I did't enslave anyone! Why cannot people get in based upon merit?

[JoJo]

I have no doubt, given the recent posts by "Black__Reign" this post is going to upset many, but really, why do SOME people of color feel they are deserved something?  Why can't we live on the basis of survival of the fittest?  Is/Was Darwin that WRONG? 
I know this discussion is quite philosophical and there are no "correct" answers, but from an economical standpoint, are we not all better off if, according to J.S. Mills, we approach life in a utilitarian point of view?  If people (or certain "CULTURES") have ideological views that are "not productive to further advancing the human condition for all; that is life, liberty, and justice" why should we adhere to such policies as Affirmative Action? 

I'm curious to hear more opinions on this seeing as wee all have to live with it, no matter what race/color you are.  I've always lived by the idea that if you respect me I'll respect you,  no matter what f-in race you are.

[EruditeLady]

Is it so hard to believe that people of color are being admitted to schools based on merit and achievement?

[TLFKARG]

You are a coward for not having the balls to post what you really think under your real username.  I am not, however, surprised and suspect that many more cowards share your misguided views.  

[Southern Gentleman]

The problem is one of fairness. There is an inherent advantage in being "white". By white, I mean more than skin color, but a part of the mainstream culture. Throughout history there have been several groups of people who are now considered white, but in the past were not. For example, in the early 20th century there was an influx of immigrants from Southern European nations such as Italy. These people were NOT considered white at the time and were heavily discriminated against. Another, perhaps more striking, example us the Irish. The Irish were not considered white either! Even though you cannot get much more physically white than they, they did not meet the requirements because they were not ENGLISHMEN. The definition originally sprang from how Anglisized someone was. During the occupation of Ireland by the British a concerted effort was made to decrease the "wild Irish." They literally starved them out to the point that they died & died & died. Coffins were made with false bottoms so they could be re-used. I could talk about the Native Americans or the Chinese, too.

The difference between African-Americans and most of these other groups is that of the potential for assimilation into the mainstream; being re-defined over time as "white." THe Irish who came to America were able to physically bleand in & could learn the culture and therefore adapt. The same is true, more recently, with the South Europeans. Part of this was also due to intermarriage. All of these things are much more difficult for African-Americans. Yhey can't just blend in, whether they "learn" the culture or not (even if they should, which is a completely different question). They are defined by the inherent preconceptions of everyone who meets them. Even themselves. Jesse Jackson once told the story of a time when he was in Washington, DC and his car broke down. It was in the evening & DC is not a low-crime area. He walked down the sidewalk to look for a phone. He heard footsteps behind him. He thought he was bout to be mugged, turned & looked, and was RELIEVED that it was a white guy. He realized that if it had been a black man he would have been more concerned. Now, this indicated the level that stereotypes have pervadeded our American culture. Crime is not defined by race, but by socio-economic status. They crime rate for poor whites is just as high as poor blacks. Unfortunately, African Americans have a tougher time escaping poverty at every turn than whites do. There is an inherent advantage in being white. Affirmative Action programs try to "level the playing field" and no, it is not a perfect system. But, its the only one that can be somewhat fair. Every group of people deserves the same opportunities for their children.

[NontradMike]

This shouldn't be too difficult to understand.  Let's see if we can get you there...

Everyone in life has challenges they have to overcome.  Women look up to a glass ceiling.  URM's often have to deal with inferior schools and a culture that, for whatever its merits, is distinctive and seperate from that of "white-America".

As a white guy, I can tell you this.  I'd much prefer the challenge AA presents than having to deal with the lifetime challenge of dealing with a rascist majority that refuses to adequately fund my schools or ensure that my vote counts.  The necessity of scoring 4-8 points higher on an LSAT and needing a .2-.4 higher GPA to get into a law school pales in comparison...

And the fact is, I am still being judged by merit.  I know what scores I need to be relatively assured entrance to the schools I want.  If I want to get into Harvard, but I only have a 3.2 GPA and 166 LSAT, well, I've got nobody to blame except myself.  Buck up, ya pansy...  nothing worse than a person born with every advantage whining about not getting what they want...  we all get what we deserve.

