Affirmative action - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

cheetahtank2 · 03-04-2008, 08:27 PM

So this topic came up today and i realized im really not sure how i feel about this all the way. Dont get me wrong i dont consider myself a racist at all which is part of what confuses me on this topic because the ideal society most would agree is racism free where everyone is free but isnt this undermining that very value? But i can see the other side of this issue which is that it is supposed to be a balancing scale sort of thing to help minorities catch up because they have been held back due to racism but this act also give them a BETTER chance of getting the job based on their race which is racial preferance and racist. I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Raptortank04 · 03-04-2008, 09:51 PM

I don't agree with Affirmative Action at all. I have a book I can lend you btw, that'll teach you more about it. Only if you want it though. It'll be a boring read unless you're into it.

Anyway... to sum up what I believe without going into length I'll use an example. Whites are ahead by 135873895745 miles while blacks are behind a set amount because of unfortunate events in the past. Now if we cut the whites ability to move ahead, the blacks will catch up and everyone will be at an equal level. That's not right. You're still making someone else deprived to help another. That's not fair and that's not what the competitive market in america is supposed to be like.

Affirmative action has good intentions, but I believe it should be revamped in how it's used.

cheetahtank2 · 03-04-2008, 09:55 PM

I see what you're saying and i agree with that and it seems to me that affirmative action and pple for it are for the future while people against it are in the now know what i mean?

Raptortank04 · 03-04-2008, 09:58 PM

Yea. That applies to it too, yea. You can't dwell on the past, that only brings people down.

Just like giving reparations out today when slavery ended over 100 years ago.

Unless you're a generation after someone who was a slave, you shouldn't receive any money because you weren't the one who suffered from it.

cheetahtank2 · 03-04-2008, 10:03 PM

Ya i def agree with that and another thing on the same topic is why should we have to pay reperations for something our ancestors did i do think the whole idea of affirmative action is a sort of ridiculous idea because everything it is goes against everything the people who made it stand for sort of but, there is a certain reality i can see that without this little boost i dont really think much would change ever people would stay in the same place they are in.

Raptortank04 · 03-04-2008, 10:13 PM

It's a competitive world out there, it always has been like that.

If people stay in the same place in a modern country (example: USA, GB, Canada, etc. etc.), then there's a good chance it's their fault. I know there are situations where the entire thing is just so bad they literally can't do anything for themselves, so saying it's all their fault isn't always going to be the right thing to say.

But at that point is where the government should step in to help the situation. Welfare, creating jobs, stimulating an economy, removing the filth that's causing the problem, but not taking away from others and putting blacks, whites, mexicans, or whoever in their place because it's going to just swap two people. One in a bad spot will get in the good job that another person has, who knows how to do it, and not know how to perform necessarily. While the person that was going to be good for the job is now unemployed.

host · 03-04-2008, 10:20 PM

We've discussed the issue in the past, on this thread:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=94861

Raptortank04 · 03-04-2008, 10:32 PM

Thanks for the link.

pig · 03-05-2008, 04:44 AM

Damn it host: I was trying to see how long we could have cheetahtank and raptortank arguing over affirmative actions. I mean, I'm not trying to be a dickhole...but are those usernames real? Are they the same person? What are the odds?

I think my contributions to this subject are covered in the link host provided; doesn't mean I won't follow and new a fresh conversation about....

Plan9 · 03-05-2008, 04:51 AM

Yeah, Pigtank and Hosttank? Those don't sound like Transformers.

indy-p · 03-05-2008, 10:51 AM

I think affirmative action is anti-meritocratic, can cause resentment among those who are denied positions, and undermines proper freedom of association.

Shouldn't the best people available, irrespective of race, gain positions? Why can't everybody in society have the chance to fulfil his or her potential?

And can't affirmative action even cause racism among those who don't get positions?

host · 03-05-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by indy-p

I think affirmative action is anti-meritocratic, can cause resentment among those who are denied positions, and undermines proper freedom of association.

Shouldn't the best people available, irrespective of race, gain positions? Why can't everybody in society have the chance to fulfil his or her potential?

And can't affirmative action even cause racism among those who don't get positions?

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

I think legacy admission is anti-meritocratic, can cause resentment among those who are denied positions, and undermines proper freedom of association.

