are there any URMs that think AA is TOO helpful in admissions process?

[angmill08]

but dont tell me that the reason you are poor and un educated is because your great great grandfater was a slave. that doesnt hold.

if that were a "true" and logical statement than ANY person who is the descendant of slaves would be poor and uneducated, and we all know that isnt the case.

TBone, sorry to nitpick, but you are making a logical error here. I might say, "I am sad because it is cloudy today." You may agree or disagree. But there is no logical implication that anyone else will be sad because it is cloudy. See what I'm saying? I suspect you have other reasons for thinking that someone saying, "I'm poor and uneducated because my great grandfather was a slave" is wrong. Perhaps you would like to make that argument using clearer language and logic? I'm teasing a little. Please do not take offense.

[ImVinny!]

"Your math is wrong.

In 2000, according to the US Census, 69.13% (194,552,774) of the population was categorized as white/non-hispanic.  12.06% (33,947,837) was categorized as black.

24% of 33,947,837 is 8,147,481
10% of 194,552,774 is 19,455,277

This means that there are about 139% more impoverished whites than blacks."

I am SOO glad when people bring in REAL statistics and not their own ranting idiocracy(I know, probably not a word, but you know what I mean).
Why would anyone in their right mind want to be called a "black" or "white" or "hispanic" and be called something that is identifying them as THEM? That makes no sense to me, you are YOU and that is not summed up in a title or anything except your own unique name and picture, heck fingerprint even. I am tired of people using their skin color as something to get a leg up and blaming others for thier own shortcomings. I agree with those of you that say this, and I really think that race is just a stupid social construction and that we should abolish such words from our vocab. I know, I am harsh, but that's what it will take. Someday when everyone is intermarried and all we will all look the same and there will be no discrimation and all this garbage will cease and I just hope I can live to see that day, because that is the time ONLY when people will shut-up about race and ethnicity, we are all members of one race: HUMAN.

I don't hate you because you are black, I hate you because you are YOU.
GET OVER IT ALREADY!

[TBoneUCLA]

but dont tell me that the reason you are poor and un educated is because your great great grandfater was a slave. that doesnt hold.

if that were a "true" and logical statement than ANY person who is the descendant of slaves would be poor and uneducated, and we all know that isnt the case.

TBone, sorry to nitpick, but you are making a logical error here. I might say, "I am sad because it is cloudy today." You may agree or disagree. But there is no logical implication that anyone else will be sad because it is cloudy. See what I'm saying? I suspect you have other reasons for thinking that someone saying, "I'm poor and uneducated because my great grandfather was a slave" is wrong. Perhaps you would like to make that argument using clearer language and logic? I'm teasing a little. Please do not take offense.

faith did not say "i am poor and uneducated because my ancestors were slaves"

i wouldnt  assume faith is either of thse things, OR that her ancestors were slaves.

what she said was "black people are poor and uneducated because they are descendants of slaves"  and that is incorrect.

you see, when you make a generalization like that it must always be true.

that means ANY person who is a descendant of slaves MUST be poor in order for they relationship to justly be considered a cause/effect.

if there are ANY people out there that are neither poor NOR educated but were decendants of slaves (which of course, there are) we have disproved this relationship as being directly causal.

there may be SOME co-relation, but clearly there MUST be other factors involved. if there were NO other factors involved, then clearly ALL descendants of slaves MUST be poor and uneducated.

*phew

it is all in the previous post, anyways...

dont F*ck with me! i got a 164 on the LSAT god dam it!!!

[CheezWiz]

Ninja,

I am sorry; my wording may have been a bit off there.  Let me clarify.  What I meant was not that the number of impoverished Blacks is greater than the number of impoverished Whites.  What I meant was that the percentage of impoverished Blacks is higher than the percentage of impoverished Whites even though a greater percentage of the population is White than is Black.

Race is statistically correlated with poverty.

Your math is wrong.

In 2000, according to the US Census, 69.13% (194,552,774) of the population was categorized as white/non-hispanic.  12.06% (33,947,837) was categorized as black.

