<p>Silverturtle is absolutely correct. He correctly establishes that under current policy in which equal rights are granted to the entire population without regard to race, racial barriers essentially recede and cease to exist since skin color does not mechanically induce present achievement barriers.</p>
<p>Yes, schools do select students based on qualities other than scholastic achievement, but me, and many other more socially enlightened individuals, are purely arguing that one these qualities should not be skin color which is the crucial flaw in today’s AA policy.</p>
<p>Yes you did. You stated that white skin does not confer any unique experiences relative to those of minority groups, which I find extraordinarily offensive to both me and the several billion individuals who happen to be of Caucasian descent.</p>
<p>I find it sad that you have yet to transcend the falsehood that those hoping to institute equal admission practices are racists. Was Martin Luther King Jr. a racist by speaking for the idealism of a society that bases our citizens on the basis of their individual merit rather than the color of our skin?</p>
<p>In addition, you cannot fault those with beneficial intentions for noticing that race-based admits would not be accepted if it was not for their ethnicity.</p>
<p>Not every white or Asian enjoys wealth; I have already established that. Also, not every Caucasian currently residing in the United States was descended from someone who was here between 1492 and 1964. </p>
<p>Correlation cannot be confused with causation. The quality of colored skin does not automatically grant different social experiences.</p>
<p>Diversity is an attribute that is derives from variations in culture, experience, and environment. Race correlates, but does not directly * cause *, these differences. Blindly admitting minorities that do not have the same degree of individual merit of more qualified applicants is not exercising the proper use of social liberality. One must understand the individual person rather than reverting to stereotypes and assuming that he or she falls within greater social context of a minority who still suffers the repercussions from prior social indiscretions by presently facing socioeconomic turmoil. Such a policy suggests that there is something inherently different between ethnic groups and thus unconditionally authenticates racism. For example, an Asian and an African American do not view the world differently due to the discrepancies in complexion.</p>
<p>Many whites and Asians’ experiences are not positive yet they do not receive the slightest vestige of AA benefits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, amciw is exactly right.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thank you, annachristina.</p>
<p>Also, NearL, you claim that merit is a binary concept. That is, either you are qualified for admission or you are not. However, merit is indeed a continuum – qualified exists, just as supreme qualification exists. To put into a concrete perspective, an 1800/3.6 is qualified just as a 2400/4.0 is false. However, it is patently false to declare that one is equal to the other regarding the degree to which each is qualified.</p>
<p>NearL, you concede that you do personally attack the words that I use but quite frankly I actually do not find your rhetorical skills impressive to any extent.
Consider this question: You have stated that you are Asian and AA has not yet negatively affected you in any way. If you had been relegated to your local community college or state university upon your college departure, would you have felt any indignant tinge at these results? I am quite positive that you would be singing a different tune.</p>
<p>Mifune brings up numerous logically sound and cogent points.</p>
<p>I’ll pose one question to him, though: </p>
<p>Undoubtedly, affirmative action empowers minorities. (Admittedly, it is indeed at the expense of other groups who may be as or more “worthy” of the benefit that affirmative action confers.) If affirmative action were ceased, the percentage of Caucasian students at top schools would increase. Top schools disproportionately send alumni into positions of power. It follows that more powerful people would be non-minorities. </p>
<p>Is this state not potentially regressive and dangerous?</p>
<p>Sure, where’s the question? When you write “consider this question”, you should follow up the clause with an actual question rather than a statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Had I been relegated to my local community college or state university, the cause would have been something other than Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action rarely is rarely the deciding factor between Yale and Podunk University. It doesn’t shut out a legitimately competitive student from the top 25 or even top 10 universities. Much more often than not - if Affirmative Action does make a difference - it is the difference between Yale and Columbia, or Dartmouth and Chicago, or Vanderbilt and UCLA. So a better question is, if I had been relegated to a university within Yale’s tier rather than Yale, would I had been ****ed? The answer is a resounding no.</p>
<p>^This is something that should be kept in mind during any debate about affirmative action. Even if a competitive applicant is “unfairly gypped out a spot” at HYPS and the like, the end result if they applied with any kind of sense is that a year later they are happy at another great school. They are not being cheated out an education by any means.</p>
<p>This is absolutely untrue. In fact, Asian numbers would increase, with Caucasian numbers staying the same. If the legacy and athletic recruit BS were taken away, Caucasian numbers would plummet.</p>
<p>White posters don’t quite get that they already receive Affirmative Action. </p>
<p>Check this quote on an article about Affirmative Action:</p>
<p>Do you want to reply to my comment regarding your fallaciousness of proposition regarding being stuck at a community college rather than going to Yale? It’s right here again:</p>
<p>Had I been relegated to my local community college or state university, the cause would have been something other than Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action rarely is rarely the deciding factor between Yale and Podunk University. It doesn’t shut out a legitimately competitive student from the top 25 or even top 10 universities. Much more often than not - if Affirmative Action does make a difference - it is the difference between Yale and Columbia, or Dartmouth and Chicago, or Vanderbilt and UCLA. So a better question is, if I had been relegated to a university within Yale’s tier rather than Yale, would I had been ****ed? The answer is a resounding no.</p>
<p>There’s also the article quote I posted above from an academic stating that whites receive affirmative action in forms that don’t appear antithetical to merit. </p>
<p>There’s also my now substantiated claim proving that whites would actually be hurt in a real meritocracy.</p>
<p>^oh come on, if you weren’t at yale already (you are, aren’t you?) you’d be on our side of the debate. you’re only defending AA because you’re at yale already (assuming you are- sorry I forget)</p>
<p>I think NearL’s arguments deserve more consideration than this. No debate would be productive if we assume that one’s thoughts are, without exception, selfish.</p>
<p>I, for example, am cautiously opposed to affirmative action (though I am somewhat openminded about the topic, as I don’t see a good alternative solution) even though I may benefit from it.</p>
<p>Yes, I agree that the Asian increase would be the most pronounced given that as a collective body, Asians demonstrate the greatest degree of academic, personal, and contributory merit of an ethnic segment of the population. But Caucasian numbers would inevitably increase to an extent as well. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>With minority applicants freed from the glass ceiling I consistently refer to, meritocracy is the proper direction. Instituting a progressive form of meritocracy and a reasonable degree of socioeconomic Affirmative Action to measure an applicant’s personal circumstances in which his or her achievements are attained, will largely lead American education on a new path of enlightenment, one in which we will all be recognized by our scholastic, individual, and contributory merits and not by our superficial appearance to the outside world.</p>
<p>If I weren’t at Yale I’d be at Dartmouth, Columbia, Chicago, MIT, or Berkeley, or my state flagship with a full scholarship - and I still wouldn’t bother arguing against AA unless I was also arguing for the elimination of white AA as well.</p>
<p>Your white supremacy is showing. You don’t get that the white applicant pool is not nearly as competitive on average as the Asian pool. You don’t get that blacks aren’t taking up your spots.</p>
<p>No, white numbers would not increase. White numbers would decrease. This is fact. In all the places where affirmative action was eliminated, white enrollment decreased - and this is in the presence of white affirmative action like athletic recruiting.</p>
<p>Yes, that is true. But if you deserved entrance into a Yale-caliber university and did not receive it (and as an Asian individual such as yourself, you were likely excellently portrayed on paper), you may have wondered to a certain extent about the exact reasoning behind your rejection.</p>