Shouldn't the best people available, irrespective of accident of birth, gain positions? Why can't everybody in society have the chance to fulfil his or her potential?

And can't legacy admission even cause racism among those who don't get positions?

Quote:

<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/08/07/will_bush_truly_renounce_privilege_in_admissions/">Will Bush truly renounce privilege in admissions?</a>
By Derrick Z. Jackson, Globe Columnist | August 7, 2004

WASHINGTON -- AS HE STOOD before thousands of journalists of color, President Bush was reminded by columnist Roland Martin that Texas A&M Univeristy recently announced it would end preferential treatment toward applicants whose parents and grandparents were graduates. "If you say it's a matter of merit and not race," Martin asked Bush, "shouldn't colleges also get rid of legacy?" Bush tried to dance for a moment with a light joke saying, "Well, in my case I had to knock on a lot of doors to follow the old man's footsteps." Then he added, "If what you're saying is, is there going to be special treatment for people -- in other words -- we're going to have a special exception for certain people in a system that's supposed to be fair, I agree. I don't think there ought to be."

Martin followed up, "So the colleges should get rid of legacy?"

Bush said, "Well, I think so. Yeah, I think it ought to be based on merit."

One more time, a few moments later, Martin asked, "Just to be clear . . . you believe that colleges should not use legacy."

Bush answered, "I think colleges ought to use merit in order for people to get in."

We don't know yet what Bush thought to himself as he left the Unity conference of African-American, Hispanic, Asian-American, and Native American journalists. But even the world's most famous legacy admission and the world's most glaring example of privilege with his C average at Yale, had to realize the seismic proportions of what he said. This was the same man who had his attorneys file a brief just before the 2003 Martin Luther King Jr. holiday to support the white students bent on destroying affirmative action at the University of Michigan.

That summer, the Supreme Court upheld affirmative action at the Michigan law school, judging that race was only one of many factors in admissions. It struck down the affirmative action plan for the undergraduate school, saying the points awarded for race were too arbitrary. In support of the brief, Bush said, "quota systems that use race to include or exclude people from higher education and the opportunities it offers are divisive, unfair and impossible to square with the Constitution . . . the motivation for such an admissions policy may be very good, but its result is discrimination and that discrimination is wrong."

Bush of course never volunteered during his presidency that legacy admissions are divisive, unfair, and impossible to square with the Constitution and that the result was wrongful discrimination. Nor has he been forced to address the issue by an overwhelmingly white press corps (90 percent according to a new Unity survey done by the University of Maryland journalism school). Nor has he been forced to by other black groups, since he has avoided the NAACP and the Congressional Black Caucus at every possibility.

But yesterday, speaking before the largest group of journalists of color in his presidency, he ran right into the buzzsaw of his own legacy. He simply had nowhere to go. His answer is sure -- if the 90 percent white Washington press corps was paying attention -- to set off a renewed focus on the most obvious hypocrisy during these years of attacks on affirmative action. While African-American and Latino students became the nation's scapegoats of "preferences," legacies who are overwhelmingly white have a two-to-four times better chance than regular applicants of being admitted to Harvard, Penn, and Princeton.

While Texas A&M says it is eliminating its legacies, and while vice presidential candidate John Edwards has called for their abolition, many elite schools, most notably Harvard, defend them. In a Wall Street Journal interview last month, Harvard President Lawrence Summers said flaty, "Legacy admissions are integral to the kind of community that any private educational institution is." Despite Harvard's recent pledge to relieve lower-income families of tuition costs, Summers was crystal clear that legacy admissions -- read that as "legacy admi$$ion$" -- come before anyone else.

Other schools, such as Duke, are just as blunt, saying legacy is a "plus factor." Read that as "plu$ factor." Summers defends legacies, saying, "the way to increase socioeconomic diversity is to admit and recruit more terrific and diverse students." That does not explain how legacies crowd out those terrific students.

That raises the obvious question. Bush, to his credit, did not duck the question on this day. But tomorrow and the next, as he races to his million-dollar fund-raisers full of men and women who, like him, benefited from the privilege of legacy, it is uncertain if he will bring up the subject on his own. If he brings it up himself again, we will know that the world's most famous legacy admission truly renounced his privilege. If he does not, his most famous legacy in education will be hiding behind it while attempting to destroy it for the scapegoats.

ratbastid · 03-05-2008, 12:51 PM

Re Affermative Action: I think it's indisputable that minorities don't have the opportunities that whites have, and I think it's right to do something about that--but the place to intervene isn't in job hiring. The place to intervene is in early childhood and education. If we were making damn sure every minority child got the same level of education as every white child, within a generation or two the institutional racial balance that's prevalent in our country would gradually disappear.

