Affirmative Action

[CheeseWhiz]

I suspect the fact that most members of this forum are white, and live in white neighbourhoods have something to do with the poll numbers. 

No, I just don't like racism.  It doesn't matter who it's for, it's still racism.  I don't like white people doing and a sure don't like black people doing and trying to say it's okay because they were oppressed for so long.

[Hatman 🍁]

I suspect the fact that most members of this forum are white, and live in white neighbourhoods have something to do with the poll numbers. 

No, I just don't like racism.  It doesn't matter who it's for, it's still racism.  I don't like white people doing and a sure don't like black people doing and trying to say it's okay because they were oppressed for so long.

Perhaps it is racism, but it is used in an attempt to reverse racism.  Perhaps two wrong don't make a right, and that maybe true. It is certainly a band-aid solution to the problem. Of course, there is no real way to fight racism with out realizing racism exists, and the only way to fight it is to have discriminative programs. If black people are systematically disadvantaged, than there needs to be a way to help take away that disadvantage. The only way to do that is to descriminate in favour of black people. Whether it is with affrimative action, or with social programs (which are deffinately a better answer than AA). Oddly enough, social programs aren't going to be something a Libertarian will support which means, you may say you hate racism, but you really are indifferent to it.

[MaC]

something I have to wonder about the libertarian position on this.  If it were not government imposed, and it was a business's private decision to use affirmative action would we still be against it?

[Emsworth]

something I have to wonder about the libertarian position on this.  If it were not government imposed, and it was a business's private decision to use affirmative action would we still be against it?

You can believe that someone has a right to do something, but still be against it. For example, I believe that one has the right to hold racist opinions, but I am still personally opposed to racism.

[opebo]

I suspect the fact that most members of this forum are white, and live in white neighbourhoods have something to do with the poll numbers. 

I believe you have hit the nail on the head, Washburn!

No, I just don't like racism.  It doesn't matter who it's for, it's still racism.  I don't like white people doing and a sure don't like black people doing and trying to say it's okay because they were oppressed for so long.

Are you implying that blacks were not oppressed?!

[CheeseWhiz]

Perhaps it is racism, but it is used in an attempt to reverse racism.  Perhaps two wrong don't make a right, and that maybe true. It is certainly a band-aid solution to the problem. Of course, there is no real way to fight racism with out realizing racism exists, and the only way to fight it is to have discriminative programs. If black people are systematically disadvantaged, than there needs to be a way to help take away that disadvantage. The only way to do that is to descriminate in favour of black people. Whether it is with affrimative action, or with social programs (which are deffinately a better answer than AA).

I do not see how we can say racism is wrong and enforce it by imposing more racism.  Do you think whites are gonna have an easier time getting over our differences now that blacks are taking jobs that whites may have needed, and might have been more qualified for?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We just don't think the Government should solve everyone's problems, they have to do that themselves.  If I knew someone to be racist, I would never associate myself with them, and if my friend were racist, I'd talk to him/her about it and hopefully put a stop to it.  But, just because I don't seek the Government to remedy everything I think is a problem, I don't think it's a problem, huh?

[MaC]

something I have to wonder about the libertarian position on this.  If it were not government imposed, and it was a business's private decision to use affirmative action would we still be against it?

You can believe that someone has a right to do something, but still be against it. For example, I believe that one has the right to hold racist opinions, but I am still personally opposed to racism.

I'm just curious about if we would support it if a business decided to do it on it's own grounds.

[CheeseWhiz]

No, I just don't like racism.  It doesn't matter who it's for, it's still racism.  I don't like white people doing and a sure don't like black people doing and trying to say it's okay because they were oppressed for so long.

Are you implying that blacks were not oppressed?!

No, they definitely were, but that is not the be all end all for them to get everything they want, as a few seem to think it is.  Personally, I can't understand why a black would want to work for a racist, anyway.

[A18]

something I have to wonder about the libertarian position on this.  If it were not government imposed, and it was a business's private decision to use affirmative action would we still be against it?

You can believe that someone has a right to do something, but still be against it. For example, I believe that one has the right to hold racist opinions, but I am still personally opposed to racism.

I'm just curious about if we would support it if a business decided to do it on it's own grounds.

Libertarianism only deals with their right to do it. Whether you would support it or not is just personal opinion.

[© tweed]

Mildly oppose.

The odds certainly are stacked against blacks in a majority of situations, but that really isn't justification to harm a more qualified member of society, black or white.

[phk]

Oppose.

Hurts low-income White males.

I morally do oppose legacies as well, as that is simply "reverse" AA.

[Hatman 🍁]

Perhaps it is racism, but it is used in an attempt to reverse racism.  Perhaps two wrong don't make a right, and that maybe true. It is certainly a band-aid solution to the problem. Of course, there is no real way to fight racism with out realizing racism exists, and the only way to fight it is to have discriminative programs. If black people are systematically disadvantaged, than there needs to be a way to help take away that disadvantage. The only way to do that is to descriminate in favour of black people. Whether it is with affrimative action, or with social programs (which are deffinately a better answer than AA).

I do not see how we can say racism is wrong and enforce it by imposing more racism.  Do you think whites are gonna have an easier time getting over our differences now that blacks are taking jobs that whites may have needed, and might have been more qualified for?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We just don't think the Government should solve everyone's problems, they have to do that themselves.  If I knew someone to be racist, I would never associate myself with them, and if my friend were racist, I'd talk to him/her about it and hopefully put a stop to it.  But, just because I don't seek the Government to remedy everything I think is a problem, I don't think it's a problem, huh?

