<p>
10 characters.</p>
<p>Maybe I should quote next time:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You assume things; I said “the GCs have verified this,” and then you start mentioning how this relates to me making things up because guidance counselors don’t release that info. You’ve expanded on “verification” while ignoring the issue of race-based affirmative action. You constantly try to debate the definitions of words I use to make how I get the information as “dubious.”</p>
<p>Other Examples:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are saying that affirmative action really doesn’t have much of an impact:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where is your proof? How significant is this? Isn’t this a bit off topic?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay, name the benefits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The website I provided, despite its conservative background isn’t all biased. There are many other websites that will show similar statistics. I’m not basing this solely on one website. Do the googling yourself.</p>
<p>Why should race have any preference in academics? How does affirmative action help? How is it necessary? You haven’t answered any of these questions.</p>
<p>I said that race-based affirmative action gives certain people an unfair advantage. Throughout this entire thread, you have been more pro-affirmative action.</p>
<p>Isn’t this a bit contradictory?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Throughout this entire thread, I’ve been trying to prove how its unfair to hard-working students in general, in a country that is supposed to be a meritocracy. You simply haven’t justified how it is fair. Instead you try to focus on how “dubious” my comments are, that it’s discriminatory and not racist, which colleges are considered elite, that it isn’t exactly an equal representation, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, obviously, that’s not how things work. You only proved affirmative action’s existence. How is that fair when they receive federal funding, and are known to be the best in the world? Please don’t go into how reliable those rankings are.</p>
<p>Okay, maybe the title of my thread wasn’t clear enough: How is race-based affirmative action fair?</p>
<p>@goingmeta If you aren’t going to answer the question; if you are going to go off topic or in circles, don’t answer. Nobody wants to hear your gratuitous sarcasm.</p>
<p>bork. just give it up man. You wont get far in life unless you change your reasoning.</p>
<p>Whatever. I don’t think I’ll ever acknowledge or respect race-based affirmative action. I’ll never agree with the pro-affirmative stances of private institutions. </p>
<p>Simply saying that a private college is free to do whatever it wants isn’t a good justification at all; but it’s the most cogent point I’ve encountered so far. </p>
<p>I still believe race-based affirmative action gives certain people significant unfair advantages (it is well-known and obvious). Students treat college admissions into these top private institutions seriously and there have been a number of people, at my high school, and certainly at other high schools, who have committed suicide after being rejected. I will still believe it is complete bull****. </p>
<p>If you can convince me otherwise, go ahead and try to enlighten me. And please try to present some kind of evidence at least relevant to the topic.</p>
<p>
Those quotes suggests nothing of the sort. Are you blind? Illiterate?</p>
<p>
Let’s sum up: you posted something I considered suspect, and I decided to call you out on it. I haven’t been ignoring the topic at hand, I just felt that I needed to know how you know certain things. When you’re attempting to make a point, contrary to what you might believe, you should be expecting that people question your assertions.</p>
<p>
Where is my proof for a question? My point is that people get admitted into universities despite a strong academic record all the time. I know a few people who ended up going to Berkeley because they were athletes. Do I consider that fair? Not really. But I’m also not sitting on a forum crying about it. You seem to think affirmative action is the only thing that “cheats” you out of a world-class education.</p>
<p>
Seriously? The part where I said “different races have something, namely a different point of view, to offer in such an institution” didn’t tip you off?</p>
<p>
LOL.</p>
<p>
How does affirmative action help? Uhh, it helps minorities get into universities maybe? Every government instituted policy isn’t there to benefit you. We denied the rights of blacks for something like 200 years and a large portion of them are still living in generational poverty. You don’t believe that warrants any sort of crutch in our university system?</p>
<p>
NOBODY is saying it has to be fair for you!</p>
<p>
No, actually it’s the only justification that needs to be brought up. For that reason, this thread should have locked/ deleted a long time ago. You’re ignoring facts and just whining at this point.</p>
<p>
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.
Students poor enough to receive federal aid would get the same aid elsewhere. If you’re also talking about research funding, see post #12.
Increased yield because prospective students want diversity, greater probability of generating future leaders in an increasingly multicultural world, making up for past wrongs, etc.