Problem is, nobody gets elected on multi-generational plans. They have to be able to stand up and talk about something that will put more money in their constituent's pockets next week, not their great-grandchildren's. But that's how cultural change works--over time.

So: I think Affirmative Action comes from a desire to do a good thing, but I think the approach it takes is entirely wrong-headed and short-sighted.

cheetahtank2 · 03-08-2008, 03:40 PM

My problem with affirmative action is how it is used in a rascist way. Instead hiring someone over the color of their skin, even if they're less qualified, as a way to help the minority. They should start in the schools and this plan shouldnt be for minorities only but for all kids who's parents dont enough money who may not get opportunity otherwise all its doing is reversing inequality from the way it was during slavery and other harsh times.

BTW pig how is that any better of a name? Anyway raptortank has been my friend for a long time and the names were made up long ago and i like to use it now only because it is never taken in name databases for memberships.

Raptortank04 · 03-08-2008, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheetahtank2

My problem with affirmative action is how it is used in a rascist way. Instead hiring someone over the color of their skin, even if they're less qualified, as a way to help the minority. They should start in the schools and this plan shouldnt be for minorities only but for all kids who's parents dont enough money who may not get opportunity otherwise all its doing is reversing inequality from the way it was during slavery and other harsh times.

BTW pig how is that any better of a name? Anyway raptortank has been my friend for a long time and the names were made up long ago and i like to use it now only because it is never taken in name databases for memberships.

Pretty much what I believe in.

Haha, yea... these names were made up a long time ago. No one else uses them or anything close to them so I've stuck with mine. besides, it's annoying having to make up a new name for every site you register in anyway.

Willravel · 03-08-2008, 04:22 PM

Affirmative action: digging a knife out of your leg by putting another knife in your leg.

Sun Tzu · 03-08-2008, 10:05 PM

host whats going on with your quote / original quote? So raptor and cheetah are two different members? This is a very strange thread. IMO AA promotes racism.

pig · 03-09-2008, 04:28 PM

cheetahtank, raptoptank: no offense intended, and I certainly do not hold up my hallowed handle as the example by which usernames should be judged. I suppose I could claim points for brevity, but how is that any measure? I simply found the exchange to be hilarious.

As for affirmative action, as I believe I have posted before, my opinion ranges depending on the particular application. However, I have never once felt disenfranchised due to my race, gender, or sexual preference - despite being a hetero Southern white male. I agree with the intention of the policies, and would prefer that they be (particularly in regards to college scholarship opportunities and the like) increasingly modified to account for socioeconomic status rather than the viceral qualities we are more familiar with in terms of this topic. When it comes to workforce hiring, I view it as 1. in terms of avoiding negative consequences - ensuring that discrimination does not occur based on superficial qualities, and 2. in terms of positive promotion, encouraging a broadly diversified workforce and cultural atmosphere. When it comes to to giving a less-qualified candidate, or nearly equally qualified candidate a job/promotion based on AA, I would hope that the discrimination would be rigorously investigated before it was deemed to be the result of AA. In the case of hiring strategies that encourage a diversified workforce, I think that's part of the strategy of the larger business plan for a given corporate interest.

For example, I know many hispanic/latin/black-africanamerican people in my line of work, and they are able to receive many preferential incentives when it comes to proposal funding and small business incentives. This system is in place to encourage a diversified representation of people in my field (engineering). I recognize that this is the case, and it doesn't bother me. It adds a certain amount of value to partnering with talented individuals of these ethnic backgrounds when putting together teams. I don't see it limiting the availability of opportunities for myself, but I do see it forcing people to seek out qualified individuals of minority makeup.

I feel that this post is disjointed. So be it.

florida0214 · 03-09-2008, 05:27 PM

I would think people who feel like a minority would want to earn their job based on merit and qualifications. Getting a job or into a college or whatever because of your minority status could be looked at as being given a helping hand or preferential treatment, which is exactly what most minorities don't want. That being said discrimination for any reason is wrong and should never play into a person ability to advance his or herself. It happens unfortunately.
Maybe affirmative action could be reverse discrimination.....just maybe.

