[FEDERALIST] If We’re Going To Have A Racial Double Standard It Should Be About Black Americans Only

Time to expel you from this topic again and send you off running.

What do you think of Antonin Scalia's argument against Affirmative Action? He said that there ought to be less black students at these schools and that they should go on a slower track. What do you think of that?

 

You might have a point if black people that were accepted got into the university and couldn't do the work that the other students that got into the university were able to do. That hasn't been the case, so there is no problem with the affirmative action being used. The applicants are able to do the work. They succeed at the same challenges presented to them as the other races.

 

I am not ignoring holistic review, I addressed it several times in my post that you for some reason don't want to address each part of. Hmm.

You posted the study and said look at the study, which I did. Then I even pulled out the part of the study addressing holistic review and broke that down to where they claimed there were 900 factors considered, but provided a link to 8 factors.

There are tons of other things, there are 900 factors. It's holistic. Blah blah blah. Setting aside the fact that the study itself (or the article discussing the study, which is what you linked to) says race is considered, there was a list of 8 factors actually included, and of those eight factors, MAYBE 1 would tend to advantage black applicants over whites or Asians. .

Of course correlation is evidence. It is circumstantial evidence. It tends to make it more likely that some conclusion is true. It is not proof, it is not causation, but it is evidence.

That is not my argument. For one thing, you are able to provide other stats which argue against RW being a better playmaker. Things like assists/usage or shooting percentage following a pass, or ORtg,, or RPM, etc. That is what I asked you for in regard to the college admissions numbers, and you said blah blah holistic review. What they didn't do is provide a list of eight factors, include among them things like average a triple double, play in OKC, be named Russell, and winning percentage, and then say see even though Westbrook had more assists, we looked at these other factors so Paul is a better playmaker. It would be a nonsense argument.

I hate to break it to you, but white kids are also told all of those things by guidance counselors when applying for college. It's almost like everyone is trying to pad their resume with leadership and extra curriculars. My question is, why is it your belief black kids are scoring so much higher on these leadership and talent fronts. I think it is just as likely for an Asian kid to have talent and leadership on his admissions.

There is no evidence of it, that is why. There is a gap in test scores of admitted students that corresponds to race. The two proffered explanations are a) the university is considering race in their admissions (which they have admitted), or b) black students consistently perform better in the aggregate of all the non-test score factors that the school is considering, year after year, such that it offsets their lower test scores to make them equivalent applicants. To me, option a sounds much less far fetched than option b.

That would only be true if I said don't admit black students because they have lower average scores. That is not my argument at all. Harvard is admitting individual black students with scores that are lower on average than those of the other students they admit. You are arguing (correctly) that the individual should not be judged based on the outcomes of the group, but are missing the point that it is the aggregation of individual outcomes that is leading to these numbers. No one is saying Harvard should reject applicants because they are black (which is the analog to Penn State RBs), but rather that their race should not be considered at all.

This is more of an argument against the opposition to the top 10% rule (playing against weaker competition).

The averages are the results of the individual admission process.

Which is why I said it favors females, blacks, and Latinx, and disadvantages males, whites, and Asians. White females are helped not because they are white, but because they are female.

The evidence, besides the school stating that it considers race, is in the numbers. You have admitted that you see no evidence that the black students have any higher ratings on average in all of the other holistic categories, but for some reason you take it on faith that they are somehow making up for the test score gap in other areas. I have no such faith.

No, wrong. The fact that those admitted meet the minimum standards required to succeed does not disprove discrimination in the admissions practice unless you can prove that those of other races with higher scores that were rejected would not have succeeded.

 

I was taught to screen out any resumes that don't meet the qualifications posted and they told me that I would not only get in trouble for preferring remaining candidates for their sex or ethnicity, I wasn't to judge anyone for coming from a better known school, or a different country or a poorer state, or make presumptions about their politics, or speculate on why they might have gaps in their resume (maybe they had a sick relative, maybe the gave birth), for having disabilities, and I was forbidden to ask about these things or about what their parents did for a living or what basketball team they like because all those things are irrelevant to the job and could cause some to prejudge them.

