The US Supreme Court has just abolished Affirmative Action in regards to college/university admissions. Do you believe this is right or wrong?

[Foxi4]

You can't repeat an experiment you've already done and expect a different result. Rather you can, but as the saying goes, that would make you insane. I'd say delusional, at the very least.

If you truly believed that, you wouldn’t try to justify using racism to “equalise inequalities” caused by racism. The only thing that uplifts people is being treated equally regardless of their race. Nobody should be judged based on their race - they were born into it. Discriminating based on race is, by definition, racist.

Costco also doesn't have certain locations which provide "VIP" memberships, but exclusively to white people. It's a bad analogy comparing access to higher education to access to bulk mayonnaise, though if the legacy program was only $100 a year then that would go a long way toward toning down its discriminatory aspects.

No schools provide VIP memberships exclusively to white people - *that* is a bad analogy. Colour is not a factor - you’re making it a factor because racial discrimination in school admittance is otherwise indefensible, so you’re trying to shift the conversation. There’s nothing illegal or untoward about giving perks to pre-existing customers in an effort to build brand loyalty - it’s a tried and true marketing strategy.

 

[Xzi]

If you truly believed that, you wouldn’t try to justify using racism to “equalise inequalities” caused by racism. The only thing that uplifts people is being treated equally regardless of their race. Nobody should be judged based on their race - they were born into it. Discriminating based on race is, by definition, racist.

A victim complex does not a victim make. Remarkable white students were not being denied admission with affirmative action in place, but remarkable students of other races and ethnicities were being denied admission before the policy. If there's any preference at all, it should be given to those serious about pursuing their education, rather than nepo babies who go to college exclusively to party for four to six years. The legacy program is affirmative action for people who objectively need it the least.

No schools provide VIP memberships exclusively to white people - *that* is a bad analogy.

My brother in Kirby, If you told me it's illegal in Florida to teach kids that black people exist you know I'd have to take it at face value, at least initially. That's the reality of just how deeply unserious Republicans are when it comes to addressing race-based inequalities in education, past and present. This ruling is all about trying to re-establish old racial dividing lines because the oligarchy perceived we were becoming too united in the common goal of rooting out bribery and corruption, particularly within SCOTUS itself. Parasites never detach from their host easily though, and it's clear there's much work to be done yet.

I'm sure things will work themselves out again eventually, after hundreds of lawsuits from the ACLU and NAACP force them to. It shouldn't have to come to that, of course, and there will still be students who have to suffer the consequences in the meantime, but I suppose cruelty and pettiness are once again core to the politics at play here.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

A victim complex does not a victim make. Remarkable white students were not being denied admission with affirmative action in place, but remarkable students of other races and ethnicities were being denied admission before the policy. If there's any preference at all, it should be given to those serious about pursuing their education, rather than nepo babies who go to college exclusively to party for four to six years. The legacy program is affirmative action for people who objectively need it the least.


My brother in Kirby, If you told me it's illegal in Florida to teach kids that black people exist you know I'd have to take it at face value, at least initially. That's the reality of just how deeply unserious Republicans are when it comes to addressing race-based inequalities in education, past and present. This ruling is all about trying to re-establish old racial dividing lines because the oligarchy perceived we were becoming too united in the common goal of rooting out bribery and corruption, particularly within SCOTUS itself. Parasites never detach from their host easily though, and it's clear there's much work to be done yet.

I'm sure things will work themselves out again eventually, after hundreds of lawsuits from the ACLU and NAACP force them to. It shouldn't have to come to that, of course, and there will still be students who have to suffer the consequences in the meantime, but I suppose cruelty and pettiness are once again core to the politics at play here.

There are no more race-based inequalities. That is the beautiful thing about Affirmative Action being eliminated. Now it's all merit. As it has been, since Jim Crow laws were abolished. This is a good thing. Race should never have mattered, and it hasn't prevented any non-white student from attending any college they wanted to, as long as they had the right test scores.

Excpet if you were Asian. Then you had to work harder than everyone else. Except if you were black, Then you got free bonuses for no reason except for the melanin in your skin.

This is a good thing for America, and one of the last racist laws is finally off the books. Why are you upset about this? None of this ever affected you.

How is the average black student "disadvantaged" because now they have to have the same scores as everyone else to get into college? Why should the NAACP sue, just because bonuses that were never deserved are being rightfully taken away, and the schools will now go off of sheer merit?

 

[Xzi]

There are no more race-based inequalities.

You must realize the only appropriate response to this is rolling my eyes. We're quite possibly further away than we've ever been from eliminating racial inequality in the US, several racist justices appointed by a racist, treasonous president preside over SCOTUS currently.

Now it's all merit

Gee, is that what we're calling crying about your debilitating alcoholism throughout your entire confirmation hearing now? Meritocracy is a four-letter word to Republicans, failing your way to the top is perfectly acceptable as long as your daddy is rich.

Why are you upset about this? None of this ever affected you.

The declining quality of our education system affects us all, in both subtle and obvious ways. There's a profit incentive in keeping Americans stupid, and that's what this all boils down to. Same reason SCOTUS struck down student loan forgiveness.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

You must realize the only appropriate response to this is rolling my eyes. We're quite possibly further away than we've ever been from eliminating racial inequality in the US, several racist justices appointed by a racist president preside over SCOTUS currently.


Gee, is that what we're calling crying about your debilitating alcoholism throughout your entire confirmation hearing now? Meritocracy is a four-letter word to Republicans, failing your way to the top is perfectly acceptable as long as your daddy is rich.


The declining quality of our education system affects us all, in both subtle and obvious ways. There's a profit incentive in keeping people stupid, and that's what this all boils down to.

You are, of course, referring to Justice Sotomayor, who came right out and said that, as a Latina, she would make, and I quote, "Better decisions" than white men.

Or, you could be referring to Justice Brown Jackson, LITERALLY only appointed to fill a quota that the doddering child-sniffer and his handlers promised to fulfill. Those are two of the most recent appointments. One of them doesn't know what a woman is, and she is going to have more power than any President we have until she retires or dies.

She thinks the movie 'It's A Wonderful Life' is steeped in white supremacy, and is herself, a major proponent for CRT. Which is absolutely racist indoctrination. But it aligns with what YOU believe in, so I guess you don't think it's racist.

If keeping people stupid was the goal, I can say that leftist liberal Democrats are fighting as hard as possible to make this a reality. Especially when it comes to caring about MELANIN IN YOUR SKIN.

We do not disagree that race has absolutely no meaning and adds no value to anyone. So, why should someone's race provide them an instant benefit in 2023, when ANYONE can do ANYTHING and there is absolutely no bar to entry to anyone, based on their ethnic background?

Finally, the whole "daddy is rich" thing. You know how more black families might be able to enjoy the benefit of not only inheriting wealth, land and legacy, but also the benefit of being raised with both a mother and a father, both of whom are teaching their children and instilling in them virtues that they will need later in life?

Say it with me. 77%. Unwed. Birthrate.

When they fix this, almost all of this will go away, and there won't be anything left to fight about.

What part of the American government do you trust, to address this issue? It seems like you have a LOT of faith in the government, and you want MORE government control over people. Who in the government do you personally trust right now to make inalterable decisions about YOUR life? Name them. Name who you would place in front of you to speak for you and trust that they had your best interests at heart.

 

[chrisrlink]

Awesome! Racist took a Big L

Andy yet I bet you'll cheer if a law passes saying all white republicans will be only accepted into high learning no matter how competent they truly are

 

[Xzi]

You are, of course, referring to Justice Sotomayor, who came right out and said that, as a Latina, she would make, and I quote, "Better decisions" than white men.

She's absolutely correct, that's not a high bar given the history of the court. A whole lot of mediocre white guys have sat on the bench, along with a few exceptional ones.

So, why should someone's race provide them an instant benefit in 2023, when ANYONE can do ANYTHING and there is absolutely no bar to entry to anyone, based on their ethnic background?

A better question is: why should a college admissions official have the power to legally discriminate if they so choose? I'm not a fan of legislating ethics or morality, but it does become somewhat more necessary when dealing with sociopaths and narcissists.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

She's absolutely correct, that's not a high bar given the history of the court. A whole lot of mediocre white guys have sat on the bench, along with a few exceptional ones.


A better question is: why should a college admissions official have the power to legally discriminate if they so choose? I'm not a fan of legislating ethics or morality, but it does become somewhat more necessary when dealing with sociopaths and narcissists.

Well, at least I know the bias you are operating off of, so I can calibrate our discussions in the future. You are a White Apologist, a severe hard, hard leftist, a full-on liberal and someone who is participating in ethnomasochism against your own race.

And that's cool. Be you. I just know what I am working with, now.

At least we agree that religion is bullshit.

If a white Supreme Court Justice nominee said, "Because I am white, I will make better decisions than a Latina who hasn't had the same experiences as me.", he would be tarred, feathered and crucified. But you accept the same language from a lady of Latin descent? Do you not see the inconsistency? Can you see how someone who never gave a fuck about race could look at that statement, and react with something like, "Damn, this chick is a racist who thinks she is superior to white people, and literally just SAID IT OUT LOUD WITH HER FULL CHEST."?

Yeah. A bit inconsistent in your avatarhood, there, brother.

No college is going to discriminate on basis of race in 2023, because it's kind of illegal. It's just that NOW, Asian students won't have to fight harder than everyone else to get accepted, and black students will actually have to have test scores that are equitable with all other races, and won't get any more free passes. Which is FAIR.

 

[Xzi]

Well, at least I know the bias you are operating off of, so I can calibrate our discussions in the future.

Says the guy resorting to blatant racism and sexism as he starts to lose control over the discussion. I expect better from you in the future, or it won't be worth engaging with you again.

I am unapologetically leftist, I've never made that a secret. That does nothing to diminish the argument that affirmative action was established for a REASON, in RESPONSE to discriminatory actions taken by admissions officials. Unlike some, I don't need to watch the same experiment play out all over again to know ahead of time we're going to end up with the same results. It's both logic and science 101.

No college is going to discriminate on basis of race in 2023, because it's kind of illegal.

It's no longer criminalized, it'll only be punishable by civil suit. As we've already established, though, these colleges care about their bottom line possibly more than anything else, so civil suits might well be enough to get them to fall back in line.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Says the guy resorting to blatant racism and sexism as he starts to lose control over the discussion. I expect better from you in the future, or it won't be worth engaging with you again.

I am unapologetically leftist, I've never made that a secret. That does nothing to diminish the argument that affirmative action was established for a REASON, in RESPONSE to discriminatory actions taken by admissions officials. Unlike some, I don't need to watch the same experiment play out all over again to know ahead of time we're going to end up with the same results. It's both logic and science 101.


It's no longer criminalized, it'll only be punishable by civil suit. As we've already established, though, these colleges care about their bottom line possibly more than anything else, so civil suits might well be enough to get them to fall back in line.

What racism or sexim? Who said anything negative about any race or gender? Why are you attacking my person, and not my arggument? I haven't done that to you. It sounds like you're the one losing control of your emotions and resorting to ad hominem. I thought we had at least some modicum of mutual respect. It would hurt me to find out that was not the case. I still respect you. I hope I have earned the same. Maybe not.


I presented evidence to support every bit of all of my arguments. You can see Justice Sotomayor's clearly racist statements. You can see the unwed birth rate for yourself, without relying on my anecdotal statements or what I read online. I showed you how much harder Asian students have to fight to get in, while black students , without any basis in merit, were given advantages just because of their ethnicity. Not guessing. Provable, verifiable facts. None of this shit was fair.

I think you are just getting backed into a corner at this point because literally everyone here disagrees with you, NO ONE but you wants race to be a consideration, and you are lashing out because you don't like losing.

You are wrong, this time, and that's okay. This is how we grow. You need to stop being racist. Seriously. You need to stop hating your own race, and elevating all others above white people. It's not a good look, and you will never get the invite to the cookout you are seeking. Remember that racists who hate white folks will still hate you, even if you are desperate to be on their side and be recognized by them.

We can fix all of your crying that black people are being disadvantaged, by resolving the 77% unwed birth rate. A topic you still refuse to confront, because you have absolutely NOTHING to confront it with, no argument and no solutions. So it's back to blaming the Strawman of the evil white Republican with his foot on as many black necks as he can step on.

 

[Xzi]

I think you are just getting backed into a corner at this point because literally everyone here disagrees with you

Believe me I'm used to it, I grew up around the internet and I've never based my opinions or arguments on what I thought would get me voted prom queen.

You are wrong, this time, and that's okay.

I'll simply say put up or shut up. Are you willing to bet that no Southern college is sued for admissions discrimination once in the next three years? If so, a fool and his money are easily parted indeed.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

Believe me I'm used to it, I grew up around the internet and I've never based my opinions or arguments on what I thought would get me voted prom queen.


I'll simply say put up or shut up. Are you willing to bet that no Southern college is sued for admissions discrimination once in the next three years? If so, a fool and his money are easily parted indeed.

Brother, I am happy to engage you on that, as soon as you engage me on what an economic disadvantage that is produced when fewer than one out of four black children are born to a two-parent home. Tit for tat. You can't demand that I address a topic until you finally engage mine.

I mean, you are an unapologetic leftist, as you said. So, let's do this without you apologizing for evil wypipo, and put some of the responsibility for the lack of legacy inheritance and generational wealth on the people, the ONLY people, who can actually do something about it.

Why are you so reluctant to talk about this?

EDIT: I fully support you as our Prom Queen, and you have my vote.

 

[sombrerosonic]

Believe me I'm used to it, I grew up around the internet and I've never based my opinions or arguments on what I thought would get me voted prom queen.


I'll simply say put up or shut up. Are you willing to bet that no Southern college is sued for admissions discrimination once in the next three years? If so, a fool and his money are easily parted indeed.

Instead of using strawman to avoid maybe you should try to attack his argument with logic.

Kinda puts your argument in a bad place as it seems like your missing evedence

 

[Xzi]

Brother, I am happy to engage you on that, as soon as you engasge me on what an economic disadvantage that is produced when fewer than one out of four black children are born to a two-parent home. Tit for tat. You can't demand that I address a topic until you finally engage mine.

So you're demanding we derail a thread topic that you started? Perhaps if the topic you were looking to distract with was a more interesting one, I'd be game.

I mean, you are an unapologetic leftist, as you said. So, let's do this without you apologizing for evil wypipo, and put some of the responsibility for the lack of legacy inheritance and generational wealth on the people, the ONLY people, who can actually do something about it.

I criticize the government and our institutions, and you decide to interpret that as a personal attack on yourself and our race. These discussions will never go anywhere with one party acting more fragile than a Faberge egg.

Instead of using strawman to avoid maybe you should try to attack his argument with logic.

Kinda puts your argument in a bad place as it seems like your missing evedence

My evidence is all of US history before the implementation of affirmative action. The evidence that these institutions are capable of self-regulation is what's entirely absent.

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

So you're demanding we derail a thread topic that you started? Perhaps if the topic you were looking to distract with was a more interesting one, I'd be game.


I criticize the government and our institutions, and you decide to interpret that as a personal attack on yourself and our race. These discussions will never go anywhere with one party acting more fragile than a Faberge egg.


My evidence is all of US history before the implementation of affirmative action. The evidence that these institutions are capable of self-regulation is what's entirely absent.

No, I am requesting, as I have respectfully and politely before, that you address your OWN bitching and moaning about how society is disadvantaging one race of people who happen to have the highest unwed birth rate in American history, without recognizing that... it's kind of their own fault. Not the evil white people you keep propping up as Strawmen. I just want you to confront that part of it, so you can dispense with the "It's all the white man's fault that black kids don't inherit wealth" bullshit.

Hard to inherit wealth from your grandmother who has custody of you because your single mother can't provide for you. I can absolutely tell for a fact that you have never grown up around black people, never went to a black church, never attended a majority-black school or actually have any idea what you're talking about. Seriously. I come from the hood. You don't. YOU are a privileged white boy. I never was. Not that either of those things matter, but you aren't going to come at me like you know the Black Experience because I absolutely know for a fact that you do not.

You criticize the government, and our institutions, but you also dodged my question when I asked you specifically how much control you want the government to have over your life, and asked you to name ONE PERSON in the government you would trust to make impactful decisions in your own life. You had nothing.

Literally all you have is bashing Repiublicans and making up imaginary Strawmen. I get it; you hate the right. We ALL get it.

Stop trying to move the goalpost. Stop with ad hominem. Stop with Appeal to Irrelevant Authority. Stop with all of your logical fallacies, which is literally all you have offered for the past page of posts. You are better than this. You're smarter than this.

Don't get up in your feelings. Address the topic and stop attacking people and venting and vomiting your hatred for the imaginary evil racist white man you see when you think "Republican".

'K? 'Kay.

EDIT: DON'T PUT ANOTHER K UP THERE. I know you want to. I added apostrophes to make sure. Even changed the second word. Just for you.

 

[supermist]

In a nutshell it's wrong but it's more complicated than a yes or no.

