Affirmative Action and Similiar Programs Must End NOW

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlackVision
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Programs
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the perceived unfairness of affirmative action in university admissions, particularly at UCLA Medical School, where lower qualified candidates are reportedly accepted over higher qualified ones based on race. Critics argue that this practice undermines meritocracy, as evidenced by significant GPA and MCAT score disparities between accepted candidates of different racial backgrounds. The debate also touches on the broader implications of legacy admissions and the advantages historically afforded to certain groups. Proponents of merit-based admissions emphasize that the best candidates should be selected solely based on academic qualifications, regardless of race. The conversation highlights the complexities of balancing diversity with academic standards in higher education.
  • #51
BlackVision said:
In that case, please allow weaker shorter asian players in the NBA. Let's see some affirmative action here.
[/b]"

Lol, that's funny. You should read George Perec's famous little novel about sport as a metaphor for society. It all ends rather tragicomically... Sieg Heil!

W, ou Le Souvenir d'Enfance. In it, he writes about his childhood years but, typically for him, that narrative is interspersed with chapters about a wholly different subject: the description of a Dystopian island, named "W", where life is equated to one gigantic Spartan sports competition.

It's in French, but that shouldn't be a problem for you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
This statement is missing information. What is it you might be trying to reliably predict?

To put it cynically, return on investment.

Blacks, hispanics have a much larger advantage and more of an opportunity than whites and asians.
Really? I remember plenty of crime and wealth related statistics which contradict this.
 
  • #53
BlackVision,

I believe that overachievers, such as Jews in general (to whom you seemingly have given your support), are less intimidated than you in seeking social recompense for those apportioned either inferior government services (e. g., public education) or disparate treatment under the law (e. g., segregation).

Also, are you against reparation to those Japanese interred by the U.S. during WWII?
 
  • #54
Also, are you against reparation to those Japanese interred by the U.S. during WWII?
I would be for the reparation toward the actual Japanese people that did get imprisoned in the US during WWII. However I would not support reparation for their sons and daughters or grandsons and grand daughters that did not experience that horror. And I certainly will not support a system that isn't meant for reparation but solely meant for the preference of one race over another.
 
  • #55
FZ+ said:
To put it cynically, return on investment.


Really? I remember plenty of crime and wealth related statistics which contradict this.


Simply if at age 50 I had more wealth than someone else at that age does not necessarily mean that I had more opportunities. I may have worked incredibly hard, been more skilful, or maybe I just won the lottery.

I did not know that in order to be classified as disadvantaged I had to murder people.
 
  • #56
Simply if at age 50 I had more wealth than someone else at that age does not necessarily mean that I had more opportunities. I may have worked incredibly hard, been more skilful, or maybe I just won the lottery.

Er, so black people have less chance of winning the lottery?

We are talking about averages here. The average child of an ethnic minority is likely to be brought up in greater poverty than a member of the current majority.

I did not know that in order to be classified as disadvantaged I had to murder people.

Aha. Victim of classic misrepresentation of statistics. Parallel to the figures that show blacks as disporportionately represented as criminals, are statistics showing blacks to be disporportionately represented as victims of crime. (In fact, this probably leads to the former. Crime begets crime.)
 
  • #57
FT+ said:
Parallel to the figures that show blacks as disporportionately represented as criminals, are statistics showing blacks to be disporportionately represented as victims of crime. (In fact, this probably leads to the former. Crime begets crime.)
All races commit most of their murders within their own race. Meaning most victims of whites are killed by whites, most victims of blacks are killed by blacks, etc etc. However a black person is far more likely to commit an interracial crime than a white person is.
 
  • #58
Of all races, which has been delegated by the others to occupy the bottom of the pecking order, the figurative whipping-boy? All roads lead to Africa, as much random a choice as it is purposeful.

BlackVision, have you ever known a black person you could call friend?

Again,
I believe that overachievers, such as Jews in general (to whom you seemingly have given your support), are less intimidated than you in seeking social recompense for those apportioned either inferior government services (e. g., public education) or disparate treatment under the law (e. g., segregation).
Jews have succeeded through adversity, and by risking their lives for the civil rights of all minorities, they show me a belief that racist policies of our country can be overcome by social, if not necessarily economic, effort.
 
  • #59
Jews have succeeded through adversity, and by risking their lives for the civil rights of all minorities, they show me a belief that racist policies of our country can be overcome by social, if not necessarily economic, effort.

In other words, through mendacious brainwashing. The big lie, indeed.
 
