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.
"...the Supreme Court ruled in the Michigan Schuette vs. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action that state electorates may restrict the use of affirmative action programs in university and college admissions and at other public institutions. In doing so, the Court weakened an importaant part of our nation’s social justice umbrella, which includes, among other things, the right to equal education, non-discriminatory employment and compensation, and equal access to housing."
All dismantling affirmative action will do, is make white people more racist because the united states will have a higher # of segregated towns and schools. It will literally reverse everything, equality wise, that the US has made as a nation since 1964. We can get rid of Affirmative action when generation X and prior die out, because that was the last generation to grow up in segregated schools, more or less, I know some/few baby boomers of course went to integrated schools.
That makes sense. Perhaps that generation should did out first.
"...the Supreme Court ruled in the Michigan Schuette vs. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action that state electorates may restrict the use of affirmative action programs in university and college admissions and at other public institutions. In doing so, the Court weakened an importaant part of our nation’s social justice umbrella, which includes, among other things, the right to equal education, non-discriminatory employment and compensation, and equal access to housing."
All dismantling affirmative action will do, is make white people more racist because the united states will have a higher # of segregated towns and schools. It will literally reverse everything, equality wise, that the US has made as a nation since 1964. We can get rid of Affirmative action when generation X and prior die out, because that was the last generation to grow up in segregated schools, more or less, I know some/few baby boomers of course went to integrated schools.
How is meritocracies "Racist". It is the complete opposite. In a strict meritocracy there is no need to even look at race, only accomplishment.
How is meritocracies "Racist". It is the complete opposite. In a strict meritocracy there is no need to even look at race, only accomplishment.
Looks like another race baiter in the house.
Social Justice, is code word for I'm taking your civil rights, to give others more civil rights than you.
Government has created a tribal mentality by separating us, from the melting pot.
They have create enemies against one another, to create more legislation to solve what they themselves created. More and more freedom & liberty taken for the government to tell us how it will be done, when it will be done and what to use when doing it.
The progressives want stricter gun laws, affirmative action, more integrated schools socioeconomically, and more things because essentially this will lead to we as citizens to be able to live freer lives without a consistent police state regulating guns or reaffirming 1970's neighborhood segregation borders...
Schools could still throw out based on races based upon names if they really wanted to. You want to throw them out to? Remember Reyes while being translated to English is King(s) it would show the applicant is Hispanic versus being of English descent.
Also try geting a job with institutionalized racism and forget about it unless they work specifically for their race and/or nationality outside of a true melting pot area.
Quick, which one is the black guy and which one is the white guy:
This is actually the opposite of the truth. If you compare the republican run territories you will notice that they have higher instances of incarceration, and incarceration is made about by strict laws. The progressives want stricter gun laws, affirmative action, more integrated schools socioeconomically, and more things because essentially this will lead to we as citizens to be able to live freer lives without a consistent police state regulating guns or reaffirming 1970's neighborhood segregation borders...If you think of a large picture, instead of specific instances the truth will reveal itself to you...
How/why did you negate yourself within the space of one sentence?
Go back and check the definitions of progressives and conservatives.
One thing I have never understood about college admissions is that one solution was to simply expand the college to admit more students. You could then admit the students you normally would plus anyone else you wanted for whatever reason AND collect more tuition. In most colleges I've been to (the CC being the exception) most rooms were empty most of the time. Hire some adjunct professors to fill them. Let in your normal student body and then let in your enriching student body that doesn't make the grade. That way no one is pushed out by someone else.
However, given that schools didn't do this, affirmative action for college admission is the one area where it was needed more than any other because colleges look at things like whether your parents are college graduates, the school you graduated from and your zip code when deciding who gets in (logical because success begets success). If you have a group that has been held down by society their kids won't have successful parents, have graduated from the right school or have the right zip code. All other things being equal the child who has educated parents, graduated from a good school and has the right zip code gets in without affirmative action but it may still be time to end affirmative action since two generations have had the benefit of affirmative action which should create a situation where more minorities have educated parents, live in better zip codes and go to better schools.
One thing I have never understood about college admissions is that one solution was to simply expand the college to admit more students. You could then admit the students you normally would plus anyone else you wanted for whatever reason AND collect more tuition. In most colleges I've been to (the CC being the exception) most rooms were empty most of the time. Hire some adjunct professors to fill them. Let in your normal student body and then let in your enriching student body that doesn't make the grade. That way no one is pushed out by someone else.
Top colleges figure that the most valuable thing they have is their status as attractive schools that are tough to enter. If Harvard followed your advice it it could probably expand to 5 times its current size, but it would soon lose its reputation as the top university in the world and its ability to attract the best and brightest (and richest). And it's hard to argue with that as a strategy. By remaining relatively small and highly exclusive, Harvard has maintained its top position for generations and built up an endowment of $30 billion.
Top colleges figure that the most valuable thing they have is their status as attractive schools that are tough to enter. If Harvard followed your advice it it could probably expand to 5 times its current size, but it would soon lose its reputation as the top university in the world and its ability to attract the best and brightest (and richest). And it's hard to argue with that as a strategy. By remaining relatively small and highly exclusive, Harvard has maintained its top position for generations and built up an endowment of $30 billion.
I'm not saying expand to let everyone in. I'm saying expand to get the diversity you want. If you have 2000 students on campus and want 10% minorities, increase your enrollment to 2220. Admit the students you normally would plus 10% more and the 10% more are minorities. You'd still want to maintain exclusivity and still would. You'd just be making room to ADD the minorities you want so that you're not excluding anyone who would have gotten in without affirmative action.
Giving preference to minorities in any way reduces your exclusivity. I'm saying don't make it harder for non minorities to get in to accommodate letting in more minorities.
I'm not saying expand to let everyone in. I'm saying expand to get the diversity you want. If you have 2000 students on campus and want 10% minorities, increase your enrollment to 2220. Admit the students you normally would plus 10% more and the 10% more are minorities.
This is basically what they already do.
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.
