• Mayoman68@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    A lot of things that US courts have recently done(this included) is making making me wonder about how judicial review should work. Because what I keep seeing is that US courts will strike down shitty band aid solutions(which AA was, it was an attempt at a quick and easy solution for a very long list of social issues) without offering better alternatives. I do think that affirmative action should not have to exist, but the better choice is full scale education reform, addressing systemic racism, an understanding of how privilege affects educational outcomes, and greater availability and lower cost of the highest quality tertiary education. As it is today I am observing courts not choosing perfect over good, but rather destroying half baked solutions because they oppose the intended outcomes of those solutions.

    • ElectroVagrant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the better choice is full scale education reform, addressing systemic racism, an understanding of how privilege affects educational outcomes,

      This would likely help, which is why if I’m not mistaken conservatives in the U.S. are opposed to it by lambasting it as “woke Critical Race Theory”. A significant part of the wealthy, and career political class views systemic racism and privilege as foundational, protected rights for which the nation was established to maintain.

      That is, of course, contrary to the fact that those elements were only preserved as a result of compromise so that the nation could exist at all, and not because they necessarily wanted to preserve them, give or take those founding politicians involved.

      • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know how many people on a certain other social media site have issues with the idea of equality? How is equality bad? Isn’t the ultimate goal of a society not to discriminate based on things such as race? So if an admission process is blind to race, how is that bad?

        • Strangle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          People in favor of affirmative action in college admissions see things very specifically.

          They see that an identifiable group is under represented and they want to ‘fix’ it. Without any idea what the ramifications of their ‘fix’ is.

          All they care about is the demographics of whatever it is they are looking at. All they think about is race.

          The idea that racism is the way out of racism is simply crazy.

          Of course, you have to realize that the definition of racism can change from an outlook of superiority to power + privilege on a whim too

          The whole progressive mindset is just fucking evil

          • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The idea that racism is the way out of racism is simply crazy.

            See, I find this statement to perfectly summarize the situation, and I do plan on using it myself. I could totally agree with you on your entire post actually except for that last statement which is woefully out of line. I don’t understand how you can get the first part of your post so right, but then get the last line of your post so wrong.

            • Strangle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I guess considering the last part out of line depends on what your (or my) understanding of the progressive way of thinking and what it’s based on and what it’s goals are.

              They’ve done a great job marketing it as ‘just be a nice person’ but that’s not at all what it really is.

              I’m sure there are hundreds of millions of well-meaning progressives who believe that. And I’m not trying to insult them.

              But people get sold on one thing and end up getting something entirely different all of the time. It’s sad, but that’s the way things are, unfortunately.

              I’m not saying the opposite of progressivism is the answer here either, what I would advocate is common sense.

              If you need a PhD and peer reviewed sociology papers to try to convince someone that something as egregious as race-based college admissions is a good thing, you’re pretty obviously the baddie and common sense should tell us that you’re trying to convince us of something for a different reason.

          • PrimalAnimist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course, you have to realize that the definition of racism can change from an outlook of superiority to power + privilege on a whim too

            I’m in my 50s, I don’t recall the definition of racism changing at all, much less “on a whim”. What are some of the other definitions you have seen arbitrarily assigned to the term racism?

            • Strangle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              When you were taught the definition of racism, or when it’s spoken about today (sometimes) it’s a hateful word and a hateful way of thinking about a group of people.

              : a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

              Progressives have since changed that definition to sometimes mean power + privilege = racism. Which is a wildly different thing and is not based on hate at all, but on socio-issues

              Prejudice plus power, also known as R = P + P, is a stipulative definition of racism used in the United States, often by white anti-racism activists.

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_plus_power

              The problems in discussing these things or calling someone ‘racist’ is that these definitions (amongst others) can be used interchangeably, because they are both wildly different definitions of the same word

    • queermunist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      “I want to attend your school just like my grandfather” = This is fine

      “I want to attend your school because my grandfather wasn’t allowed to” = This is not

      Think about that for a second.

    • RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      But asking them who their father is is fine?

      If people gave a shit about fairness they’d care about legacy admission more than affirmative action.

      • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, that’s not fine either and should also be outlawed due to a history of systemic racism giving some people an advantage over others.

        It should be 100% merit based, plain and simple. It’s the only fair way.

        • RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Funny how we addressed the tool that helped black kids first, rather than the one that hurt them.

          Maybe it’s because this is being pushed by bad people, that you seem to agree with under some fantasy of “100% merit based” reality.

          Systemic biases exist, AA compensated for them banking AA is basically pretending this nation isn’t racist AF.

        • kofe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not how it’s going to play out in reality, unfortunately. I truly wish it were.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How about the likes of Harvard bitching and moaning about this, replaced “affirmative action” with measures to make it easier for students from poorer backgrounds to attend it, which would probably help way more people of latin and afro-american ancestry (who in the most tend to be poorer than average) than this system of “quotas for people who went to nice schools and can afford Harvard student fees” that mainly helps the scions of high-middle and richer parents whose only thing in common with the vast majority of people in the minorities supposedly being helped is a handful of genes?

