White. I know that if I go up against a black candidate, or hispanic, candidate I had better have qualifications that far exceed that individual because If it is close I don't fill a slot. And without a college educartion it is the double whammy. I don't blame anyone else I understand that I may need to work harder, longer hours to distinguish myself. I refuse to apply for government jobs due to the fact I might get preferential treatment due to the fact I am a disabled vet.
We all get dealt different hands in life you deal with what you get. I have been pretty fortunate and have perservied and I am greatful for evrything I have. That feelling cannot be created by using a quota system that props of someone who doesn't cut the mustard.
Scott Gomez of the NJ Devils. Also Alaskan. Fun trivia question, name the only Alaskan Hispanic player in the NHL.
Is the policy "anti-minority", or is it "pro-fairness".. I don't want a semantic battle, but you get my point..
I am confused about how it's different for UM in your opinion, but in the next paragraph you say you don't know what their policy is and talk about typical policy.. Did I read that wrong? Anyway, I agreed that 30-40 years ago AA had a place (unfair as it was to some people, I understand) but I think it's over, and will create more problems with public perception of race relations than it fixes.
I agree Mustangrrl had a great point, the point that she made it on her own without any help.. I think that's the uplifting message in her post..
I'll spell it out for you. A quota system is when a selection committee sets aside a specific number or more formally a percentage of the selection field that must be met by some arbitrary group of candidates. It's categorically false to call UM's undergrad admissions policy a quota system. Blame me for pandering the "liberal" line if you want (not as creatively as Moonbeam), but I don't step into the fray and attack a program with deliberately false labels. In essence, Bush is saying, "diversity is generally a good thing, but I don't like this form of AA. Maybe there's some other creative way that achieves the goal that's within my conservative political viewpoints". I'm not really focusing on this news story, but I don't believe he's stepping out front and saying AA is an absolute relic nationally like you strongly imply (nor has he given any comment on all the many forms of preferential treatment, such as Yale legacy admissions, or even outright discrimination that still exist). You've picked up his quota word choice, and dangled it around here just the same with no concrete justification besides, "believe me on this, guys". You also ask us to simply believe you that AA is bad for the perception of race relations in this day and age. Either way, where's the platform for your argument? It appears it's only people like yourself that has "perception" problems with AA (no offense intended).
As for the graduate admissions system, neither one of us knows the actual admissions selection process (and I'd venture that neither does the president). Unless we bone up on the actual case law and have access to UM's grad schools' admissions applications and acceptances, neither is qualified to call anything a quota system. That's the only qualification of my opinion on the Supreme Court cases.
My problem with the politics is beneath the smoke and mirrors of the controversy, it seems somewhat clear to me that Bush's conservative base would absolutely love to have a Supreme Court precedent on their side at an institution with a average to good diversity of students (but definitely nothing like many of the other well-known public state universities or Ivy League-level institutions). That precedent would indeed be a powerful tool to compel other more diverse universities to rewrite their admissions programs. He's advertising fairness to the masses in the real interest of pandering directly into the hands of his most loyal supporters, but that's just MHO.*
You also missed half of Mustangrrl's fine points: don't be so easy to blame any individual's missed opportunity as the fault of people like her or any minorities (or anyone) who did get in the door.
And whether some people see it as a problem or not, there are still glass ceilings out there. I find it slightly humorous the NFL was brought up, because if nothing else, the league (and NCAA programs) has a serious perception problem when it comes to hiring of minorities or head coaching for upper management positions. Should all the qualified Marvin Lewis' of the world just shut their trap until they're finally given a chance to coach the worst franchise in the league (remember how long Tony Dungy was a bridesmaid)? If I'm not mistaken, the NFL commissioner's office has declared that any team with a coaching vacancy must interview a person of color. By definition, that could be called either recruitment, AA, or undue pressure. I call it a simple, rational and sound policy to add some fairness back to the hiring practices of the league (and by all accounts, NCAA football is simply far worse on paper).
I find it laughable though that regarding 30-40 years ago when the Civil Rights Act was new legislation, and the South was just freshly desegregated, you almost express more sympathy for the status quo than those few that benefited from AA:
[Emphasis added]
If you want to read one of the most compelling examples of AA (probably not called such at the time) I have ever seen, then look up John Nason, who passed away last year:
http://www.carleton.edu/campus/news/pr/johnnason.html
It's an old example, but it embodies the spirit of recruitment for diversity to defeat racial barriers in society.