You couldn't consider if they went to a more difficult or "better" school?? That seems designed to undercut your ability to find the best candidates.

 

No, you are. You 100% are because you are questioning students getting in based on lower scores.

According to....who? You? Again, you keep thinking of this as an averages thing.

Admissions are not about averages. They don't let kids in because they are better than the average of their peers. They judged each resume individually and then pass it off to someone else to then judge that same person individually

It is evidence simply, it is not something you just extrapolate to whatever point you want to make.

Anthony Davis averaging more points than Durant in 2018 is a fact...but that's ALL it says. It doesn't say that he's a better shooter than Durant, scorer, or offensive threat. It merely says he averaged more points.

The existence of X amount of Asians at Harvard does not prove that Asians are being denied entry into Harvard because they are Asian.

All of these are just more tests that are in the end basically irrelevant when judging players. No one cares about this stuff when they are picking All-stars or MVP awards, no one seriously goes "His Ortg is better..." because people don't put as much weight into numbers as you seemingly do.

Everyone knows Lebron is the best player in the NBA and it has little to do with his numbers.

I said nothing about how likely or unlikely it was though? I brought up anecdotes and admitted that it was anecdotal because you are missing the actual individual and instead judging students by the group they belong to.

There is no evidence for or against it, yes, I've admitted that.

No, option A sounds super far fetched. It would be like someone saying UC Berkley is discriminating against Blacks because of its like 2% (IIRC) black population. That a super liberal school would reject black students is kind of far fetched, that a school like Harvard would go out of their way to deny Asians into their school is also far fetched, I've seen no evidence to them doing it.

Option B...do you think that they are comparing Black Student resumes to Asian student resumes?

Not every black student is 190 below. You keep going by an average when it is more like that Harvard simply has a bar for its testing, you reach it, you are now considered and your resume is then moved into stronger consideration. That's why they tell you not to apply to these schools unless you've scored X score on X test. It's likely then they don't even truly consider the test, they only consider it in that you reached the bar. That's it. I'm sure there are cases where people score perfect or near perfect on the test and they then consider it, but we have no idea how they are weighing the test at all.

If you apply to college there are these requirements, basic requirements, that they will show students to reach for...
http://www.prepscholar.com/sat/s/colleges/Harvard-admission-requirements

Sites like that and others usually give pretty good guides at what it takes to get into this or that school.

So your entire argument could be wrong if Harvard does indeed have a SAT requirement, because it then means all they ask is that a student passes it, then they may not consider the score at all.

Here is a Harvard professor on this very subject...
http://theconversation.com/youre-no...ed-into-a-top-university-on-merit-alone-87985

Key points...

So, her argument was simply that who gets into Harvard, beyond them getting to pick the best students around the nation, is basically up to the opinion of those doing admissions. You may not like it, but that's how it is.

I mean in the Fisher case...Blacks and Latinos with better scores were also rejected.

Are you sure? White women benefit from AA more than any other group. I think you'd say that this was evidence for racism, that even though there is AA, white people are still the main beneficiary of it.

Yes, the schools consider race. They consider the race of white people too. Everyone considers race, people consider race when hiring, we know that because if you have a black sounding name you are less likely to get hired. That's considering race. They consider race because they, Harvard, does not want a 2% black population on campus...and you know what? Neither does UC Berkley, problem is, the best black students are seemingly now avoiding going there if they have a choice to and it's something they have been trying to fix. It seems, despite how you may feel about it, these schools like their diversity, and for good reasons, studies show it only helps students.

One must prove that people are being locked out of a school because of their race or that the black student got into Harvard because of their race. This hasn't been proven.

