AA is my reparations. I don't know if you have ever attended a failing school because it is the closest school to your black neighborhood.
I have not, but many white kids also attend failing schools. Should they also get AA?
Also, what about the many black students that do not attend failing schools. Should they get AA?
Or if you have ever been pulled over because you are black.
Even if this happens, how does preferential admissions compensate for this?
I've been pulled over repeatedly for driving an old, crappy car. Should I get preferential admissions for this?
Having an education will help to right those wrongs by putting those same discriminating blacks back into their communities to combat these transgressions.
But most educated African-Americans leave those poor communities, don't they?
And unless they've actually faced failing schools, etc., they shouldn't really need preferential admissions to get into law school, right? (I've already noted that disadvantage, per se, should be taken into account.)
AA may be needed for Howard but guess what? Howard is not a public school it is private so they are not subject to the same regulations unless they take some type of federal funding.
Actually, it's easier to use AA if you're private. The recent lawsuits were against Michigan specifically because it was public, and it's harder for public institutions to discriminate in this manner.
(Personally, I don't have a problem with Howard being mostly black, as some minorities may prefer learning in this kind of environment. I'm just observing that's its not as diverse as most places. But diversity, in my opinion, is not always the highest ideal either, as you seem to agree.)
Until you step in the shoes of a black man in America, you will not understand the importance of AA.
Maybe not, that's why I'm asking.
I see what you're saying. I just think that, unless someone is actually disadvantaged, they shouldn't get preferential admissions, as it tends to perpetuate racism.
P.S. Statistically I was more likely to be in prison than to be accepted to the Tier 1 law school that I was accepted to.
Possibly, but what does this really tell us?
It seems to me we'd be far better off if we just fixed those failing schools, so everyone would have an equal starting point. At that point (and even now), we could just judge people based on their actual economic background, as opposed to making assumptions based on skin color.
Anyway, these issues should probably be discussed on the AA board anyway, and I don't mean to hijack this thread. I was just honestly curious what you meant by reparations. I do think that people who are poor because of historical discrimination should have that taken into account, so in that sense, I can relate to the idea. On the other hand, there are many minorities that are better off than most whites, and the "reparations" argument doesn't seem to apply in that context. The idea that we need more minority lawyers to combat unfair policies makes more sense, though I wouldn't call that reparations. I just think it needs to be weighed against the other effects.
Anyway, that's all, and I do think Howard is probably a good choice for minority law students.