New, Reasonable AA Proposal

[Lindbergh]

I almost never hear AA supporters discussing the problem of poor whites, so I guess that's a reasonable conclusion. 

I almost never hear you voicing your opposition to eating horse meat.  Can I reasonably conclude that you support eating horses? 

Sure -- I have no particular love for the animal.  I think most people would support this when circumstances demand it, which is probably why you don't hear much opposition to it.

That is also not a reasonable conclusion.

ETA: Seriously, I thought you were an LSAT teacher 

If I am, that would indicate that I can better determine than you whether or not conclusions are reasonable, wouldn't it?    

Do you really think most people would oppose eating horses when circumstances demand it?  What about the fact that horsemeat is made into dogfood, and no one complains?  Isn't this evidence of the above? 

Even better question -- how much time to you want to waste on my "humorous" asides? 

This passed several years ago.

http://vote98.sos.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/6.htm

And honestly, I don't find anything humorous about you. Critiquing the asides is no more of a waste of time than the rest of it, in than that they prove that you like to run off at the mouth.

Or, that you have no sense of humor, and are unwilling to address the actual points at issue in this thread, and therefore prefer to waste time debating whether people care about eating horses.  Guess we at least know from that who really likes to run off at the mouth.   

[Lindbergh]

I almost never hear AA supporters discussing the problem of poor whites, so I guess that's a reasonable conclusion. 

I almost never hear you voicing your opposition to eating horse meat.  Can I reasonably conclude that you support eating horses? 

Sure -- I have no particular love for the animal.  I think most people would support this when circumstances demand it, which is probably why you don't hear much opposition to it.

That is also not a reasonable conclusion.

ETA: Seriously, I thought you were an LSAT teacher 

If I am, that would indicate that I can better determine than you whether or not conclusions are reasonable, wouldn't it?    

Obviously not.

In other words, if you disagree with someone who has a better sense of logical reasoning than you, they must be wrong.  Fair enough.   

[Lindbergh]

How exactly does being a minority, per se, affect your GPA and LSAT once educational opportunity is accounted for?  If it does not, then how is it relevant to admissions decisions?

You obviously have not read the literature on stereotype threat.

I also haven't read the Harry Potter novels.

Making up excuses for minority academic underperformance, while clearly desirable for AA supporters, seems counterproductive when the goal is (presumably) real equality between groups.

[Lindbergh]

Finally, I'll note that you, and most AA supporters, have created a "hilarious myth" of disadvantage where only ethnicity exists.   

You're saying that most AA supporters oppose giving an advantage to poor whites over rich whites in the admissions process?  Because that's the implication of saying that they believe that "only ethnicity exists."   

I almost never hear AA supporters discussing the problem of poor whites, so I guess that's a reasonable conclusion.  Most AA supporters appear to be privileged whites who assume that just because they had a cushy ride, everyone else does also. 

That is not a reasonable conclusion.

Well, that's your opinion.  I guess what I really believe is that most AA supporters don't really care one way or another about poor whites, for the reasons noted.  To most, it appears, being white is some magic potion that makes life incredibly easy, whatever the circumstances.

And you've objected so strenuously to people making unfair generalizations about AA detractors. Perhaps you'd like to extend the same courtesy to the other side?

Well, if I can hear an AA supporter acknowledge that a poor white/asian might actually need and deserve preferences more than a wealthy minority, I'll modify my opinion.  Until then, I'll have to conclude that most such supporters don't know anything about actual disadvantage.

Dude, over and over again in these threads, many AA supporters have said that they believe in class-based AA in addition to race-based AA, as they are different and separate issues.

Are they? How so?  Isn't AA fundamentally based on the idea that minorities have less educational opportunity?

It is ridiculous to argue that unless someone believes that a person from a disadvantaged background ALWAYS deserves MORE than a person of color from a less disadvantaged background, they don't believe that poor whites (or whoever) need help, too.  They should simply both be considerations. You're arguing that class simply matters more, and is more of a disadvantage. Some people argue that race matters more, and institutional racism is more of a disadvantage. I would argue that they both matter, and should be taken into consideration, and that your idea of using race only as a "tipping point" tie-breaker between people of similar classes, essentially tying the two types of affirmative action together, ignores the fact that race and class, although related, are separate issues, both of which would ideally be worked on. And that proportional representation along various dimensions can be a worthy goal, IN ADDITION to helping out people who've faced disadvantages of various kinds.  

Help me out here, and please answer the specific question:  Once educational opportunity is controlled for, how exactly does having a darker complexion (or "institutional racism") relate to academic achievement?  

Even more precisely, how in god's name is a wealthy minority, with all educational advantages, more deserving of preferences in the consideration of his academic credentials than a poor white/asian with no educational advantages?  

