Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll say it. Asians are much smarter in math than many other races. Might be genetics, might be family, I don't know. But they sure don't cry victims at every chance they get.
I'll say it. Asians are much smarter in math than many other races. Might be genetics, might be family, I don't know. But they sure don't cry victims at every chance they get.
What reason would they if white people deem them the "model minority" and leaves them to their own devices?
AA addresses two things. One of them is to trying to equal the playing field.
You have to look at it like this, white america had an over 100 year head start as far as wealth and education is concerned, and as you know those whose parents are well educated tend to have children who are as well. With education usually comes some degree of wealth/power as well. Look at any of the wealthiest old familles in this country and you will see that they have generations of of educated people from prestigous universities that were off limits to blacks until this century. This is were your legacy scholarships and grants come from.
You say, well, it's okay to have racial discrimination to even out average differences in capital accumulation split by ethnic groups - cause you really want that omelette and are willing to break a few eggs. Then it's a lot harder to argue against other people doing the same thing - like, say, a local co-op board wants to blackball black applicants to preserve property values. They really want that omelette, but frankly only those of us unlike you who are against racial discrimination universally are going to be listened to when responding to that sort of thing.
Quote:
Secondly, it provides diversity which in my opinion provides exposure to others that normally some white and black students would never encounter in their lifetimes. This can foster an understanding and knowledge that may over the long run can stem the spread of racism.
If you think giving a huge chunk of the academic elite - which will overlap with the professional and business elite to a significant extent given a few decades lag time - a chip on their shoulder about their personal experience with reverse racism and casting doubt on the academic credentials of underrepresented minorities is helpful I want some of what you're smoking.
You say, well, it's okay to have racial discrimination to even out average differences in capital accumulation split by ethnic groups - cause you really want that omelette and are willing to break a few eggs. Then it's a lot harder to argue against other people doing the same thing - like, say, a local co-op board wants to blackball black applicants to preserve property values. They really want that omelette, but frankly only those of us unlike you who are against racial discrimination universally are going to be listened to when responding to that sort of thing.
Please show where I said anything about it being "ok" to have racial discrimination? I was explaining the possible purpose of having AA in the first place. Denying anyone a place to live based on their race under the "lowering of property tax" is crap and I hope that you are smart enough to realize that. So what you are saying is that a white man with no job and is on welfare would not lower property taxes compared to a black man making six figures?
If you think giving a huge chunk of the academic elite - which will overlap with the professional and business elite to a significant extent given a few decades lag time - a chip on their shoulder about their personal experience with reverse racism and casting doubt on the academic credentials of underrepresented minorities is helpful I want some of what you're smoking.
Please read what I wrote carefully. If blacks and whites were able to obain wewalth and education at the same amount of time, there would not be as large income disparities between the two groups. how do you get "reverse discrimination" which by definition is non-existant and is the figment of a bitter white man, sinse there is either racism or there is not. Read: the opposite of racism is no racism
Question, why would a white graduate of Harvard resent a black Harvard graduate? The person that would actually believe such nonsense is someone who did not attend and graduate from Harvard (and proably from any other college either)
Please show where I said anything about it being "ok" to have racial discrimination? I was explaining the possible purpose of having AA in the first place.
If you don't support affirmative action and were simply explaining the thought process of other people who do, then I apologize for accusing you of supporting racial discrimination.
Quote:
Denying anyone a place to live based on their race under the "lowering of property tax" is crap and I hope that you are smart enough to realize that. So what you are saying is that a white man with no job and is on welfare would not lower property taxes compared to a black man making six figures?
I'm not defending residential discrimination - the opposite in fact, I'm illustrating it as an example of one of the problems a person immediately becomes voiceless and ineffective in opposing once they are seen as advocating racial discrimination to suit their own means and goals. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but I am saying that someone considering doing that would listen to me - not necessarily change their decision, but listen and give it some serious thought - if I tried to persuade them otherwise, but if someone who they had heard (or thought they had heard, see above) defending racism when it benefited them tried to talk to them about it they would just mentally shut down.
Quote:
Please read what I wrote carefully. If blacks and whites were able to obain wewalth and education at the same amount of time, there would not be as large income disparities between the two groups. how do you get "reverse discrimination" which by definition is non-existant and is the figment of a bitter white man, sinse there is either racism or there is not. Read: the opposite of racism is no racism
Yeah the phrase "reverse-racism" or "reverse discrimination" or whatever is kind of dumb, unnecessary, and linguistically fraught - racism is racism and calling racism against white and sometime Asian people something different adds no value whatsoever - but it's common usage and sometimes it's simpler to just go with the colloquial language rather than to fight it.
Quote:
Question, why would a white graduate of Harvard resent a black Harvard graduate? The person that would actually believe such nonsense is someone who did not attend and graduate from Harvard (and proably from any other college either)
No one (well, let's go with almost no one, there are probably a handful of counterexamples floating around somewhere) from Harvard or similar institutions resents fellow graduates just for the color of their skin. They do however resent people who are there and clearly don't belong (who wouldn't have gotten in on merit and don't cut it while there - with exceptions made for people who fit this description but are socially active enough with students who don't that they're well liked as individuals despite it) - and after four years studying and socializing with the same people, it's pretty well known which of the affirmative action eligibles and athletes belong (many of them do) and which don't (ditto).
