Giving props to Timing for elaborating on SamFisher's Tulia reference - quite honestly it had indeed slipped my mind; but also regarding Jasper, clearly these two incidents are based on some discriminatory action which is inherently illegal. So, yes racism is alive and well in Texas, and I suspect in many other areas, but the aforementioned examples are not condoned by law; I would like to believe that such a malaise would not exist through the heart of a majority of Texans whom I suspect to be more so prudent. UT proposes inclusion of race as a factor in admissions on the other hand, is a legal discriminatory policy sanctioned by government.
Eeh, you can slice it many ways, maybe the per capita rate of one or the other is proportional and the black rate is so high it puts the others out of whack, etc etc etc. I'm actually serious in that it is a bad graph. I think it is.
I'm a south asian and I am for affirmative action. My family and most of our south asian friends were a part of the upper class back home and we reasserted ourselves as a part of the upper class here. Many of us came here well educated and with family wealth. There is no need for us to have affirmative action when we already flood american universities.
Do you mind saying what country you're from specifically? Reason I ask is that anti-affirmative action people always like to point out how well Asians do in this country yet don't pose real questions as to why, they usually give just generalized statements about culture values etc. I have my own theory on it. I guess I would break it down into three reasons. First is economies, good Asian economies (Japan, Taiwain, South Korea) don't have good Latin comparisons I don't believe so on average, I'm betting Asian immigrants are wealtheir when they come here. Second is form of government, this I got really from my experience with Cubans. They are in my own experience the most driven latins I ever encounter and I think it's due to Castro/Communism type rule. Since they've lived their lives in such oppression they just have a stronger drive to succeed when they come to a new country. With the spread of Communism across Asia, I think this is another reason why perhaps Asians succeed here more than other minorities particularly Asians from Vietnam, China, Cambodia, etc. Both Cubans and Asians escaped the environments that oppressed them to succeed here unlike African-Americans who basically continued to live in the country that oppressed them so it's more difficult for them to achieve similarly because they essentially still deal with the root issues of their oppression. Third reason, basically the proximity of the US to latin American countries as opposed to Asian countries. Since it's so much easier for poor Latinos to get here than poor Asians, the Asian sample size is tiny in comparison. Kind of a statistical situation that gives the comparison a big problem. There might be more reasons like I believe Asians might insulate themselves more to American culture than other minorities but I'd love to see them do a study on that topic and see what the numbers bear out. Also, Trader Texx continues to have an inability to properly digest exactly what Affirmative Action is and the intent of lawmakers and colleges. Lawmakers accept the policy as a measure to balance the playing field for minorities in all aspects of government from the military to government contracts to college admissions, and college administrators use affirmative action to make sure there is appropriate representation on campus. White men have recently gotten affirmative action basically taking spots from more qualified women applicants and that's hardly because white men have been harshly oppressed by society, it's because they're not appropriately represented on campus. This basically underscores the folly of Trader Texx's ever changing ignorant argument. Any race, gender, or ethnicity under represented in government is a potential Affirmative Action candidate. So #1, the origin of the policy is to alleviate discrimination through leveling the playing field and #2 this is done by seeking appropriate representation for all on campus, in the military, government contracts etc., representation that without affirmative action and possibly because of past or present discrimination would not exist. For someone who posts so much on the topic I'm surprised (well not too surprised I guess) he has yet to figure out exactly what he's posting so much about.
actually, affirmative action causes more unfairness to asians than whites. On average, Asian American students (including Indian Americans and SE Asian Americans) are above the national average in standardized tests, however AA sets quotas on how many minorities should be allowed in schools, so there is a cutoff on the number of Asian Americans a school can accept, while often times, in a meritocratic system they would accept more. at the root of the AA debate are two conflicting American values. Capitalism and Equality. It is not so cut and dry because AA can be used effectively to ensure a diverse school to draw more applicants, at the same time it can be abused to take minority students for the wrong reasons. AA also makes the assumption that minority students are worse students than those in the majority, which is not true. However, it is a fact that the US, a country whos fundamental beliefs is equality, does not share equality between race groups economically and opporunity-wise. AA seeks to change that, but it has been abused to the point where it causes more bitterness and wrong.
White men have recently gotten affirmative action basically taking spots from more qualified women applicants and that's hardly because white men have been harshly oppressed by society, it's because they're not appropriately represented on campus. Is this how many schools approach Affirmative Action? I know at UT-Arlington (where I most recently went to school), Asians and African-Americans would be over-represented, at least in terms of the comparison to statewide statistics. And whites might well be under-represented. Of course, that's with a non-affirmative action admissions policy (and a largely non-competitive one). Is that the ultimate goal? To have the racial breakdown on college campuses to be equal to the racial breakdown in society at large? I mean, I know that can't be the stated goal because that would probably qualify as a "quota" which are still not allowed. But I was wondering if that was the aim of those who most support Affirmative-Action in college admissions. Personally, I've decided I don't care about how they determine college admissions. It seems screwy and largely random to me the way they do it beyond any concern about affirmative action.