Depending on how much taxes an area pulls in, schools can be underfunded and not have it in their budget to offer AP courses which for one can be a college credit if you pass the AP test, but can also bump your GPA above a 4.0.

This puts the 4.0 student who had to go to an underfunded school at a disadvantage when compared to a student who has a GPA higher than that because their school had more public funding. Affirmative action helps offset the inequality in this example

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

In a nutshell it's wrong but it's more complicated than a yes or no.

Depending on how much taxes an area pulls in, schools can be underfunded and not have it in their budget to offer AP courses which for one can be a college credit if you pass the AP test, but can also bump your GPA above a 4.0.

This puts the 4.0 student who had to go to an underfunded school at a disadvantage when compared to a student who has a GPA higher than that because their school had more public funding. Affirmative action helps offset the inequality in this example

But, the same exact students would be under the same circumstances, if the school were underfunded. Which means every white, Asian, Indian or Hispanic student would literally be learning the same curriculum, under the same teachers, with the same potential opportunities.

In that actual, real scenario, why should the Asian kid get a disadvantage while the black kid gets a bonus? Same classes, same school, same everything. Why give one race an advantage over others, while giving another a penalty?

Personally, I find that HIGHLY racist as hell, to automatically assume that Asian kids would naturally (by virtue of ethnicity alone) do better on test scores, while black kids would need a boost.

Do you see the logic? It's like saying black kids are lesser, and need a helping hand, because they just can't do it on their own.

If I were black, I would be HIGHLY insulted and offended that someone just figured that my kid, in the same classes as everyone else, needed a modifier so they could succeed.

Do you get what I am saying? The racists are the ones who think black kids can't do it without a leg up on everyone else. THEY are the ones who think less of black people.

 

[Xzi]

No, I am requesting, as I have respectfully and politely before, that you address your OWN bitching and moaning about how society is disadvantaging one race of people who happen to have the highest unwed birth rate in American history, without recognizing that... it's kind of their own fault.

I haven't been subtle about this, yet you can't seem to get it through your thick skull: being disadvantaged over several generations in the past is demonstrably going to result in being disadvantaged in the present. If the Waltons, Bezoses, and Musks of the world returned even a fraction of the profit extrapolated from slavery, every black dad could hire a live-in maid to raise their kid instead, and I assume you'd approve of that even though it's equally detrimental.

Without mentioning race, I do wonder which you'd consider worse: an absentee crackhead father, or a rich, incestuous pedophile father who also happened to sell US nuclear and military secrets to the highest bidder?

 

[WalterSlovotsky]

I haven't been subtle about this, yet you can't seem to get it through your thick skull: being disadvantaged over several generations in the past is demonstrably going to result in being disadvantaged in the present. If the Waltons, Bezoses, and Musks of the world returned even a fraction of the profit extrapolated from slavery, every black dad could hire a live-in maid to raise their kid instead, and I assume you'd approve of that even though it's equally detrimental.

Without mentioning race, I do wonder which you'd consider worse: an absentee crackhead father, or a rich, incestuous pedophile father who also happened to sell US nuclear and military secrets to the highest bidder.

Yeah. I have a thick skull. I thought we could be friends. I have never insulted you, personally. That smarts, man. I thought better of you.

I guess I just have to return to the facts. You can't have generational wealth with one-parent homes. And no one else can help black people resolve this, except for black people. It's no one else's fault if black men refuse to wear condoms, or stick around when the kid is born. And this is something YOU trust the government to solve.

What's your solution? Give the black kids a bonus that they don't deserve. Based on skin color. Not merit.

I have to ask; why do you think black kids are so stupid? No one else does, except for white apologists.

Why do you think they need a boost, in the first place? Do you not think that black kids can do anything any other kid can do? Are you going to say what your President said, and claim that "Poor kids are just as bright as white kids"? I notice you never said anything against THAT brilliant quote from your pedo Pres.

You have a myopic view of the world, my friend. Not rooted in any basis in reality. You just hate the right, and your entire worldview is shaped by that. You are a bigot in every sense of the word, and no one will ever change your mind.

That's the definition of the word "bigotry". Just own it. You are a bigot. And a racist. YOU think less of black people than any of the evil white Republicans you are inventing to support your argument. It's very, very clear how little you think of them.

Still love you, brother.

 

[linuxares]

If your colleges/universities needed a quota to accept people in. You guys need to figure stuff out for real.
Academics is the only thing that should play role imho. Like most in the civilized world do...