If I was a negro I wouldn't apply to any colleges in Michigan or any state that refuses to consider race as a factor. If you don't plan to track gender and race then how do I know if you are only admitting white males? And if tax money is supporting the colleges then the students body should reflect the people of the state. Why would negroes pay state income and sales taxes and their children can't go to the state colleges? Is that fair?
But shouldn't people be admitted based on a ranking of ability, with the most qualified getting in? I understand that, given "tiebreaker" situations, you want to make sure the population is represented, so perhaps tracking is necessary for that. But only then should it apply.
And, perhaps, to identify why a group does not meet the standards. Identifying such groups would allow research of the cause of the discrepancy, and could lead to corrections in methods of earlier education.
All men created equal .. the 14th & 15th amendments, civil rights laws from the 60's ... affirmative action is discrimination.
Imagine a college admissions committee trying to decide between the white [son] of an Appalachian coal miner's family and the African American son of a successful Pittsburgh neurosurgeon. Why should the black applicant get preference over the white applicant?
Affirmative Action is an insult to any proud black person and implies that blacks are manifestly inferior and stupid.
wow. Mr. stewartm0205 said the word negro.
Affirmative action is not discrimination. It is just balancing the residual racism that still exist in our society. If there was no racism then it would be wrong so until that day arrives it is still needed. If you stop tracking the numbers you will end up with 100% white students in Michigan's universities because I think it would be difficult for a group to be totally fair in admitting students. I believe in the absolute equality of the races so if there is a different in admissions then I believe it is due to the historic and residual racism in our society and it must be dealt with if our society is to become less racist.
There has been racism for millennium - human nature unfortunately .. a govt program will not change that by 'balancing'. As if Govt is all knowing and all benevolent and fair.
Only by truly treating people the same regardless of sex, race, creed, color, religion can equality become a real thing ... do as I say and not as I do - is hypocrisy.
Giving preferential treatment to someone because of their race is racism as you are discriminating against other races when you do that. You nor I can change the fact that there were slaves in America just as much as we can have a do over for the Japanese interment camps.
There are many other states that have been going thru the same thing as Wisconsin - I know California has some lawsuits on going.
The past couple of years - affirmative action in the news - related to the Superemes
sotomayor and the white fire workers and
Kegan not hiring minorities when she was a dean at Harvard
I know your reply was to Big T, but I'll state:
If you are allowing race to trump ability, then it is in fact the very definition of racism.
And reiterate:
However, if you are just using the tracking data to make sure that people of equal ability are proportionately represented, it seems ok to me.
Racism is a relatively new phenomenon. Arose in the 1600-1700s as a way of justifying slavery and the exploitation of others. Continued after the end of slavery as a means to have a permanent underclass to maintain a stratified society so that the few can rule the many. Disappearing quite rapidly now which makes the few pretty nervous. Most people don't understand that there is no level playing field. You either advocate for an equal society which means affirmative action or you advocate for an unequal society. Remember separate and equal which was always separate but never equal.
Mr. stewartm0205 has received a Bob Job and received SLACK in blazingly fast period of time.
The races are equal. If there are differences in performance it is due to psychological damages caused by living in a racist society. If racism does not cause any negative effects then there would be no reason to do it.
There has been racism just about as long as there have been people. Just give people a reason to hate someone because they are different .. and most people will.
I think that as the world becomes a smaller place it is getting better - but mankind has a long way to go.
Though I don't often like to quote from Wiki ... this is but a mere snippet of examples Racism in Europe
Racism is a specific type of hate. The first thing you need for Racism is race and race is a relatively new concept.
If there are differences in performance it is due to psychological damages caused by living in a racist society
Part of that damage done is done by treating a group of people as if their intellect is so substandard that they need handicapped requisites to compete. It may be well-meaning racism, but it is racism nonetheless. How can you have good self-esteem, if you know that your own abilities are not good enough to compete without a handicap?
If racism does not cause any negative effects then there would be no reason to do it.
Those negative effects should be dealt with at the source during an earlier age, not after the fact.
Diversity can be a failure as long as white people are introduced into the mix. The whites fight against the diversity, bust the block, and flee the area, You can see how the whites resist diversity in my recent post where gay whites were protesting, in fact scared of, the minority groups in the neighborhood sporting their youthful zeal for life.
steamed
And shove it you white boy and uppity Asians who voted against race and gender discrimination and whine about reverse discrimination.