Yes, I have faith that black students that are getting into Harvard are getting into Harvard because they have strong resumes. Their graduation rate is high, there is nothing to suggest that they are inferior students, you have claimed this, I have not. I am trusting Harvard's admission process, they are the students that deserve to be there unless you think them being black makes them inferior students somehow, I don't know, but the admissions are allowing them in, as the professor above said, this is more art than science. It's more opinion and it seems more about if the admissions just like the person they'll get in.

 

I disagree. But at the same time I support giving preferential treatment with race being a factor when it is for a race that has been oppressed for hundreds of years and is still discriminated against in education today whether that discrimination is done intentionally or not.

That being said, your criteria for qualified applicants seems to relate only to scores. I think there is other criteria that are also important. The fact that the applicants are qualified is what is of primary importance.

 

You bringing up unrelated BS because you are getting called out for supporting racial discrimination isn't going to work the way you wish it would. I mean, that Scalia nonsense is good if your goal is to get me to laugh at your desperate attempt to create a diversion from the topic at hand, but not good for anything else.

No, I still have a point even if they do well. If an employer refuses to hire qualified black people based on their race, does it matter if those he does hire do the job well? Of course not.

Racial discrimination is simply wrong, you guys who support it in instances where you approve of the outcome of it are fundamentally no better than those who pushed Jim Crow laws.

 

Not unrelated at all Bobby, after all, it was Scalia's argument against Affirmative Action.

You can't condemn his words because you like the results of no affirmative action, just like Scalia, who said there ought to be less blacks at these schools.

 

I don't condemn his words because if he was saying that fewer black people SHOULD go to college due to lower academic scores and lower academic achievement, I agree with him. Remember it's you that stands for racial discrimination, not me. I stand for meritocracy, those who earn things, deserve them.

Again though, this is you trying to derail the conversation and move away from the fact that you deadass support racial discrimination if you feel like it is benefiting the right "tribe". I mean, at least @FranchiseBlade will admit to it. Honestly if you just owned up to supporting racial discrimination, I'd give you less flak for it.

 

Nope, he said they should go on a slower track. I'm not surprised you agree with his racist remarks, not at all.

So, you are saying that the black students that are going to Harvard DON'T deserve it?

I'm saying that they do. You're saying that they don't. Not sure what led you to that conclusion, maybe you know them personally...well you don't...you just know that they are black and thus you think they don't deserve to be there. That's truly disgusting.

 

It is very unlikely that all of them deserve it over those Asian students that were discriminated against. There are also likely white students who don't deserve to be there more than the Asian students that were discriminated against too.

Remember how I'm the one against racial discrimination here, you are the one supporting racial discrimination because you approve of who is benefiting and who is suffering.

 

Which Asian students were discriminated against?

Which ones?

You are saying it is a fact, so time to prove it.

Who is being discriminated against racially again? Is it Asians? You know, the 2020 class of Harvard that is over 20% Asian? Is there a magic number of Asians that each school should have? You do know AA works for all races, right?

So yeah, I missed the part where I'm for racial discrimination, I'm just stating that it isn't happening. Either you can't read or you are being completely dishonest, which one is it?

You know, at least @StupidMoniker doesn't make complete lame strawmen and ignore entire parts of my post and tries to counter data I bring forward and lays off the insults. With you, it's just you literally makeup ____ about your opponent, ignore studies, then come back and say the same thing over and over again as if it weren't just refuted. Like how you used that 450 number although it didn't mean what you thought it meant.

 

That isn't ignoring holistic review, it is questioning the use of holistic review as an excuse to deflect from the question at hand, which is: do universities/Harvard discriminate on the basis of race (ie. take race into consideration when making admission decisions to the benefit of one or more races and the detriment of one or more races). Skipping ahead to the end of your answer, you agree that they are doing this. Given that, I don't understand what your argument is.