* People had speculated that in light of the Trent Lott fallout, the Bush administration would work harder to promote its "conservative compassionism" (a crock if I've ever heard one). Instead, he's fired back several direct volleys because he was very empowered by the mid-term elections. They proved that without a doubt, he can win ANY national election by firing up his voting base with ZERO support from crossover Democrats. We have a little less than two years to find out if Democrats can fire up their base to bridge the gap.
Edited for typos.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,783
- 6,341
- 126
Anybody see the Daily Show's take on the subject?
Bush: against AA
Rice: against, but admits benefiting from it
Powell: for, at first
Lott: for, has faith in it, practices it!
LOL!The old adage remains true: How do you know when a Politician is lying? When his lips move!
Bush: against AA
Rice: against, but admits benefiting from it
Powell: for, at first
Lott: for, has faith in it, practices it!
LOL!The old adage remains true: How do you know when a Politician is lying? When his lips move!
I get a lot of enjoyment watching Democrats lead Blacks around by the nose ring called, Affirmative Action.
Thank God, Bush is beginning to tear it down.
Do you think you are going to force me to give you the plumb positions in my Group?
If you want to prosper in my Group, you will rise because of proven excellence and a committed relationship to me and my goals as dictated by the marketplace.
Get real kids, what I do is throw you a bone to keep the Feds and the Media off my back. I use every legal strategy to keep you out. It is the cost of doing business.
Rely on Affirmative Action and you will forever be a slave
Thank God, Bush is beginning to tear it down.
Do you think you are going to force me to give you the plumb positions in my Group?
If you want to prosper in my Group, you will rise because of proven excellence and a committed relationship to me and my goals as dictated by the marketplace.
Get real kids, what I do is throw you a bone to keep the Feds and the Media off my back. I use every legal strategy to keep you out. It is the cost of doing business.
Rely on Affirmative Action and you will forever be a slave
It's very simple.
My objective is to produce a quality product and a profit.
If you can assist in that objective, I could care less what your skin color is.
If you use the government to get into my face and muscle me, that is a battle you cannot win, son.
Any questions?
My objective is to produce a quality product and a profit.
If you can assist in that objective, I could care less what your skin color is.
If you use the government to get into my face and muscle me, that is a battle you cannot win, son.
Any questions?
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,783
- 6,341
- 126
Just the one above your post. If qualification is what the criteria was in real life, we'd likely not be discussing this, but since qualification is all too often not the most important factor, making it the top priority in education seems a little out of sync.
But thats just the point! Its NOT about your 4 buddies, and it IS about the society as a whole! Why do u think blacks as a group are under represented in the workforce and colleges? Do argue that they are genetically inferior to white men? maybe they are genetically predispositioned to droping out of high school and doing drugs?
Those people arguing that blacks should get no 'special favors' because they say blacks have equal opportunity consider the following:
Two men are in a race. Both are equal in every way but for the first half 1st man carries the second man. Then at half point both of them start to run on their own. Is fair for the second man to argue that they have equal chance at success since now they are both running on their own?
Akaz
Manly: You've picked up his quota word choice, and dangled it around here just the same with no concrete justification besides, "believe me on this, guys".
Damage: I just checked my posts and only used the word quota once to resond to Mustangrrl. Quotas aren't the only way AA manipulates people on both sides. Maybe you're mistaking me for someone else?
Manly: Either way, where's the platform for your argument?
Damage: Personal friends, religious upbringing, and being taught that all men are created eaqual all my life. I belive that.. And I believe giving anyone help or repressing anyone simply because of their skin color is wrong.
Manly: You also missed half of Mustangrrl's fine points: don't be so easy to blame any individual's missed opportunity as the fault of people like her or any minorities (or anyone) who did get in the door.
Damage: Check the post I just listed above and you will see I have already addressed this, I didn't miss anything on that.....
Manly: My problem with the politics is beneath the smoke and mirrors of the controversy,...
Damage: A rebulican is saying something about it so he must be wrong? Please do go Moonbeam on me here and partisan out..
Manly: you almost express more sympathy for the status quo than those few that benefited from AA:
Damage: Ok.. You want sources/platforms from me, define your sources for "few" benefiting from AA.. If it is "few" then it doesn't help many people anyway, right?
P.S. I don't agree with the NFL either.. Maybe 32 jobs open and people still complain, there just aren't that many positions...
Damage: I just checked my posts and only used the word quota once to resond to Mustangrrl. Quotas aren't the only way AA manipulates people on both sides. Maybe you're mistaking me for someone else?
