Who else opposes race-based affirmative action?

noimagination
Thu, 22 Jul 2010 12:31:55 +0000

The Ivies, all of which are private, are known to provide quality education, which is acknowledged by the entire world.

Lots of schools can offer quality education. I never said that the Ivies don’t - I asked why you are so sure that they provide the best quality education.

They receive vast amounts of federal aid.

Students poor enough to receive federal aid would get the same aid elsewhere. If you’re also talking about research funding, see post #12.

How on earth does race-based affirmative action benefit them?

Increased yield because prospective students want diversity, greater probability of generating future leaders in an increasingly multicultural world, making up for past wrongs, etc.

I oppose it because I think America should be a meritocracy. If a university only cares about its own advancement, I feel that it is unjust. And how does affirmative action promote the university’s interests? You said that those active in athletics became active leaders. What does that have to do with race-based affirmative action?

1. Private universities != America. If you’re going to bring up federal research funding again, I will once again remind you that we fund religiously-affiliated institutions and that funding doesn’t necessarily imply governmental control. Regarding federal student aid, the aid would be given to the student at any school.


Are you opposed to private enterprise altogether, then? Or is higher education somehow different?
The point about athletes was that elite private schools (esp. Harvard) care about producing leaders, not educating the top of the IQ charts. Academic ability is not all they care about - if it were, why would ECs be considered? If they can educate more people who go on to become leaders in the community, they have achieved their goals.