Diversity's Stigma - U of Michigan ruling due shortly

i don't disagree with you, really. racism blows...and we have to account for it. i'm just not sure that a system that says, "ok, white boy...because your grandfather was a jackass, you can't get into this college, even though your scores and grades were better than the minority we're allowing in your place." that builds resentment...and is not, in my mind, a real long term solution to fostering a nation that celebrates or rewards its own diversity.

 

But the admissions process doesn't discriminate, if all whites who apply to the school score high enough, they will not be denied. It gives points based on a particular situation, which is based on past discrimination and the racial inequalities of some of this country's institutions. No points are taken away for white males for being white males.

 

Correct...but if points are awarded because you're NOT a white male, that's not equal protection. One group is being favored over another...they're getting points merely based on race.

You're splitting hairs, really. That's like saying the following law would be OK..."As long as you're white, you can own a car." Hey...it doesn't say black people can't own a car. It just says you have to be white to own one.

I understand the problem that's being addressed...there are lots of problems that need addressing. But that doesn't mean we throw out the Constitution when we do so. There have to be other means by which to accomplish this goal. Obviously, job one should be to improve public schools by any means necessary...that might go a long way towards helping resolve the issue.

 

Alright, we will just have to agree to disagree, but I have to say that your analogy isn't representative of my point, because again, white males aren't being denied anything.

On a side note

We could go around and around on interpretation of the law, but just to give you my honest feeling, yes affirmative action is a little unfair. But there isn't an enormous amount of white males missing out on jobs or education because of affirmative action. To me the ends justify the means. But that's just my humble opinion.

 

I already argued on basis on the interpretation of the XIV amendment. I noticed you didn't respond to that.

Please CLOSE THE cASSe again.

 

Couple of points:

While very arguably not to the degree of AfrA and NA--Hispanics (especially Mexican Americans) have frequently gotten the raw deal from out governments as well. Trumped up Mex. War and land grab; ouright stolen or quasi-legal swindled land from those with Spanish surnames that occured post the Texas War for Indep (regardless if the family also actually fought against Santa Ana) and also post Mex War & Hilalgo treaty in Az, NM and Cal--many other cases.

Also, many immigrants from China got systematic raw deals as well. Many brought here to build the railroads and then every attempt (some through legal means, other not) to run them out and keep them from being permanent community members. Fascinating SF history on some of this no less.

One other thing: I think criteria like historical injustices to the group in question is not one of the sounder reasons for AA. I think it is under-representation and current discrimination in the secondary school system or other current institutions that makes more sense--which is why many Asians Americans are often not included. For instance--look at the Michigan policy--males are given bonus points for being nurses. Just as male nurses are obviously needed, physicians, other health workers and others are needed in primarily rural and minority areas. AA thus becomes a mechanism for assisting people from those communities to get skills so they can return and provide services. Sometimes this addresses linguistic and cultural issues nonminorities on average won't face (there are always some that will but this is more the expcetion than norm), other times you may just want to train someone who has a good likelihood they will continue to serve those communities (i.e., from those communties or have similar linguistic/cultural characterstics). Also, this need not mean only additional assistance to African Americans or Latinos; for instance I think poor white Appalachia persons who express a interest to return to their communities to provide sorely needed health services should be eligible for similar aid.

 

That's based on your interpretation.

 

After reading some of the briefs on both sides from this page: http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/affirm.html#summary (scroll down to: "Amicus Briefs in the University of Michigan Case"), it doesn't appear the case is as clear cut as some would have us believe. I find it interesting that the briefs filed for the University are from the following...