Manly: Either way, where's the platform for your argument?
Damage: Personal friends, religious upbringing, and being taught that all men are created eaqual all my life. I belive that.. And I believe giving anyone help or repressing anyone simply because of their skin color is wrong.
Manly: You also missed half of Mustangrrl's fine points: don't be so easy to blame any individual's missed opportunity as the fault of people like her or any minorities (or anyone) who did get in the door.
Damage: Check the post I just listed above and you will see I have already addressed this, I didn't miss anything on that.....
Manly: My problem with the politics is beneath the smoke and mirrors of the controversy,...
Damage: A rebulican is saying something about it so he must be wrong? Please do go Moonbeam on me here and partisan out..
Manly: you almost express more sympathy for the status quo than those few that benefited from AA:
Damage: Ok.. You want sources/platforms from me, define your sources for "few" benefiting from AA.. If it is "few" then it doesn't help many people anyway, right?
P.S. I don't agree with the NFL either.. Maybe 32 jobs open and people still complain, there just aren't that many positions...
I did not mean to imply that blacks and whites (or anyone for that matter) are genetically identical. What i meant to say was that there is nothing in the genetics that predispositions blacks towards lower performance in work place and colleges.
And since its not genetics that causes the poorer performance by blacks in work place and colleges, then it must be the socio-economic factors! (its either nature or nurture).
So how do u go about fixing that socio-economic conditions? One way would be to fund schools and infrastructure in predominantly black areas considerable more than (twice as much 10 times as much?) as in the equavalent white areas to compensate for generations of underspending on black areas.
Its just like two cars of the same make and year. One was maintained on tip top condition while the other was allowed to run down. after a year if say that okay going forward we will spend same amount of money on both cars and so from now on they are equal and there for should perform equally. NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Its been just a generation since blacks were in theory given equal opportunity while its been much less time than that in practice. And already people are screaming for equality. Tell you what, equality doesnt cut it after such prolonged period of inequality. The scales have to be tiped the other way for while before 'equality' is restored.
The clearest indicator of when its time for AA to go would be when blacks are proportionally represented in colleges and work place. And its not gonna happen in a generation either. Not when you are trying to overcome centuries of inequality.
Is AA gonna mean that some less (and DOESNOT mean UNQUALIFIED) qualified person of color gets selected over a somewhat more qualified white person............ Yes it will. But there is cost to reversing past injustices and its only fair that the class that benefited most from those injustices bear bulk of that cost.
Akaz
My mistake, my apology. I still assert that Bush's statement that UM's undergrad admissions scoring is a quota system is patently false, and you're on the record on rejecting AA for other reasons.
No offense, but naive or too utopian. The DoI may use the term "all men are created equal" but the framers at the time did not mean women or any people of color. As much as we respect their Revolution and careful crafting of the Republic, obviously this is something that sounded pretty on paper, and is a highly optimistic, perhaps unattainable goal. More appropriately (and I'm fuzzy on some of this material), the Constitution is interpreted to mandate equality of opportunity, not equality of condition (aka socialism). Obviously, infants at birth arrive in all sorts of socioeconomic conditions, not to mention other issues. To say we're all equal at birth is simply naive. We live in a far from perfect nation where everyone carefully abides by the rules of 200 year old documents.
No, I just call it like I see it. On specifically the quota issue and I've made my case, I'm calling Bush out as wrong. If that brands me a liberal, so be it. I was a Republican as recently as 1995. My problem specifically is he says one thing (a powerful, cogent speech slamming Sen. Lott last month) and all of his actions this month completely belie that message. That doesn't surprise me; we Californians have seen enough of that treatment from this administration to shrug it off. What I am saying is that although the official party line is they are filing a narrow brief, it's the Supreme Court precedent at a major university that is not overwhelmingly diverse that will be a powerful club against other premiere institutions. I'm not criticizing UM at all, just that their minority representation is a respectable/good 25%, but lower than many other top-tier universities. In other words, poison the barrel for AA, and then attack it nationally. I don't know if you support that strategy. I'm just pointing it out because people will miss it.
Wrong, my point is that when the Civil Rights Era was nascent, and AA was starting to open up the doors for some minorities to take the university route, the first to benefit would be characterized as few. I'm only pointing out that just as diversity was beginning on the road to marked improvement to something that could be characterized as equitable, you seem to express more sympathy with the status quo. I should have said initial few. But I apologize if I read too far in between the lines; I carefully crafted my statement as "almost express".
