Affirmative Action? For/Against?

[Kidnemo]

Originally posted by ShineAqua
Wow you're fucking clever

This is as far as I read into your post...but thats all I needed to read.

It was obviously directed at me and I will not read anything you wrote after that.

I appreciate the compliment.

And yea, it's juvenile, but I honestly don't feel I can have a conversation about this topic with Shine...and with that:

*poof*

[Tyler_Durden]

Originally posted by Brisco Bold
We aren't at that stage yet where everyone is at the same starting point. Until that times comes, the balance has to curved in the opposite way that has been for the past couple of decades.

People tried communism already - and it failed, buddy.

[spacecowboy]

Originally posted by Stone
Well, I didn't expect anything from you before this thread - however, you're rapidly tanking whatever respect for you I might've had.

People voting for Bush knew he would work to limit racist Affirmative Action - who needs to protest when you voted for the right, winning Presidential candidate? Keep voting for Republicans, and maybe you'll see the law changed.

Stone, I don't think your respect is worth much to anyone anyways. People voting for Bush can't seem to graps the fact that he was the wrong, losing candidate. He stole that election plan and simple. He's done after this.

SC

PS Kidnemo, Shine's comment was made to Stone, not you. He addresses you later on in the post.

[Stone]

Enjoy the dream - if the tax cut resembles anything like its initial form, we should be riding an upwards-charging economy by next year's election. We'll continue to be in the midst of the fight against terrorism. Not to be overly cocky, but what do you think will happen if we get to work on Iran in October 2004?

And, the only candidate the Democrats could put up against Bush with a chance of winning - Lieberman, has little or no chance of making it through the primaries.

The Dems had two shots at winning the election:

1.) Iraq turning into a "quagmire".
2.) The tax cut getting keelhauled.

Neither will happen. Bush is going to throw down next year - the Democratic candidate hasn't a chance in fucking hell.

The "stole the election" stuff is sad, dumb, tired, and the far left still hasn't come to grips with the fact that NO ONE CARES ANYMORE.

[Schlep]

Originally posted by Rusty Jake
67.31% of you don't have a damn clue about what you're talking about. Really.

Already trying to make friends with only 1 post...

A lot of you didn't seem to read the article Kaneda posted, here it is again, and what Kaneda said afterwards. Try reading it this time. Notice that the policy helps poor whites too, which it undoubtedly should. And until you get just worked up and self-righteous and try to do something about the extra points awarded for other characteristics, STFU.

I did read your racist article, so don't go making accusations. The article portrays two completely opposite groups of people and calls it the status quo. As if every black person in the US is named Bubba and gone shrimpin while every white guy in the US is from Old Money that Grandpa Hubert made from his plantation.

It paints it as if no white people, throughout the whole history of the US have ever suffered in any way shape or form that could possibly earn them any sympathy. Tell that to the Irish and the Italians. Tell that to the old workers of the meat packing plants in Chicago. Tell that to my family who worked their butts off every day for decades to be able to make it as small farmers in a country that's all but forgotten the farmers.

I don't need some dumbass sitting there telling me that me or my family have never suffered. And that, in the end, is what's wrong with affirmative action. It has nothing to do with what someone's been through, the trials and tribulations they've delt with personally in their lives, it's only about politics and 'making everyone equal' even though it hardly does that. Take your article and shove it.

[Rusty Jake]

I am still going to stand by that article 100%. But I do want to clear something up.

I don't see where the article says whites aren't fucked over. Of course there are millions of fucked over whites in this country. That's an absolute fact. In the case of U of M, (and I believe many other Universities) their affirmative action policy takes that into account, and I am favor of it. I mean we live in a society where Alan Greenspan worries if unemployment goes too low. There are poor people of all colors and ethnicities getting kicked in the ass everyday in this country. But another absolute fact is that people of color disproportionately get the short end of the stick, in every institution in this country, compared to whites as a whole. I say that without denying anybody's suffering.

What gets me so riled up about this is that a lot of whites tend to get angry at people of color, and not top 10% of this country. It's not people of color that our taking our jobs, it's the heads of corporations that move those jobs overseas. It's not people of color who are taking our place in college, it's the rich kids who get in on legacy and alumni BS.

I'll say it again, there are poor and working class people of all colors in this country. Why haven't we seen a multiracial movement of poor and working class people in this country to solve our common problems?

I feel it's because the top 10% has got us distracted at these AA myths.

[bloodyarts]

I'm for it.

I think it does more good than bad. And it seems to me that most of the people bitching about it have not been effected by it in any way, shape or form, nor do they know anybody who has. People act like it's some widespread, out of control disease that will bring about the end of the white race.

A scary thought comtemplating life on the other side of the fence, huh?

Does that make it right? Maybe not, but the people that are getting by because of affirmative action are achievers in their own right, and deserve a shot. What's more, if they didn't maintain the standards necessary for STAYING in the college that gave them the preferential treatment, they would flunk out just like any other loser. Those who do well under AA only serve as proof that the chance they got was well-deserved, and that test scores don't really paint the best picture of the candidate.

