Affirmative action

Lash, these are your words from pg. 6 of this thread:

I am more sorry for children, who are being told and conditioned to the false fact that they cannot make it without special help, and that their 'disability' is the color of their skin.

And these are your words from another thread:

And you didn't say what we should do? Its incredibly easy to criticise. Do you have a better idea?

Would you care to answer your own challenge as it relates to the above?

Certainly, PDiddie--

1) Parents of minorities should encourage their children in school, help with homework, and teach them from an early age that they can acheive any goal they set, as long as they are willing to study. They should meet with the child's teachers if there are grade problems.

2) If their child doesn't make the grade to get into a university, they should take two years at a community college to get a grip academically--and then, if the child chooses to get a further education, they can transfer to a university.

3) The government can help increase diversity at collge campuses by asking universities to make provisions to accept the top percentages from all high schools. In racially mixed schools, every one has a chance to compete. In predominantly black schools, all preferred students will be black...

Not all white kids are accepted into the school of their choice, and have to start out at community schools.

4) The gov. should help open more community colleges.

5) The gov. should continue on its goal of Teacher Accountability, to provide a good education for all students in all neighborhoods.

If any student feels discriminated against in college admissions, they should use the law to sue the school, and proven discrimination against a child due to color, ethnicity...disability....etal should bring harsh and swift punishment to the university.

6) Legacies, atheletic, and all other manner of unfair admissions policies should be iradicated. GPA in HS and SAT, plus ranking in class should be the only factors.

This is what I think should be done.

i think i mentioned this earlier but Condoleezza Rice stated that race should be a factor in university admissions and i would think she would know.

Condy is the pre-eminent wizard of this issue? Because she's black?
Is she also the last word in foreign policy? Abortion? She is also a woman.

Condi Rice (who just happens to be African-American -- "wink-wink-nod") makes a carefully strategized statement that vaguely supports race being a potential consideration in college admissions, but (you guessed it!) also fully backs the administration brief challenging a University of Michigan system that includes race as a consideration among equally qualified candidates:

"Rice issued a statement saying that she supports the president's decision to challenge race-conscious admissions as administered by the University of Michigan and that race-neutral means are preferable. But she said there are occasions when "it is appropriate to use race as one factor among others in achieving a diverse student body.""
(See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8578-2003Jan17.html)

According to CNN ( http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/17/rice.action/index.html ), "The White House released a statement from Rice the same day that a story in the Washington Post credited her with taking a key role in helping to shape the Bush administration's decision to challenge the affirmative action admissions policy at the University of Michigan."

Let's examine for the moment how the administration just plain old lies as it tries to position the U of M admissions process as a "quota" system, which it is anything but. The U of M doesn't admit unqualified blacks in order to achieve a certain percentage of minorities, which is what the administration is implying because the use of the word "quota" is code-word race baiting that gets the GOP closet racists all in a lather. The strategic use of the phrase "quota system" is one in a long line of Neo-Confederacy code words, used to rev up the "angry white males," even when these inflammatory code words are completely dishonest. It is also used to set up class resentment among working class whites who believe that unqualified blacks and Hispanics are "stealing" their children's slots at state schools. In short, it is race baiting.

U of M President Mary Sue Coleman directly disputes the notion that her University implements or condones a quota system:

"It is unfortunate that the President misunderstands how our admissions process works at the University of Michigan. It is a complex process that takes many factors into account and considers the entire background of each student applicant, just as the President urged.

We do not have, and have never had, quotas or numerical targets in either the undergraduate or Law School admissions programs. Academic qualifications are the overwhelming consideration for admission to both programs."
(See http://www.umich.edu/coleman.html )

But Bush, a white male prep school affirmative action admission at Yale, doesn't let truth get in the way of appeasing his Neo-Confederacy core group of voters.

The Chicago Tribune, in a January 18th front page story, argues that the Bush court filing in the U of M case actually takes a much harsher stand than Bush is implying:

"The White House has sought to present the president's position as moderate. Administration officials emphasized that the government's friend-of-the-court briefs would focus on the Michigan policies and not make the bold argument, as pushed by conservatives at the Justice Department, that affirmative action is unconstitutional.

But the briefs tell a different story. Although they do not explicitly say affirmative action is unconstitutional, their reasoning would force colleges and universities across the country to abandon their affirmative-action policies in favor of race-neutral approaches.

