Reasons against Affirmative Action

[IanC]

Roger Clegg-
“Any benefits [of diversity],” he noted, “have to be weighed against the costs of racial discrimination, which this article ignores”:

It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.

a well thought out response, although in the end I always go back to thinking AA is worthwhile if only they would tie it to individual characteristics rather than the racial quota that it always devolves into.

A Weird Defense Of Affirmative Action

 

[onecut39]

Roger Clegg-
“Any benefits [of diversity],” he noted, “have to be weighed against the costs of racial discrimination, which this article ignores”:

It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.

a well thought out response, although in the end I always go back to thinking AA is worthwhile if only they would tie it to individual characteristics rather than the racial quota that it always devolves into.

A Weird Defense Of Affirmative Action

Why is the assumption always made that affirmative action students are unqualified? Do you have any data whatever to back that up?

 

[IanC]

I am surprised that I have to re-invent the wheel, over and over again, when it comes to the basics in affirmative action. but here it is.....again.

every university (and work place) wants its 'fair' share of blacks even though there are not enough qualified blacks to go around. elite schools like Harvard or MIT get some applicants who would be accepted anyways because they have the necessary qualifications and these students do just fine. because there are fewer qualified blacks than spots that they want filled with blacks the elite schools lessen their standards and accept 2nd tier black students until their quota is filled.

the 2nd tier schools (which are still very exclusive with high standards) find that it is impossible to fill their quota because the elite schools have taken most of the 1st and 2nd tier black students. these schools have to lower their standards to accept 3rd tier black students who typically have a difficult time keeping up because they are overmatched by the whites and asians.

this standard operating procedure of taking the best available blacks instead of just guaranteeing a spot to at least minimally pool qualified applicants ensures that black students will be obviously mismatched all the way down the ladder. when statistics are released it is typical to find most of the black students's qualifications are in the bottom 10%, with commensurate grades also in the bottom 10%.

on the other hand, schools with no affirmative action policies typically have black students with higher grades and pass rates because the black students did not start off at a huge disadvantage to begin with.

here is an article from the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education that will give you an idea of just how wide the gap is.....

The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test

If we raise the top-scoring threshold to students scoring 750 or above on both the math and verbal SAT — a level equal to the mean score of students entering the nation's most selective colleges such as Harvard, Princeton, and CalTech — we find that in the entire country 244 blacks scored 750 or above on the math SAT and 363 black students scored 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Nationwide, 33,841 students scored at least 750 on the math test and 30,479 scored at least 750 on the verbal SAT. Therefore, black students made up 0.7 percent of the test takers who scored 750 or above on the math test and 1.2 percent of all test takers who scored 750 or above on the verbal section.

that is only 600 black students per year in the USA who would qualify for elite schools. actually much less than that because the kids who score high on one side usually score high on the other side so it is likely that there is a large overlap between the math and verbal top scorers. this isnt the link I was looking for but it will do. the one I was looking for pointed out that a single school like Harvard or MIT would use up all the qualified black students if the same standards were in place for blacks compared to whites and asians.

 

[Artevelde]

Affirmative action is institutionalized racism and discrimination. Period.

 

[IanC]

Affirmative action is institutionalized racism and discrimination. Period.

it started as a legitimate effort to ameliorate past wrongs, and to give an opportunity to many that wouldnt get one otherwise.

unfortunately all that is left are quotas, unearned expectations, and resentment for undefined charity.

 

[Artevelde]

Affirmative action is institutionalized racism and discrimination. Period.

it started as a legitimate effort to ameliorate past wrongs, and to give an opportunity to many that wouldnt get one otherwise.

unfortunately all that is left are quotas, unearned expectations, and resentment for undefined charity.

The worst legislation is made with the best of intentions. Good intentions are no substitute for rationality and clear-headed public policy.

 

[Jackson]

Roger Clegg-
“Any benefits [of diversity],” he noted, “have to be weighed against the costs of racial discrimination, which this article ignores”:

It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.

a well thought out response, although in the end I always go back to thinking AA is worthwhile if only they would tie it to individual characteristics rather than the racial quota that it always devolves into.

A Weird Defense Of Affirmative Action

Why is the assumption always made that affirmative action students are unqualified? Do you have any data whatever to back that up?

Look at Kagan's decisions.

Look at the entire premise of Affirmative Action. It passes up the most qualified of candidates in favor of, in the presumption, minorities. It does not do minorities any favors, but in some cases, set them up for failure unless the AA is carried through into their career and then who pays?

In the case of Kagan's decision, she threw out a test where none or one minority qualified for promotion in a fireman's promotion test. All candidates, even though they FAILED the test were promoted. Would you like those who failed that test in charge of saving your life?

If we keep lowering the bar for qualified candidates, we are not a country where excellence and hard work means anything any longer.

 

[regent]

How many jobs in the US are given to applicants as a form of preferance? Ever reccomend a friend for a job or friend reccomend you. It's done daily. Many do not even apply for some jobs, though advertised by law as open, because they know someone has already been picked and the institution is just going through the motions. Colleges have admittance programs called legacy admittance, the sons and daughters of alumni are given preference. Got a feeling Bush got into Yale that way and FDR into Groton.

 

[DGS49]

Not to make this into a political thing, but dare we speak of Our Beloved President and FLOTUS?

OBP declines to disclose his academic bona fides and although everyone knows why, no one dares utter it. "We" would much rather maintain the fiction that he is "...possibly the brightest person ever to hold the Presidency." What rubbish. No doubt he would never have matriculated at either Columbia or Harvard Law without a gigantic push from the Diversity Police, and his exalted position as Editor of the Harvard Law Review would be exposed as nothing more than having won a popularity contest, thus besmirching the institution itself. Further, exposure of his records would reveal the embarrassing fact that he gained admission largely because he LIED about being born in Kenya, which was part of his fictitious autobiographical personna at the time. Certainly, the admissions committee was salivating at the prospect of bringing in a real, live Kenyan!

And FLOTUS? How do you suppose she found herself making $350k as the "Diversity Vice President" of a Chicago hospital association? There was nothing on her resume making her even remotely qualified for a position at that level. Her senior thesis in college could have been written by a high school kid with a thesaurus (and it reads like it).

Sorry for the tangent.

Carry on.

 

[onecut39]

How many jobs in the US are given to applicants as a form of preferance? Ever reccomend a friend for a job or friend reccomend you. It's done daily. Many do not even apply for some jobs, though advertised by law as open, because they know someone has already been picked and the institution is just going through the motions. Colleges have admittance programs called legacy admittance, the sons and daughters of alumni are given preference. Got a feeling Bush got into Yale that way and FDR into Groton.

Kinda reminds me of "Heck of a job Brownie".