And again, affirmative action isn't just for Blacks. Why everyone seems to think that the Black race is somehow exclusively benefitting from this is beyond me. From my point of view, it's Asians and Indians who are benefitting the most from this plan.

This is part of the reason racism is perpetuated, and why Whites are firmly against. Affirmative action is turned into a black and white issue, when in reality, it's not.

[rant]Don't worry. Before long, AA will be abolished, and Black people (just Blacks, not other nationalities) will lose the right to vote (as if their vote ever really mattered). And all will be right with the world again.[/rant]

[Stone]

Originally posted by bloodyarts

And again, affirmative action isn't just for Blacks. Why everyone seems to think that the Black race is somehow exclusively benefitting from this is beyond me. From my point of view, it's Asians and Indians who are benefitting the most from this plan.

I'm pretty sure the U of M plan only covers Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians - not Asians or Indians. In fact, I'm pretty sure its harder for Asians to get into a lot of California schools than it is whites - Asians are "overrepresented" in proportions greater than whites, there. Being an Asian definitely doesn't help you where I go to school, either.

And, remember, beneath that Asian umbrella lies everyone from the ultrarich guy from HK who sends his kid to school with an X5 and a Centurion Card to a single-mom Vietnamese immigrant who runs a chinese take-out place in a Nebraska suburb. Both overrepresented. Go Affirmative Action!

[Schlep]

Originally posted by Rusty Jake
I don't see where the article says whites aren't fucked over.

Yet few whites have ever thought of our position as resulting from racial preferences. Indeed, we pride ourselves on our hard work and ambition, as if somehow we invented the concepts.

As if we have worked harder than the folks who were forced to pick cotton and build levies for free; harder than the Latino immigrants who spend 10 hours a day in fields picking strawberries or tomatoes; harder than the (mostly) women of color who clean hotel rooms or change bedpans in hospitals, or the (mostly) men of color who collect our garbage.

Of course there are millions of fucked over whites in this country. That's an absolute fact. In the case of U of M, (and I believe many other Universities) their affirmative action policy takes that into account, and I am favor of it.

Where? The one stretch that may fit is the points for living in the rural communities, but even that only benefits farmers and people living in small towns. What about the white guy that grows up in the worst part of Detroit attending one of the worst schools in the state? Where's his break? He has it just as bad as his black and latino classmates, but because he's white, he's instantly 'had it better' than his classmates.

I mean we live in a society where Alan Greenspan worries if unemployment goes too low. There are poor people of all colors and ethnicities getting kicked in the ass everyday in this country.

Exactly.

But another absolute fact is that people of color disproportionately get the short end of the stick, in every institution in this country, compared to whites as a whole. I say that without denying anybody's suffering.

So in order to rectify one problem, we institute another? What kind of policy is that for the most powerful nation on the planet? Tell me anything...tell me that the schools will hire more admissions people to go over each application individually. Tell me that there'll be more opportunity on the applications to explain the hardships you've endured and why you deserve this chance more than the guy next to you. Tell me that we're going to start inner city outreach programs from the schools to help kids make a good fight towards getting into college. But don't tell me that we're just going to give people who aren't white a better chance at getting into the school, because "Statistically speaking..." That's crap.

At the very least, go strictly by GPA and SAT/ACT scores, nothing else, and then let the essay be the deciding factor after that.

The thing that gets me so riled up about this is that the vast majority of us whites tend to think people of color are the problem, and they're stealing our college admissions and jobs, in doing so we effectively align ourselves with the interests of the top 10 richest % of this country. And it's that top 10% that is fucking us over, not people of color. If we want to better our lot, I believe we need to ally with other poor and working class people of color.

And what angers me about the other side, is their crusade against "The Man." Guess what, the man pays your mom and dad. The man pays taxes to the city that go towards the schools. The man donates old computers and other hardware to make school better. Does he do this out of the kindness of his heart? Most of the time, probably not, but in the end he does do it. More importantly, what bothers me is that this argument always turns into "poor little Bubba" versus "rich, powerful Muffy," which is almost never the case.

"At Harvard, alumni children are twice as likely to be admitted as Latino or black student. The class of 1992 at that instituion included two hundred marginally qualified applicants who gained admission because their parents attended Harvard, a number greater than the combined total of black, Chicano, Native American, and Puerto Rican members of the class."

Harvard's also how many thousands of dollars per semester? How many white kids do you think even apply? Everyone would love to go to Oxford, but it's out of the reach of about 98% of us. The other 2% are either really rich or smart beyond belief. That's just the way it goes sometimes.

[Stone]

Actually, at schools like Harvard, you don't have to be wealthy to get in (or to pay for it) - the experience is actually hardest on families with incomes in the $50k-$80k range. Everyone gets "full" financial aid (same thing where I go), so the school decides how much you can pay, and then gives you the rest in the form of grants and loans. If your parents don't make much money, then the school basically covers everything, and you just have to figure out how to survive on $200 of extra money a semester. If you're rich, you're paying $35k a semester, but who cares.

However, if you're middle class, the school tends to overestimate a bit as far as your ability to pay goes - they'll tell these families that make okay amounts of money but have sizable debt that they can cover $10k a year in college costs. Fairly difficult to do, and it seems unfair.