  • #60
FZ+ said:
Er, so black people have less chance of winning the lottery?

We are talking about averages here. The average child of an ethnic minority is likely to be brought up in greater poverty than a member of the current majority.

So a jew is likely to be brought up in greater poverty than the whites? I think that if this is a reason given to bring in quotas then it should be changed to a more efficient method of giving advantages solely to those brought up in poverty. An easy example would be to set quotas for those people who have parents with low incomes.


FZ+ said:
Aha. Victim of classic misrepresentation of statistics. Parallel to the figures that show blacks as disporportionately represented as criminals, are statistics showing blacks to be disporportionately represented as victims of crime. (In fact, this probably leads to the former. Crime begets crime.)

I think there is certainly a link between the two, but one leads to the other in both directions especially when combined with the knowledge that blacks often live in areas where there are other blacks.
 
  • #61
seeking social recompense for those apportioned either inferior government services (e. g., public education) - Loren Booda

Loren does not explicitly state which group he means when he uses the word "those." His post does remind me of something... I have a co-worker who was raised in Gary, Indiana. He claims that when he was young, his mother could walk in the neighborhood at night, and not fear becoming a crime victim. He says that when the population there became increasingly black, the crime rate soared, and as a consequence whites mostly moved away. He says that now Gary is essentially all black. He is very bitter about how much tax money is given to the citizens there for schools and public housing. "More goes to Gary than to all the rest of Indiana" is how he puts it, though I think he must be exaggerating. He says despite the public money poured into the city, "blacks have just trashed it. They burn down buildings and break windows and have made a mockery of the schools." His anger is palpable as he tells this--and I have heard him tell it more than once.

I am curious if Loren or others here have "another side to the story." I have no personal experience of living in industrial Midwestern cities and would like to know if this fellow is making wild claims with no foundation, or whether he is essentially telling it like it is.
 
  • #62
I worked at Goodwill Industries in Washington, DC for a couple of years. The paid workers there were over 95% black, and paid less than minimum wage, since they were also receiving SSI and Medicaid for mental and physical disabilities - all in all, poverty wages. Most by far were honest and a pleasure to work with. In fact, working there was a haven away from the crime of the ghetto outside.

Talk about a stereotype breaker - this opportunity brought us mostly white volunteers together with these deserving people whose situation was none their fault. They worked harder for much less than privileged suburbanites, had a great attitude and went unsung except by those who bothered to know and support them. Their medical condition, as it shoud be, is accepted as a disability, but social support is also recognized necessary to make effective their recovery.

It is not so much the shade of one's skin that entitiles one to consideration, but the life experiences and systemic biases that also include associations with that color. (See my post on "Academic Action" on this thread.) I think that most extraterrestrial civilizations would judge criminal our having a history of superiority based on race, but even more so, dooming ourselves to repeat it by denial.
 
  • #63
Loren, thank you for showing the other side of the coin.

The fellow I was writing about is a staunch Republican. Sometimes I dangle Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice in front of him as counterexamples, but it doesn't seem to make much difference to him. He holds fast to his stereotypes of black Americans.
 
  • #64
I think that if this is a reason given to bring in quotas then it should be changed to a more efficient method of giving advantages solely to those brought up in poverty. An easy example would be to set quotas for those people who have parents with low incomes.
I agree with this - if I was in charge, this would be how I would change the system, though it isn't just poverty that is a factor. But I suspect that this would run into even more problems than affirmative action - it has a whiff of neo-communist wealth redistribution about it, and it will not be popular in a proudly capitalist nation. Race-based affirmative action is a watered down version of this, but it is better than nothing.
 
  • #65
How literally should we take "giving advantages solely to those brought up in poverty"? If someone was raised in a middle-class or upper-class household, and became homeless at the age of 50 because of alcoholism (for example), are you saying that such a person is excluded from the granting of advantages?

ADDED NOTE: maybe it was minors specifically who were being discussed in that context.
 
Last edited:
  • #66
Njorl said:
Asians suffer very little from racial discrimination presently. Blacks and hispanics, on the other hand, are hated by a significant percentage of the people who have power in this country.

Right. Blacks and Hispanics are hated so much by the people in power that they are given preferential treatment in jobs and schools. Oh the humanity.

I noticed that you've been constantly ignoring this quesiton: Why are Asians be punished with SAT penalties and quotas (ie. they have to score significantly higher than non-Asians to get into the same schools). Would you call this discrimination? Or are we correcting the over-representation of the privileged Asian American? You know, being born with the advantage of having working-class immigrant parents who don't speak the language.
 