No one has yet established how ethnicity is at all relevant to academic achievement once educational opportunity is controlled for.  How then can one argue that an educationally privileged minority is EVER more deserving of special consideration than an educationally disadvantaged white/asian?  The effects of educational opportunity on academic achievement is obvious and undeniable.  The effects of ethnicity on academic achievement, once opportunity is controlled for, frankly escape me.  Even if there is somehow some effect that ethnicity, standing alone, has on academic achievement, it appears clear that educational opportunity has a FAR greater impact.  To the extent anyone wants to argue otherwise, the burden of proof is presumably on them.

So if you want to argue that ethnicity and "institutional racism" somehow affect minority academic performance in a meaningful way, and should be taken into consideration even after opportunity is controlled for, you'll need to explain why, because the connection is honestly not that obvious.  

Note:  I'm specifically discussing educational admissions here.  It appears to me that once opportunity is controlled for, there is no real justification for ethnic discrimination beyond a tipping point.  If there is a specific industry, after graduation, where minorities are facing discrimination, additional programs may be necessary at that point to ensure fair treatment.  But it makes no sense to me to try to address that later problem with countervailing discrimination during the admissions process.  (I've expressed why above.)  

Finally, let me specifically ask you:  In your opinion, is a disadvantaged white/asian EVER deserving of more consideration than a wealthy, educationally advantaged minority?  (Even in the most extreme cases?)  Serious question.  Why or why not?

I understand the desire to work on race (by which I assume you mean rascism), and the desire for proportional representation.  However, you seem to be ignoring the fact that AA, as currently practiced, probably makes people more racist, not less, for the reasons already noted.  And I'm not sure why proportional representation, while theoretically desirable, is more important than simple fairness.  Does it really make sense to give whites preferences over asians just because the latter generally do better academically?  It would seem to me that once opportunities are controlled for, it is primarily the individual's responsibility to achieve comparably, whatever cultural tendencies might exist within various groups.  

[Lindbergh]

Can we at least agree that the educationally/economically advantaged minority should not get preference points over the educationally/economically disadvantaged white/asian? 

I don't concede anything, ever. 

I might agree with you on this though.  It depends on what we consider the greater adversity.  Again, I don't buy the "money = privilege" formula quite so easily. 

K, at least you're open-minded.  I guess I just don't understand how anyone can conclude that it's really harder for an educationally-advantaged student to achieve academically than a disadvantaged white/asian.  (Other, later challenges, to the extent they exist, can presumably be dealt with in more appropriate / targeted ways.)

Also, I don't think there's any question that money buys privilege, in many different ways.  The question is how much additional "privilege" you get for looking a certain way.  I do think being short, fat, ugly, or non-white can cause you to be treated differently at times.  I'm just not sure if it makes sense to try to compensate for this in admissions, especially when such policies probably increase the extent to which you're treated differently.  

[Lindbergh]

I almost never hear AA supporters discussing the problem of poor whites, so I guess that's a reasonable conclusion. 

I almost never hear you voicing your opposition to eating horse meat.  Can I reasonably conclude that you support eating horses? 

Sure -- I have no particular love for the animal.  I think most people would support this when circumstances demand it, which is probably why you don't hear much opposition to it.

That is also not a reasonable conclusion.

ETA: Seriously, I thought you were an LSAT teacher 

If I am, that would indicate that I can better determine than you whether or not conclusions are reasonable, wouldn't it?    

Do you really think most people would oppose eating horses when circumstances demand it?  What about the fact that horsemeat is made into dogfood, and no one complains?  Isn't this evidence of the above? 

Even better question -- how much time to you want to waste on my "humorous" asides? 

This passed several years ago.

http://vote98.sos.ca.gov/VoterGuide/Propositions/6.htm

And honestly, I don't find anything humorous about you. Critiquing the asides is no more of a waste of time than the rest of it, in than that they prove that you like to run off at the mouth.

Or, that you have no sense of humor, and are unwilling to address the actual points at issue in this thread, and therefore prefer to waste time debating whether people care about eating horses.  Guess we at least know from that who really likes to run off at the mouth.   

You're welcome to respond to the post in which I respond to the "actual points at issue in this thread." Or not. You are an LSAT instructor, after all. Your logic is unassailable.

Done.  And I certainly don't claim my logic is unassailable.  However, I have noticed that most people don't apply logic much at all when it comes to this issue.  This is why I've posted this thread -- to make people question their assumptions, examine the issue more carefully, attempt to explain certain discrepancies, and then decide if the current system really makes sense, or whether a more focused, rational approach would be better. 

[Miss P]

I can't imagine why anyone would question your good faith.

Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their all in jail. 

[H4CS]

I can't imagine why anyone would question your good faith.

Go easy on the blacks and hispanics.  It's not necessarily their fault their all in jail. 

You're up late to be dealing with this nonsense.

[Miss P]

You're up late to be dealing with this nonsense.

Oh, surely I have other reasons to be up late.

[H4CS]

You're up late to be dealing with this nonsense.

Oh, surely I have other reasons to be up late.

Mine are weirder.