Manic_Skafe · 03-09-2008, 06:58 PM

Ratbastid is spot-on.

Few things are as indicative of the length and quality of your life as is the quality of your education. Just as the welfare and jail systems have proven to be inadequate and ineffective in terms of rehabilitating and reeducating those that these systems were created to help - the only way to truly better this society and level the playing field is to give everyone a fair education.

As diversified as it is here, I've seen people of all colors suffer the effects of a poor education.

AA comes too little to late.

But as it's always easier to tear it down than it is to build it up, what do you cheeta/raptor propose as a solution to the problem?

cheetahtank2 · 03-15-2008, 07:24 PM

I appreciate the clarification pig hehe.

I feel rabastid has it spot on as well. If one generation of minorities could be well for lack of a better word forced to participate in the same kind of education system as the white race then it will be continually easier to do so to the generation that follows until soon it is just considered "the norm". While affirmative action does have good intentions it is simply on the wrong level and wont change much for the future all because of the "what have you done for me lately?" attitude that seems to be what todays society is all about.

cheetahtank2 · 03-22-2008, 08:28 PM

sorry manic didnt see the end of your post there.

I feel the same way you do about this in that it comes to late (see above post) and following that line of reasoning the only sensible thing to do would be to institute more programs or other methods of involvement that encourage minorities to want to go to better schools or make their schools better. The reason these programs have to get the children and teens to want a better education is because if forced they will only grow to resent it more. As to how to do this i'm afraid i dont have an answer but, I believe the younger you try to instill ideals the easier it is to do so. Maybe starting school a year earlier and introducing more of a reward system that benefits them immediately because many kids dont see just how important and crucial their education is for there later life.

Do you have a solution proposal Manic??

Raptortank04 · 03-23-2008, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheetahtank2

sorry manic didnt see the end of your post there.

I feel the same way you do about this in that it comes to late (see above post) and following that line of reasoning the only sensible thing to do would be to institute more programs or other methods of involvement that encourage minorities to want to go to better schools or make their schools better. The reason these programs have to get the children and teens to want a better education is because if forced they will only grow to resent it more. As to how to do this i'm afraid i dont have an answer but, I believe the younger you try to instill ideals the easier it is to do so. Maybe starting school a year earlier and introducing more of a reward system that benefits them immediately because many kids dont see just how important and crucial their education is for there later life.

Do you have a solution proposal Manic??

Yea, I'm in the same boat with finding an alternative to affirmative action

lol. I simply think that it shouldnt be existant at all. It should only be illegal to deny someone a job because theyre white, mexican, black, asian, etc. but not to give them the job based on that.

I've read countless documents that show that most of the problems race policies like affirmative action try to solve are caused my financial issues. Why not make more financial help policies? Give more money to schools, etc. etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheetahtank2

because many kids dont see just how important and crucial their education is for there later life.

Yea... I didn't realize that until maybe late in my freshman year or early sophomore.

Rly wish I did better in my freshman year... ugh =/

03-04-2008, 08:27 PM	#1 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	Affirmative action So this topic came up today and i realized im really not sure how i feel about this all the way. Dont get me wrong i dont consider myself a racist at all which is part of what confuses me on this topic because the ideal society most would agree is racism free where everyone is free but isnt this undermining that very value? But i can see the other side of this issue which is that it is supposed to be a balancing scale sort of thing to help minorities catch up because they have been held back due to racism but this act also give them a BETTER chance of getting the job based on their race which is racial preferance and racist. I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

03-05-2008, 04:44 AM	#9 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	Damn it host: I was trying to see how long we could have cheetahtank and raptortank arguing over affirmative actions. I mean, I'm not trying to be a dickhole...but are those usernames real? Are they the same person? What are the odds? I think my contributions to this subject are covered in the link host provided; doesn't mean I won't follow and new a fresh conversation about.... __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

03-05-2008, 04:51 AM	#10 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	Yeah, Pigtank and Hosttank? Those don't sound like Transformers. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