There is a huge Vietnamese population in Houston that by no means "came here wealthy". They were dirt poor escaping a horrible situation back home, similar to Mexicans who come to Houston. I find your argument extremely lacking and based on a very micro view of your own personal situation.
And Murder is illegal, yet the State will commit 'murder' to right a wrong. 'Race' as a factor in admissions is discriminatory, but it exists to repair a larger and more pervasive problem in our society. You can look at each occurence in isolation and try to solve them with a reductionist approach, or you can look at the problem more holitistically ... and you will have more flexibility and success in leveling the playing field. It's a tough topic. I understand the unfairness to those who get hurt by such policies. It would be nice if there was a better alternative, but it is almost like society's 'last big chance' to correct inequities experienced all through youth.
I think the Asians proved how useless AA has become. Some of them are a generation away from being boat people and yet has somehow become the most educated group in America. They are by no means wealthy when they arrived here. Take a look at the number of Asians in the fields of research, technology, medicine, laundry, restaurant, etc. Heck, many of them speak broken English and still manage to become prosperous. If they can come over here not knowing the language and still manage to catch up, then anyone can. I don't buy the excuses and I don't buy AA.
Wow where do I even begin with this masterpiece... Perhaps the argument that communism has driven a group of people to be overachieving hard workers? Oh goodness that's funny. Timing, please go to a Chinatown in any city in America. These recent immigrants are harly wealthy. Neither are the Vietnamese who came here escaping a harsh motherland. Timing this explanation you have provided just underscores what the justifications for AA have turned into: an absurd grasping for straws rationalization process. We're now reaaaaally stretching things to find some reason for this...
A Rice Sociology Professor, Stephen Klineberg, did a study, showing how Asian immigrants to Houston are wealthier than Hispanic and Latin American immigrants.
LOL Bigtexx, seems your concern was misplaced, at least in this case. Maybe you when you 'arbitrarily' pick a minority group to patronize, you should be more discriminating in order to avoid such a pie-in-the face-scenario in the future.
For those of you who may not know, UT used race as a factor in admissions for a LONG DAMN TIME until the Hopwood decision. Not only that but they had advising offices set up in individual colleges that were funded by the University to assist minority students in their academic endeavors. With the Hopwood decision those offices were either shut down or changed in name and function to remove any affiliation with the word or mission of Minority assistance. These were good programs and although they were funded to help minorities in particular, they were used by all students. Yes, even the white guys could get help at the office. Maybe now that can be reversed as well, and the things we had to keep covert when going that extra mile to help out under privileged students at risk, that could possibly be viewed as being done on the basis only of race, can be done out in the open again. * By the way unless you WORKED at UT for one of these offices like I DID, don't even try and tell me that I don't know what I am talking about here.
Am I correct in assuming that you meant "Asian immigrants to Houston came here wealthier than..."? Otherwise, I don't see how this is contrary to what bigtexx is saying.
i'm not sure what all this is about, but one of the main benefits that asian immigrants have in asia is that their educational system teaches math better than in the US. it's true that some lack english skills when they first come, but many become completely fluent. and some of them have a slight advantage in the math area, that's all. the teaching in asia is better. US teachers suck at teaching math. i'm not sure what study stephen klineberg did, but it also depends on which area the asians came from. some areas of asia are extremely poor and some are way above western standards and much more modern and wealthy. if you're talking about japanese, they are probably extremely wealthy. but most of asia is still considered poor. there are some other wealthy areas of asia, but the majority is still poor. some of them come here with no education, but asians help each other out and usually form partnerships and combine their savings from working to form businesses. that's how poor, uneducated ones do it. i don't really see what's wrong with affirmative action though.
***EDITTED VERSION**** i'm not sure what all this is about, but one of the main benefits that asian immigrants have in asia is that their educational system teaches math better than in the US. it's true that some lack english skills when they first come, but many become completely fluent. and some of them have a slight advantage in the math area, that's all. the teaching in asia is better. US teachers suck at teaching math. i'm not sure what study stephen klineberg did, but it also depends on which area the asians came from. some areas of asia are extremely poor and some are way above western standards and much more modern and wealthy. if you're talking about japanese, they are probably extremely wealthy. but most of asia is still considered poor. there are some other wealthy areas of asia, but the majority is still poor. some of them come here with no education, but asians help each other out and usually form partnerships with multiple people and combine their savings from working to form businesses and they usually use their kids and family as employees to save money. that's how poor, uneducated ones do it. i don't really see what's wrong with affirmative action though.
