As many of you may know, Barak Obama graduated Harvard Law School Magna Cum Lauda. As a child living on food stamps in his early ages, he showed great promise.Because of the poor area he grew up in, and his family circumstances, there would have been no way he could have gone to Harvard without affirmative action (albeit he did attend a prep school). But this is not a bashing of Obama nor affirmattive action, merely a comment on the past. It worked, he is now president. Furthermore, it should be eradicated now because it has come full circle, a man who 50 years ago would have been segregated now has great power, he is the quintential maverick.
Now that we know it worked, the program should be disabled. Although they are exceptions, some minorities hide behind affirmative action. It is a fact that an African-American in a poor area has a much better chance of going to an Ivy-League University with financial aide and scholorships than a white person in an affluent suburb, even thought the latter probabaly went to a better school.
This is my opinion, what do you think? I have yet to hear any compelling arguements for affirmative action that do not have something to do with segregation, newsflash: the students benefiting from the program never experienced it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Umm...I don't think Obama lived in a "poor area." He attended a famous prep school with scholarships in Hawaii and worked his way to universities like Columbia and Harvard. Even if he was aided by affirmative action (which I highly doubt), getting summa cum laude is no easy task. I have more to say about this, but I'm speechless right now. 0_o
Oops. Not summa cum laude, but magna cum laude. However, my point still remains.
I do agree that racial affirmative action is no longer a good policy. I believe that if any positive discrimination should take place it should be for socio-economic factors. A poor white should have just as much help getting into a choice school as any black person would.
While I may be slightly biased as a white person from an affluent area applying to college, I still think that anything solely based on race is simply racist.
How can you know for sure he only got in because of affirmative action? And I thought Obama did not grow up in a poor, unprivileged lifestyle for the majority of his childhood. He even attended a prestigious private school. He may have gotten scholarships solely due to his academic record. Though I do agree that affirmative action should be eradicated and people should be valued merely on their skills, while completely disregarding race.
I dont. I thought I said I am sure he had more than enough merit, I am merely saying that affirmative action was definitely a factor.
Whether or not Obama got into Harvard only due to affirmative action is debatable, though no one can deny that it did not benefit Obama. Affirmative action used to give many bright but disenfranchised minorities opportunities in college, but it is a sad fact that now many students, who may be undeserving of their aid from affirmative action, are being chosen by colleges over more qualified students. While this probably wasn't the case with Obama, it is a problem that schools aren't addressing well. They can say it's to promote ethnic diversity in their school campuses, but I personally don't think a student of a generally unprivileged minority standing should get into Harvard over another student if he performs worse in all aspects.
Here's the thing. You all make good points, but I think that it is entirely possible that a poor black student with lower, scores and grades may be more deserving to go to Harvard than a white student from an affluent area with higher scores and grades. SAT prep courses, ACT/SAT prep books, internet access at home, tutoring, parents who were lucky enough to attend college. All of things cost money, and they are not neccessarily available to disadvataged minorities. If a minority student had access to all of those things that wealth and affluence provide, then it is more than just possible, but highly probable that student would be on par with the white student who did have access to those things. So looking at grades and test scores, both of which can be improved if there is access to proper resourses, cannot be the only measure of worthiness to admittance into Harvard or any of the other Ivy League schools. I'm not saying that these schools should automaically let minorities in, or set quotas for the number of minority students they admit. However, I do think that minority students need to be looked at from a different perspective and we have absolutly no right to say that you cannot completly diregard race in college admittance.
It's pretty much this simple:
Two wrongs don't make a right.
If you support affirmative action you are racist by definition.
Also, race is an arbitrary, human created distinction. People should not be defined by their race.
I'll post this quote again:
"I have a dream that my four little 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."
Well...I agree with "Ballin4life803"
if racism is "the belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability" or "Discrimination or prejudice based on race." then isn't affirmative action essentially slightly racist towards non-minorities? I don't think affirmative action is the future that Mr. King wanted. Affirmative Action doesn't promote equality as much these days as it did when it was first put into action. Maybe it is still good policy in some parts of the nation but as a whole I don't think affirmative action should be kept in our nation.
Like Scott said, any discrimination that happens should be based a little more on economic factors. A wealthy black and a wealthy white should have the same chance of getting into schools while a hard working student from a poorer family should probably be given more consideration for schools/scholarships.
Then again, maybe we shouldn't discriminate at all.
But then again (again), maybe we're all being to idealistic and naive. Maybe Racism or discrimination runs deep within our society and is not as rare as we think it is.
But whatever. Overall, I think the student with better performance should be given more consideration. In my opinion, the only times schools should consider these other factors would be when two students are equal in test scores/grades/academics and they need something to act as a tiebreaker.
I think that affirmative action is a good thing. Therefore I am automatically labeled as a racist? Great. Now that's not discrimination.