13,922 Current Law Students
3M, et al. (Fortune 500 Corporations)
American Bar Association
American Educational Research Association, et al.
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)
American Jewish Committee, et al.
American Law Deans Association
American Psychological Association
American Sociological Association, et al.
Amherst College, et al.
Arizona State University College of Law
Association of American Law Schools
Association of American Medical Colleges, et al.
Bay Mills Indian Community, et al.
Lt. Gen. Julius W. Becton, Jr., et al. (Retired Military Leaders)
Black Law School Graduates Committee
Black Women Lawyers' Association of Greater Chicago
Boston Bar Association, et al.
Carnegie Mellon University and 37 Fellow Private Colleges and Universities
Cities of Philadelphia and Cleveland, and the National Conference of Black Mayors
Clinical Legal Education Association
Coalition for Economic Equity, et al.
Columbia University, et al.
John Conyers and Other Members of Congress
General Motors Corporation
Rep. Richard A. Gephardt, et al.
Graduate Management Admission Council and the Executive Leadership Council
Harvard, Stanford and Yale Black Law Students Associations
Harvard University, et al.
Hayden Family
Hispanic National Bar Association and Hispanic Association of Colleges & Universities
Howard University
Howard University Law Students
Human Rights Advocates and University of Minnesota Human Rights Center
Indiana University
King County Bar Association, et al.
Law School Admission Council
Law School Deans
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights
MTV Networks
Massachusetts Institute of Technolgy, et al.
Media Companies
Michigan Black Law Alumni Society
Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm
NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union
National Asian Pacific American Legal Consortium (NAPALC), et al. National Center for Fair & Open Testing (FairTest)
National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America (N’COBRA), et al. National School Boards Association, et al.
National Urban League, et al.
NEA, its state affiliates, AFSCME and People For the American Way
New America
New Mexico Hispanic Bar Association, et al.
New York City Council Speaker Gifford Miller, et al.
New York State Black & Puerto Rican Legislative Caucus
NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund, et al.
Pennsylvania General Assembly Members, et al. (
Senators Thomas A. Daschle, et al.
Social Scientists Glenn C. Loury, et al.
Society of American Law Teachers
State of Maryland, et al. (including 21 states and the Territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands)
State of New Jersey
United Negro College Fund and Kappa Alpha Psi
UCLA School of Law Students of Color
University of Michigan Law Student Associations
University of North Carolina School of Law
University of Pittsburgh, et al.
Veterans of the Southern Civil Rights Movement, et al.

and the briefs filed against the university are from these folks...

Asian American Legal Foundation
Cato Institute
Center for Equal Opportunity, the Independent Women's Forum, and the American Civil Right Institute
Center for Individual Freedom
Center for New Black Leadership
Center for the Advancement of Capitalism
Claremont Institute Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
Law Professors
Michigan Association of Scholars
National Association of Scholars
Pacific Legal Foundation
Reason Foundation
State of Florida
United States
Ward Connerly

Incidentally, here's some of the 65 Fortune 500 companies in the 3m brief...

Steelcase, Inc., 3M, Abbott Laboratories, Bank One Corporation, E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc., The Dow Chemical Company, Eastman Kodak Company, Eli Lilly & Company, General Mills, Inc., Intel Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Kellogg Company, KPMG International on behalf of its United States member firm, KPMG LLP, Lucent Technologies, Inc., Microsoft Corporation, PPG Industries, Inc., The Procter & Gamble Company, Sara Lee Corporation, Texaco Inc., and TRW Inc.

 

Karma.

 

i couldn't get the link to work, rimrocker

hope you don't think i think this is clear-cut. i'm just stating my opinion...an issue that makes it this far up is never one that is clear cut...the supreme court doesn't deal with clear cut cases.

 

The academic establishment, the Fortune 500, the military, vs. a bunch of conservative think tanks and the Bush admin.

But it's logical, I mean they don't have any problems with racial diversity at the Cato Institute, practically half the janitors are black or mexican!

 

That's wierd the link wouldn't work... I set it up so that I think you can get to the page I was talking about (plus a lot more if you're interested.) Enjoy the reading.

And you were not the reference.

 

rimrocker -- what's your sig about??

 

Does anyone else laugh whenever they see the name Cato Institute?

 

I work in wildland fire. That's the page we use to figure out what's happening around the country. During the next 3 weeks, it'll get more entries as we start to get fires in AZ and NM. (Most of the area is due for dry lightning tonight and tomorrow, so we could be busy soon.) We should peak with 4-5 pages of fires in the July/August timeframe as the Northern Rockies and PNW start to enter fire season as the SW and Colorado are dropping down in intensities.

 

becuase Affirmative Action has been coopted into something it was not meant to be.
It is now meant as somekind of Equality machine.
IMO, it was about righting the past wrongs.

Truth is . it is suppose to be somewhere inbetween

and I state again
the biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action . . .are White Women

Rocket River

 

Treated Equaly .. in another post u talked about EARNED things
If that is the case all subjectivity should be REMOVED

THESE SHOULD BE GONE.
Alumni
4 points - "Legacy" (parents, step-parents)
1 point - Other (grandparents, siblings, spouses)

If you don't want to be 'punished' for the past
YOU SHOULD NOT BENEFIT FROM IT EITHER!


Essay
1 point - Outstanding essay (since 1999, 3 points)
Personal achievement
1 point - State
3 points - Regional
5 points - National

Leadership and service
1 point - State
3 points - Regional
5 points - National


What *is* personal Achievement?
Graduating with a 2.8 while taking care of your 5 sisters and bros
is an Achievement. It is too subjective. . .same with the Essay
a Essay on the Greatness of Malcolm X will not get the same run as
an essay on George Washington.

Miscellaneous
20 points - Provost's discretion

what the hell is this for? so his golfing buddy can get his stupid kid in?

Throw out the SATs [ at least the various parts that are subjective]

Rocket River
Also throw out the grades in those subjective classes too . . .