  • #67
Jin314159 said:
Right. Blacks and Hispanics are hated so much by the people in power that they are given preferential treatment in jobs and schools. Oh the humanity.
For 20% of employment opportunities in the US, a black skin is a disqualifying factor. You can not say the same for asians.
Jin314159 said:
I noticed that you've been constantly ignoring this quesiton: Why are Asians be punished with SAT penalties and quotas (ie. they have to score significantly higher than non-Asians to get into the same schools).
I do not believe this. Do you have any evidence?
Jin314159 said:
Would you call this discrimination? Or are we correcting the over-representation of the privileged Asian American? You know, being born with the advantage of having working-class immigrant parents who don't speak the language.

When blacks or hispanics move into a neighborhood, the property values decline. This is a reflection of the inherent racism that still dominates American culture. This does not happen when Asians move into a neighborhood.

There is racism against Asians. It is not of nearly the magnitude nor omnipresence of the racism exercised against blacks.

Njorl
 
  • #68
Njorl said:
When blacks or hispanics move into a neighborhood, the property values decline. This is a reflection of the inherent racism that still dominates American culture.

And racism is the ONLY reason for this? Objective crime rates, for example, don't matter?
 
  • #69
The one question Njorl consistently ignores is: How is this fair? Why should some middle-class white kid suffer by being denied admission to the University of Michigan law school when less-qualified minorities are being admitted?

I am a minority, and I didn't grow up with much. My elementary and middle schools sucked. So you know what I did? I scored very high on all standardized tests and I received high grades. I made sure that I'd never need a handout.
 
  • #70
selfAdjoint said:
And racism is the ONLY reason for this? Objective crime rates, for example, don't matter?

Actually, they don't.

Njorl
 
  • #71
Is there any evidence that folk in the neighbourhoods of Milken, Skilling, Lay, Fastow, Ebbers, Stewart, etc have sold and moved somewhere else (to be away from high profile criminals)?
 
  • #72
Njorl said:
Actually, they don't.
Njorl you are insane. Property value decreases with increased Blacks and Hispanics DUE to the higher crime rates that almost always certainly comes with it. No one wants to live in a crime ridden city. Can you name a predominately black neighborhood that has a crime rate even close to par with the nation's average?

Notice that property value INCREASES in areas with high surplus of Asians. Such as San Francisco, Seattle, etc. The crime rate of Asians are even lower than that of Whites. Your logic is flawed.
 
  • #73
Nereid said:
Is there any evidence that folk in the neighbourhoods of Milken, Skilling, Lay, Fastow, Ebbers, Stewart, etc have sold and moved somewhere else (to be away from high profile criminals)?
It's called common sense. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a neighborhood that has 10 times the crime rate of the nation's average will obviously have deflated property value.
 
  • #74
loseyourname said:
The one question Njorl consistently ignores is: How is this fair?
Fair? Adults don't deal in what is fair. They deal in what is, and what may be. Fairness is a lie we use to make our children behave, like Santa Claus.

Affirmative action is not about fairness. It is enlightened self-interest. Fairness would be reparations payments for slavery. Fairness would be everyone being born with an equal chance in life. Fairness is a pipe-dream. I suggest you get over your silly notion that life will ever be fair and start living in the real world.

loseyourname said:
Why should some middle-class white kid suffer by being denied admission to the University of Michigan law school when less-qualified minorities are being admitted?
Why shouldn't the University of Michigan be allowed to attribute overcoming racism as demonstration of qualification?
loseyourname said:
I am a minority, and I didn't grow up with much. My elementary and middle schools sucked.
Same here. My minority is that I'm over 6'5". That is a pretty small minority, but it never really caused me much trouble. Everybody is a minority. The question is, are you a persecuted minority. Do people look at you and assume you are a criminal? Were you or your parents denied jobs because of the color of your skin? Do the people with power in society despise you just because of what you are?
loseyourname said:
So you know what I did? I scored very high on all standardized tests and I received high grades. I made sure that I'd never need a handout.
Then you don't have anything to complain about now, do you?

Njorl
 
  • #75
Njorl said:
Fair? Adults don't deal in what is fair.
Yes they do. Adults with any level of common sense practice what they deem is fair. We have the criminal system that we do because most people believe that things should be "fair" That one shouldn't get arrested with no evidence and put away to death with no evidence. People would be against that because it would not be "fair" But maybe you purposely want to make everything unfair. In which case you might have your own issues to deal with first before carrying on such a conversation.

