Instituational favoritism = affirmative action??

Discussion in 'Community' started by Taft, Jan 17, 2003.

  1. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #1
    I've seen a few stories about this over the last few days and wanted to hear some opinions about it.

    We've discussed affirmative action, with the end result that most people are against affirmative action, at least in how its presently practiced. But consider the following: at some educational institutions sons and daughters of alumni get admitted at twice the rate of the general public.

    If such statistics are really indicative of instituational favoritism, that certainly colors our discussion of affirmative action. How can we lobby and speak out against affirmative action when favoritism on the basis of heritage and social status exists?

    Here is one of the many articles (in this case an opinion piece in the form of a journal from a left leaning publication) about this issue:
    http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2003/01/16/bush/index.html

    Thoughts?

    Taft
     
  2. Kethoticus macrumors 6502

    Kethoticus

    #2
    Thoughts? Simple: only the elimination of any kind of favoritism will bring about truly equal opportunity for all. Why in the world racism, alumni status, or anything else are tolerated in this day and age is beyond me. But there's one thing I've learned in my 38 years: people are people, as Depeche Mode once said, and that basically means that even with laws and public policies to the contrary, people will always exercize favoritism for one reason or another. There will never be true fairness and objectivity in any human institution because humans are inherently unfair and imperfect (otherwise, we wouldn't need laws and the threat of punishment to curb our behavior).
     
  3. Backtothemac macrumors 601

    Backtothemac

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Location:
    San Destin Florida
    #3
    Here is reality, there will never be true equal opportunity for all people in all situations no matter what. It doesn't matter what legislation is introduced to try to force people to do so. If someone doesnt' want you there, you won't be there.

    Now, the answer to the above question is simple. If the insitution is private, then we need to suck it up and walk on down the road. Fair, no, but life isn't fair. If it is a state run school. You better bet your ass that the rules should change.
     
  4. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #4
    Well said! People of money and privilege expect special treatment, laws don't apply. Private insurance and healthcare. Private institutions are private and the state no say in their policies!
     
  5. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #5
    ????i]Originally posted by wdlove [/i]


    Well said! People of money and privilege expect special treatment, laws don't apply. Private insurance and healthcare. Private institutions are private and the state no say in their policies!
    [/QUOTE]

    You have just summed up everything that is inherently wrong with the old boy's club currently occupying the white house. God help us all.
     
  6. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #6
    This is still America, under the Constitution we are guaranteed freedom. It is God that is helping us, I give thanks him everyday. Our leaders only have the power they have because he has given it to them, they will have more to answer for at judgement day. Leaders have the duty to use that power for the good of mankind!
     
  7. Judo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #7
    I'm not so sure freedom is something that should be strived for or can ever be achieved, kinda like perfection. Maybe equality and compassion are more important.
    Just an idea.
     
  8. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #8
    Oh boy. Our guarantees of freedom are being chipped away weekly by Ashcroft and bush, and you're okay with this?
    Right now there is an american citizen named Jose Pedilla who is in a Navy prison in total isolation with "the lights on 24 hours a day" "where he will remain for the duration of the war [on terrorism]". No lawyer, no legal representation, no charges, no evidence, no rights. This guy is no angel, but it's highly unlikely that he has anything to do with the real terrorists. Now that the government has done this, they feel free to do it again, to anyone.
    I'm glad you believe in God, I do too. (Which you should capitalize even when using "He" or "She" or Jahwe or Allah...) I don't believe that God has given these men their power. We did. Either by voting for them, or by abstaining from the vote, or with bush by allowing the vote to be hijacked. We are responsible for judging them and making sure that they are serving the greater good. When they are dead and buried and being sent to Hell it will be too late, and then we will be judged on how we allowed this to happen.
    I ask you wdlove, what has this administration done for the good of mankind?
     
  9. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #9
    Institutional favoritism is bad, yes. The problem is that is starts so early.

    Poor and lower middle class people have decripit public schools, larger class sizes, inexperienced teachers etc.

    They can't afford good lawyers so the justice system is not as "fair" for them.

