Trump DOJ to prosecute universities for anti-white affirmative action policies

[Anonymous]

But it is not because that is surefire way to create a permanent underclass citizens with blacks, hispanics and white trash. Asians do well because they come from a very favorable socio-economic background. Once you have that advantage then it matters less which college you get into(an Ivy or Public Ivy). Asians are stuck in a virtuous loop of educated parents make money pass it on to their kids who get top education who make even more money.

But a if black student is denied admission into the top college then its like denying the entire black community for generations after. Blacks are stuck in a negative loop. Blacks don't score well because of social status and are relegated to a a weaker school and the negative loop continues. One or two exceptional student will break this cycle BUT most will not. Is this what you want? Where is upward mobility for blacks?

How is it like denying the entire black community. Why do you only apply community when it comes to black people.

I am Asian and I went to Ivy League school. My parents had to make a lot of sacrifices to get me to where I am. I did not do drugs or skip classes I focused and made all the right choices but are you saying I dont deserve any success in life because I worked hard? I have seen lots of Black kids who squander the opportunities they have, why should they deserve any better? I have also seen other Blacks who have struggled and made the right choices and are doing very well.
People should succeed based on their life choices and hard work and not based on race.

[Anonymous]

People who are talking about all the things that race is an indicator of (e.g. lower SES level, lack of role models with higher education, etc) are missing the point. Colleges already ask for this information and they do giver admissions preference based on it. A white, rural, first-in-family college applicant will absolutely get admissions preference over a white, suburban, child of parents with advanced degrees. And this is as it should be, IMHO.

Race-based preference is given, because racism still exists whether you choose to believe that or not. It's not about all the other factors that are correlated with race, it's about race. Rich black kids still face discrimination and obstacles based merely on the color of their skin, which is one justification for giving them preference.

On the flip side, even if you don't believe they face unique race-based obstacles, schools can affirmatively choose to prioritize creating a racially diverse student body if they want to do so...just like they prioritize creating a student body in all kinds of other ways. Schools can choose to give an edge to a student who plays the tuba, or fences, or volunteers at the local kayaking club. And for those saying that they can't because race is a protected class while flute-players are not, I'm sorry but SCOTUS disagrees with you. Sounds like Trump wants to challenge that decision, and it's really too bad that this non-issue is so important to him. But there you go. If your foreign policy is falling apart and your domestic agenda is in shambles, you might as well go back to stoking the nationalistic fire that got you elected, I guess.

Like reproductive rights, I don't expect an online forum discussion to change anyone's minds on the subject...but I do think it's important to be accurate about what's being discussed. And what's being discussed is not race as a proxy for other disadvantages but race itself being a disadvantage. It is.

-- Indian-American with multiple degrees from multiple HYPS schools who accepts that my kids might have a harder time getting admission to the same schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But it is not because that is surefire way to create a permanent underclass citizens with blacks, hispanics and white trash. Asians do well because they come from a very favorable socio-economic background. Once you have that advantage then it matters less which college you get into(an Ivy or Public Ivy). Asians are stuck in a virtuous loop of educated parents make money pass it on to their kids who get top education who make even more money.

But a if black student is denied admission into the top college then its like denying the entire black community for generations after. Blacks are stuck in a negative loop. Blacks don't score well because of social status and are relegated to a a weaker school and the negative loop continues. One or two exceptional student will break this cycle BUT most will not. Is this what you want? Where is upward mobility for blacks?

How is it like denying the entire black community. Why do you only apply community when it comes to black people.

I am Asian and I went to Ivy League school. My parents had to make a lot of sacrifices to get me to where I am. I did not do drugs or skip classes I focused and made all the right choices but are you saying I dont deserve any success in life because I worked hard? I have seen lots of Black kids who squander the opportunities they have, why should they deserve any better? I have also seen other Blacks who have struggled and made the right choices and are doing very well.
People should succeed based on their life choices and hard work and not based on race.

Black kids who skipped class to do drugs are not gaining admission to Ivy League schools unless they are such geniuses that they are sitting at the top of their classes and not getting caught for skipping class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:identity politics, GOP style.

Well, to be fair, Identity Politics was indeed started by liberals.


