Affirmative Action: Jim Webb speaks out.

[Dave Gray]

Jim Webb spoke out against affirmative action, calling for an end to government programs in regards to race.  Some praise him, some don't.  He's a Democrat in Virginia going against the base of his party.

To me, this needs to be evaluated two ways.  First, politically:

Webb is going to make a name for himself and get independents.  It will be a short term risk, with long-term reward, if he can make it.  He may get challenged and lose in the primary, but I think it's unlikely.  I think the Democrats are on the wrong side of this issue.  They are seriously hurting in the white male vote, as it is, and I don't think there's much to gain in supporting affirmative action anymore.  Politically, it's hard to justify and is going to lose more and more votes.

Next, morally/ethically.

I am firmly against affirmative action, today.  I understand the need for it may have existed and the roots of thinking behind it, but at this point, I only think it's causing further racial division.  I think that it's hard to combat racism by discriminating in any fashion.  I don't think that things are equal for whites and blacks today, but I think that the government has done its part to level that playing field as much as possible.  Any additional steps they're taking is part of the problem, I feel.  Poor is poor.  Uneducated is uneducated.  Violence is violence.  It's not black/white anymore.

[Pappy13]

Personally I agree, however I can see where minorities might disagree.  While I think that opportunities exist for any race now, historically minorities have caught the short end of the stick, so I could see the reasoning being that it's too early to call for a complete removal of any favoritism.  There's still a good bit of catching up to do for past transgressions so to speak.

[Dave Gray]

^^ That's true, however, I don't think the government can step in and close that gap.  It's up to the people.

I believe, perhaps naively, that businesses will do the right thing.  I think that natural, organic diversity creates a stronger business environment, and ultimately will help the bottom line.  It gives you a good public image, helps you gain perspective, and opens up new customer bases.

I think that race can still be ethically considered in qualifications, but that setting any kind of quota is a mis-step.

On the government end, I think that while the "debt" isn't "paid", that it can never really be paid, and that any more steps to do so are only causing additional strife.  I believe that there is a chance for success for anyone, should they truly seek it out.  It will be harder for some, but that race is no longer a key deciding factor over things like poverty and education.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

First step needs to get rid of other systems of preference that still persists.  Such as hiring based on nepotism.

Or for example in Michigan, a few years back there was a ballot question that effectively stopped the University of Michigan from giving a preference in admission based on being an underrepresented race.  However, Michigan also granted a preference in admission based on having a parent who graduated from Michigan--that preference continues, but because whites are an over represented portion of the alumni it works as a form of race discrimination against blacks. 

Legacy admissions, particularly at state funded schools are completely wrong. 

[Dave Gray]

First step needs to get rid of other systems of preference that still persists.  Such as hiring based on nepotism.

In government, yes.  However, these are not recognized systems in place.  It's a result of crappy practices.  And I don't think that this needs to happen first.  You can't wait to make progress in one area first.  Nothing will get done that way.

Or for example in Michigan, a few years back there was a ballot question that effectively stopped the University of Michigan from giving a preference in admission based on being an underrepresented race.  However, Michigan also granted a preference in admission based on having a parent who graduated from Michigan--that preference continues, but because whites are an over represented portion of the alumni it works as a form of race discrimination against blacks. 

That's an unfortunate consequence, but ultimately things like this will happen.  To me, the things aren't causal.  It's correlation, but something that will go away naturally over time.  It's a separate issue.

[fyo]

The biggest discriminator is taboo -- parent income / class.

What would have a profound effect is to look at EVERYTHING in society that limits class mobility. The "American Dream" is too much a "hitting the lottery" thing to really move things, but it's what politicians point to (ending debate) whenever the topic comes up.

I'm not saying I have a solution, but it's pretty clear that there's absolutely zero interest in looking at the problem.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

That's an unfortunate consequence, but ultimately things like this will happen.  To me, the things aren't causal.  It's correlation, but something that will go away naturally over time.  It's a separate issue.

While not directly causal it is more than a mere correlation.

The original purpose of legacy admissions was not to keep blacks out of college.  (They had other methods for that.)  The original purpose of legacy admission was to limit the number of Jews from attending college (it did slow the process by a bit, but eventually began to work for the Jews as so many were so vastly qualified they got in even with the preferences in place it eventually helped even more get in.  So a system that was designed for religious discrimination is now a race discrimination program paid for by taxpayers.

[Dave Gray]

^ It appears that you are using this to justify affirmative action.

If so, that's my main issue.  I realize that there are injustices with regards to race.  But I think that artificially creating more injustices, in effort to balance that out, is the big mistake.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

^ It appears that you are using this to justify affirmative action.

If so, that's my main issue.  I realize that there are injustices with regards to race.  But I think that artificially creating more injustices, in effort to balance that out, is the big mistake.

Sorta. I am saying if we are going to get rid of AA we need to simultaneously get rid of all the pro-white racial programs that exist, but first we need to stop pretending they don't exist or they they were mere correlations as you did in your earlier post. 

[Phishfan]

Legacy admissions is not a racial program. Blacks, jews, anyone gets that same benefit as long as they are legacy. Dave is correct, it is just a correlation. For it to be a racial program they would have to say all white legacies are granted this but not other races. You yourself said that the program had been overcome by a religous group already on their own with it still in place.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Legacy admissions is not a racial program. Blacks, jews, anyone gets that same benefit as long as they are legacy. Dave is correct, it is just a correlation. For it to be a racial program they would have to say all white legacies are granted this but not other races. You yourself said that the program had been overcome by a religous group already on their own with it still in place.

1.  The ORIGINAL purpose was designed to protect the majority in and keep minorities out.

2.  If the alumni population is 95% white but the overall population is only 75% white than it is in fact a racial program. 

Get rid of programs like this FIRST and then AA. 

[Fau Teixeira]

2.  If the alumni population is 95% white but the overall population is only 75% white than it is in fact a racial program. 

I disagree with this mentality.

Just because a disproportionate amount of the population as determined by average racial breakdown takes advantage of a program doesn't make the program a racial program.

By that mentality, the state of california should do away with food stamps, because a disproportionate amount of hispanic and black households receive them vs. their percentage representation in the state population. Food stamps therefore must be a racial program.

http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/research/res/pdf/foodtrends/FSA6.pdf <--- source (look at that .. someone on these boards references statistical research.. yay me)

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Just because a disproportionate amount of the population as determined by average racial breakdown takes advantage of a program doesn't make the program a racial program.

It does if the original purpose of the program was to oppress a minority and benefit the majority, as is the case with legacy admissions. 

[Fau Teixeira]

it seems to me more of a program to keep alumni happy and donating to the university than anything else

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

it seems to me more of a program to keep alumni happy and donating to the university than anything else

That is the revised reason given for the program as the original honest reason is no longer acceptable.