[giffy]

The problem is one of fairness. There is an inherent advantage in being "white". By white, I mean more than skin color, but a part of the mainstream culture. Throughout history there have been several groups of people who are now considered white, but in the past were not. For example, in the early 20th century there was an influx of immigrants from Southern European nations such as Italy. These people were NOT considered white at the time and were heavily discriminated against. Another, perhaps more striking, example us the Irish. The Irish were not considered white either! Even though you cannot get much more physically white than they, they did not meet the requirements because they were not ENGLISHMEN. The definition originally sprang from how Anglisized someone was. During the occupation of Ireland by the British a concerted effort was made to decrease the "wild Irish." They literally starved them out to the point that they died & died & died. Coffins were made with false bottoms so they could be re-used. I could talk about the Native Americans or the Chinese, too.

The difference between African-Americans and most of these other groups is that of the potential for assimilation into the mainstream; being re-defined over time as "white." THe Irish who came to America were able to physically bleand in & could learn the culture and therefore adapt. The same is true, more recently, with the South Europeans. Part of this was also due to intermarriage. All of these things are much more difficult for African-Americans. Yhey can't just blend in, whether they "learn" the culture or not (even if they should, which is a completely different question). They are defined by the inherent preconceptions of everyone who meets them. Even themselves. Jesse Jackson once told the story of a time when he was in Washington, DC and his car broke down. It was in the evening & DC is not a low-crime area. He walked down the sidewalk to look for a phone. He heard footsteps behind him. He thought he was bout to be mugged, turned & looked, and was RELIEVED that it was a white guy. He realized that if it had been a black man he would have been more concerned. Now, this indicated the level that stereotypes have pervadeded our American culture. Crime is not defined by race, but by socio-economic status. They crime rate for poor whites is just as high as poor blacks. Unfortunately, African Americans have a tougher time escaping poverty at every turn than whites do. There is an inherent advantage in being white. Affirmative Action programs try to "level the playing field" and no, it is not a perfect system. But, its the only one that can be somewhat fair. Every group of people deserves the same opportunities for their children.

One of the best posts I have seen on the subject. 

[hylas99]

I am loving the recent flames on this board. Keep 'em coming.

BTW, original poster. The philosopher you refer to is John Stuart Mill, not John Stuart Mills. And utilitarianism is not the same thing as survival of the fittest. In fact, many arguments in favor of affirmative action are utilitarian in thrust.

[Runner-up]

I have no doubt, given the recent posts by "Black__Reign" this post is going to upset many, but really, why do SOME people of color feel they are deserved something?  Why can't we live on the basis of survival of the fittest?  Is/Was Darwin that WRONG? 
I know this discussion is quite philosophical and there are no "correct" answers, but from an economical standpoint, are we not all better off if, according to J.S. Mills, we approach life in a utilitarian point of view?  If people (or certain "CULTURES") have ideological views that are "not productive to further advancing the human condition for all; that is life, liberty, and justice" why should we adhere to such policies as Affirmative Action? 

I'm curious to hear more opinions on this seeing as wee all have to live with it, no matter what race/color you are.  I've always lived by the idea that if you respect me I'll respect you,  no matter what f-in race you are.

The other side will continue to laugh at us, as long as we structure our arguments this way.

[maricutie]

I don't think diversity would be that much of an issue, were it not for the extreme weighting that is given to one's ethnicity.  We all want to meet a lot of different people in law school.  Age, gender, economic background, work experience, and ethnicity are all good factors for determining who gets into law school.

That said, it even disturbs me when I look at the admissions grids and I see people with numbers like 2.25/145 (or worse) get into some T1, T2 schools.

Reason why this happens is because very few minorities are within the 3.5+ and 165+ category. Very, very little. Ref. to the Mich case, something like 26 blacks fit here, and a comparable number of hispanics. Since these are the top scoring minorities, they get their pick of HYS and, generally, the rest of the top 14. So the schools lower on the totem pole need to look a little further down relative to GPA and LSAT, otherwise risk not having any minorities AT ALL in their classrooms. Hence, the 'effects' of AA are definetely most pronounced at the lower schools.

And people, please ignore the original poster's flame ....

[HBCU.EDU]

Post under your real username you tool. YOu are such a f-ing troll dude. Yet another AA thread.