"It's cautious in its formal tone, but aggressive in legal arguments or legal scope," said Evan Caminker, a dean of the University of Michigan Law School. "And it's aggressive in its legal implications.""
(See http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0301180148jan18,1,5059964.story?coll=chi%2Dnews%2Dhed )

So that brings us back to Condi and her highly orchestrated statement of non-dissent dissent. Like most such Karl Rove-inspired press comments, it is meant to assuage moderate suburban white women voters, while meaning nothing in terms of changing the substance of the latest anti-multi-cultural society Bush initiative. It is a pro-white affirmative action policy shrouded in legalese and Neo-Confederacy code word mumbo jumbo. Condi pulls off a typical Rovian-Orwellian rope-a-dope: She appears to "split" with Bush, while still supporting his action. The White House then gets "image enhancement" mileage out of having a black female appear to be allowed to challenge Bush, when she was apparently one of the key architects of the policy under fire.

'wizard' is probably a poor choice of words, Lash.

I commend you on your recommendations in the previous posts.

.PDiddie says,


Change it to less qualified Blacks and Hispanics and call it what it is. Another form of social welfare. As for class resentment what do you think discrimination of any type leads to? How would you react if someone less qualified than you or your child was accepted by a college because of his race or ethnicity in your stead? Would you still have a warm feeling for race based acceptance. I doubt it.

PDiddie--

Appreciative of your comments. Wizard--Yes, it was late at night and my volcab was disappearing.

Now, if I can just get you to see that many people, myself included thinks the rising of blacks and hispanics to educational and employment equality is good for them and good for me. If I can just get you to stop lurking through the spoken word, suspicious of the dreaded 'code words'...

Can you believe that racial justice is the goal for people who are of my belief that giving someone 20 points for being black/hispanic, when they only get 12 for their entire sholastic career is just plain wrong, and unconstitutional...

I've just about reached my breaking point with the sad song of rich white people.

Let's get over ourselves. We are not oppressed.

We have to pay taxes on the money we earn. And some of that money is going to go to people who have less fortune, and more pigmentation, than us.

The rivers you cry, au 1929, will be mopped up by black and hispanic women guaranteed a whole two bucks over minimum wage, those lucky duckies.

Affirmative action does NOT discriminate against white people - there is an inherent value to the life experiences of those in racial, economic, and ethnic minorities. White people are denied virtually nothing in American society if they want it and will work for it.

I hear more about the oppressed white man than I do about anything that actually happens, and I'm tired of it. The government is comprised almost entirely of white men. The vast majority of college students are still white. Ceo's and boardrooms are overwhelmingly white; white workers earn more per capita than any other racial or ethnic background in America. We may pay the most taxes, and it's because we have the most money.

There is no systematic bias against white people, or the rich, in America. The system is gamed for our benefit, and anyone who denies it is delusional - at best. Whatever your ideal for class and racial harmony in America, it will never be achieved so long as those who attempt to acheive it are assailed as being anti-white or anti-rich for the simple goal of justice and/or equality.

In my own little corner of the world, I throw down the gauntlet: don't complain about steps taken to insure equality.

Come up with better programs to reach the same goals.

The whining that is the hallmark of (basically) the modern Republican Party is destructive and unproductive, beholden to false tropes of "fairness" that are only fair in the perverted world of their issue. No solutions, just things to get rid of because they threaten entrenched privilege.

That's not governing, that's punishment for the sake of preservation.

Lash:

"Can you believe that racial justice is the goal for people who are of my belief that giving someone 20 points for being black/hispanic, when they only get 12 for their entire sholastic career is just plain wrong, and unconstitutional...


according to policy at the U of M which is the object of the current question the applicant gets 100 points for scholastic career having a GPA at 3.0 or above (as was reported this morning on Tim Russert.

All in all, I would think the best way to advance civilization is to continually raise the bar, and train dilligently that we may coninue to clear that one, then the next higher, and its successor, and so on. I don't see that lowering the bar, whatever the rationale, does much to improve the game.

