Affirmative Action

[Flak]

I see it like this: I have a pretty nice job with decent pay. There's no question I had to compete with a lot of others for this position. Why did I get this job? Because I was the best qualified. I had the right background, expertise, and experience for this position, when compared to the dozens of others applying for the exact same position and it has paid off nicely for both me and my employer. Thirty years ago, there's just about zero chance I get this job. Why? Because I'm not white.

That's what Affirmative Action is. It says the best qualified person gets the job. It gives everyone a fair chance. I got my job because I was the best qualified.

I can understand why there are so many here against that. If I was white, without my educational background and previous experience, and trying to compete against my current resume for a job like the one I have right now, I'd feel pretty threatened too.

 

[Desmond Hawkins]

I am against affirmative action, but if I go too much on the offensive, I will end up in a multi-thread 200 post two week-long debate with the "pro" people, that will eat into valuable school and hockey time (Flames vs. Wings)

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

That is in general NOT TRUE.

In general , Asians of today in the United Statres are even more educated than whites

 

[KaNick]

Originally posted by Flak
I see it like this: I have a pretty nice job with decent pay. There's no question I had to compete with a lot of others for this position. Why did I get this job? Because I was the best qualified. I had the right background, expertise, and experience for this position, when compared to the dozens of others applying for the exact same position and it has paid off nicely for both me and my employer. Thirty years ago, there's just about zero chance I get this job. Why? Because I'm not white.

That's what Affirmative Action is. It says the best qualified person gets the job. It gives everyone a fair chance. I got my job because I was the best qualified.

I can understand why there are so many here against that. If I was white, without my educational background and previous experience, and trying to compete against my current resume for a job like the one I have right now, I'd feel pretty threatened too.

You said it yourself, this system was useful 30 years ago. It is out of place nowadays. Basically what it does is take away the possibility of racism against minors and ensures it against whites (and Eastern-Asians I think).

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

Originally posted by GrandMasta Nick
You said it yourself, this system was useful 30 years ago. It is out of place nowadays. Basically what it does is take away the possibility of racism against minors and ensures it against whites (and Eastern-Asians I think).

Black people continue to have twice the unemployment rate of White people, twice the rate of infant mortality, and just over half the proportion of people who attend four years or more of college. In fact, without affirmative action the percentage of Black students at many selective schools would drop to only 2% of the student body. This would effectively choke off Black access to top universities and severely restrict progress toward racial equality.
Even if AA is removed, do you think that the situation of all the white anglo saxon protestants men (since AA also stands for women) will suddenly improve? Even if every unemployed Black worker in the United States were to displace a White worker, only a small % of Whites would be affected.

 

[WillJ]

[I've only skimmed through this thread, and I know some of this has already been said; bear with me as I say it again. ]

I am against affirmative action, at least in its current American form, as any sane person should be in my opinion. My qualms with it:

1. It's racism. An employer should not be forced to hire someone, or an educational system forced to accept someone, because someone is a woman or of a minority.

2. Sure, there are tales of people coming from down in the ghetto and rising up to become something, with affirmative action helping them, but the people that benefit most from AA are rich and middle-class blacks (and other groups) who need very little help.

3. Standards are sometimes forced to be lowered because of AA. If I'm not mistaken, your average university's guidelines require at least one African American to be employed in each department. In mathematics, for example, I imagine you could count the number of black people with Ph.D.s on two hands. So what's a uni to do? How do you expect someone to become a math professor if he doesn't have a Ph.D.? (This is just an example.)

4. Employers and educational institutions aren't allowed to directly ask for a person's race, because the government is scared of that person being racist. Go figure.

5. It's outdated. Affirmative action, although having its faults, is pretty much a great thing when the people at the top are racist bigots (AA would be the only viable method of countering this). And I'm pretty sure that's not the case; this isn't the 60's.

6. Attack the root of the problem, not the leaves. All-black schools are on average much worse than all-white schools. The higher the minority population (not counting Asians) in a school, for the most part the worse the school. This is what needs to be changed. Letting these people graduate from these run-down schools and then making colleges accept them and employers hire them is just ********.

7. Asians are hurt. Unlike white people, Asians have never run this country; they've never forced blacks to grow their crops for them or forced the Native Americans out of their land. But oh wait, they work too hard. Let's discriminate against them. God bless America.

 

[student]

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
Black people continue to have twice the unemployment rate of White people, twice the rate of infant mortality, and just over half the proportion of people who attend four years or more of college. In fact, without affirmative action the percentage of Black students at many selective schools would drop to only 2% of the student body. This would effectively choke off Black access to top universities and severely restrict progress toward racial equality.
Even if AA is removed, do you think that the situation of all the white anglo saxon protestants men (since AA also stands for women) will suddenly improve? Even if every unemployed Black worker in the United States were to displace a White worker, only a small % of Whites would be affected.

Affirmative action is anything but racial equality. Affirmative action implies that blacks are inherently inferior, so they should be given special privelages since we can't expect a black person to do as good as a white person in the first place. Affirmative action is also racist to whites because it says that your accomplishments aren't very impressive, because you are white. How does that help racial equality? If affirmative action didn't exist, that wouldn't mean blacks would be banned from college. All it would mean is that they would have to do as good as whites and all other races to get in. THAT is racial equality, or at least a step towards it.

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

Affirmative action is anything but racial equality. Affirmative action implies that blacks are inherently inferior, so they should be given special privelages since we can't expect a black person to do as good as a white person in the first place. Affirmative action is also racist to whites because it says that your accomplishments aren't very impressive, because you are white. How does that help racial equality?

Affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does. The logic of affirmative action is no different than the logic of treating a nutritional deficiency with vitamin supplements. For a healthy person, high doses of vitamin supplements may be unnecessary or even harmful, but for a person whose system is out of balance, supplements are an efficient way to restore the body's balance.

If affirmative action didn't exist, that wouldn't mean blacks would be banned from college. All it would mean is that they would have to do as good as whites and all other races to get in. THAT is racial equality, or at least a step towards it.

All else being equal, color-blind seniority systems tend to protect White workers against job layoffs, because senior employees are usually White. Likewise, color-blind college admissions favor White students because of their earlier educational advantages. Unless preexisting inequities are corrected or otherwise taken into account, color-blind policies do not correct racial injustice -- they reinforce it.

 

[student]

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
Likewise, color-blind college admissions favor White students because of their earlier educational advantages. Unless preexisting inequities are corrected or otherwise taken into account, color-blind policies do not correct racial injustice -- they reinforce it.

How do white students today have earlier educational advantages?


As for color blind policy:

color blind:
student A has a 3.9 gpa and a 1400 on the SAT, and student B has a 3.0 gpa and a 1100 on the SAT. They went to the same highschool and took the same classes. You have one spot left at your college, you would naturally choose student A. What is racially injust about this?

non-color blind:
student B is black, student A is white. Now your choice will change because of that fact? I think you are being racially unjust here. You are saying that the black can't be expected to achieve like the white, because he is black and everyone knows blacks can't do as good as whites because of the color of their skin is black, so he should be admitted. How is this not racially unjust?

 

[nihilistic]

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
In general , Asians of today in the United Statres are even more educated than whites

My point is that Asian immigrants did not start out with that advantage.

 

[addiv]

If AA would not exist, many perfectly qualified non-whites would still be discriminated against when applying for a job. In fact, racism is still very present in modern society. Something needs to be done against that, and it seems to me that the only practical way to do so is by AA. Besides, whites should stop acting so injured, they have discriminated against non-whites more than enough in the past, so it might actually be instructive for them to be the ones who are discriminated for a while.

 

[luiz]

I think many the "pro" people are totaly missing the point.

Yes, the unemployement and poverty rates are higher amoneg blacks. Yes, there is still racism, and that's bad.

BUT if a black person is not as qualified as a white person, then he CANNOT take the place of the white person because of his colour. It's that simple.

 

[MoHiggins]

Originally posted by SeleucusNicator
Affirmative Action as it exists today in the United States is racism. Pure and simple racism.

I'm not a big fan of racism, to make an understatement.

I can understand why you'd be a against racism against white people but why do you hate racism in general? What does it matter to you if blacks or chinese are discriminated against? It might even give you an advantage.


(Not my views, I am asking a question along SN's line of thinking)

 

[Free Enterprise]

Originally posted by addiv
If AA would not exist, many perfectly qualified non-whites would still be discriminated against when applying for a job. In fact, racism is still very present in modern society. Something needs to be done against that, and it seems to me that the only practical way to do so is by AA. Besides, whites should stop acting so injured, they have discriminated against non-whites more than enough in the past, so it might actually be instructive for them to be the ones who are discriminated for a while.

This response came to mind after I read this:
1 Wrong+1 wrong=2 wrongs

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

Originally posted by student
How do white students today have earlier educational advantages?

- Some stats : White suburban schools have vastly more money than inner-city schools, whose students are often 90 to 100 percent children of color. That’s because almost half of school funding comes from local property taxes.
In New York state, the richest school district spent $38,572 per student in 1992. That’s seven times what the poorest district spent— $5,423. In Illinois, the ratio was 8 to 1. In Texas, per-student spending ranged from $3,098 to more than 10 times as much—$42,000.

White high school graduates are much more likely to go to college, and to finish college, than African Americans.
source

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

Originally posted by luiz
I think many the "pro" people are totaly missing the point.

Yes, the unemployement and poverty rates are higher amoneg blacks. Yes, there is still racism, and that's bad.

BUT if a black person is not as qualified as a white person, then he CANNOT take the place of the white person because of his colour. It's that simple.

Then what would YOU do to correct this UNFORTUNATE situation?

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

I voted no, it should be determined soley on skills and education, not skin color, nationality, gender, ect.

 

[luiz]

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
Then what would YOU do to correct this UNFORTUNATE situation?

Provode education for all poor people.
Since there's nod difference between the ethnicities, black people will benefit as much as white people.

Unless you think black people are inferior and need some extra handout.

 

[BloodyPepperoni]

Provode education for all poor people.

See my previous post. The one that starts by
some stats. If providing education for all poor people is the way to correct the situation why isn't it done?

Unless you think black people are inferior and need some extra handout

I stand against racial discrimination and you dare calling me racist?

 

[WillJ]

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
See my previous post. The one that starts by
some stats. If providing education for all poor people is the way to correct the situation why isn't it done?

You're actually denying that giving these people a good education right form the start and making them feel like they have a shot at success wouldn't work? Just because it's not currently done? What in the world kind of reasoning is that? With your reasoning, AA should have never begun, because in 1964, the year it started, it hadn't been done and instead blacks and others were excluded from all that was good in the world.

Originally posted by BloodyPepperoni
I stand against racial discrimination and you dare calling me racist?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you support forcing certain employers and public educational institutions to accept certain amounts of black people (and other groups). That is racial discrimination. Not necessarily a bad thing (it at least has good intention), but racial discrimination nonetheless. You can't argue otherwise (unless you have a different definition of racial discrimination).