I can understand poverty. It is often assumed that those that live in poverty are not as smart as those that are rich. Not to mention the rich can often have "connections" which may help a school or company.
But prejudice? Sorry but don't buy it. At least not completely. I'm not trying to say that there isn't prejudice. Just that it's not near as much of a factor as people keep trying to say. And you have to remember that prejudice comes from both directions. Not just whites.
That's fine that you don't "buy it," but there is pretty solid evidence out there that indicates that it exists. Look at the study I cited earlier in this thread for an example.
Yes it is a terrible one. For the simple fact that it creates more racism. I've talked to a few whites that turned racist because they were denied one too many jobs just because someone of color was hired, even though they had better resume's than the person of color.
A lot more people
think they didn't get a job because of a minority than those who actually don't get jobs because of minorities. It's an easy way to blame someone else for your own failures.
Basing it off of class can be just as detrimental as it can cause hard feelings between the poor and the rich. And I think that there is enough hard feelings between those two right now without having to add more too it.
But "rich" and "poor" are not as readily observable and susceptible to prejudice.
Why exactly do they feel more comfortable? Do you know?
Lots of reasons, such as the fact that they have a shared background, they are more likely to understand their issues, etc.. I don't think I'm being particularly controversial here in saying this.
AA does. Or at least the way people use AA. If a black person applies for a school or company that happens to be totally white what happens if they are denied? A charge of racism. Even if their race had absolutely nothing to do with the reason for them being denied a position. That costs the company or school money. Even if they are found innocent it still costs them money. Name me one school or company that doesn't mind loosing money for no real reason.
So you oppose the policy because it can lead to frivolous lawsuits? Why not just limit the frivolous lawsuits (which is how it works in practice)?
Yes, and no. Yes because AA is a government law.
What government law?
Says who? Each and everyone of those people can have very different lives. Different perspectives. Different thoughts. You are trying to make it sound as if they would all have the same perspective. They wouldn't. Unless you are trying to say that just because your black you will have a different perspective than someone that is white.
If that is the case then lets examine this scenario. Got two people. One white. One black. They both grow up in the same neighborhood. Same schooling giving by not only schools but also from parents. Parents make same amount of money. They both have reletively the same experiances and same opportunities.
How does race play a factor here?
If you don't think that those two people would still have different perspectives on a lot of things, I don't know what to say.
And this is a perfect example of why I think we should move away from a strictly race-based system and toward a holistic one that looks at class as well.
Furthermore, while it's of course possible that the white conservative guys from Greenwich will have radically different perspectives, it's likely that the difference will be smaller than it would be with a black liberal chick from Bed Stuy.
Again yes somebody does. Look above to the appropriate paragraph where I already explained this.
You didn't explain anything. It's a fact that private schools are not required by the government to use affirmative action. They do so by choice.
And people do learn early. It's kind of hard to not hear about racial issues through out your childhood. Particularly in k-12 grades. The great thing about public school is that it is already diverse because a public school has to accept anyone in their district. And I don't know of a single district that doesn't have diversity in their school system. But we are talking about college admissions. Not grades k-12. By the time they get into college they already have had diverse dealings for much of their lives.
I'm not trying to be rude, but if you really believe this, then you don't know what you're talking about. There are vast swaths of the country where public schools are 95+% individuals of a particular race. Even in more diverse areas, the schools tend to go by neighborhood, which leads to the same result. Why do you think they had to institute busing in so many areas?
I knew plenty of people who started college never having had a discussion with a black/hispanic/indian/asian/etc.
No actually I'm not. The difference here is that one is based on a persons acedemics. The other is based on a persons skin color. They could both have worked just as hard as the other. But due to differing grades one is accepted while the other is not. In the case of the AA student he was accepted because of his skin color. Despite his grades not being as good as the white persons. Despite them both working just as hard as the other. Can you honestly tell me that someone with a 3.5 GPA should be accepted over someone with a 4.0 GPA? Because that is exactly what happens with AA.
And again, you're assuming that there is absolutely no difference between the two individuals other than their GPA. That's just not the case.
Without AA the black person would have gotten into a good med school yes. But if his GPA was not up to Harvards standards then why should AA get him into Harvard over someone who had a better GPA? Again even if they worked just as hard (or even harder) as the person with the better GPA.
Because Harvard wanted him, and they can do whatever the **** they want to do.
Again, there are more factors than just hard numbers. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to want diversity in a group.
That is the problem with AA. It gets people into positions that they normally would not have gotten. All because of their skin color. It doesn't really matter how often it happens. It does matter that it happens at all.
If you think this is the only area of life where this happens, I don't know what to say.
Sorry but I'm going to have to reject this study. They said that they had 500 applications yet sent those applications to 1300 different jobs. Because of this you have no idea how or who they sent those applications to. Did they send all applications to each of the 1300 jobs? You have no idea if they only sent applications to the appropriate job that those particular skills applied to. You have no idea if someone else was already hired for the job by the time said application was sent in. You have no idea if there was a better application sent in. You have no idea if the employer was just waiting to review said application. You have no idea how long they waited before the people doing this study waited before they decided that the employer wasn't going to call.
In essence there are too many variables to accurately tell if this study is accurate or not. Now if you had the original study then we might beable to decern some of the answers.
You can feel free to disagree with it, but nothing that you've said here is an actual refutation of the methodology of the study or its results.
No, my ancestors weren't whiny, and yes, the irish were denied jobs in America merely because they were Irish. So, no, your attempt at moral equivalency and rabid straw-dog-ism failed massively.
Congrats, you completely missed the point.