Ahh yes, I forgot how Libertarians lacked morals

[nclib]

Mildly favor.

Affirmative action helps counterbalance the forces that make it difficult for minorities.

[7,052,770]

I've told the story about my genious white friend not getting accepted into Rice (he had 235 PSAT, #2 in GPA, 1600 SAT, 35 ACT, many extracirricular, and he wanted to go there and set up an optional interview), and my black friend who applied to Rice on a whim, not caring and ok but not great testing scores and not setting up the inteview, being accepted with a partial scholarship.
Obviously that's not right.

That's not to say there isn't some merit to affirmitive action, but there's too many cases like the one above for me to support it.

[TeePee4Prez]

I've told the story about my genious white friend not getting accepted into Rice (he had 235 PSAT, #2 in GPA, 1600 SAT, 35 ACT, many extracirricular, and he wanted to go there and set up an optional interview), and my black friend who applied to Rice on a whim, not caring and ok but not great testing scores and not setting up the inteview, being accepted with a partial scholarship.
Obviously that's not right.

That's not to say there isn't some merit to affirmitive action, but there's too many cases like the one above for me to support it.

My sister and her African American friend have a similar situation when they both applied to the University of Scranton.  My sister was ranked 16 of 200-something, in honors and AP tracking, played 4 years varsity soccer, and 11XX SATs.  She is going to have mountains of debt when she graduates because she only got a partial scholarship.  Her friend got a full ride being in mostly 2nd (advanced) and 3rd track (general), 900 SATs, no sports, and ranked in the middle of the pack.  Financial situations are also very similar as well.  To be fair to her friend, she is doing well there and works pretty hard.

As for Earl's saying it's just whites being the majority on this Forum in relation to the poll numbers, all I have to say this is one of many examples I've personally seen on how AA affects me or someone in my family.  This is not to say some provisions have merit and yes I strongly oppose legacy admissions as well.   

[Schmitz in 1972]

I oppose race, relation, income, or athletic based affirmative action. I would not go so far as to say that any type of affirmative action is automatically wrong. I would see positively affirmative action based on, to paraphrase Dr. King, the content of the applicants character. Unfortunately, due to universities being more concerned with national rankings, sports successes, and an image of diversity than trying to turn out principled and honest men and women, this sort of affirmative action would never catch on.

[CheeseWhiz]

Perhaps it is racism, but it is used in an attempt to reverse racism.  Perhaps two wrong don't make a right, and that maybe true. It is certainly a band-aid solution to the problem. Of course, there is no real way to fight racism with out realizing racism exists, and the only way to fight it is to have discriminative programs. If black people are systematically disadvantaged, than there needs to be a way to help take away that disadvantage. The only way to do that is to descriminate in favour of black people. Whether it is with affrimative action, or with social programs (which are deffinately a better answer than AA).

I do not see how we can say racism is wrong and enforce it by imposing more racism.  Do you think whites are gonna have an easier time getting over our differences now that blacks are taking jobs that whites may have needed, and might have been more qualified for?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We just don't think the Government should solve everyone's problems, they have to do that themselves.  If I knew someone to be racist, I would never associate myself with them, and if my friend were racist, I'd talk to him/her about it and hopefully put a stop to it.  But, just because I don't seek the Government to remedy everything I think is a problem, I don't think it's a problem, huh?

Ahh yes, I forgot how Libertarians lacked morals

Ahh yes, I forgot how you lacked the ability to say anything meaningful in a debate

Now, are you going to keep throwing around meaningless accusations, or do you want to explain to me, why, first of all, you keep talking like the Libertarians are the only ones who believe in this, when the vast majority of the Forum obviously agrees with me: reverse discrimination is not the way to end discrimination.  Now, second, why you feel that I'm either racist or heartless, just because I don't support reverse racism, but don't say the same about everyone else here.

[TB]

I'm against it in principle, though in practice, I can support certain forms of it, within a limited timeframe.

[Virginian87]

Strongly oppose.  Diversity should not take precedence over credentials and intellect.  For college applications, a minority student should not get special status if there is a more qualified white student applying as well.  What should be done is abolish all boxes specifying one's race on standardized tests and applications for jobs and schools.  This way, race is not an issue and a person is selected based on his qualifications alone.

[CheeseWhiz]

Now, are you going to keep throwing around meaningless accusations, or do you want to explain to me, why, first of all, you keep talking like the Libertarians are the only ones who believe in this, when the vast majority of the Forum obviously agrees with me: reverse discrimination is not the way to end discrimination.  Now, second, why you feel that I'm either racist or heartless, just because I don't support reverse racism, but don't say the same about everyone else here.

Care to answer that, Earl?

[Dr. Cynic]

I give half-hearted support. I believe that intellect and qualifications SHOULD be what the workplace uses to hire, I also recognize that a Harvard study proved that traditionally "Caucasian names" such as Brad or Alicia were more likely to get a job dispite equal (and occasionally more impressive) credentials of traditionally "African-American names" like Akeem and Shaniqua.

[Cubby]

I give half-hearted support. I believe that intellect and qualifications SHOULD be what the workplace uses to hire, I also recognize that a Harvard study proved that traditionally "Caucasian names" such as Brad or Alicia were more likely to get a job dispite equal (and occasionally more impressive) credentials of traditionally "African-American names" like Akeem and Shaniqua.

Thats not the fault of employers, thats the fault of stupid black parents giving their kids names that stigmatize them for life.

I am strongly against affirmative action.

[Virginian87]

Thats not the fault of employers, thats the fault of stupid black parents giving their kids names that stigmatize them for life.

Wow.  I take it you have no friends named Kwame.