The way to deal with the problem, to eliminate it, is to expend the effort and resources required to provide real education in primary and secondary schools, not to relax or skew the standards for admission to post-secondary institutions. In the long run, it's our own fault Johnny can't read, and that Tyrone and Juan are further behind than Johnny. Treat the disease, damnit! That's the only way to get the symptoms to go away.



timber

however on the Univ Michigan web site it says they only get 80 points however that is still far different than 12 points

timberlandko: totally agree but as long as we have a local school board/district setting standards as well as funding availabilty there will never be "equal value" education.

Yup, that's The Disease that needs treating. The Education of The Nation is a matter of National Concern, and has become a National Embarrassment. Uniform National Standards (and ambitious ones at that) and equitable collection, allocation, and distribution of the available pertinent resources is the only practical answer ... and this coming from one with great reservations regarding the role of Government in individual life ... but so be it. The right answers sometimes are not the easy answers.

Sacred Cows are duecedly difficult critters to herd, though ....



timber

First, you're giving the percentage of change, I'm giving the difference in the two percentages, so please don't correct me when my numbers are just as valid, if merely less misleading.

Second, your position as I understand it is that you do not consider any improvement in race relations, racism or bigotry to be of value. I'm glad you are being honest, because I think a lot of people share this simplistic and misguided "all or nothing" point of view. It allows you to complain without substance, and without end.

While no one is going to say they are happy if one person is murdered, a decrease in the number of murders per year is something to laud. So, not having an idea how this survey might have come out just a few years ago leaves a gaping hole in what we can conclude from it. I'm not happy if anyone is denied access to employment for any reason other than their abilities, but knowing which way things are trending is far more valuable information than simply knowing that X occurs.

Absolutely ... but that requires assembly. Way too many folks prefer their information prepackaged and ready to play with.



timber

tress wrote:
knowing which way things are trending is far more valuable information than simply knowing that X occurs.

i take it then that the "trending" of the populace away from unilateral war against Iraq is meaningful?

As I've read the posts on this forum, it is clear that no one thinks affirmative action is an ideal solution for eradicating racial discrimination. The difference is that some feel it is wrong for constitutional reasons, for the harm (perceived or not) that it does to the self-image of minorities and for the unfairness experienced by those white students who don't get a placement in a university because of affirmative action. Others feel that it is necessary until racial discrimination is no longer a problem in this country.

Some of the recommendations from those who would do away with affirmative action have included giving help to any student who needs it, giving a placement to every student who graduates at the top ten percent of his or her class, enrollment at a community college or trade school or Lash's suggestions, all of which are excellent.

All of the recommendations have been sensible and reasonable; yet don't address the underlying sickness, which makes them unworkable.

I'm not as well informed politically as most of you, but I do have some experience with a homeless shelter. It is in this segment of society where you will see so many children who have very little chance graduating from high school, if they manage to survive that long, or who go to schools that are borderline, at best.

One little boy, about four years old, whose mother had locked him out of the temporary apartment in which they were living, was asked by the staff if he would like something to eat. When he said yes, he was told to just help himself. He immediately went to the garbage can to search for food. I don't know if he was white or black, the staff member who told me about it didn't mention his race, just that he had lived most of his young life on the streets. How on earth will this child, and so many like him, have the luxury of trying to decide which college he would like to attend?

Unless the well-entrenched problems at this level are addressed and funded reliably, year to year, nothing will really change. All the well-meaning programs such as affirmative action are little more than bandages trying to staunch a hemmorage, while there is so much obscene disparity in the availability of quality education, medical help, job training day care and housing.

Yes, of course parents should read to their children, should make sure their children do their homework, should be active in the schools, meeting with their children's teachers to make sure they are doing well and on and on. That is only possible if the child has a parent, never mind two, who is capable of performing all those everyday tasks.

All I see right now is a desperate attempt by a few poorly funded organizations to run fast enough to at least not lose ground.

Some of the responses present the same old theme. That the reason that the blacks and Hispanics are unable to compete is the poor education they receive in the NY City schools. To this my rebuttal is look at what the oriental students are able to achieve going to the same schools. They contumely garner a good part of the honors in math and science. There was a listing of the science award winners from NY City schools. I would say at least half of the names were oriental. Why? Is it the schools? No in my opinion the problem is securely in the parents corner that is where it all starts and unfortunately in many instances ends.

Rapsters, pimps, gangbangers, and drug dealers are not social paragons to most Oriental Americans, Au, nor do the Asians have a multi-generational tradition of suckling at the public teat. The problem has deep and twisted roots, I fear.



timber