Same thing occurs on the high school level as well. The dude who everyone knew would have gotten in (not at Harvard per se, but somewhere equivalent) regardless of race, everyone congratulated him and was legitimately happy for him. The girl who clearly wouldn't have made it to any Ivy without the lift and got into Harvard? I wouldn't put some of the things that were widely spoken at the time into writing.
If you don't support affirmative action and were simply explaining the thought process of other people who do, then I apologize for accusing you of supporting racial discrimination.
It really should not be you are "for or against" it but rather when and where it should be applied. This is something that neither sides has considered. For instance, places like Atlanta and Washington D.C proably would not need AA as much, but there are places that given the opportunity would never hire anyone that does not look like them. I guess that would be fine with you?
I'm not defending residential discrimination - the opposite in fact, I'm illustrating it as an example of one of the problems a person immediately becomes voiceless and ineffective in opposing once they are seen as advocating racial discrimination to suit their own means and goals. I'm not saying two wrongs make a right, but I am saying that someone considering doing that would listen to me - not necessarily change their decision, but listen and give it some serious thought - if I tried to persuade them otherwise, but if someone who they had heard (or thought they had heard, see above) defending racism when it benefited them tried to talk to them about it they would just mentally shut down.
What are you talking about? Why give an example of blatant discrimination to prove your point when it does the exact oppposite? AA was never designed for unqualified minorities to be picked over more qualified whites. That makes absolutely no sense from the company's perspective. Why would they hire an inferior candidate over a more qualified one in the first place? This was nothing more than a bitter white male who was beaten out by a more qualified person of color and used AA to blame for his own failure to get hired.
Yeah the phrase "reverse-racism" or "reverse discrimination" or whatever is kind of dumb, unnecessary, and linguistically fraught - racism is racism and calling racism against white and sometime Asian people something different adds no value whatsoever - but it's common usage and sometimes it's simpler to just go with the colloquial language rather than to fight it.
How can be racism against a white person if he is responsible for the hiring/firing in a compnay? If the company (or whatever you want to put the block) is owned and operated by a minority and they refuse to hire whites, I can understand that, but since that rarely happens your arguement is largely invalid. In otherwords, you must have to wield some sort of control or power over someone or something else.
No one (well, let's go with almost no one, there are probably a handful of counterexamples floating around somewhere) from Harvard or similar institutions resents fellow graduates just for the color of their skin. They do however resent people who are there and clearly don't belong (who wouldn't have gotten in on merit and don't cut it while there - with exceptions made for people who fit this description but are socially active enough with students who don't that they're well liked as individuals despite it) - and after four years studying and socializing with the same people, it's pretty well known which of the affirmative action eligibles and athletes belong (many of them do) and which don't (ditto).
Like I said before only a fool would believe that anyone who graduates from an Ivy League school can finish without working hard. AA, was only the means to get them in and not complete the course work. As for those who may not care for those who did not get in through AA, there are people who resent those who were accepted through legacy scholarships so what was your point again? You are starting to show your lack of knowledge regarding college because atheletes are there to make the school money and nothing more. So why why would anyone who goes to the school be so concerned on why they should not be there or not? Is this another code word for blacks who should not belong since the majority of atheletic scholarships go to black atheletes.
Same thing occurs on the high school level as well. The dude who everyone knew would have gotten in (not at Harvard per se, but somewhere equivalent) regardless of race, everyone congratulated him and was legitimately happy for him. The girl who clearly wouldn't have made it to any Ivy without the lift and got into Harvard? I wouldn't put some of the things that were widely spoken at the time into writing.
You sound like that whinny girl from Texas who claimed that a black person was accepted over her and that was the reason that she did not get accepted. My arguement to that is they could have easily been bumped by another white student whose grades and activities and achievements were better. It all sounds like a cop out for their own short comings to me.
It is an interesting problem. Merit is an interesting criteria but it does have some problems. At the moment the elite UC schools are at or near 40% asian. Roughly 3 X their demographics percentage in CA.
Is that a good thing? It does not of course indicate that Asians are in fact 40% of the best minds in CA but rather that certainly family and cultural drives tends to get superior academic performance.
Black students are represented well below their demographic share. Non Hispanic whites are about on share though Hispanics take a beating.
Which family & cultural drives are those? Maybe we should encourage low performing groups to follow those drives instead of making excuses for them?
Which family & cultural drives are those? Maybe we should encourage low performing groups to follow those drives instead of making excuses for them?
Might be a great idea. First thing we do is establish a strong family structure. We give all the men good jobs so that they can attract and maintain the mothers. We give them serious support and education to improve them in the role of fathering their children. We provide bonuses to the families and the mothers for maintaining the nuclear family and for the performance of their children.
Do this well and in a couple of generations the problems is solved. Big bill though. All those jobs. The support. Bonuses for performance. Probaby a very good investment...but I doubt it will be made.
Highest usage of prescription drugs, can't function like a normal human being without RX drugs.....check
Pathetic drivings skills, most likely to kill or be killed in an auto accident.......check
Highest number of pedophiles.....check
Most likely to engage in incest......check
More likely to get arrested for DUI......check
Shoot up kindergarten classes......check
Shall I go on?
Well; there ARE about 6 times as many anglo whites as Blacks so there would probably be MORE crimes committed by white people. The REAL test would be how many out of 100 people of each race commit crimes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
