You realize that there are rules in redistricting that exist to create majority-minority districts with the explicit goal to have minorities elected. Because results are what matters! Of course, that backfired on Democrats quite a bit - but the fact is there is Affirmative Action in voting.
If their point system is race-based, it would be racist and I would oppose it. Or “have a problem with it” as you put it.
For diversity, perhaps. But not for past discrimination, unless it’s a formerly all-woman’s school.
So what happens if and when blacks are represented disproportionately in college, do we give preferences to whites? Is that when you drop the justification that preferences are about past discrimination?
Which was your way of implying it’s not important.
Okay, back to college - if the primary problem with blacks dropping out of college is money, how do your policies help blacks? They drop out anyway. Shouldn’t you focus on helping them financially too?
No, this isn’t your last post to me.
That’s similar, yes. But what about women? And the Senate?
:dubious:
Due to the voting system and fairly homogeneous gender distribution, it’s hard to design any kind of Affirmative Action for women specifically or for Senate seats. But I am sure if there was a way there would be “progressive” clamoring to do just that.
We could just give women candidates a 3% bonus vote - they win as long as they get up to 3% less in votes than a male opponent. It’s a “soft” cap.
Anyone who says nonsense like:
is just trying desperately to preserve white privilege.
See, that would be too blatant. In order to not infuriate the people who are discriminated against, Affirmative Action has to be fairly well hidden.
So what’s with all the transparency nonsense?
Pointing out that they have to hide what they’re doing.
I’m not familiar with any such peer-reviewed research.
Did I ever say that?
Cite, please.
SHOULD quotas be illegal, Brickbacon? Why or why not?
I’ve already provided links to articles that back up my claim. (But to save you the trouble of finding them: click here.) If you want us to believe that blacks drop out of college mainly because of money, why don’t you provide us with a cite?
Recall that when California abolished affirmative action, graduation rates among blacks quickly went up. Why? Did they suddenly get a lot more money? Or were they merely attending schools that matched their abilities.
It’s too bad it’s impossible to just stop using race as a factor in admissions and use rational factors like grades, test scores and other qualifications instead. You could even use objective measures of potential, not just prior academic achievements. Damn, if only that were possible.
Hypothetically, you’ve got a black and white student from the same high school. They took all the exact same classes and got the exact same grades. They were both in the same clubs and on the same teams. Their parents make the same income. They score the same on the SATs. The Unviersity that they both apply to thinks they are both qualified, but only has room for one of them. Okay for them to take the black kid? why or why not?
Exactly, precisely, same scores/achievements? Toss a coin.
Its an executive order at the federal level, not a law.
The diversity rationale is really an attempt by schools to move race conscious discrimination beyond remidiation of historical injustice to trying to increase participation by underrepresented minorities. THIS I agree is bullshit. You want to carve out some preferences for the children of slaves and American Indians. Fine by me, they represent such a small part of the college population that if AA is what kept you out, you were a coin toss to begin with. But when you apply the same rationale to hispanics who will soon be the second largest ethnci group in the country (and the largest fairly soon after that), I agree. We are trying to equalize results rather than equalizing opprtunities for those who have had oppostunities stripped from them as a result of grave historical injustice.
it won’t help. A lot of whites (males particularly) have a blind spot. Its not their fault, its just hard for them to see.
No, everyone but blacks and American Indians compete and then we try to squeeze ina few qualified blacks and American indians that otherwise wouldn’t have otten in on merit alone.
The applciation may be wrong but the principle is not
Enrollment of blacks in the UC system dropped from 1628 in 1996 to 1453 in 1998.
Not earth shattering but still.
Not ddirected at you but… Its too late for that.
says a white male. Sure eventually that is the goal but you havenot made the case that we are there yet.
Black enrollment dropped about 15% in the UC system. graduation rates rose significantly so there is probably more refinement that can be done.
Of course it’s okay, if all things were equal and it was a coin toss situation.
But that’s NOT what we’re discussing.
We’re discussing a situation where the white student has higher qualifications - and yet the school takes the black kid instead.
So I’m not sure why you brought this up.
Of all the cynical, unfair, and indeed racist tactics, this one is one of the worst.
You claim the right to just dismiss any opinion that way.