AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Affirmative Action

33 8454
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

Affirmative action refers to policies that take factors including ''race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation or national origin into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group, usually as a means to counter the effects of a history of discrimination.''

In this diverse world, at one point or another, you would surely come into contact with this, be it for college admissions, job applications or what not.

My question to you guys is therefore, do you support affirmative action? Or do you believe it is a gross attack on meritocracy, to prefer one person over another based solely on his race, religion, or physical characteristics? I'm an opponent of affirmative action, no one group should be given preferable treatment over another; any historical imbalance due to discrimination can be solved in the end through a fair and equal education. Why should say, white people today be punished over what their ancestors perpetuated, and be forced to give up a job they are better qualified for to a coloured person, on the basis that there's a quota to be filled?

  • 33 Replies
PsyhcoWalrus
offline
PsyhcoWalrus
40 posts
Nomad

Basically, everbody is equal. No, I don't believe they should give special treatment to certain individuals according to their ethnicity, sexuality or religion. America was based on equality and freedom from the beginnning.

People shouldn't be allowed special treatment or service because of any social factor. Rather, it should be that if you pay more, like a VIP, you get better services.

dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

I don't agree with giving people special treatment because of their race either. Because their race, or their gender, doesn't define them as a person. If you want to help those who are poorer, then actually go into those communities and help the poor. Don't assume that because of their race, gender, or whatever else that they do or do not need help.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Hehe... in a society where people are treated negatively due to such 'underrepresentation factors', going with positive treatment is shooting too far in the other direction and makes no sense. The very first thing to do is to give same treatments to all, and often we're still far away from that.

And if something like that is to be instored for some reason, don't touch at basic conditions/rights. Those should stay the same no matter what. Best would be to make additional clauses for such special cases, on top of the rest.

aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

One of the most common cases of affirmative action is in regards to college admissions. People complain that minorities are often given preference over white people, even if all their scores are equal. Basically, people think that college admissions should be based solely on merit.

And I agree- but how do we measure merit? An SAT score? Community service? Really, when you think about it, there is no objective way to measure something like merit. So, Admissions can never truly be fair, just as fair as possible.

Lets go back to SAT/AP scores. On average, Black families tend to make about $10,000 less than white families. Which family do you think will be more likely to afford an SAT tutor? Which will be more likely to be able to afford live in an area with a good public school that offers many AP classes? Basically, when we consider merit, I think race should be a factor. At least for now, there is evidence that minorities are still being discriminated against.

Yes, there are poor white people. And there are rich black people. But statistaclly, black people get paid less, even if they have the same qualifications. It takes strength to overcome discrimination.

Nichodemus, you say white people shouldn't be punished for their ancestor's sins, but should black students be held back simply because their parents are still being discriminated against?

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

to prefer one person over another based solely on his race, religion,

It's the same as racism. It is discrimination towards that which is irrelevent.
Physical characteristics may however be relevent, hence why I included it.

So no, I don't support affirmative action. Why would I support a black person equally qualified as me getting the job, because he's black? The harm was our forefathers to his forefathers, not me to him -- I am not one that deserves to suffer due to another person and he is not one to gain due to another person. Actively allowing that to happen is just as bad as judging from race, religion, etc.

- H
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

Lets go back to SAT/AP scores. On average, Black families tend to make about $10,000 less than white families.


On average, but it's not always the case. So why don't they just ask for the salary? Instead of just assuming that the black family is poorer and needs it more.

I'm a minority, and I'm still against this. Racism is racism. If we want equality, then why don't we actually have equality. Instead of trying to balance things out by having more inequalities for people to argue over.
partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,129 posts
Jester

forced to give up a job they are better qualified for to a coloured person, on the basis that there's a quota to be filled?


quota's in this sentence are bad.

it's the same like some businesses have a quota for having atleast 3 girls in the management staff.

i realy don't understand why you would do that when you know that the you let some great guy go because it is for the quota. --.--'
you can better just have the best people. no matter what they are.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

Yes, there are poor white people. And there are rich black people. But statistaclly, black people get paid less, even if they have the same qualifications. It takes strength to overcome discrimination.


Then we should attack this discrimination, not try to treat the after effects of it. Having affirmative action doesn't solve anything.

but should black students be held back simply because their parents are still being discriminated against?