- 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.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Are you opposed to private enterprise altogether, then? Or is higher education somehow different?</p></li>
<li><p>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.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I don’t believe in AA of ANY kind. The policies served their purpose, but it is time to retire it. Let’s let our own merits and accolades lead to our successes. We don’t need “forced diversity,” we need opportunity for anyone, regardless of background, gender, socioeconomic background, blah blah. I want what I do based on what I do, not some numbers game based on my stats, hooks, background, or heritage.</p>
<p>^ Exactly what I’ve been trying to say in this entire thread. I don’t see any reasonable justification for AA.</p>
<p>Mel Gibson isn’t a fan.</p>
<p>^^ Unfortunately, your failure to address legitimate criticism makes your opinion less-than-credible. Post #27?</p>
<p>^noimagination’s posts are always so fun to read.</p>
<p>Anyway, there are already a ton of threads on this topic. It wasn’t necessary to make another.</p>
<p>I also don’t think affirmative action is very fair. I’m so glad Cali schools don’t have it.</p>
<p>The OP may have said some things that didn’t make much sense (didn’t express himself well enough), but I agree with the gist of what he’s trying to say. Either he didn’t know any better, or he just got tired. It doesn’t help to have several posts from goingmeta.</p>
<p>Noimagination said:</p>
<p>“Unfortunately, your failure to address legitimate criticism makes your opinion less-than-credible. Post #27?”</p>
<p>“Students poor enough to receive federal aid would get the same aid elsewhere. If you’re also talking about research funding, see post #12.”</p>
<p>I don’t see how you would get a significantly smaller amount of federal grant aid at other institutions. However, top-rated schools like the Ivies do cover the entire tuition and R&B if you are Pell-eligible. I take it that you aren’t eligible for much federal aid, noimagination?</p>
<p>Ever heard of: [Project</a> on Student Debt: Financial Aid Pledges](<a href=“http://projectonstudentdebt.org/pc_institution.php]Project”>http://projectonstudentdebt.org/pc_institution.php)</p>
<p>“Increased yield because prospective students want diversity, greater probability of generating future leaders in an increasingly multicultural world, making up for past wrongs, etc.”</p>
<p>Past wrongs? Are you kidding me? Only a ■■■■■■ would say that.</p>
<p>Need makes sense to me, not a stupid concept like race.</p>
<p>Most of our education problems occur at homes and in primary school. If parents got involved in their childrens’ education and kids actually read at a 6th grade level by the time they got to 6th grade, AA would not really be necessary.</p>
<p>Instead, we send kids to get C average degrees in college while putting themselves thousands of dollars in debt, all so they can work at McDonalds when they graduate.</p>
<p>By trying to get everyone to go to college and graduate, you only devaluate the degree, one reason why some are saying a Master’s degree is the new bachelor’s degree. Larger and larger curves ensure that everyone passes, when in reality people are learning less. Plus, colleges don’t want students to fail as it makes faculty and the university look bad and they don’t get any more tuition from the student.</p>
<p>By helping less qualified students get into college, all you do is lower the standards for college when we should be raising them for students while they’re still in primary school</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t tell me you actually believe this.</p>
<p>Oh white people, why are you so funny? It’s not like centuries of colonialism, imperialism, and slavery (by white people and against POC) have any impact on society or anything.</p>
<p>[High</a> College Dropout Rate Stems Growth](<a href=“High College Dropout Rate Threatens U.S. Growth | The Fiscal Times”>High College Dropout Rate Threatens U.S. Growth | The Fiscal Times)</p>
<p>Llewellyon, if colleges were creating such a generous curve, why are so many kids dropping out? And you can’t honestly believe that AA is the reason for the degree is devalued(in your eyes). It’s been used in college admissions since the 70s so unless you want to argue that degree have been losing their value for 40 years I think that these two issues are not connected.</p>
<p>The Pat Buchanan article claims that conservative evangelical Christian Whites and White Catholics are under-represented at Harvard. Even if that is true it could be the result of selection bias on the part of these applicant rules rather than discrimination by Harvard. One of my best friends growing up was raised in a very devout Catholic family and was accepted at both Harvard and Notre Dame. He ended up going to Notre Dame. There are undoubably many Catholics who could get accepted at Harvard and do get accepted at Harvard but their families want them to get a “Catholic” education so they end up going to Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, Holy Cross and other top Catholic colleges and universities.</p>
<p>The situation with conservative evangelicals is not as clear cut since schools like Liberty University, Oral Roberts University and Bob Jones University do not have academic statures that even begin to approach those of the Catholic colleges mentioned above. However, many evangelicals consider religion the central pillar of their lives and the things that are taught at Harvard are so anathema to their beliefs that would go to a low ranked bible school rather than a secular university.</p>