Check your status here:

- black or African
- white
- Asian
- Hispanic
- Native American
- two or more races
- other
- in love with a tree
- polyamorous
- bisexual ambidextrous
- pansexual wiccan
- still deciding
- Brony


Each day, without fail, my middle school daughter would share some story about how another kid in her class has either switched gender or had embraced some other "form." I can no longer keep up.

So?

My rising junior dd recently filled out some info form on a college website. She was telling me that it not only presented about 10+ gender identity options, but the race question actually was phrased as "which race do you identify as." I suppose we can all just choose whatever we want now. It's like identity mad libs.

I fail to see the problem with this statement. I am half white and half URM. I always identify white. Remember your life experience is not universal to all.

Fine. Then I'm guessing it's OK if I identify as black?

Sure...but you KNOW you don't really want to be black. And that is the question I ask my White friends when they start whining about issues like this. Would you trade places with that person - not just the parts you see as an advantage, but the entire experience?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universities continue to judge students on the color of their skin, instead of the content of their character, grades, and other achievements - even after we have, as a nation, elected a black president (twice).

The racism which is affirmative action must now end.

I agree. I'm the one who used to work in higher-ed admissions, and I left the job. I did not agree with the goal of giving a slot to a black student with a 3.3 when a white student with a 3.6 (and higher test scores) was rejected, when both were from a similar SES. It's racist, and discrimination against whites.

So you just wanted an all white class is what you are telling me. In the name of fairness?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who are talking about all the things that race is an indicator of (e.g. lower SES level, lack of role models with higher education, etc) are missing the point. Colleges already ask for this information and they do giver admissions preference based on it. A white, rural, first-in-family college applicant will absolutely get admissions preference over a white, suburban, child of parents with advanced degrees. And this is as it should be, IMHO.

Race-based preference is given, because racism still exists whether you choose to believe that or not. It's not about all the other factors that are correlated with race, it's about race. Rich black kids still face discrimination and obstacles based merely on the color of their skin, which is one justification for giving them preference.

On the flip side, even if you don't believe they face unique race-based obstacles, schools can affirmatively choose to prioritize creating a racially diverse student body if they want to do so...just like they prioritize creating a student body in all kinds of other ways. Schools can choose to give an edge to a student who plays the tuba, or fences, or volunteers at the local kayaking club. And for those saying that they can't because race is a protected class while flute-players are not, I'm sorry but SCOTUS disagrees with you. Sounds like Trump wants to challenge that decision, and it's really too bad that this non-issue is so important to him. But there you go. If your foreign policy is falling apart and your domestic agenda is in shambles, you might as well go back to stoking the nationalistic fire that got you elected, I guess.

Like reproductive rights, I don't expect an online forum discussion to change anyone's minds on the subject...but I do think it's important to be accurate about what's being discussed. And what's being discussed is not race as a proxy for other disadvantages but race itself being a disadvantage. It is.

-- Indian-American with multiple degrees from multiple HYPS schools who accepts that my kids might have a harder time getting admission to the same schools

So you're saying that a poor white will be given an advantage over a middle class white? Why is it contained within the same race? Why isn't a poor white given an advantage over a middle class black?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universities continue to judge students on the color of their skin, instead of the content of their character, grades, and other achievements - even after we have, as a nation, elected a black president (twice).

The racism which is affirmative action must now end.

I agree. I'm the one who used to work in higher-ed admissions, and I left the job. I did not agree with the goal of giving a slot to a black student with a 3.3 when a white student with a 3.6 (and higher test scores) was rejected, when both were from a similar SES. It's racist, and discrimination against whites.

So you just wanted an all white class is what you are telling me. In the name of fairness?

No. I didn't want an all white class. Stop turning this around as my being a racist, which is what you're doing. I wanted a class of the best and brightest, with preferences given to those from poor and/or uneducated families, and those most likely to succeed in their academic programs, regardless of color. If that turned out to be an all-black class, fine.

[Anonymous]

This is political pandering 101. Trump is taking body blows on a number of fronts. What better way to regain the base's love than to point out to them that those dern Black and Brown people have it better than they do and are taking opportunities from you good White folk? It is obviously a successful strategy. He won the election with it. It is like cheese in the trap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are talking about all the things that race is an indicator of (e.g. lower SES level, lack of role models with higher education, etc) are missing the point. Colleges already ask for this information and they do giver admissions preference based on it. A white, rural, first-in-family college applicant will absolutely get admissions preference over a white, suburban, child of parents with advanced degrees. And this is as it should be, IMHO.