No, they shouldn't. But they also shouldn't get in easier because a quota needs to be met or benefits for having more minorities are made. What should be done is focusing on equal pay for the same work, regardless of education, gender, race, political, or religious standings.

You do the work, you get paid. I don't care if you're Einstein or mentally retarded, it's worth the same to be done.

Instead of trying to balance things out by having more inequalities for people to argue over


It's like this. You have a hole in your boat. Your boat is slowly tipping to one side because it's now imbalanced. You decide that to stop this, you carve another hole so that the water is spread evenly, thus not capsizing the ship. Unfortunately, you're still sinking, so you solved nothing at all.

What needs to be done is the equivalent of plugging the hole, THEN bailing the water.
aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

On average, but it's not always the case. So why don't they just ask for the salary? Instead of just assuming that the black family is poorer and needs it more.

They do. I think salary is even included on the common app. Many colleges (and pretty much all top level colleges) give out a substantial amount of need-based grants. I personally would not be able to attend my college without the grant money I receive.

But we also have to account for the fact that there would be a disproportionate number of white people to minorities without affirmative action. And while I think that concrete quotas are bad (well.. just plain stupid really), I also think many institutions benefit from being representative of society.

Colleges in particular are very sensitive to this. Diversity is a powerful thing- it betters the learning environment for everyone, not just minorities. It enables us to learn about other cultures, other ways of life. Diversity in colleges enables us to see first hand people from all backgrounds do amazing things.

Which brings me to:
Then we should attack this discrimination, not try to treat the after effects of it. Having affirmative action doesn't solve anything.

What should be done is focusing on equal pay for the same work, regardless of education, gender, race, political, or religious standings.


By having affirmative action in colleges, we ARE focusing on this. We are creating a new generation with more understanding of people from different backgrounds. We are placing people who might otherwise be washing dishes for the rest of their lives in positions of power, where they can enact this change.

But, if you don't agree with that, I have two questions:

1) If you recognize that there is a race related economic disparity, how exactly would you fix this without using any kind of affirmative action?

2) What do you do with the people who are being negatively affected in the meantime?

Affirmative action should never become a permanent fact of society. It should work to eliminate the problems that necessitate its own existence.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

1) If you recognize that there is a race related economic disparity, how exactly would you fix this without using any kind of affirmative action?


By attacking the source of the disparity, ie, inequal pay for equal work.

Of course, for those affected by this disparity it would be fair to have lower rates/incentives, but not as a blanket for the whole minority/race. That, is at it's base, racism.

2) What do you do with the people who are being negatively affected in the meantime?


Something like affirmative action, but not as a blanket statement. It should be only those who are being affected by it get this discount (Oneself or offspring/partner), not just because you're part of that race. This would go for working women as well, not just racial groups.

Affirmative action should never become a permanent fact of society. It should work to eliminate the problems that necessitate its own existence.


Which if applied to my example, is the equivalent of bailing water. Once you've got the hole patched, then it means something to bail the water. If there's still water flowing in, all you're doing is wasting time.
aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

It should be only those who are being affected by it get this discount (Oneself or offspring/partner), not just because you're part of that race.


Harvard alone gets about 35,000 applicants a year. They have to read and process all of these applications (which are pretty long, by the way) in just a few months. How do they determine the extent of something as nebulous as the effects of racism on ones life in this time period? Affirmative action uses race as a blanket statement, sure. And therefore it lets in a few people who don't really deserve it. I mean, there are an awful lot of pale "native Americans" running around.

But I don't see any practical alternative that still achieves all of the goals of affirmative action.

By attacking the source of the disparity, ie, inequal pay for equal work.

How? Do you force employers to pay minorities the same as everyone else? The civil rights act of 1964 supposedly already dealt with this. And yet, the trend continues. So... how?

Which if applied to my example, is the equivalent of bailing water

I disagree. Bailing the water is only part of it. I also explained how affirmative action can help stop the propagation of racism, which I believe would be equivalent to plugging the hole.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

How? Do you force employers to pay minorities the same as everyone else?


Simply, yes. Not just minorities though, everyone. Regardless of who you are and what your race/religion/political standing/sexuality/gender are, everyone should get paid the same amount for doing the same work.

And yet, the trend continues. So... how?


Crack down on it? Increase the penalty for cases in which this occurs?

I also explained how affirmative action can help stop the propagation of racism, which I believe would be equivalent to plugging the hole.


I don't see how a minute form of racism will help stop racism. Really, all that I can see it doing is, "Oh look, Native Americans get accepted into college easier than White people, simply for being Native American."

By having affirmative action in colleges, we ARE focusing on this. We are creating a new generation with more understanding of people from different backgrounds.


I agree with the second part of this statement. The first has nothing to do with the new generation being more understanding. If anything, it makes them less so because they may have resentment about the lower standards for minorities to get into a college.
EnterOrion
offline
EnterOrion
4,220 posts
Nomad

It's just white people trying to feel better about themselves by letting black people do more things in life. Closet racists, mostly.

If a black person couldn't get into a college for any reason other than they're black, then they shouldn't be allowed in.

We should only have the best of the best becoming the best. If they all happen to be white, who cares? Humanity is still doing itself a favor by giving the rest of us some new gizmos or cures to cancer. Unfortunately, not all people are equal, contrary to popular opinion. Black people in general suck at tests, scoring by and far the lowest on exams and IQ testing. White people are quite a bit higher, with relative parity between whites and Asians. So who gets into college the most based on merit? White people and Asians.

I know that it sucks, but that's life. Racism is pretty much dead among this generation anyways, so not like it'll matter in thirty years.

aknerd
offline
aknerd
1,416 posts
Peasant

Simply, yes

Well, what about getting the job in the first place? Do you prevent people from hiring based on race? If so, how?

Crack down on it? Increase the penalty for cases in which this occurs?

The problem with attacking this from a legal standpoint is that most companies will fight charges of discrimination. And it isn't an easy thing to prove, especially not when the company has access to a whole team of lawyers, and the employee probably gets a court appointed attorney.

Really, all that I can see it doing is, "Oh look, Native Americans get accepted into college easier than White people, simply for being Native American."


Says the person who did not get into a college. The people who DID get in benefit from the exposure to diversity. And more people than ever (as of 2010) are going to college, so...

If anything, it makes them less so because they may have resentment about the lower standards for minorities to get into a college.

As someone who goes to a college that uses affirmative action, I have never come across a person with this sentiment. More often than not, these kinds of thoughts are directed at athletes (even though we don't give athletic scholarships...), not minorities.

If a black person couldn't get into a college for any reason other than they're black, then they shouldn't be allowed in


This sounds reasonable at first, until you think about how college admissions actually works. Then, it is completely ridiculous.

No one gets into a decent college just because they are black. Back to Harvard: 35,000 people applied, about 2170 got in. So, how many of those 32,830 students weren't qualified to get in to Harvard? At first, one might say "Well, all of them. Otherwise they would have gotten in."

But that is simply not the case. Some of them might have been more qualified than people who got in, and some of them were probably not fit for community college. But most of them could have gone to Harvard and done quite well. Many of the rejects would have added to the achievements of the University. But there simply isn't enough room.

Given that there are literally tens of thousands of students who are qualified but didn't get in, do you really think they just picked some kid because he was black? No. He would have already had to have been just as qualified as everyone else. Being black just makes it more likely that he will be in the 2170 group.

Black people in general suck at tests, scoring by and far the lowest on exams and IQ testing.

Or, maybe these tests suck at actually determining the reasoning abilities of members of certain demographics. Different cultures think about things differently.

So who gets into college the most based on merit?

Since when is test taking the only measure of merit? If that was true, why is the application process so much more involved than simply submitting your test scores?

The fact is, people ARE still racist. Minorities still have to overcome racism. Isn't this act in itself worthy of merit?

So, I have another question. If affirmative action in colleges detracts from the potential of the college so much, then why do colleges do it? Why does a private university that is focused on making as much money as possible give out hundreds of thousands of dollars in the form of scholarships to minorities? Nobody is making them do this. So why?
dair5
offline
dair5
3,371 posts
Shepherd

We should only have the best of the best becoming the best. If they all happen to be white, who cares?


I do. Just about everyone in my community cares.

Unfortunately, not all people are equal, contrary to popular opinion. Black people in general suck at tests, scoring by and far the lowest on exams and IQ testing. White people are quite a bit higher, with relative parity between whites and Asians. So who gets into college the most based on merit? White people and Asians.


Black people don't suck at testes, it just happens to be that there are many black people who live in communities where testing, and getting good grades isn't the norm. It isn't cool, it isn't expected, and hardly anyone really cares. If this attitude was changed then they could do just as well.
Showing 1-15 of 33