24% of 33,947,837 is 8,147,481
10% of 194,552,774 is 19,455,277

This means that there are about 139% more impoverished whites than blacks.

[Ninja]

Ninja,

I am sorry; my wording may have been a bit off there.  Let me clarify.  What I meant was not that the number of impoverished Blacks is greater than the number of impoverished Whites.  What I meant was that the percentage of impoverished Blacks is higher than the percentage of impoverished Whites even though a greater percentage of the population is White than is Black.

Race is statistically correlated with poverty.

Your math is wrong.

In 2000, according to the US Census, 69.13% (194,552,774) of the population was categorized as white/non-hispanic.  12.06% (33,947,837) was categorized as black.

24% of 33,947,837 is 8,147,481
10% of 194,552,774 is 19,455,277

This means that there are about 139% more impoverished whites than blacks.

On that point you are correct.  If I remember correctly, the impoverished rate of hispanics and native americans is also higher than that of whites.  Now the question is whether a race with a 24% impoverished rate should receive blanket aid while a race with a 10% impoverished rate receives none.  This is only one piece of the puzzle, but it may be worth discussion.

[Alamss]

I haven't read all of this huge thread but from what I understand some people consider African American's socio-economically disadvantaged situation to be very much an effect of slavery. I don't think so though. There are so many peoples and races in this world that have gone through enslavement, brutalization, extermination, and torture, systematically, continuously and by persons of seperate races, that many times did so because they thought the ones one the receiving end were inferior.

Slavery overall was awful, and yes slavery here many times was even worse and it lasted for a few hundred years. But was the slavery here much worse than the systematic hatred of the jews and then finally a termination of 6 million of them in the most horrible ways, was it worse than a few hundred years of enslavement, looting, and torture by the British, French, and other colonizers of eastern countries. My own ancestors were tortured and killed by the British who systematically colonized and enslaved India. I have not one bit of a detractive effect by that fact. Was it worse than the brutal and systematic Japanese killing and torture of millions upon millions of Chinese and other Asians from the countries it colonized. The examples of immense suffering by many peoples is plenty through out history but some have achieved much even after that wheras others haven't.

There is still systematic subtle racism in many parts of the world toward many peoples but some exceed wheras others don't. I am ethnically from the present day Pakistan. Pakistan is behind in many ways but I by no large means at all contribute that to the fact that many of its people up till world war two were enslaved and looted from by the British. That really is not why the nation is behind. It and its people are a little behind because they haven't implemented the right political and economic strategies. Look at Japan, its people suffered through their own government, were bombed the hell out of them and now look where they are. There are examples both ways of people who were as severely treated by others. The question is that how well you deal with it and how well you initiate to do something about it and not let that hold you back, rather than dwelling about it.

I believe that those who achieve, achieve on their own initiative, no matter the obstacles to them and those who don't, don't do so because of their own lack of initiative, not because of someone else. I am not saying that slavery did not have an adverse affect, by I do believe it cannot be blamed for the problems of African Americans, as much to the extent as it is being blamed upon.

[CheezWiz]

... the question is whether a race with a 24% impoverished rate should receive blanket aid while a race with a 10% impoverished rate receives none...

Directly, no, I don’t think that the 10% should get the shaft.  But I do not believe that simply because the 10% currently get no AA benefit means that Blacks should not get AA benefit.  I think that instead the 10% (and others) should be included.

In my background, the social sciences, we deal with hard numbers matched with human factors.  It is difficulty to introduce the subtle hues of grey that exist when you are dealing with people when some only want to address the black and white (lowercase) of things.  There are those on this board that refuse to accept that institutionalized slavery, social oppression, and other factors of depression attribute to the current state of the Black race.  The fact that Blacks have been oppressed is not the cause of their current state. To say that these historical factors have no effect is, at best, naïve. 