Affirmative action is not about fairness. It is enlightened self-interest.
Reverse racism is all that it is. That is all it is about.

Fairness would be reparations payments for slavery.
To the actual slaves yes which none seem to exist today.

Fairness is a pipe-dream. I suggest you get over your silly notion that life will ever be fair and start living in the real world.
The world is what we make of it. At least there are people striving to make things as fair as possible. Thanks to those people we have democracy, we have the justice system, we have the United Nations, etc. Yes these people with "pipe dreams" actually contribute to the world in their effort to make the world a better place and make things more "fair". I highly doubt anyone with your perspective would contribute anything worthwhile to the world.

Why shouldn't the University of Michigan be allowed to attribute overcoming racism as demonstration of qualification?
Did you mean overcoming racism or practicing racism?

The question is, are you a persecuted minority. Do people look at you and assume you are a criminal?
People will make judgements based on what the majority in that group does. So tough luck. If you are 7 feet tall, people are going to assume you play basketball. A group has to build a better image for themselves if they want each individual in that group to be looked upon more favorably.
 
  • #76
Njorl said:
Fair? Adults don't deal in what is fair. They deal in what is, and what may be. Fairness is a lie we use to make our children behave, like Santa Claus.

So because you are cynical, we should just allow unjust policies to continue in existence without putting up any fight? There should be no effort made whatsoever?

Affirmative action is not about fairness. It is enlightened self-interest. Fairness would be reparations payments for slavery. Fairness would be everyone being born with an equal chance in life. Fairness is a pipe-dream. I suggest you get over your silly notion that life will ever be fair and start living in the real world.

Thank you, Gordon Gekko. Some of us think that the government should keep in mind the best interests of its citizens, and fairness (you know, "we hold these truths to be self-evident" and all that Pollyanna bullcrap) should be one of those interests.

Why shouldn't the University of Michigan be allowed to attribute overcoming racism as demonstration of qualification?

If they can demonstrate that a minority student has overcome racism and that, because of this, he is more likely to be successful at that school than a white kid with higher qualifications, then I might consider it. As it is, they seem to have an attitude more like yours: We say it is so, and so it is so, and piss on you if you disagree.

Same here. My minority is that I'm over 6'5". That is a pretty small minority, but it never really caused me much trouble. Everybody is a minority. The question is, are you a persecuted minority. Do people look at you and assume you are a criminal? Were you or your parents denied jobs because of the color of your skin? Do the people with power in society despise you just because of what you are?

I'm a Native American, and you know what? Sometimes this has been a problem, more for older relatives of mine than for me. My father, especially, has had to put up with a lot of sh*t in his life. You know what else? Not once has it hampered my ability to perform well in school or on a test. The fact that my skin is dark and my parent's don't have a whole lot of money does not mean that I can underperform and expect to be rewarded anyway. That is more than unfair. It is flat-out stupid policy.

We already have laws against racism. We have laws that state a public university system, and any employer, must give equal consideration to all applicants, regardless of race and other such factors that are not directly related to their ability to perform the task for which they are applying. Why do we need another law that advocates reverse racism?

Then you don't have anything to complain about now, do you?

You know, some of us actually try to look beyond our own noses when considering policy. Affirmative action does not adversely affect me, and in fact, I stand to benefit from it. So what? That doesn't make it right. And as cynical as you want to be, the law should be right. The law should be just. Policy should be just. Affirmative action was a policy first instituted by idealists, and now you want to tell me it should remain in place because idealism is irrelevant?
 
  • #77
BlackVision said:
Property value decreases with increased Blacks and Hispanics DUE to the higher crime rates that almost always certainly comes with it.
Your bigotry is showing. Is the first black family to move into a white neighborhood a crime wave? It lowers property values.

It is the inherently racist belief that one black family moving into a neighborhood spells doom that I am talking about. Because most people have subtle racist paranoia, one prosperous black family moving into a neighborhood lowers property values. Lower property values then allow progressively poorer people to move into the neighborhood. Crime follows poor people.