    You can measure the dripping hypocrisy and sense of entitlement of the people defending certain (maybe most) “afirmative action” measures by just how well-off compared to the vast majority of the population those “helped” by it are (a particularly obvious one is “quotas for CxO positions for women” - it’s not going to be women from poor backgrounds who work as cleaning-ladies that will benefit from such quotas, but rather a handful of women from much better off backgrounds than 99% of people)

    • nomadjoanne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not to mention that you may actually be hurting minorities by allowing them to go to schools they aren’t quite prepared for. A lot of people end up leaving science because of this. They may not quite be up for a Stanford or MIT, but they might be extremely well qualified for a university just one or two rungs lower.

      Instead they flunk out when, okay, maybe they wouldn’t have won a Nobel prize, but they could have actually had a very good career in STEM.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is a huge problem out there with the inequality in access and quality of even primary Education in the US.

        Make it so that inner city schools are as good as posh private schools and I guarantee you that there will be a ton of kids from poor minorities well prepared to attend the likes of Stanford and MIT.

        Affirmative Action has been used as a massive distraction from the huge discrimination along income lines in Education in the US whilst doing almost nothing to actually correct the worst discrimination, as it’s not the well-off kids who attended expensive private and are “prepared for MIT” and happen to be black or latino who need help.

        There is no will to help those who trully need help since most of them “are from the wrong socio-economic strata” and deemed as “wouldn’t fit in the culture of our university” hence all there is are this kind of bullshit marketing fake-help measures which carry on filtering out poor kids.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Treating people equally regardless of their skin color is hardly ‘keeping the colored folks down’.

      • MyOpinion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        People of color have never been treated equally in America. That is the reason they need priority in education to allow them to start to balance out some of that inequality.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is gross.

      Treating people equally, regardless of their skin color, is gross?

      • Asafum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that people were NOT being treated equally and so we had to try to force institutions to accept people they’d otherwise discriminate against. This isn’t going to bring any equality, we’re going to go back to marginalized groups and historically discriminated groups being left out again and rich white people will be back “on top.”

        I say this as a white guy with all the advantages society gives me so I’m not some rando asking for a leg up on anyone. It’s not about me.

      • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think he means anti-white? Racism is any kind of prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by a group, individual, or institution against a person or group on the basis of their race or ethnicity. The group being discriminated against does not necessarily have to be the minority group.

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Racism is any kind of prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by a group, individual, or institution against a person or group on the basis of their race or ethnicity.

          Absolutely not. Racism is inherent to the pseudo-science of scientific racism invented by European “intellectuals” to justify the brutality of colonialist exploitation - which, of course, is still ongoing. It is a fundamental classification of “race” as defined by scientific racists - ie, white supremacists. White goes on top, black at the bottom, some other people go in between. There is no other kind of “racism” - if it doesn’t work according to that specific race hierarchy, it’s not racism.

          This is the reason why it’s not technically true that black people cannot be racist - they can, but they can only be racist insofar as the tenets of white supremacism allows. White supremacism never allows black people to discriminate against white people - which is why you don’t see black cops murdering white folk once a week in front of cameras and getting away with it (they would if they could - cops are cops).

          Han supremacism (for instance) is not racism - it is not based on the same race classification system that forms the core tenet of white supremacist ideology. It simply does not view the world through the lens of race that westerners (ie, white people) do. It is an entirely different form of institutionalized bigotry and discrimination.

    • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not sure what you’re trying to say here. Historically minority groups (specifically black and Hispanic) have been underrepresented in higher education. Affirmative action was supposed to help make higher education racially represent the population at large. Many minority groups are disadvantaged from a young age in terms of education in the USA so collecting data on race of applicants was supposed to help normalize people’s racial background. If I grew up in a predominantly well funded schools my exam scores will likely be higher than a student who grew up in a poor school district. The effects of segregation, racism, and xenophobia in the USA have led to a racial divide between many local school districts in the USA. The whites who have historocally had more money have better funded schools. Without knowing where someone came from it is harder to judge how good their respective scores are. Odviously there are still ways to do this but the supreme court removed a legally required one.

        • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think we can all agree racism is bad. The point of affirmative action was to help those who are victims of past racism. As I said, minority groups tend to live in localized areas and have historocally had less financial resources and because of this suffer from worse education and less connections to people who have gone to college before. Collecting racial data was a way to normalize test results and make up for lack of college prep knowledge for disadvantaged students. Collecting this data also forces schools to be aware of thier unconscious bias. AA was introduced to combat racism in college selections, I don’t think we will slip back to as bad as it was, but i think a new program should have been implemented before rejecting this one.

          • dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            And now it’s time to get rid of it, because racism shouldn’t justify racism. Racism in the past shouldn’t justify racism today. Racism towards one group shouldn’t justify racism towards a different group. “Reverse” or “positive” racism doesn’t exist, it is just plain old racism you try to justify to yourself.

              • dustojnikhummer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

                Prejudice - why do people of certain color need more handholding? Are you saying they are not as capable because of their race?

                Discrimination - if you prop up one group over others, you are discriminating others. If you do it solely based on their skin color, that is racist.

                • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Prejudice - (preconceived opinions not based on reason or actual experience) students with better SAT scores will perform better in college. There’s no evidence to support this and it is still a major deciding factor in college admissions.

                  Discrimination - (unjust treatment of different categories of people) the argument over what is “just” treatment will likely never end. I believe it is unjust that primary school districts in the USA can vary wildly in quality.

  • Gigan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The most egregious example of institutional racism is finally undone.

    • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      In a country built by slave labor this is the most egregious example of institutionalize racism? Not the slavery? Or the time we took Japanese people and put them in camps?