Manly, Akaz..
Thanks for your viewpoints.. It's giving me more to think about.. I'm still not convinced treating people differently is fair, but I understand more why you think minorities deserve special treatment (I refuse to call it help).
It's kind of funny that Manly said I was naive & utopian for believing the "all created eaqual" thing.. That's what is supposed to be.. If we don't believe it, it never will be. The longer I read about this, the less it seems to me that "all created equal" is what minorities want.
It's funny that I've heard the "real-world" argument on both sides of this..
My brain hurts, I'm gonna go post about motorcycles or something.. Thanks!
Thanks for your viewpoints.. It's giving me more to think about.. I'm still not convinced treating people differently is fair, but I understand more why you think minorities deserve special treatment (I refuse to call it help).
It's kind of funny that Manly said I was naive & utopian for believing the "all created eaqual" thing.. That's what is supposed to be.. If we don't believe it, it never will be. The longer I read about this, the less it seems to me that "all created equal" is what minorities want.
It's funny that I've heard the "real-world" argument on both sides of this..
My brain hurts, I'm gonna go post about motorcycles or something.. Thanks!
Originally posted by: tm37
Originally posted by: classy
They did sue. It even made regional news. But sports? No white guy is denied the right to play any position in any sport. No minority is denied the right to play hockey either. Maybe you don't watch TV
There seems to be alot of fix it now going on here.
How many white Wide receivers or conerbacks are there? I haven't seen one Hispanic player in the NBA or NHL. That's injustice in your book. After all everything should be a representation of socity as a whole. Of course that is an obsurd idea that a sports team would be forced to put a player on there roster solely based on race, Yet you claim we should apply this to everything else.
My sister couldn't get a pell grant to save her life, got married (which hurts your chances) and then the remander of her college was paid for. Just because her last name was now of a hispanic origin. I am really sorry but that just ain't right. There is no way to justify taking a lesser qualified person over a onther based on race regaurdless of which way it goes. It isn't right to take someone solely based on race as much as it right to exclude that person. Two wrongs don't make a right.
What it comes down to is should people get something or should they earn it. I have been fairly sucessfull in my life and can honestly say that my race had ZERO IMPACT on the jobs I have held or the sucess I have had. I have gotten everything I have through hard work and a few good choices. ANd I have made some bad choices that I had to overcome. Yet Had I been black I would not have had to learn from thoose early mistakes because I would have still gone to college even with my 2.6 GPA. As it turned out I did ok but it wasn't easy.
As a whole a young black male is more likely to be involved with drugs, crime, be fatherless, be murdered. It is a tough lot to try and get through. And I admire anyone who can. To often though we say well you just can't make it on your own you need help. Be do this you create a dependance on that program. I see people that suceed with out being the TOken minority all to often and usually the are the strongest opponents of AA. Not everyone gets the opportunity that some will get. I am a firm believer in judging people by who they are and not what they are. It creates a system that benifits people for trying just enough.
As a whole the black male is less likely to Graduate High school, and in turn lss likely to attend college. To blame this on the white man is shifting the blame off thoose people who make the mistakes and onto people who didn't. Johnny died of a crack overdose and was a VICTIM. Or more likely he just failed out of school and it isn't his fault. You have to try reaaly hard not to get your high school diplomia (I know I tried). This is notsomething that can be fixed at 18 years old with a quota system or at the corperate level with that same quota system. The key is to discover WHY do blacks need that hand up to get into school. COrrect thoose social problemsand it will be a start. Laying the blame on the feet of others is not the answer. I have been in postions to hire people, I was a supervisor in the navy and I Currently am just a tech. My positions I held had nothing to do with my race. WHen I was made SHop Sup in The navy I was called all kinds of names by the guy I replaced. He said THe reason He got fired was because He was black and They liked me because I was "a white boy". The fact is the reason that E-5 was answering to an E-4 was because he was a totally ineffective leader. He tried to say that no one in the shop liked him because he was black. There was five of us. 2 white guys 2 black guys and one Mexican. I was the second most junior guy there but the hardest worker. If NAS North Island Has looked at the quotas I would have never held one of the most valuable postions I have ever held. I got the gig due to My work ethic, comunication skill and the fact I had run the shop on the boat.