This is a well understood phenomenon. It is one of the principle reasons that blacks have not risen in economic status. The most significant investment of any lower income family is their house. It is leveraged to provide the economic means for other activities - business investment, college tuition etc. Most houses significantly outpace inflation as investments. This has not been so for much of black America simply because the majority of the nation has subtle racial paranoia. When successful, law-abiding, Rumanian immigrants move in down the street, property values increase because a house has been bought. When a successful, law-abiding black family move in down the street, property values decrease because they are black. The Rumanian immigrants have an intrinsic advantage in society because they are white. Because they are white, they have a significantly higher expectation that their most important financial asset will increase in value.
BlackVision said:
No one wants to live in a crime ridden city. Can you name a predominately black neighborhood that has a crime rate even close to par with the nation's average?

Notice that property value INCREASES in areas with high surplus of Asians. Such as San Francisco, Seattle, etc. The crime rate of Asians are even lower than that of Whites. Your logic is flawed.

My logic is not flawed; your reasoning is limited. You don't have the intellectual capacity to deal with complex issues. You eliminate the complexities that disagree with your bigoted worldview until you reduce the situation to something you can comprehend.

Unlike successful Asians or other immigrants, poverty follows successful blacks. It is able to do this because of racism. Where poverty goes, crime goes. The racist belief that blacks are more likely to be criminals becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The same thing has been said of many ethnic groups - Irish, Jews, Italians and, yes, Chinese. The difference is that Italians, Irish and Jews could easily look like anyone else, and the Chinese were always too few in number to be a threat. On the other hand, it is easy to maintain a racist society against blacks. There is no shortage of hate mongers to fan the subtle fears of the mildly racist majority.

Njorl
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #78
BlackVision said:
Yes they do. Adults with any level of common sense practice what they deem is fair. We have the criminal system that we do because most people believe that things should be "fair" That one shouldn't get arrested with no evidence and put away to death with no evidence.

You're not going to try to tell me that our criminal justice system is fair, are you? Please. :smile:

Njorl
 
  • #79
Njorl said:
You're not going to try to tell me that our criminal justice system is fair, are you? Please.

You're not going to tell me that the criminal justice system shouldn't try to be fair, are you? Please.
 
  • #80
loseyourname said:
So because you are cynical, we should just allow unjust policies to continue in existence without putting up any fight? There should be no effort made whatsoever?
Not at all. The point is not to give up trying to make things better, it is to realize that things will never be fair. For one thing, you will never get people to agree upon what "fair" is. Is it fair that one child be born with cerebral palsy and mental retardation? Should we inflict them on all newborns until we can cure the one, just to be fair? Of course not. Once you realize that "fairness" is unattainable, you settle for the best that can be done. For now, that is affirmative action.
loseyourname said:
Thank you, Gordon Gekko. Some of us think that the government should keep in mind the best interests of its citizens,
And affirmative action is in the best interest of the citizens. Certainly, the University of Michigan has decided it is in the best interest of the University.
loseyourname said:
and fairness (you know, "we hold these truths to be self-evident" and all that Pollyanna bullcrap) should be one of those interests.
What does the Declaration of Independence have to do with fairness? If anything, it supports my argument. The colonies broke away because they could, and it was in their leaders enlightened self-interest to do so. Also, let us not forget which people were not endowed by their creator with the right to liberty according to Mr. Jefferson.
loseyourname said:
If they can demonstrate that a minority student has overcome racism and that, because of this, he is more likely to be successful at that school than a white kid with higher qualifications, then I might consider it. As it is, they seem to have an attitude more like yours: We say it is so, and so it is so, and piss on you if you disagree.
Should someone with a high SAT score need to demonstrate that it is significant? Most good SAT scores are significant, but not all. It is easier to assume all are. It is assumed good grades are significant. Having worked with a large number of high school students I can tell you that many complete twits get staight A's. Still, all good grades are considered significant. Do some blacks coast through life without experiencing significant racism? Probably they do, but most do not. It is easier to assume a black student has overcome significant racism, because that is the norm. College admission is not hiring for a cabinet level post. You can't investigate every applicant. You make assumptions to make the process feasible.
loseyourname said:
I'm a Native American, and you know what? Sometimes this has been a problem, more for older relatives of mine than for me. My father, especially, has had to put up with a lot of sh*t in his life. You know what else? Not once has it hampered my ability to perform well in school or on a test. The fact that my skin is dark and my parent's don't have a whole lot of money does not mean that I can underperform and expect to be rewarded anyway. That is more than unfair. It is flat-out stupid policy.
Admission to a college is not a reward. I have found this misconception in most opponents of affirmative action. A college assumes that a student will impact the college, not merely attend. The college chooses not just those who warrant the opportunity, but those who they believe will add to the institution.
loseyourname said:
We already have laws against racism. We have laws that state a public university system, and any employer,
Many employers are free to practice racism. Racism, even when plainly evident is also nearly impossible to prove except in the most egregious circumstances.
loseyourname said:
must give equal consideration to all applicants, regardless of race and other such factors that are not directly related to their ability to perform the task for which they are applying. Why do we need another law that advocates reverse racism?



