Why banning Affirmative Action could be bad for Whites (lobby, Hispanics, school)
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'd say this makes a good case for banning affirmative action. Most universities have become leftwing indoctrination centers that regularly churn out blue haired land whales that do nothing but get blazed and whine about how "victimized" they are. Not attending these loony bins will only reduce the number of white liberals.
"If SCOTUS bans affirmative action, universities will find ways to promote BIPOC anyway, so "Maybe White conservatives ... should lobby for fair representation[Whites: 18%]. Where Whites are a minority, such as California, it makes sense for Whites to embrace multiculturalism."
Dude, I say this with the utmost sincerity: Step away from the Robert Stark Kool-Aid. Your post is so nonsensical I read it five times before giving up trying to understand it. I resorted to reading the responses and came to an epiphany: I understood your post, but I can't assimilate the sheer insanity of it. I won't even try to address it's shortcomings. I don't even know where start. Never have so few words yielded such a mass of unintelligible, fantastically irrational, gibberish. Mathguy's response pretty much captures my thoughts on the subject, so I'll leave it at that. Now I have to figure out how to re-wire all the circuits in my brain that you shorted-circuited.
It's legal because it's not racist. Affirmative Action is not for black people or any minority group specifically. They worded it in a way that it was always meant to be not actually help black people exclusively, it was ALWAYS for everybody.
Funny enough, if you banned AA one of the biggest groups hurt by the ban would be white women.
Anybody still running around believing Affirmative Action is specifically for black people has been wrong for decades. This is one of the ways the right misleads is uneducated constituents. They tell you that stuff like "blacks are stealing a job and your spot at a college because of affirmative action" and then you have white people foaming at the mouth at something that's actually helping them.
Interesting. Do you apply this same logic to the alleged voter suppression tactics Dems accuse Repubs of using? For example: Requiring an ID to vote doesn't specify only POCs need to do so, therefore it's not racist? Is that your belief? Looking for some consistency here.
It's legal because it's not racist. Affirmative Action is not for black people or any minority group specifically. They worded it in a way that it was always meant to be not actually help black people exclusively, it was ALWAYS for everybody.
Funny enough, if you banned AA one of the biggest groups hurt by the ban would be white women.
Anybody still running around believing Affirmative Action is specifically for black people has been wrong for decades. This is one of the ways the right misleads is uneducated constituents. They tell you that stuff like "blacks are stealing a job and your spot at a college because of affirmative action" and then you have white people foaming at the mouth at something that's actually helping them.
"If SCOTUS bans affirmative action, universities will find ways to promote BIPOC anyway, so "Maybe White conservatives ... should lobby for fair representation[Whites: 18%]. Where Whites are a minority, such as California, it makes sense for Whites to embrace multiculturalism."
Maybe we should just close about 95% of the communist indoctrination centers they call universities. That would take care of The New God Diversity.
Does anyone ever wonder where Excellence has gone? You NEVER hear excellence mentioned. Perhaps the concept is too complicated for people whose main skill seems to be counting to 100.
It's legal because it's not racist. Affirmative Action is not for black people or any minority group specifically. They worded it in a way that it was always meant to be not actually help black people exclusively, it was ALWAYS for everybody.
Funny enough, if you banned AA one of the biggest groups hurt by the ban would be white women.
Anybody still running around believing Affirmative Action is specifically for black people has been wrong for decades. This is one of the ways the right misleads is uneducated constituents. They tell you that stuff like "blacks are stealing a job and your spot at a college because of affirmative action" and then you have white people foaming at the mouth at something that's actually helping them.
QUOTE: A 1978 decision by the Supreme Court, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750, commonly referred to as Bakke, held that. although the university unlawfully discriminated against a white applicant by denying him admission to its medical school solely on the basis of his race, the university may consider the race of an applicant in its admission procedure in order to attain ethnic diversity in its student body.
"If SCOTUS bans affirmative action, universities will find ways to promote BIPOC anyway, so "Maybe White conservatives ... should lobby for fair representation[Whites: 18%]. Where Whites are a minority, such as California, it makes sense for Whites to embrace multiculturalism."
This may be a case of lies, lies and d**** statistics.
The 5% differential can possibly be explained by a greater probability of going to out of state universities or private colleges. It's not that much of a difference so it's worthwhile looking at other factors that may have a role. And if you look at that chart, the gap was even bigger in the past, when AA was practiced (10% average).
I have followed the ongoing Harvard lawsuit and the data used by the defendants have showed minimal change to white enrollment if AA was banned at Harvard, but a much larger Asian American enrollment while black and Hispanic enrollment fell.
Based on recent SCOTUS ruling it is quite likely they will overturn previous SCOTUS defenses for AA and even rule it unconstitutional. I don't doubt that institutions will try to find ways around it, but the difference is that this time the institutions are open to lawsuits if it can be showed they applied different standards based on race. Which is that they do. And admitted to it. And all the data is there.
All it takes is one angry Asian-American applicant who is rejected for the whole house of cards to come tumbling down. It would be much harder to hide the tracks if the institutions tried to bypass AA being declared unconstitutional.
They've increased their diversity quotas significantly, and found are still using race as a factor. Its actually gotten much worse.
Affirmative Action is illegal in California public universities as of 1996. Perhaps you are referring to private universities, or another state which doesn't have a ban.
The article has a graph that shows that White enrollment in California declined after affirmative action was banned. It did not help Whites.
lol were not there a story about blacks complaining how whites are putting on applications one or more races for indetification
Last edited by CaseyB; 08-27-2022 at 04:32 AM..
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.
