Affirmative action on the surface seems like a good idea, but in reality it doesn't address the right things. Consider a situation that I had back when I was in high school. There was a girl who was half hispanic who lived in a similar neighborhood as many of the white kids, thus being from a similar financial background. She had the same educational opportunities as the whites, and she was in the top 10% of the class. She was offered a full-ride to an ivy-league school, and nobody else in the top 10% was even offered a full-ride to the state schools(including the valedictorian). Admirably, this girl turned down this scholarship because she wanted to get it off merit, not because of her race. However, to get back to the point, how is this correcting the "social injustices" that many of you are speaking of? She had the same opportunities as the rest of us, but yet got much better rewards for similar results. I do agree that there is a correlation with race and socio-economic standing, so address that. But addressing the issue by race alone is downright wrong. Martin Luther King said, "I have a dream that my four 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." Does affirmative action do this?
First off, this is just one personal experience. And yes, it is isolated, but I have heard of many stories like this. But more importanly, it shows how the AA system is so very flawed. It isn't necessarily helping the disadvantaged, it is helping the people of a certain skin color or ethnic background. If it is the disadvantaged you are all worried about, why not do as somebody earlier stated and replace AA with a program that gives preferance to the economically poor and disadvantaged? The way things work now, a minority that is filthy rich can get the same advantages as somebody who is in poverty. Plus, there are plenty of white kids that are just as poor and disadvantaged as the minorities. What do you say to them?There is no way that this is a cure. I'm sure you've heard these arguments, and will probably just insult them, but they are very valid. First, this won't help solve racism. If anything it will make a lot of white people resent minorities. No matter if that is justified or not, you are going to have people who feel like they were cheated out of a position in a school or a job. That isn't going to make them like the person who they think didn't deserve it.Second, it is telling the white people that they have to do twice as good to get ahead, and it is telling the minorities that they can do pretty good, and the government will get them the rest of the way. Is that really an accomplishment? Many successful minorities are against affirmative action because they feel they will always have it in the back of their mind that maybe their success had some sort of aid. Jerome Holmes, recently appointed as Justice of the 10th Circuit of Appeals, is publically against it, and he is an African American man. Dinesh D'Souza, an Indian immigrant author, is another prominant individaul with that mindset. Finally, what would be wrong with eliminating the race box altogether on applications? There would be no way to give preference to anyone who is white or any other color. Instead, be more specific about life's other circumstances. That would be the way to have a more equal application process.
As far as the girl from my high school, the point was that she didn't have anything outstanding compared to anyone else in my school. Yes, she was very smart, and yes, she had a lot going for her, but there were also white students who had just as much going for her and who were smarter than she was. I don't remember all the specifics (this was four years ago), but I do remember her even admitting that it wasn't at all fair. This is why she turned down the opportunity. Yes, I quote King. There are plenty of whites who have just as much character as minorities. They aren't being judged by their character, they are being judged by their race. That is what AA is designed to do. I definately agree with the LSAT. I think it's stupid that 4 hours can determine how qualified someone is. There should be many more considerations than that. And, I agree that things need to be done to make everyone on an equal playing field. That being said, if this is the standard, why can't the minorities that 'James Bond' speaks of do as well? If they have the money, they have the same opportunity. If they don't, they don't have the same opportunity. This is why it should be done on class, not race. Bond also says that "failure is the individual's fault." I can turn this around. Minorities need to stop blaming white America and take the responsibility. I think that there definately should be policy implemented to fix the problems of equality. However, I don't see the equality being a race problem as much as financial. If your poor, your public education will be worse than if you can afford private or prep schools. But, I think the answer to equality is to fix the educational experiences at a younger age. I think affirmative action used to be effective, but I think it is getting more and more outdated. I think that if you are going to have legislation, it must be fair to everyone, and have as few holes as possible. Flawed laws don't need to be anywhere in our system. You can easily take race off an application. You can also take the names off. For admissions purposes you can assign a case number or code names, etc. Professors do it for grading essays all the time...
She thought that she could get in on her own merit. It's like me applying to a target school. That was her target school. Her scholarship letter was for a minority scholarship so she turned it down because she felt that affirmative action is wrong, not because of her peers. And, sticking up for your convictions is noble.
Page created in 0.429 seconds with 17 queries.