Teach these young men to BE MEN not Black men but MEN. I was lucky because my father thought me to be a man, not a white man but a man. I bust my butt every day strive to suceed, perhaps that is the answer. I know that if I want to get a governement job THe deck is stacked against me due to the fact I am White. I know that if I go up against a black candidate, or hispanic, candidate I had better have qualifications that far exceed that individual because If it is close I don't fill a slot. And without a college educartion it is the double whammy. I don't blame anyone else I understand that I may need to work harder, longer hours to distinguish myself. I refuse to apply for government jobs due to the fact I might get preferential treatment due to the fact I am a disabled vet.
We all get dealt different hands in life you deal with what you get. I have been pretty fortunate and have perservied and I am greatful for evrything I have. That feelling cannot be created by using a quota system that props of someone who doesn't cut the mustard.
I stop reading your post cause it starts out with a freaking lie. The Pell grant has not got a damn thing to do with race. It is solely based on economics. Hell when I applied for a Pell grant about 9 years ago I don't even remember even filling out what race I was, I dont even think they asked. And dude when it comes to sports son, the best player makes it no matter what color he is. Sports may be the only area in life, professional and college anyway, where the best athlete makes it on the field. Blacks now pitch and play quarterback. I would give my life if every area of life was like sports. Look at Dirk and now Ming in the NBA. I 'll just stop here. I did scim the rest of your post, *yawn* :/
One comment, and I do have to say you're been very level-headed in this discussion as well. First off, calling AA simply a program to give people special treatment is prejudicial. Using the NFL coaching case again, Marvin Lewis should have gotten a head coaching job last year; Tony Dungy probably waited 5 years until Tampa signed him. If the league office doesn't do the right thing and at least take the step that they did (forcing every team to interview at least one person of color), they would have gotten sued for institutional discrimination. I'm not sure if you can sue the NCAA though. It's all the universities and colleges in the U.S. that have athletic directors who won't look beyond their comfortable old boy's network. In the U.S., that's simply wrong to deny opportunity when people are qualified and they apply and or interview when possible.Originally posted by: Damage
Manly, Akaz..
Thanks for your viewpoints.. It's giving me more to think about.. I'm still not convinced treating people differently is fair, but I understand more why you think minorities deserve special treatment (I refuse to call it help).
It's kind of funny that Manly said I was naive & utopian for believing the "all created eaqual" thing.. That's what is supposed to be.. If we don't believe it, it never will be. The longer I read about this, the less it seems to me that "all created equal" is what minorities want.
It's funny that I've heard the "real-world" argument on both sides of this..
My brain hurts, I'm gonna go post about motorcycles or something.. Thanks!
Sure, there will always be cases where someone just as qualified did not get an opportunity because someone roughly as qualified (or even less so) did. The pie is only so big. But AA is trying to correct institutional discrimination as a whole; there are thousands of Whites & Asians who enroll at Ivy League universities every year, even chosen from a HUGE qualified applicant pool.
I dispute your characterization of "all men created equal" as what minorities don't want, but won't debate it here.
AA IMO is a practical program (with warts as anything has) that has worked for decades. I agree with you than in any given case, its application will become obsolete (such as how Asians get zero preference in most university admissions). I don't think now is the time in general. It's simply way too naive to sit back and say we live in a great society where we should all try to be color neutral, and punish discrimination when it happens. Institutionalized discrimination isn't something that's easily punished, and even if the DoJ (or other federal agencies) were serious in going this route, society would probably be worse off if there was a complete national effort to "punish" discrimination whenever it happens. People would be suing left & right whenever they felt slighted in any competition. It's quite frankly better, more successful, less invasive to fix the problem at the source. This isn't a philosophical debate: it's the acknowledgement of a consistent problem in certain areas, and how best to solve that problem. AA isn't always applicable or politically accepted either. For example, by voter resolution, it was forced out of the University of California system a few years ago. By all accounts, it was a very drastic blow to the collective enrollment of minorities at the top campuses, esp. in graduate programs.
TallBill
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2001
- 46,017
- 62
- 91
Actually, you can. Each university decides on how they admit people into the university. They can take a wide reciever with a lower act for their football team because it helps the school. Better sports teams boost moral, etc. They can accept a lower GPA Oboe player because the school band needs an oboe player. Different people with diversity bring more to the table for a more whole university. And if your out there strictly for performance, apply to a top performance school. They accept based on intelligence.
All that being said, i think afirmative action is silly. Accepting more minorities that are equally or nearly qualified is fine. But accepting someone much less qualified doesn't make sense.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 385
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter