Affirmative Action

What are your thoughts on affirmative action in terms of college admissions and in the workplace?

Attached: adolescent-adult-blur-933964.jpg (4813x3209, 2.72M)

Everyone should go to college and anybody should be considered for a position regardless of race.
Fuck quotas. Also fuck private businesses.

This

zoos

As far as college admissions go I have mixed feelings but it isn't worth getting bent out of shape over when legacy students and athletes are still getting a huge leg up over everyone else.

University application should be utterly blind: remove the possibility of racial bias at-all.

Remove university applications in the first place and force everybody to go, just like with pre-school, grade school and high school. How hard is that?
Also nationalize the school system.

Attached: thatcherquote.jpg (567x402, 23.06K)

It’s worth noting that most US colleges aren’t competitive enough to be effected by Affirmative Action. While theoretically it’s there in the background in practice it doesn’t really apply to many colleges outside the Ivies.

Fucking awful idea: the west needs fewer graduates and more people entering into skilled, manual employment: not more.

What a massive fucking waste of money

kys asap anti-intellectual filth

So send them to trade school.
Also automate physical labor so people's brains stop being wasted on a massive scale
You mean to tell me a mcdonald's worker is being utilized to his full potential? Manual labor will not be necessary soon with the complete mechanization of it. We're still gonna need people repairing and programming machines however.

They're right though, nowadays you need a bachelor's degree to do jobs you could easily do with the knowledge you got from high school. I think people should be allowed to pursue higher education if they want but it really isn't worth it for a lot of people.

What? 33% of any school year are graduates: there's no fucking need for that. My grandad dropped out of school at 16, worked at a car factory, trained at night-school to design them. That's a perfectly valid root to education, but you can't do that in Britain anymore.

As an asian, affirmative action hurts us. Fuck you guys for being low eye queue and getting accepted anyways because lul systemic discrimination is real except when asians are systemically discriminated against because no one cares about asian people

How does it hurt you?

The top universities, at least in the states, have racial quotas to prevent asians from taking up too many of the spots since we get good grades and are smarter than the rest of you retards. Those spots are instead reserved for (mainly) white people and a few token blacks. It's active discrimination that no one cares about because everyone thinks that discriminating against asians is perfectly fine and valid.

And in which manner do they stop asians from taking too many spots? sorry i'm a brainlet and didn't go to college, i live in México too anyway so idk what the fuck you guys do.

what they said: kys anti-intellectual filth

They reject them obviously.

"The Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade wrote in his 2009 book, "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal: Race and Class in Elite College Admission and Campus Life,'' that “to receive equal consideration by elite colleges, Asian Americans must outperform Whites by 140 points, Hispanics by 280 points, Blacks by 450 points in SAT (Total 1600)." As Ron Unz demonstrates, the percentage of Asians among the student bodies of Ivy League schools has been a steady 17 percent, give or take a couple of points, for about 20 years.

The value of equal opportunity is being trampled.The creditability of elite colleges suffers. Meritocracy is compromised.

This clearly shows that these colleges set a quota for Asian students.

The percentage of Asian students at the California Institute of Technology, which uses a "race-neutral" admission policy, has roughly followed the proportion of college-age Asians in the general population."

This isn't an argument, literal children work in factories and they haven't completed elementary school.
Pic related, Marx shitting on people like you.

Attached: Karl_Marx_Quote Practical people[1].jpg (1032x774, 132.14K)

and outperform jews by 10000

Intellectuals are petty bourgeois bloodsuckers and they can join you in a labor camp.

Marx could be edgy sometimes tbh

the sad part is you really think this don't you

It was just another concession that capitalists gave us to try to temper our anger towards them. At the same time doesn't do anyone any good to rally against affirmative action and pull the rug out from under those who benefit from it, unless you want to be seen as an enemy to those groups. Its a right wing myth that it is keeping droves of whites and asians out of college.

/thread right here.

Affirmative action is good, but it shouldn't be based on racial groups. Instead seek out people from a poor economic background generally, focused especially on creating a mass of educated people in all social clusters throughout society.
By making it about race we miss out on the central question, which is empowering communities that have been left behind.

those who promote "affirmative action" will be lined up against the wall.

Get up against the wall. If you are a socialist you are for affirmative action. You just don't like this instance of it because it doesn't directly benefit yourself. We should always be pushing for the progress and rights of others, and especially the disadvantaged. The idea itself isn't the problem, its porky and capitalism's perversion of it.
If, under a socialist society, we noticed that one group of people were doing worse than others in a large array of ways, wouldn't we give them some extra attention and help to bring their conditions up to the standard of everybody else?

At this point, affirmative action should be class based tbh.
It would probably make it more accurate.

Not him but no, to each according to their needs and from each according to their ability doesn't mean affirmative action at all. Affirmative action doesn't make sense under socialism because the idea of rewarding those who are more productive doesn't make sense in the first place.

Why would they be doing worse? As workers they would be provided the same opportunities and benefits as any other worker and receive compensation equal to their productivity and labour. What your saying is that we should continue to look at workers as seperate racial groups and determine what they require from there rather then the workers as a whole.

Was this a typo? Don't you mean rewarding those who are less productive doesn't make sense? You know, "To each according to his contribution"?

...

I'm the person who posted this.
Disregard my faggy greentext bullshit. Halfchan was probably the only place I ever regularly posted on the internet and it has just made me a blithering idiot.

I'm a much less assholeish way: I do feel that there will be a "growing pain" period at the beginning where certain groups may need more attention than others. Its not a core part of socialism but I do believe that the "idea" of Affirmative Action would still have some merit, at least during the beginning.

There is no reason to have schools for knowledge anymore with the advent of the internet. The only valid reason for universities are for hands on things you need special equipment or supervision to learn to do safely. Equating universities with knowledge is a lie told by the academia complex to make money. Even the top universities people openly say it's more about networking than learning, yet despite this public admission people still hold that somehow knowledge is magically imparted though the process of attending formally. It is some kind of superstition used to control people.

AA is not good but you must understand the argument for it is not just claiming the misrepresentation is based on active racism but that the conditions made by past racism has resulted in less chance to not be stupid. Of course this outcome is true, but it applies to class more than race. In either case a selective solution like this is simply continuing the liberal idea that inequality is ok as long as it is diverse.

Admissions should be completely and utterly blind. No one should have any clue of who they are letting into their school outside of their academic ability. Schools should be funded enough to teach more students as well.
Academic qualifications are fucked right now though. Absolutely ridiculous and stupid shit that doesn't represent anything apporaching academic ability. It's extremely poor.

But you do know why affirmative action was brought in in the first place right? You're basically arguing that the more privileged people with the better schools and environments should continue to place above those who dont have the same means and privileges as them.
I'm no arguring FOR affirmative action as a thing that society should have always and forever. Kaiden from the country club isn't being barred from college, he just has to compete with more people.

The whole concept of college admissions or job interviews is a capitalist construct.

If people want to go to college let them go.
If people want to work somewhere let them work.

Restricting people from doing these things is a result of the scarcity mentality of capitalism. Only a certain number of people can be here because more wouldn't be optimal for profit (maybe the college is "exclusive" or the workplace doesn't have the infrastructure for so many people). In capitalism it's an expensive investment to construct more space or bring in more people at a college or workplace. In socialism, people joining in will only increase the value of the organizaiton. In any system people will benefit from increased participation, but only capitalism puts on a restriction that participation must increase profits.


But if we're talking about reforming capitalism before we get to socialism, then yeah. Because wealth is generational, it will even things out a bit to have affirmative action. It's a band-aid on a bullet wound though.

Affirmative action ought to be a means to an end rather than an end in itself. Racism and sexism needs to be eliminated, but that can't happen overnight, until it is gone there needs to be some measure that takes authority away from the bigots that would intentionally exclude people for superficial reasons. As long as society is overwhelmingly bigoted, I think affirmative action is necessary, if only to tide us over until the bigotry problem is solved.

goddamn it, you basically said what I said here

nevermind. sorry.

It's necessary in countries like US and India, and will be for the foreseeable future. Since I'm American, that's what I'm most able to comment on.

When choosing a person for a position, there are two types of fairness to be considered: fairness for the individuals applying for the position, and fairness for the population served by the position (i.e. their right to have the best possible doctor, bus driver, president, etc.) The relative importance of these types depends on what sort of position it is.

I'll start with college admission. A college student doesn't directly serve anyone except themselves, so only individual fairness should be considered. Therefore in this context AA exists to counteract external disadvantages that the applicant faces during their childhood and earlier education. Race absolutely should be considered, but it's absurd that class/economic situation is not (there may be some schools that do, but I don't know of any). The weight of each AA factor should be proportional to the life-disadvantage that factor confers (e.g. poverty is probably the biggest disadvantage a person can have, so it would be the one with the highest weight.)

When hiring for a job, both types of fairness come into play. Every individual has an equal right to good employment, not limited by race, caste, or whatever other circumstance of birth. If true fairness exists in the education system, then black or Dalit doctors should be as good on average as white or Brahmin doctors. AA should be used to counteract the bias of the hiring agent or other inequalities within the hiring process itself, while disparities in capability should be addressed during education. But of course you can't make education fair overnight, so in the meantime you may have to find some balance between the two types of fairness here.

When choosing someone for a position of high leadership, whether in the state or a political organization, the second factor trumps the first almost completely. Clearly, the right of (e.g.) Americans to have a good president is more important than the individual right of any particular candidate to become president. But this precedence does not necessarily translate to a preference for leaders with privileged backgrounds, because the served public has a legitimate interest in choosing someone who represents them. For example, if Brahmins make up 10% of the Indian population, it would be fair if less than 10% of cabinet members were Brahmin, because the low-caste majority has a right to a government that represents them.

For CEOS and the like, neither is relevant, because CEOs no more "serve" a population than bandits do, and no individual has a right to a position that shouldn't exist.

Even in a socialist society you would need affirmative action for at least a couple generations. In Cuba, for example, the revolution rapidly made university student populations much more in line with the general population (i.e. more black students), but ever since then the number of black students has dwindled closer to pre-revolutionary levels.

Affirmative action is mostly about denying places to Asian Americans. What historical injustice is that supposedly correcting?


Sure racial injustice is never worth getting bent out of shape over when it's a different race getting fucked.