03-08-2008, 03:40 PM	#14 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	My problem with affirmative action is how it is used in a rascist way. Instead hiring someone over the color of their skin, even if they're less qualified, as a way to help the minority. They should start in the schools and this plan shouldnt be for minorities only but for all kids who's parents dont enough money who may not get opportunity otherwise all its doing is reversing inequality from the way it was during slavery and other harsh times. BTW pig how is that any better of a name? Anyway raptortank has been my friend for a long time and the names were made up long ago and i like to use it now only because it is never taken in name databases for memberships. Last edited by cheetahtank2; 03-08-2008 at 03:43 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

03-08-2008, 10:05 PM	#17 (permalink)
Sun Tzu Conspiracy Realist Location: The Event Horizon	host whats going on with your quote / original quote? So raptor and cheetah are two different members? This is a very strange thread. IMO AA promotes racism. __________________ *To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking*

03-04-2008, 09:51 PM	#2 (permalink)
Raptortank04 Upright	I don't agree with Affirmative Action at all. I have a book I can lend you btw, that'll teach you more about it. Only if you want it though. It'll be a boring read unless you're into it. Anyway... to sum up what I believe without going into length I'll use an example. Whites are ahead by 135873895745 miles while blacks are behind a set amount because of unfortunate events in the past. Now if we cut the whites ability to move ahead, the blacks will catch up and everyone will be at an equal level. That's not right. You're still making someone else deprived to help another. That's not fair and that's not what the competitive market in america is supposed to be like. Affirmative action has good intentions, but I believe it should be revamped in how it's used.

03-04-2008, 09:55 PM	#3 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	I see what you're saying and i agree with that and it seems to me that affirmative action and pple for it are for the future while people against it are in the now know what i mean?

03-04-2008, 09:58 PM	#4 (permalink)
Raptortank04 Upright	Yea. That applies to it too, yea. You can't dwell on the past, that only brings people down. Just like giving reparations out today when slavery ended over 100 years ago. Unless you're a generation after someone who was a slave, you shouldn't receive any money because you weren't the one who suffered from it.

03-04-2008, 10:03 PM	#5 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	Ya i def agree with that and another thing on the same topic is why should we have to pay reperations for something our ancestors did i do think the whole idea of affirmative action is a sort of ridiculous idea because everything it is goes against everything the people who made it stand for sort of but, there is a certain reality i can see that without this little boost i dont really think much would change ever people would stay in the same place they are in.

03-04-2008, 10:13 PM	#6 (permalink)
Raptortank04 Upright	It's a competitive world out there, it always has been like that. If people stay in the same place in a modern country (example: USA, GB, Canada, etc. etc.), then there's a good chance it's their fault. I know there are situations where the entire thing is just so bad they literally can't do anything for themselves, so saying it's all their fault isn't always going to be the right thing to say. But at that point is where the government should step in to help the situation. Welfare, creating jobs, stimulating an economy, removing the filth that's causing the problem, but not taking away from others and putting blacks, whites, mexicans, or whoever in their place because it's going to just swap two people. One in a bad spot will get in the good job that another person has, who knows how to do it, and not know how to perform necessarily. While the person that was going to be good for the job is now unemployed.

03-04-2008, 10:20 PM	#7 (permalink)
host Banned	We've discussed the issue in the past, on this thread: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=94861

03-04-2008, 10:32 PM	#8 (permalink)
Raptortank04 Upright	Thanks for the link.

03-05-2008, 10:51 AM	#11 (permalink)
indy-p Upright	I think affirmative action is anti-meritocratic, can cause resentment among those who are denied positions, and undermines proper freedom of association. Shouldn't the best people available, irrespective of race, gain positions? Why can't everybody in society have the chance to fulfil his or her potential? And can't affirmative action even cause racism among those who don't get positions?

03-05-2008, 12:51 PM	#13 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Re Affermative Action: I think it's indisputable that minorities don't have the opportunities that whites have, and I think it's right to do something about that--but the place to intervene isn't in job hiring. The place to intervene is in early childhood and education. If we were making damn sure every minority child got the same level of education as every white child, within a generation or two the institutional racial balance that's prevalent in our country would gradually disappear. Problem is, nobody gets elected on multi-generational plans. They have to be able to stand up and talk about something that will put more money in their constituent's pockets next week, not their great-grandchildren's. But that's how cultural change works--over time. So: I think Affirmative Action comes from a desire to do a good thing, but I think the approach it takes is entirely wrong-headed and short-sighted.