You know, some of us actually try to look beyond our own noses when considering policy. Affirmative action does not adversely affect me, and in fact, I stand to benefit from it. So what? That doesn't make it right. And as cynical as you want to be, the law should be right. The law should be just. Policy should be just. Affirmative action was a policy first instituted by idealists, and now you want to tell me it should remain in place because idealism is irrelevant?

No. I want you to prioritize the "injustices" that need to be rectified.

Do you know how many positions in prestigious schools, both grad and undergrad, go to candidates based on affirmitive action? Less than 500 per year. Thousands of admissions go to "legacies", whose parents got in during overtly racist admissions policies. Many get in just because of wealthy parents, which past racism makes far less likely in minorities. Eliminate all inequities in admissions and the arguments against affirmitive action will hold more weight.

Njorl
 
  • #81
loseyourname said:
You're not going to tell me that the criminal justice system shouldn't try to be fair, are you? Please.

Nothing would please me more than if everything were fair. I'd have trouble enjoying it though, because I'd have a heart attack from shock if I witnessed it.

So, when all of the other unfairnesses have been dealt with, please let me know. I'll go down to the supreme court and protest affirmative action.

Njorl
 
  • #82
Just a relevant issue here:
If you go back to the politics in the 60's-70's, you will in all probability find affirmative action programs for women (in addition, stronger laws against sexual harassment/domestic violence cases, for example).

The reason why most of such aff. act. programs are phased out today is that they were effective and have made themselves superfluous.

Practices implemented in order to improve the societal/economical status of African-Americans must occur on several levels
Individual/Group/Rest of society etc.

To disband affirmative action practices simply makes no sense (it should remain, as one social engineering technique, amongst others (making strident calls for individuals to reform themselves is also a social engineering technique, if someone thought differently)).
 
  • #83
Njorl said:
Not at all. The point is not to give up trying to make things better, it is to realize that things will never be fair. For one thing, you will never get people to agree upon what "fair" is. Is it fair that one child be born with cerebral palsy and mental retardation? Should we inflict them on all newborns until we can cure the one, just to be fair? Of course not. Once you realize that "fairness" is unattainable, you settle for the best that can be done. For now, that is affirmative action.

I guess we'll just have to disagree as to what is the best for now.

And affirmative action is in the best interest of the citizens. Certainly, the University of Michigan has decided it is in the best interest of the University.

Jeez, man. You sure do make a lot of bold, unfounded statements. Is it honestly not even up to argument for you whether or not affirmative action is truly in the best interests of this nation's citizens. Governing bodies at universities are wrong every now and then, you know.

Should someone with a high SAT score need to demonstrate that it is significant? Most good SAT scores are significant, but not all. It is easier to assume all are. It is assumed good grades are significant. Having worked with a large number of high school students I can tell you that many complete twits get staight A's. Still, all good grades are considered significant. Do some blacks coast through life without experiencing significant racism? Probably they do, but most do not. It is easier to assume a black student has overcome significant racism, because that is the norm. College admission is not hiring for a cabinet level post. You can't investigate every applicant. You make assumptions to make the process feasible.

A large part of being successful in college is taking tests. A large part of being successful is scoring high grades. The ability to remain alive and perform substandardly but not horribly, despite racism, is very debatable as an indicator of success. If you want to debate other aspects of admissions decisions, be my guest. But for Christ's sake, be consistent. Be willing to debate affirmative action as well. If you are really so certain that your position is the correct one, perhaps you can show me something beyond unbacked statements and anecdotes. Give me some numbers that show students admitted because of affirmative action perform just as well as those who got in because of high grades.

Do you know how many positions in prestigious schools, both grad and undergrad, go to candidates based on affirmitive action? Less than 500 per year. Thousands of admissions go to "legacies", whose parents got in during overtly racist admissions policies. Many get in just because of wealthy parents, which past racism makes far less likely in minorities. Eliminate all inequities in admissions and the arguments against affirmitive action will hold more weight.

And? You're dodging the issue and arguing a strawman. When did I ever advocate the admission of legacies? I think those should go as well. Admission should be performance-based, period. Universities should be meritocracies, and every policy instituted should be one that aims toward that goal. No policy should give any particular group any particular favor over another for social or political reasons.