Race-based preference is given, because racism still exists whether you choose to believe that or not. It's not about all the other factors that are correlated with race, it's about race. Rich black kids still face discrimination and obstacles based merely on the color of their skin, which is one justification for giving them preference.

On the flip side, even if you don't believe they face unique race-based obstacles, schools can affirmatively choose to prioritize creating a racially diverse student body if they want to do so...just like they prioritize creating a student body in all kinds of other ways. Schools can choose to give an edge to a student who plays the tuba, or fences, or volunteers at the local kayaking club. And for those saying that they can't because race is a protected class while flute-players are not, I'm sorry but SCOTUS disagrees with you. Sounds like Trump wants to challenge that decision, and it's really too bad that this non-issue is so important to him. But there you go. If your foreign policy is falling apart and your domestic agenda is in shambles, you might as well go back to stoking the nationalistic fire that got you elected, I guess.

Like reproductive rights, I don't expect an online forum discussion to change anyone's minds on the subject...but I do think it's important to be accurate about what's being discussed. And what's being discussed is not race as a proxy for other disadvantages but race itself being a disadvantage. It is.

-- Indian-American with multiple degrees from multiple HYPS schools who accepts that my kids might have a harder time getting admission to the same schools

So you're saying that a poor white will be given an advantage over a middle class white? Why is it contained within the same race? Why isn't a poor white given an advantage over a middle class black?

They probably are. Most admissions systems are based on points. So poor white might get a point for being poor. Middle class black might get a point for being black. Poor black might get two points, one for being black and another for being poor. All else being equal, poor black would get in. Middle class black and poor white would be considered as equal-caliber admits, and which one gets in is based on what the rest of the class of admits look like (if there is a lot of racial diversity in rest of class poor white gets in, if there is a lot of SES diversity in rest of class then MC black gets in).

I'm way over-simplifying, but that's generally how it works. People like to focus on the race piece, because that's how American politics are framed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:identity politics, GOP style.

Well, to be fair, Identity Politics was indeed started by liberals.


Check your status here:

- black or African
- white
- Asian
- Hispanic
- Native American
- two or more races
- other
- in love with a tree
- polyamorous
- bisexual ambidextrous
- pansexual wiccan
- still deciding
- Brony


Each day, without fail, my middle school daughter would share some story about how another kid in her class has either switched gender or had embraced some other "form." I can no longer keep up.

So?

My rising junior dd recently filled out some info form on a college website. She was telling me that it not only presented about 10+ gender identity options, but the race question actually was phrased as "which race do you identify as." I suppose we can all just choose whatever we want now. It's like identity mad libs.

I fail to see the problem with this statement. I am half white and half URM. I always identify white. Remember your life experience is not universal to all.

Fine. Then I'm guessing it's OK if I identify as black?

Sure...but you KNOW you don't really want to be black. And that is the question I ask my White friends when they start whining about issues like this. Would you trade places with that person - not just the parts you see as an advantage, but the entire experience?

But maybe I would like to be black, since we are basically taught we need to be ashamed that we are white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm generally pro-affirmative action but wouldn't a policy of affirmative action based on income work to accomplish the same goals AND take the wind out of the sails of the white nationalists?

I agree with this theoretically. But the issue is how do you prove someone is from poor socio-economic background. Income can be fudged many ways and wealthy whites/asians will work with their accountants to make themselves "financially look poor" for couple of years before their kids apply. Also does income alone change the social background of blacks? No. Many lower middle income or middle income blacks still live in a majority black neighborhood for family reasons.

Therein lies the issue. Everyone is looking for a leg up, no one wants to actually do the work to get ahead.

What do you mean by "do the work to get ahead" ? Define that? Asians also top any admission tests and do plenty of "extra-curricular" activities. So are you ok if Asians are over 50% in any top school, because based on any objective measure they sure deserve it.

NP. Absolutely. College admissions should be race-blind.