The fact that some Blacks are lazy welfare moochers does not discount the effects of historical factors.  The fact that some Blacks are rich does not discount the effects of historical factors.  The fact that there is gansta rap does not discount the effects of historical factors.  However, all of these things may contribute to the state of the race.  But their contribution does not discount, dismiss, or disallow the presence of said historical factors.

The fact that there are equally, worse so, or less oppressed members of other races does not discount the need for AA for Blacks.  If anything, I think it calls for the expansion of AA privilege/benefit/assistance to other classes.

Let’s add some substance to that yes or no box.  “o Yes / o No (If you have checked yes please attach a statement of oppression/disadvantage/adversity explaining why we should consider you for Affirmative Action benefit)”  That would open this up to a great many classes who have ALSO borne the brunt of institutionalized oppression.  “I’m gay and my partner and I can’t get married.  We struggle daily to advance within a system that considers us second class…”, “I am Arab-American, since 9/11 I have fought the false association between my race, my religion, and terrorism….”  Whatever, I just see any of these as reasons to limit AA to Blacks.

[ImVinny!]

Finally someone able to intelligently articulate what I was trying to say before.
Great job explaning there!

I haven't read all of this huge thread but from what I understand some people consider African American's socio-economically disadvantaged situation to be very much an effect of slavery. I don't think so though. There are so many peoples and races in this world that have gone through enslavement, brutalization, extermination, and torture, systematically, continuously and by persons of seperate races, that many times did so because they thought the ones one the receiving end were inferior.

Slavery overall was awful, and yes slavery here many times was even worse and it lasted for a few hundred years. But was the slavery here much worse than the systematic hatred of the jews and then finally a termination of 6 million of them in the most horrible ways, was it worse than a few hundred years of enslavement, looting, and torture by the British, French, and other colonizers of eastern countries. My own ancestors were tortured and killed by the British who systematically colonized and enslaved India. I have not one bit of a detractive effect by that fact. Was it worse than the brutal and systematic Japanese killing and torture of millions upon millions of Chinese and other Asians from the countries it colonized. The examples of immense suffering by many peoples is plenty through out history but some have achieved much even after that wheras others haven't.

There is still systematic subtle racism in many parts of the world toward many peoples but some exceed wheras others don't. I am ethnically from the present day Pakistan. Pakistan is behind in many ways but I by no large means at all contribute that to the fact that many of its people up till world war two were enslaved and looted from by the British. That really is not why the nation is behind. It and its people are a little behind because they haven't implemented the right political and economic strategies. Look at Japan, its people suffered through their own government, were bombed the hell out of them and now look where they are. There are examples both ways of people who were as severely treated by others. The question is that how well you deal with it and how well you initiate to do something about it and not let that hold you back, rather than dwelling about it.

I believe that those who achieve, achieve on their own initiative, no matter the obstacles to them and those who don't, don't do so because of their own lack of initiative, not because of someone else. I am not saying that slavery did not have an adverse affect, by I do believe it cannot be blamed for the problems of African Americans, as much to the extent as it is being blamed upon.

[CheezWiz]

Alamss,

You provide many examples of nations (not races) being attacked or oppressed.  This is different then an internal separation and struggle between a country's multiple races.  Horrible, yes, but not the same as detrimental acts condoned by the ruling government on a race.  The goal of the British Empire was not to capture and enslave the natives in foreign countries so the atrocities they experienced are not logically similar.  You touched on Pakistan, and I don’t know their history, but their neighbor India has a cast system.  This system has limited how certain groups can function within the country's infrastructure based on their race (cast).  If we were talking about an Indian AA program to assist lower cast citizens then that would be valid.  But to compare descendants of the oppressed from India or Pakistan who now live in the US (and thus have shown that they could overcome their problems from their home countries) is not the same as the struggle of Blacks in America. 

The nearest comparison you draw is of the Nazi take over of Germany.  And, if we were discussing a German program similar to AA that would be valid.  It should be noted though that there are many German and international programs to assist Jews.  In fact, we (the world) gave them an entire country (Israel), subsidize their military with weaponry, and economy with trade deals.  The concept of reparations has been applied to Jews but not Black Americans for the time and money they lost at America’s hands or Native American’s for the entire country we took from them.  Instead, we have AA.

