Asians are screwed in the utmost by unspoken affirmative action for white people at many top universities. http://nymag.com/news/features/asian-americans-2011-5/index2.html#print http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...statistics-indicate-an-ivy-league-asian-quota The level at which they are screwed by affirmative action for minorities is not as significant. In fact, the frequent trope that affirmative action for other minorities hurts Asian applicants is really just a distraction from the main issue which is discrimination by predominantly white decision makers in favor of whites against Asians. So, really if we cared about Asians what needs to be stopped first is unspoken affirmative action for white people as they already enjoy the most advantages and get the greatest numerical benefit. Instead white people seek to undermine only affirmative action for non-whites while pretending that affirmative action for white people doesn't exist and isn't more pernicious to the Asian community. The Asian community needs to band with the hispanic and black community, not be fighting against it because the roots of their problems are ultimately the same - discrimination from the dominant group.
Can you point to a systematic and long standing racial barrier for Asian-American students being admitted to public universities? If so, then I would concede that their exclusion from affirmative action policies is discriminatory. Affirmative action does not mean that the school admits an unqualified student. It also does not mean a free ride. It means that they do not admit the white student when there was an African-American student of similar qualification and only one spot between the two. In that instance, the minority student gets admitted and will faithfully receive a tuition bill every semester. Do I think the policy is the right thing to do? Frankly, I'm torn on the issue. The Court is deciding whether it is permissible.
I completely agree that this "systematic and long standing barrier" refers and applies to the African American population. But then why do affirmative action policies apply to Hispanics as well? That doesn't lie in the scope of the purpose of it then, right?
It's not race specific. It serves the idea that institutions should be representative of the community. If UT had no Asian students or White studens or female students then AA would benefit them.
All I have to say to this is, YEAH RIGHT. It's nice in theory, but it simply doesn't exist in practice. If you've attended college in the last 20 years it's plainly obvious that "similar qualification" is not what's going on... Colleges are using it as a substitute for quotas
So you base this on whatever informal observations you made when you were in college. We get it, you don't have a leg to stand on in this argument. Refman plainly spelled out what affirmative action is, and you have no response, but to say that's not what it appeared like to you.
all Refman did was talk at the high level theoretical viewpoint. It's more nuanced than that in practice. It's purely discrimination based on skin color or ethnicity. I do not support making decisions like that.
And all you're doing is saying "No guys you don't understand! This is stoopid!" What a well thought out and compelling argument you bring to the table. That Rice education is shinning through.
What refman did was state the way the policy is actually written. All you've done is talk about your own observations and throw out things that aren't actually based on the written policy. You're simply perpetuating the common myths about AA, not the actual policy itself. Refman brought up the actual requirements of the policy itself. If you've ever spoken to people who decide admissions you'd know that what you've said about AA isn't true at all and that what refman said is exactly the way it's done in real life.
Your allegations are based on what exactly? It appears that it is based on speculation and guessing. You make those allegations with no factual support. How convenient for you.
The Supreme Court just ruled on this. 7-1 decision to allow affirmative action to continue if it is the only way a university can increase diversity. This effectively affirms that diversity is something that colleges can pursue and affirmative action is acceptable if its the only way to do so. The Court has sent this case back to a lower court to review it under this standard. With that said, I expect the lower court to strike down UT's program as the top 8% rule is also an effective way to increase diversity. (making affirmative action unnecessary) I'm surprised with the ruling. I think its a pretty fair standard.
Why should that matter? If those are the kids who deserve to get in based off their work then those are the kids that should be there. Arbitrarily allowing lesser qualified students into a school to promote diversity is dumb
The only thing is that students who are exposed to more diversity are getting a better experience and education for that fact alone.