But it is not because that is surefire way to create a permanent underclass citizens with blacks, hispanics and white trash. Asians do well because they come from a very favorable socio-economic background. Once you have that advantage then it matters less which college you get into(an Ivy or Public Ivy). Asians are stuck in a virtuous loop of educated parents make money pass it on to their kids who get top education who make even more money.

But a if black student is denied admission into the top college then its like denying the entire black community for generations after. Blacks are stuck in a negative loop. Blacks don't score well because of social status and are relegated to a a weaker school and the negative loop continues. One or two exceptional student will break this cycle BUT most will not. Is this what you want? Where is upward mobility for blacks?

This is some real candor. I think lots of people who support affirmative action believe certain groups like African Americans won't be able to succeed without getting a handout. Other groups can apparently make it on their own, but African Americans cannot.

If you want to help the so-called underclass, that's great! There are tons of ways to do it that don't involve giving kids admission preferences because of the color of their skin.

You are reading whatever you want selectively. I never said blacks cannot make it without affirmative action in admissions. No one said AA is all about giving admission preference based on their skin color ALONE.

All I said was blacks(and hispanics) are in a negative loop that has to be broken for many of them NOT just for the lone exception. Education is a very good predictor of upward mobility. And college education is a major factor in someone getting out of dire poverty.

Can you name atleast 5/6 ways out of the tons of ways how a historically disadvantaged black community can be pulled out of their rut WITHOUT them ever getting a decent college education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:identity politics, GOP style.

Well, to be fair, Identity Politics was indeed started by liberals.


Check your status here:

- black or African
- white
- Asian
- Hispanic
- Native American
- two or more races
- other
- in love with a tree
- polyamorous
- bisexual ambidextrous
- pansexual wiccan
- still deciding
- Brony


Each day, without fail, my middle school daughter would share some story about how another kid in her class has either switched gender or had embraced some other "form." I can no longer keep up.

So?

My rising junior dd recently filled out some info form on a college website. She was telling me that it not only presented about 10+ gender identity options, but the race question actually was phrased as "which race do you identify as." I suppose we can all just choose whatever we want now. It's like identity mad libs.

I fail to see the problem with this statement. I am half white and half URM. I always identify white. Remember your life experience is not universal to all.

Fine. Then I'm guessing it's OK if I identify as black?

Sure...but you KNOW you don't really want to be black. And that is the question I ask my White friends when they start whining about issues like this. Would you trade places with that person - not just the parts you see as an advantage, but the entire experience?

But maybe I would like to be black, since we are basically taught we need to be ashamed that we are white.

so maybe you can answer the question. Would you rather be black?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But it is not because that is surefire way to create a permanent underclass citizens with blacks, hispanics and white trash. Asians do well because they come from a very favorable socio-economic background. Once you have that advantage then it matters less which college you get into(an Ivy or Public Ivy). Asians are stuck in a virtuous loop of educated parents make money pass it on to their kids who get top education who make even more money.

But a if black student is denied admission into the top college then its like denying the entire black community for generations after. Blacks are stuck in a negative loop. Blacks don't score well because of social status and are relegated to a a weaker school and the negative loop continues. One or two exceptional student will break this cycle BUT most will not. Is this what you want? Where is upward mobility for blacks?

How is it like denying the entire black community. Why do you only apply community when it comes to black people.

I am Asian and I went to Ivy League school. My parents had to make a lot of sacrifices to get me to where I am. I did not do drugs or skip classes I focused and made all the right choices but are you saying I dont deserve any success in life because I worked hard? I have seen lots of Black kids who squander the opportunities they have, why should they deserve any better? I have also seen other Blacks who have struggled and made the right choices and are doing very well.
People should succeed based on their life choices and hard work and not based on race.

I am asian too and I know for sure asians didn't suffer through the indignity of slavery and Jim Crow. I know Asians weren't systematically disenfranchised en masse when it came to voting. I know Asians weren't stopped from buying a home like the blacks were for various reasons until the 1980s, which stops them from accumulating assets or using home equity to pay for college. I know Asians don't have to live in dire circumstances with drug war happening in the neighborhood. I know Asians don't have to worry about cops shooting them on random traffic stops. I know Asians don't have to overcome the entire negative black stereotypes that blacks have to overcome no matter their own individual qualities.

