• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Harvard accused of bias against Asian-Americans

A liberal arts education teaches people to learn and to communicate, two very important skills.

HAHAHA. Teaches you to learn???!!! What does that mean.?

I'd like to see an english major design a cellphone or do anything useful.
 
I didn't lump every black person together. Which part about averages confused you?

Targeting people based on the average of their race instead of on an individual basis.

I would certainly say that making a general statement about a group based on group average is lumping them together.
 
Bigger obstacles.

But skin colour is not an objective measure of how many obstacles an individual has surmounted. Affirmative action would be more just if based on economic and geographic background than racial background. A rich black person from Malibu has probably faced less obstacles than a poor white person from Appalachia when it comes to reaching tertiary education.
 
Yes, this is a hate crime?

It is often instituted for government and educational settings to ensure that certain designated "minority groups" within a society are able to participate in all provided opportunities including promotional, educational, and training opportunities.[8]
Affirmative action - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


MLK: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

Democrats: "... Judged by the color of their skin. Got it!"
 
Affirmative action not only persecutes white males but also asians. It is a hate crime and why do we let it continue?
They're not going to win. The Supreme Court has already ruled that race can be used in the admissions process as it should be.
 
But skin colour is not an objective measure of how many obstacles an individual has surmounted. Affirmative action would be more just if based on economic and geographic background than racial background. A rich black person from Malibu has probably faced less obstacles than a poor white person from Appalachia when it comes to reaching tertiary education.
And a rich black person from Malibu has probably faced more obstacles than a rich white person from Malibu. Fortunately for the former, race is taken in account. Fortunately for the poor white person in your example, economics is taken into account.
 
And the people who get perfect scores on the SAT but still get rejected are also victims of scoreism. And people who get rejected even though they have many phenomenal extra-curricular activities are victims of activityism. But the people who are children of politicians or Harvard graduates never seem to complain because they always get preferential treatment. Instead of focusing on that let's complain about bull****!
It's telling to me that the most complained about admissions policy is the one that helps black people. Legacy admissions, donor admissions and other admissions based on factors other than merit which primarily benefit upper class white people are rarely challenged and never with the same intensity. People don't have a problem with non-merit-based admissions policies. They don't have a problem with policies that benefit certain races over others. They have a problem with black people.
 
And a rich black person from Malibu has probably faced more obstacles than a rich white person from Malibu.

Probably? Yes. Should a random person be judged by what the average member of his race had to face though? Hell no. That's plain old racism and it's a shame that you believe in it.
 
HAHAHA. Teaches you to learn???!!! What does that mean.?

I'd like to see an english major design a cellphone or do anything useful.

One would assume you aren't an English major. Perhaps you can find a translation program that suits you.
 
Probably? Yes. Should a random person be judged by what the average member of his race had to face though? Hell no. That's plain old racism and it's a shame that you believe in it.
I feel good about supporting affirmative action and I'm glad I'm intelligent enough to not buy into the myth that it's racism. I think it's a shame that so many people hide their racism under the guise of supporting so-called "race-blind" college admissions (which are, in actuality, racist towards people of color). I'm glad I finally saw through that sham.
 
I feel good about supporting affirmative action and I'm glad I'm intelligent enough to not buy into the myth that it's racism. I think it's a shame that so many people hide their racism under the guise of supporting so-called "race-blind" college admissions (which are, in actuality, racist towards people of color). I'm glad I finally saw through that sham.

So you support discrimination based on race ?

And thats somehow " not racist " ??
 
I feel good about supporting affirmative action and I'm glad I'm intelligent enough to not buy into the myth that it's racism. I think it's a shame that so many people hide their racism under the guise of supporting so-called "race-blind" college admissions (which are, in actuality, racist towards people of color). I'm glad I finally saw through that sham.

How can it possibly be racist to ignore race?
 
How can it possibly be racist to ignore race?

The hypcrocisy in this thread is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
 
How can it possibly be racist to ignore race?
Let's say I run a school and only allow white people into the school. Then, 20 years later, I decide to allow black people, but I also give preferential treatment towards legacies. Since I discriminated against black people in the past, the legacy policy favors white applicants which means that my past direct discrimination becomes current indirect discrimination. The only way to counter that is to create a race conscious admissions policy.
 
I feel good about supporting affirmative action and I'm glad I'm intelligent enough to not buy into the myth that it's racism. I think it's a shame that so many people hide their racism under the guise of supporting so-called "race-blind" college admissions (which are, in actuality, racist towards people of color). I'm glad I finally saw through that sham.

Every racist feels good about supporting racism and every racist believes his decision to promote racism to be an intelligent decision.
No doubt you believe you're being unique here but you really aren't and I'm sorry to disappoint you.
There's nothing helpful in dividing people into different groups based on their race.
 
Using someone's race as a qualifier most definitely is.
Nope. Affirmative action counters the discriminatory nature of the rest of the admissions process which favors white applicants. For years, black people were kept out of universities which means they benefit less from legacy policies than white people. For years, black people were discriminated against in employment, which means they benefit less from donor policies than white people. Currently, predominantly black elementary and high schools lack extracurriculars and SAT/ACT prep which means they benefit less from score and extracurricular only policies than white people. In other words, every measure of "color-blindness" in the application process benefits white people because of past and current discrimination against black people in the areas being measured. Affirmative action counters that indirect discrimination.
 
Every racist feels good about supporting racism and every racist believes his decision to promote racism to be an intelligent decision.
No doubt you believe you're being unique here but you really aren't and I'm sorry to disappoint you.
There's nothing helpful in dividing people into different groups based on their race.
I have no doubt that you are sincere in your beliefs. I just don't care. /shrug
 
Let's say I run a school and only allow white people into the school. Then, 20 years later, I decide to allow black people, but I also give preferential treatment towards legacies. Since I discriminated against black people in the past, the legacy policy favors white applicants which means that my past direct discrimination becomes current indirect discrimination. The only way to counter that is to create a race conscious admissions policy.

So in this case the correct move would be to ignore legacies, not to favor blacks over whites so to get things even. That's a childish thinking.
And I don't see how in the case we have here there's anything analogous to the legacies issue in your scenario.
 
And I don't see how in the case we have here there's anything analogous to the legacies issue in your scenario.
Except for the fact that American colleges with legacy policies have historically excluded black people from admission thus ensuring that their legacy policies benefit white applicants.
 
Less may apply, but don't pretend it's alright or not discrimination over the fact that schools set lower standards for certain races and oftentimes have race-based scholarships. It's discrimination and it's wrong. There are schools pretty much devoted to minorities as well.

Slavery was wrong too.
 
Back
Top Bottom