Even if you are going to hold that affirmative action is necessary to combat legacies and wealthy students, basing it on race doesn't make any sense. There are plenty of poor, underprivileged white kids out there whose parents didn't go to college. Why don't you offer to help any of them?
 
  • #84
Your bigotry is showing.
Don't mistake bigotry for pure common sense. Sorry my mind is not as warped and my thinking ability actually has a nice dose of reality.


Is the first black family to move into a white neighborhood a crime wave? It lowers property values.
Since when does one black family lower property value. What neighborhood in America are you talking about that doesn't have one black family. Beverly Hills even has a few percentage of blacks. Do you think Beverly Hills has low property value? You sure are reaching.

It is the inherently racist belief that one black family moving into a neighborhood spells doom that I am talking about. Because most people have subtle racist paranoia, one prosperous black family moving into a neighborhood lowers property values. Lower property values then allow progressively poorer people to move into the neighborhood.
Again what neighborhood are you talking about? I have a black friend that lives in Beverly Hills. Does that qualify as a black family? I assure you he will tell you Beverly Hills does not have low property value.

Crime follows poor people.
If there was a list for the biggest lies of all time. This would be in that list. Again and again, it has been shown that the poorest white neighborhoods, the poorest asian neighborhoods, never even have remotely the crime rate of any black neighborhood. I also showed thorough examples in previous threads absolutely debunking this myth. It is no surprise that Washington DC, a black majority city, has a murder rate very identical to South Africa. I assure you the economical gap between Washington DC and South Africa is quite large. Furthermore, a white majority poor city like OKlahoma City, which is significantly poorer than DC, has an extraordinarily low crime rate.

Chinese and Indians in United Kingdom who are largely 1st generation immigrants in the UK and are likely poor have LOWER crime rates than that of Native British population. African immigrants in the UK, have crime rates 10 times the figure of the Native British population. The exact same white-black crime gap that exists in the United States or anywhere else in the world. Look also to South Africa for that same gap.


This is a well understood phenomenon. It is one of the principle reasons that blacks have not risen in economic status. The most significant investment of any lower income family is their house. It is leveraged to provide the economic means for other activities - business investment, college tuition etc.
Since I absolutely debunked your previous statement, I don't think I need to answer this one.

This has not been so for much of black America simply because the majority of the nation has subtle racial paranoia.
Perhaps in your head. Ask Jews if they're often discriminated against. I wonder where Jews are on the economical ladder.

When successful, law-abiding, Rumanian immigrants move in down the street, property values increase because a house has been bought. When a successful, law-abiding black family move in down the street, property values decrease because they are black. The Rumanian immigrants have an intrinsic advantage in society because they are white. Because they are white, they have a significantly higher expectation that their most important financial asset will increase in value.
And this "racist" American society somehow favors Jews and Asians. Both of which are disproportionally in high property value neighborhoods. Why don't these neighborhoods have low property value?


My logic is not flawed
It is severely flawed.

your reasoning is limited.
Quite the contrary.

You don't have the intellectual capacity to deal with complex issues.
Trust me. I'll put my IQ against yours any day. If you would like, I will also fax you my 1500+ SAT. Simply because you have low intelligence doesn't mean everyone else does. Simply because one doesn't buy your warped perspectives does not mean the person has low intelligence. It would likely be the contrary.

You eliminate the complexities that disagree with your bigoted worldview until you reduce the situation to something you can comprehend.
This coming from someone that doesn't care about "fairness" Like I said, you have your own problems to deal with before even having such a discussion like this. The very simple fact that you threw the word "fair" to the garbage, like it has no meaning, like it shouldn't have any meaning, shows your own shallowness, your own bigotry.

Unlike successful Asians or other immigrants, poverty follows successful blacks.
You seem to forget that Asians and Jews were quite poor when they first arrived to this country. They themselves worked themselves out of poverty. Something blacks have yet to do. Oh also when Asians and Jews were poor, they still had low crime rate.

It is able to do this because of racism.
No. No one faced more racism historically than Jews. It has still been the most successful group in terms of economics. Your viewpoints here are extraordinarily on the radical left. You refuse to take all evidence, all facts into consideration. Instead you like to hold on to your own bigotry no matter what the evidence.

If blacks fail, it is often from their own doing. This has been brought up numerous times by even black leaders themselves. Did you miss the Bill Cosby remarks of recent history? Are you going to tell me Bill Cosby is just a lying bastard? That the black community is all so perfect and innocent and it's just simply the white man keeping them down?