You don't seem to get that the averages are the result of the individual admission decisions. If they admit 3 black people with scores of 4, 5, and 6, rejecting all others with a score of less than 5 and then admit 10 white people with scores of 2, 8, 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. 8. and 10, rejecting all others with a score of less than 8, then the average black admittee has a score of 5 and the average white admittee has a score of 8, but there are white applicants with a score of 7 being denied admission based on the preference for a black student with a score of 6. There is also the outlier with a score of 2 who maybe got in as a legacy or something.You think that is okay because they are all reviewed individually and even a 4 can graduate. I think it is racist.

Evidence is used to draw conclusions based on the evidence. The average global temperature this year is evidence of global warming. By itself, it does not prove global warming, but it is used in combination with other evidence and reasoning to come to that conclusion.

True.

True, I am more concerned about the average admission test scores than the number of students. I have never brought up the number of students in any group, that was you.

Those were examples of multivariable analysis, what you might call holistic review.

Numbers are just measurement, measurement of how good a basketball player is in this case. If LeBron was averaging 10/2/1 this season, no one would say he is the best player. Of course it has to do with his numbers.

You admittedly have no counter evidence to rebut my case that it is racially discriminatory, but that doesn't matter because the people are judged one at a time.

Wrong. I have given you the evidence for it. You have not provided any evidence against it.

You literally admit that option a is happening a few paragraphs below this.

I would hope that they compare the resumes of all the applicants without regard to race. They do not.

That is how averages work. Some black admittees are more than 190 points below the Average Asian Admittee. Some are closer than that. Some are probably above the Average Asian Admittee. The point of the average is to show that they are not graded on the same curve. The fact that the curves overlap is not evidence against discrimination, it is to be expected.

I am editing out all the minimum requirement stuff, because it is non-responsive to the argument.

This is all I have been saying, and here you are admitting it. I don't know why you bothered denying it for pages and pages. So you agree that they give a racial preference to black applicants (and thus discriminate against other races).

You just admitted it in the sentence before this. If the student population would only be 2% black if race was not considered, and instead is 7 or 14% black, then people are getting in because of their race and (because there are a limited number of spots available) being locked out because of their race. The one is a direct consequence of the other.

If they are being admitted in part because of a racial preference, and would not be there absent that racial preference, then they don't deserve to be there, because racism is wrong.

 

Admission to top tier Uni's is more than book smarts. You can't have admission to the top uni's be solely based on GPA and aptitude scores, it would be very boring. African Americans get a chance to showcase their "diverse" strengths in the world after college, as opposed to just book smarts which their scores are lower on. That is the argument from the other side. I don't see the big deal, if you're a smart Asian or white kid, it's not going to kill you in the long run.

 

I can give a perfect example of this, FB. Both of our kids went to "magnet" middle schools and "magnet" high schools. As you know, Texas has the "10% rule" in order to get into UT. Well, what happens when very smart public school kids go to a school where all the kids are very smart? You have a few hundred students who would likely be in the top 1-3% of a good public school being out of the "top 10%" of the magnet high school, yet the same rules apply. Go figure.

 

I'm going to skip over the book smarts argument, which is just a worse version of the JayGoogle argument I addressed above. If you are a smart black kid, you are also going to get into a good school. To me, that doesn't excuse racist policies.

 

Yeah, the 10% rule does favor students who would do well in the other top schools but not top 10%. They can excel in average schools and make that 10%.

 

That isn't what I was referring to and you know that. I think race can play a factor. Bringing in students with different backgrounds and experiences benefits all of the students at the school including the white students. students who are in the majority at the school. It makes a better school. If two students are both qualified, then it isn't a bad thing to favor minority students to help diversify.

Another part of it is that in general white kids benefit from a lack of discrimination and black children suffer because of discrimination in education as it is. Working to fix that scenario is a worthwhile cause.

 

My main issue in all black people threads is its time for blacks to work on internal problems of poor blacks

The government can only do so much.

 

This is one of the most racist posts i've ever seen. There should be at least some sort of policing by admin on this site for stuff like this.