I can keep going but You won't know how bad it is unless you live in their shoes OR have the compassion to feel some one else's pain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who are talking about all the things that race is an indicator of (e.g. lower SES level, lack of role models with higher education, etc) are missing the point. Colleges already ask for this information and they do giver admissions preference based on it. A white, rural, first-in-family college applicant will absolutely get admissions preference over a white, suburban, child of parents with advanced degrees. And this is as it should be, IMHO.

Race-based preference is given, because racism still exists whether you choose to believe that or not. It's not about all the other factors that are correlated with race, it's about race. Rich black kids still face discrimination and obstacles based merely on the color of their skin, which is one justification for giving them preference.

On the flip side, even if you don't believe they face unique race-based obstacles, schools can affirmatively choose to prioritize creating a racially diverse student body if they want to do so...just like they prioritize creating a student body in all kinds of other ways. Schools can choose to give an edge to a student who plays the tuba, or fences, or volunteers at the local kayaking club. And for those saying that they can't because race is a protected class while flute-players are not, I'm sorry but SCOTUS disagrees with you. Sounds like Trump wants to challenge that decision, and it's really too bad that this non-issue is so important to him. But there you go. If your foreign policy is falling apart and your domestic agenda is in shambles, you might as well go back to stoking the nationalistic fire that got you elected, I guess.

Like reproductive rights, I don't expect an online forum discussion to change anyone's minds on the subject...but I do think it's important to be accurate about what's being discussed. And what's being discussed is not race as a proxy for other disadvantages but race itself being a disadvantage. It is.

-- Indian-American with multiple degrees from multiple HYPS schools who accepts that my kids might have a harder time getting admission to the same schools

I totally agree with your post and you said it very well. Affirmative Action is not race based preferential system as some would like to have us believe. It is basically a way(there is no perfect system) to even out the discrepancies of various negative factors that can affect blacks or poor rural white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are talking about all the things that race is an indicator of (e.g. lower SES level, lack of role models with higher education, etc) are missing the point. Colleges already ask for this information and they do giver admissions preference based on it. A white, rural, first-in-family college applicant will absolutely get admissions preference over a white, suburban, child of parents with advanced degrees. And this is as it should be, IMHO.

Race-based preference is given, because racism still exists whether you choose to believe that or not. It's not about all the other factors that are correlated with race, it's about race. Rich black kids still face discrimination and obstacles based merely on the color of their skin, which is one justification for giving them preference.

On the flip side, even if you don't believe they face unique race-based obstacles, schools can affirmatively choose to prioritize creating a racially diverse student body if they want to do so...just like they prioritize creating a student body in all kinds of other ways. Schools can choose to give an edge to a student who plays the tuba, or fences, or volunteers at the local kayaking club. And for those saying that they can't because race is a protected class while flute-players are not, I'm sorry but SCOTUS disagrees with you. Sounds like Trump wants to challenge that decision, and it's really too bad that this non-issue is so important to him. But there you go. If your foreign policy is falling apart and your domestic agenda is in shambles, you might as well go back to stoking the nationalistic fire that got you elected, I guess.

Like reproductive rights, I don't expect an online forum discussion to change anyone's minds on the subject...but I do think it's important to be accurate about what's being discussed. And what's being discussed is not race as a proxy for other disadvantages but race itself being a disadvantage. It is.

-- Indian-American with multiple degrees from multiple HYPS schools who accepts that my kids might have a harder time getting admission to the same schools

So you're saying that a poor white will be given an advantage over a middle class white? Why is it contained within the same race? Why isn't a poor white given an advantage over a middle class black?

They probably are. Most admissions systems are based on points. So poor white might get a point for being poor. Middle class black might get a point for being black. Poor black might get two points, one for being black and another for being poor. All else being equal, poor black would get in. Middle class black and poor white would be considered as equal-caliber admits, and which one gets in is based on what the rest of the class of admits look like (if there is a lot of racial diversity in rest of class poor white gets in, if there is a lot of SES diversity in rest of class then MC black gets in).

I'm way over-simplifying, but that's generally how it works. People like to focus on the race piece, because that's how American politics are framed.

Another well thought out and explained post. For a simpleton everything is seen as a black or white(literally and figuratively) issue but in reality everything is grey.