Blacks have a 70% illegitimacy rate. With 70% of blacks being born out of wedlock, by far the highest single mom figure compared to any other group, you actually wonder why blacks are in poverty? But of course you will blame the 70% illegitimacy rate of blacks on the white man and racism. Of course of course. It's the white man. Blacks aren't doing anything wrong at all.

Where poverty goes, crime goes.
Again completely debunked.

The racist belief that blacks are more likely to be criminals becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
It's not a belief. It's a simple fact. Would you like me to show FBI figures for the past 100 years? The homicide rate of blacks are about 10 times the rate of whites every single year.


The same thing has been said of many ethnic groups - Irish, Jews, Italians and, yes, Chinese. The difference is that Italians, Irish and Jews could easily look like anyone else
Another lie. Also Jewish surnames, etc are dead give aways.

and the Chinese were always too few in number to be a threat.
What the hell does numbers have to do with racism? Please tell me what percentage of Nazi Germany were Jews. 1%? Yeah Jews didn't face discrimination because they were too few in numbers and weren't perceived a threat by Nazi Germany. And you wonder why people are heavily questioning your statements.

On the other hand, it is easy to maintain a racist society against blacks. There is no shortage of hate mongers to fan the subtle fears of the mildly racist majority.
There is more racism against whites then there are against blacks believe me. Ask the Middle East who they hate. Ask North Korea who they hate. Hell ask Blacks who they hate.

But the link between racism and success is close to absolute zero. No amount of racism is going to prevent Jews from succeeding the way they do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #85
Njorl said:
And with this statement, Blackvision finally completes the donning of his white sheet and hood.
Your have problems. A society judges a group based on what they see the group does as a whole. Are you going to deny this?

Society thinks blacks are good at basketball because they see that the NBA is 90% black. Society thinks Asians are good in math because they always get the highest scores in mathematical tests. Society thinks Jews are good lawyers because there are so many Jewish lawyers. The success and failure of groups, society judges on.
 
  • #86
Njorl said:
You're not going to try to tell me that our criminal justice system is fair, are you? Please. :smile:

Njorl
At least people with "pipe dreams" put the effort to try to design a "fair" system instead of going "Life isn't fair. So let's be as unfair as possible. Let's arrest people and put them to prison without due process. It isn't fair. But life isn't fair right?" Which seem to be the sentiment you're giving off.

You seem to also have missed the whole point of that statement.
 
Last edited:
  • #87
Njorl said:
I do not believe this. Do you have any evidence?
(On Asian SAT Penalties)

The anti-Asian SAT penalty is well-documented in Murray and Bernstein's "Bell Curve." If you look in the index for "SAT penalty" you'll find it. Essentially, Asian American students need an average of 100 points higher than non-Asian students to get into the same institutions.
 
  • #88
Njorl said:
Affirmative action is not about fairness. It is enlightened self-interest.

There you go. You admitted it yourself. Affirmative Action is not about fairness, but self-interest. And as an Asian American, Affirmative Action goes against my self-interest and hence I'm against it. It's as simple as that.
 
  • #89
People, try to keep your post clean and don't bring people mental state and ability into the argument. I have clean some post.
 
  • #90
Im a white male, 19, who makes less than ten thousand a year and has to support myself. I'm currently in college and see plenty of blacks and other minorities far better off than myself, wearingmore expensive clothes, and riding in much more expensive cars. So its just that they will receive special benefits, when I am forced to work for every inch? Just because their ancestors were slaves? I am a christian, but I am not petitioning Rome for anything.
 
  • #91
BlackVision said:
Nereid said:
Is there any evidence that folk in the neighbourhoods of Milken, Skilling, Lay, Fastow, Ebbers, Stewart, etc have sold and moved somewhere else (to be away from high profile criminals)?
It's called common sense. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out a neighborhood that has 10 times the crime rate of the nation's average will obviously have deflated property value.
Is a non-answer such as this equivalent to 'I don't know'?
 
  • #92
Nereid said:
Is a non-answer such as this equivalent to 'I don't know'?
Is your comment equivalent to "I have no common sense"?

Perhaps you will also ask "Is there any evidence that houses near the ocean are in high demand driving property values up?"

Or maybe "Is there any evidence that houses near a coal power plant will drive property values down"?

Seriously. Common sense. It does come in quite handy.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
55
Views
12K
Back
Top