03-08-2008, 04:22 PM	#16 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Affirmative action: digging a knife out of your leg by putting another knife in your leg.

03-09-2008, 04:28 PM	#18 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	cheetahtank, raptoptank: no offense intended, and I certainly do not hold up my hallowed handle as the example by which usernames should be judged. I suppose I could claim points for brevity, but how is that any measure? I simply found the exchange to be hilarious. As for affirmative action, as I believe I have posted before, my opinion ranges depending on the particular application. However, I have never once felt disenfranchised due to my race, gender, or sexual preference - despite being a hetero Southern white male. I agree with the intention of the policies, and would prefer that they be (particularly in regards to college scholarship opportunities and the like) increasingly modified to account for socioeconomic status rather than the viceral qualities we are more familiar with in terms of this topic. When it comes to workforce hiring, I view it as 1. in terms of avoiding negative consequences - ensuring that discrimination does not occur based on superficial qualities, and 2. in terms of positive promotion, encouraging a broadly diversified workforce and cultural atmosphere. When it comes to to giving a less-qualified candidate, or nearly equally qualified candidate a job/promotion based on AA, I would hope that the discrimination would be rigorously investigated before it was deemed to be the result of AA. In the case of hiring strategies that encourage a diversified workforce, I think that's part of the strategy of the larger business plan for a given corporate interest. For example, I know many hispanic/latin/black-africanamerican people in my line of work, and they are able to receive many preferential incentives when it comes to proposal funding and small business incentives. This system is in place to encourage a diversified representation of people in my field (engineering). I recognize that this is the case, and it doesn't bother me. It adds a certain amount of value to partnering with talented individuals of these ethnic backgrounds when putting together teams. I don't see it limiting the availability of opportunities for myself, but I do see it forcing people to seek out qualified individuals of minority makeup. I feel that this post is disjointed. So be it. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

03-09-2008, 05:27 PM	#19 (permalink)
florida0214 Crazy Location: South Florida	I would think people who feel like a minority would want to earn their job based on merit and qualifications. Getting a job or into a college or whatever because of your minority status could be looked at as being given a helping hand or preferential treatment, which is exactly what most minorities don't want. That being said discrimination for any reason is wrong and should never play into a person ability to advance his or herself. It happens unfortunately. Maybe affirmative action could be reverse discrimination.....just maybe. __________________ "Two men: one thinks he can. One thinks he cannot. They are Both Right."

03-09-2008, 06:58 PM	#20 (permalink)
Manic_Skafe More Than You Expect Location: Queens	Ratbastid is spot-on. Few things are as indicative of the length and quality of your life as is the quality of your education. Just as the welfare and jail systems have proven to be inadequate and ineffective in terms of rehabilitating and reeducating those that these systems were created to help - the only way to truly better this society and level the playing field is to give everyone a fair education. As diversified as it is here, I've seen people of all colors suffer the effects of a poor education. AA comes too little to late. But as it's always easier to tear it down than it is to build it up, what do you cheeta/raptor propose as a solution to the problem? __________________ "Porn is a zoo of exotic animals that becomes boring upon ownership." -Nersesian

03-15-2008, 07:24 PM	#21 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	I appreciate the clarification pig hehe. I feel rabastid has it spot on as well. If one generation of minorities could be well for lack of a better word forced to participate in the same kind of education system as the white race then it will be continually easier to do so to the generation that follows until soon it is just considered "the norm". While affirmative action does have good intentions it is simply on the wrong level and wont change much for the future all because of the "what have you done for me lately?" attitude that seems to be what todays society is all about.

03-22-2008, 08:28 PM	#22 (permalink)
cheetahtank2 Upright Location: Everett, WA	sorry manic didnt see the end of your post there. I feel the same way you do about this in that it comes to late (see above post) and following that line of reasoning the only sensible thing to do would be to institute more programs or other methods of involvement that encourage minorities to want to go to better schools or make their schools better. The reason these programs have to get the children and teens to want a better education is because if forced they will only grow to resent it more. As to how to do this i'm afraid i dont have an answer but, I believe the younger you try to instill ideals the easier it is to do so. Maybe starting school a year earlier and introducing more of a reward system that benefits them immediately because many kids dont see just how important and crucial their education is for there later life. Do you have a solution proposal Manic??