I haven't read all of this huge thread but from what I understand some people consider African American's socio-economically disadvantaged situation to be very much an effect of slavery. I don't think so though. There are so many peoples and races in this world that have gone through enslavement, brutalization, extermination, and torture, systematically, continuously and by persons of seperate races, that many times did so because they thought the ones one the receiving end were inferior.

Slavery overall was awful, and yes slavery here many times was even worse and it lasted for a few hundred years. But was the slavery here much worse than the systematic hatred of the jews and then finally a termination of 6 million of them in the most horrible ways, was it worse than a few hundred years of enslavement, looting, and torture by the British, French, and other colonizers of eastern countries. My own ancestors were tortured and killed by the British who systematically colonized and enslaved India. I have not one bit of a detractive effect by that fact. Was it worse than the brutal and systematic Japanese killing and torture of millions upon millions of Chinese and other Asians from the countries it colonized. The examples of immense suffering by many peoples is plenty through out history but some have achieved much even after that wheras others haven't.

There is still systematic subtle racism in many parts of the world toward many peoples but some exceed wheras others don't. I am ethnically from the present day Pakistan. Pakistan is behind in many ways but I by no large means at all contribute that to the fact that many of its people up till world war two were enslaved and looted from by the British. That really is not why the nation is behind. It and its people are a little behind because they haven't implemented the right political and economic strategies. Look at Japan, its people suffered through their own government, were bombed the hell out of them and now look where they are. There are examples both ways of people who were as severely treated by others. The question is that how well you deal with it and how well you initiate to do something about it and not let that hold you back, rather than dwelling about it.

I believe that those who achieve, achieve on their own initiative, no matter the obstacles to them and those who don't, don't do so because of their own lack of initiative, not because of someone else. I am not saying that slavery did not have an adverse affect, by I do believe it cannot be blamed for the problems of African Americans, as much to the extent as it is being blamed upon.

[Alamss]

CheezWiz your right on the points that it is not a same comparison but yet it is a comparison of struggle nonetheless, in different form. The actions of the British and others was based on race and a desire for economic extraction, both in the case of slavery and colonization. In colonizing they considered the persons being colonized as inferior, they enslaved, but they didn't enslave just to enslave, they enslaved so they could easily parasitically extract the economic resources of the countries and control their socio-political infastructure. How else do such a small number of people take over such large persons and places.

In African slavery the european(and American but in much sense they were kind of still European) goal was the same, to extract resources parasitically to use for their own nations. For whatever reason they instead of extracting resources they found it more lucrative to extract the persons as resources of free labor. In this sense yes the Africans do have a little more of a lasting scar because they are still residing under the nation who once enslaved them whereas in cases of other peoples, those nations left the peoples behind.

India's caste system really does not have anything to do with race, India is pretty homogenous racially and people are rather casted on their inherent and ancestral social roles, not race. Yes Jews got help for their own millions killed, and yes reparations were made by Germany but just that cannot be contributed to their present prosperity and success, both in the United States, Israel and most everywhere else in the world. They are some of the most succesful people, generally speaking.

What I am saying is that yes people, various were put down by others and maybe even they deserve special treatment for being done so, but there is a difference between two equally oppressed persons. That difference is not mental capacity. I beleive an African American, Hispanic, Asian, Jew, European White, or any other persons of different races, ethnicities, and religions are born with the same mental capacity to achieve. What you achieve does not have at all much to do with racial affiliation but rather it is CULTURE that seperates the major achievers, achievers, slight achievers, and not so high achievers.

For example I nitpick my own cultural things that I find slanted backwards or that might be detractive to achivement. It is our culture through which we set as our standard that either propel or do not propel us to where we want to be. Actions of others do to a certain point affect our culture but in the end our culture is established by us, not others.