How can I be a racist when I believe in equality? When we are giving more opportunity to people who have been lucky enough to attend good schools and diminishing the dreams of people who may not have been as fortunate. How are we to blame a person who may have gotten B's while also supporting their family by working everyday after school? Should we tell them that they can't go to a better school where maybe under different circumstances they could have achieved more? I think that affirmative action makes a school more diverse. How are we supposed to get a broad experience from a school that is filled with people who have all had the same opportunities? When you combine those people with others who have experienced different things then a school has diversity in ideas, and that is what is important.
Now don't get me wrong, if a school is using affirmative action based solely on race then I think that is unfair. But I do believe in equality and I will gladly give up my spot at some college to a person who has worked harder than me, even if they have a lower GPA and test scores. So don’t quote Martin Luther King Jr. and call me a racist when the person who is judging and discriminating is you.
If they went through so much hardship they can write a college essay about it. If you support affirmative action you support discriminating against some races. How can you claim you believe in equality?
You claim affirmative action is necessary to have diversity in schools. Are you saying a diverse group of people could not get in to these schools without affirmative action? Regardless, people are NOT defined by their race, they are defined by their actions - the content of their character (thanks Batman and MLK).
The irony is unbelievable. You say that I am racist (with absolutely no evidence or argument), and say I should not quote MLK (despite the pertinence of the quote). Meanwhile you support discrimination. Does it matter who the discrimination is against? I say that we should treat all "races" equally. In fact I deny the existence of race. The only thing "race" indicates is the color of your skin, and people should not be judged based on that.
I would have to strongly disagree with Baiilin4life. affirmative action is not racism. Affirmative action does not only factor in race but in many cases monetary issues as well. Do you disagree that it is much more impressive for a poor child growing up with a single parent in a neighborhood greatly effected by gang violence to get a 4.0 than the rich suburban white kid who has had most of everything handed to him on a platter? Doesn't it make sense that the poor African American kid should in fact gain admission because he has had to surmount greater challenges? Even as a suburban white kid who would most definitely not benefit from affirmative action i see its benefits and the justice in it. The argument that it is "reverse racism" is unfounded because in most cases once socio economic issues are factored in the person benefiting from affirmative action does deserve such a reward. As someone who has been able to view how applicants for medical school are chosen, I have been able to see first hand that race is not an issue as much as the challenges that the candidate for admission has faced in their life. In all honesty Ballin4life suggesting that supporting the practice of admitting disadvantaged applicants is racism is bordering on ignorance and not respecting the nuances that exist in the world. Affirmative action supports equality and the facts are that many affirmative action programs do not only base their decisions on race.
Despite Bryan and Emily's arguments that it provides equality, affirmative action in its present form does not do that. I agree that taking into context all socio-economic factors is the way to award things like college admissions. But, this is done anyways, with colleges not using race as a significant factor. This is the correct thing to do.
What I think is another concern, however, is affirmative action in the work place. Presumably, job applicants must have professional qualifications in order to even apply for the job. In cases such as these, I don't think that an applicant's background is relevant unless it would affect how he or she would do their job. The best applicant should always be chosen. The same goes for contracts. Minority contractors should not get preferential treatment because of a "minority" status from the government. If they don't offer competitive products, they should not be given the contract.
There also seems to be a profound disagreement as to the definition of affirmative action for the purpose of this debate. For me personally, if is just racially based, it is unethical and racist. If it is based off of all socioeconomic conditions, it is justified, at least for instances like school admission.
I'm obviously talking about the racial element of affirmative action. You can't justify racism by saying "oh we take into account other factors too..." It's still racism. Not "reverse racism", racism.
Furthermore, as I said before, a child who had to go through such hardship should tell his story in his college essays. It should not be assumed that all people of a certain race or even all poor people went through the same problems.
Please keep accusing me of being ignorant or racist or whatever, even when you support race based policies. You're just making yourself look bad.
I'm quite torn on my feelings when it comes to affirmative action, but I fail to see how Max's argument makes any sense. Because we have proof that a program works we should now get rid of it? That's like saying: "I studied for this vocab quiz and it worked, I got an A. So now I know that studying helps, I'm going to stop studying..." What?
I am sorry that you are feeling attacked Ballin4Life. I never called you racist and you’re not ignorant. I agree with you on your points of race and I respect you for those views. However, I disagree on your view that affirmative action is racist and that everyone who supports it is racists.
Sticking to the issue, obviously we have different views on what affirmative action is. I believe that socio economic affirmative action benefits those who may not have gotten as high of test scores and GPAs because they didn't have all the resources and support systems that more affluent students have. As for writing about it, that a good idea but these essays can hardly compare to the ones of kids who had theirs read over by well trained counselors and professionals. I am simply saying that with this extra consideration a person who has struggled might have a better shot at getting a higher education.
I agree with you Scott when you argued that affirmative action is unfair in the work place. Because Ballin4Life and I have already determined that race doesn't exist, and therefore gender shouldn't exist, and there are no socio-economic factors then there is no reason for affirmative action in the work place.
Just so we all agree.
Preferential selection affirmative action = bad.
But do you agree with socio-economic affirmative action?
Post a Comment