    They can't make huge campaign contributions so, in the congress where elections cost so much money, the legislators hardly listen to them.

    So here are three pilars of society: public education, justice and representation that aren't so equal for all.

    I would be all for the end of affirmative action in higher education if the negative action of primary education were not so strong. (You know what I mean). Why aren't we funding public schools? It's the stupidest thing in country.

    and affirmative action would go down easier with the public if it were based on class, including some other conditions, rather than race. The United States has come a long way on race, though it still has a way to go. I think we should set a timetable on the end of affirmative action (which I still support in some way) where 15 years after the primary schools have achieved equitable funding, higher educational institutions would drop preferential standards.

    After all, the biggest most successful afirmative action program was the one before the mid '50's. Only white males allowed. If you think that the long term consequences of that program are not still in evidence just look at any picture of a corporate board, a legislative body or a group of judges (especially a corporate board). It's largely white male. Instead of asking "why aren't there any black people?" Ask "Why are there so many white men?". It a subtle difference in questioning that leads directly back to the long term consequences and power of our previous "affirmative action" system.
     
  10. Choppaface macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Location:
    SFBA
    #10
    college admissions is like gambling. if the goal is to have only qualified students accepted, then a lot more has to be done besides the abolition of affirmative action. all it takes is a grouchy admissions officer for some perfectly fine student to get rejected, and that happens pretty frequently. there are a lot of capable students who don't get in because either their essay didn't glow or admissions just didn't really like them. if there are some private institutions that want to maintain quotas, they can do that fine.... but the whole system is already so subjective that getting rid of affirmative action isn't necessarily such a great improvement.
     
  11. job macrumors 68040

    job

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Location:
    in transit
    #11
    He's only been in office for two years now. It takes decades for historians and political analysts to determine how influential any administration was. To make such far-reaching statements at this point in time is absurd. Try it 10-20 years down the road.
     
  12. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #12
    I'm not looking for far reaching statements and any statements 10-20 years from now are too late.
    wdlove said that " Leaders have the duty to use that power for the good of mankind! " I just wanted wdlove to step up and say how bush's policies are benefiting mankind. A little backup of the statement is all I'm looking for.
     
  13. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #13
    Funny, I thought the Republicans hated the idea of a president working to build his legacy or doing anything that might be long term in nature. Color me surprised.
     
  14. idkew macrumors 68020

    idkew

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Location:
    where the concrete to dirt ratio is better
    #14


    You have just summed up everything that is inherently wrong with the old boy's club currently occupying the white house. God help us all.
    [/QUOTE]

    you sound like a very bitter person.

    private clubs/universities/whatevers can practice whatever the hell they want. they should never HAVE to follow what the government says is right. if they want to institute AA, it is THEIR choice, no one else's.

    i am currently enrolled in a PRIVATE institution, and the admissions people are doing ALL they can to attract people of ethnic backgrounds. We can not get enough. There are people here who's sole job is to recruit minority people.

    Sure sounds like an old boy's club to me.
     
  15. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #15
    idkew, My comment actually had little to do with the affirmative action debate, but the fact that wdlove believes that it's okay to have an elite class to whom no laws need apply.
    My dig was aimed at the bush regime. If they were just hanging out playing golf with each other in a private club then I really couldn't give a crap. But since they are now sitting in the seat of power using our tax dollars and setting in place policies that directly affect our lives than yes it concerns me.
    I guess I do sound bitter while discussing politics with conservatives, and the drivel that comes out of the mind of wdlove does tend to get under my skin a little too easily...oh well.
     
  16. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #16
    I don't think God picks the leaders of this country. I know God didn't write the laws or the constitution. I am pretty sure God does not favor the US over other countries because God is probably not that petty.

    None-the-less: Leaders have the duty to use that power for the good of mankind!
     
  17. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #17
    wdlove is still noticeably absent on this follow up point. How has the bush government's policies helped mankind? If no answer is given then are we to assume that these policies are against the good of mankind and only for the benefit of the elite class?
    Come on wdlove, you have to be able to come up with something here, you've had a couple days to think about it and I know you've been posting in that time.
     

Share This Page