Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Interesting new take on Affirmative Action

mojodragon · 01-25-2005, 06:37 PM

For years, we've seen this debate in one form or another. The Pro-AA side says that it's necessary to make up for past and current injustices. The Anti-AA side says that it's the only legalized form of discrimination that our country has going for it (which isn't exactly true, the military can discriminate pretty much at will for different reasons). Anyway, I was looking through CNN.com and found <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/07/amar.affirmative.action/index.html">this link.</a>

It is a very well-thought out argument from a liberal-minded lawyer with an inter-racial child. So, from the start, it gets a few more credibility points than Bubba, who's sister in law once knew a guy that dated a girl that has an online friendship with a court reporter.

The main idea is that giving minorities a leg up in the admissions process allows them to get into more competitive schools that their own accomplishments wouldn't otherwise allow. Then, they end up getting slightly lower grades than they would have gotten in the less competitive schools. Then, as a result of the lower grades, they fall into a dangerous cycle. Lower grades means lower confidence, and less apropos from the staff. Then, after graduation, they have a lower chance of passing the bar. And, even if they pass the bar, they have lower chances to get hired. An employer will more likely take the A+ student from USC before they'll take a C student from Harvard.

My problem with the whole AA debate is that you can't really argue either side without getting flamed as a racist. If you say that AA is good, then you're racist against whites. If you say it's bad, then you're racist against blacks.

01-25-2005, 06:37 PM	#1 (permalink)
mojodragon Darth Mojo Location: Right behind you...	Interesting new take on Affirmative Action For years, we've seen this debate in one form or another. The Pro-AA side says that it's necessary to make up for past and current injustices. The Anti-AA side says that it's the only legalized form of discrimination that our country has going for it (which isn't exactly true, the military can discriminate pretty much at will for different reasons). Anyway, I was looking through CNN.com and found <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/01/07/amar.affirmative.action/index.html">this link.</a> It is a very well-thought out argument from a liberal-minded lawyer with an inter-racial child. So, from the start, it gets a few more credibility points than Bubba, who's sister in law once knew a guy that dated a girl that has an online friendship with a court reporter. The main idea is that giving minorities a leg up in the admissions process allows them to get into more competitive schools that their own accomplishments wouldn't otherwise allow. Then, they end up getting slightly lower grades than they would have gotten in the less competitive schools. Then, as a result of the lower grades, they fall into a dangerous cycle. Lower grades means lower confidence, and less apropos from the staff. Then, after graduation, they have a lower chance of passing the bar. And, even if they pass the bar, they have lower chances to get hired. An employer will more likely take the A+ student from USC before they'll take a C student from Harvard. My problem with the whole AA debate is that you can't really argue either side without getting flamed as a racist. If you say that AA is good, then you're racist against whites. If you say it's bad, then you're racist against blacks.