6 ms·

I would argue the problem with AA is not that people might abuse it, but because its a fundamentally flawed system that starts to prefer certain races to one an

I would argue the problem with AA is not that people might abuse it, but because its a fundamentally flawed system that starts to prefer certain races to one another. For instance, asians are definitely a minority in the US but are extremely heavily discriminated against when applying to colleges. There is even a lawsuit against harvard right now that shows how harvard denied many asian students in favor of other minority's. So, thats one issue with AA. The other is simply that fields like medicine should have only the best of the best getting through. Why should a native american kid who did shitty all through high school get to go to med school and a asian kid who got a perfect 4.0 and did extra curricular things not. This is making america worse and in many cases further pushes a racial divide agenda that says "minority's cant hack it in the real world". What is worrying is that the truly great minority leaders/thinking/doers/etc.. will have their accomplishments completely invalidated by their non-minority peers for thinking they got to where they are just because of their racial makeup. Just to see the above in action, look at this reddit thread : https://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/2zun6p/accepted_into_medical_school/ https://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/2zun6p/accepted_int...

gkop 11y ago
I agree with you that liability for abuse is not a significant problem with AA. I am not convinced one way or the other on the overall cost/benefit, but lean in favor of AA because it helps with my white guilt.
pcthrowaway450 11y ago
Don't worry Dan, the word 'minority' has been redefined to not include Asians. I was informed of this the other week by an Asian friend who's a college student. She mentioned it in passing like it was just basic knowledge.
- theorique 11y ago
  People use the term "NAM", or non-Asian minority, to separate out minorities who are affirmative-action target populations from non-Whites as a whole.
- gkop 11y ago
  When's the last time an unarmed Asian youth was gunned down in the streets by police officers?
  - peterfirefly 11y ago
    When was the last time a huge unarmed criminal Asian youth tried to take the gun from a police officer?
napoleond 11y ago
Maddox put forward a interesting question about women getting paid less then men- He said "You know how I know that this is bullshit? Because if there was a way companies could instantly save 30% of their wages and get the same output, who in their right minds wouldn't do it" My thoughts on the actual issue are sadly ill-informed, but the logic here seems problematic: "People say X phenomenon occurs. You know how I know it doesn't? Because it seems like it would benefit the people in charge!" Did I mis-understand the quote?
- gizmo686 11y ago
  The implication is that companies would only hire women, as they are cheaper than men.
- mikeash 11y ago
  That's the idea. The problem is that it ignores other consequences. A company might save 30% on wages by hiring only women, and then find themselves with no clients because all of the potential clients are sexist. For a more concrete example, consider the old South, and whether stores there unfairly discriminated against black people. The equivalent argument would be: this is obvious bullshit, because if there was a way companies could instantly expand their customer base by 30% (or whatever the proportion of black people living in the South was), who in their right minds wouldn't do it! This argument ignores the fact that a store which admits black people might lose a large portion of their white clientele. Of course, the 30% figure is wrong. Women do earn 30% less than men, but not for the same work. Most of the earnings gap is because women work different jobs than men. There is a wage gap for the same jobs, but it's substantially smaller. But the fact that the conclusion happens to be correct doesn't make the argument not nonsense.
dasil003 11y ago
Of course AA is flawed, but the status quo is flawed too. That's the point of AA. It's supposed to be a counter weight to structural imbalances in order to let minorities get a foot in the door with the hopes that in the future it will not be necessary. Note that I'm not claiming that AA works or is for the best, I really don't know. But just that you can't have this discussion honestly without acknowledging that there are subconscious biases working against certain groups of people. The whole basis of Maddox's quote assumes that people are objective and have no biases—that's a myth, just like the idea that all players in an economy have perfect information and are rational. This is where the whole "check your privilege" thing comes in. From one white man to another, we are not qualified to judge how much hard work and talent is required for a woman or a black person to succeed and be recognized.
- tomp 11y ago
  You could achieve just as much, and more, by using affirmative action to target people who are actually disadvantaged, i.e. the poor. It would target mostly the same people (blacks and hispanics), but not thosethat don't need assistance. Obama, a black man, surely needs help from the government much less than the genious poor white kid from the ghetto. Plus, it's not racist, so you win twice!
- interesting_att 11y ago
  This is such a weak argument. It's misleading to include white people in the discussion of affirmative action, because, almost paradoxically, the program only strengthens the white-power hierarchy. There are millions of things we can do to reduce racial inequality that don't involve discrimination against Asians: ending the drug war and funding rehabilitation programs, reducing police brutality and discrimination, ending for-profit prisons, voting rights for previously convicted, quality hospitals and healthcare access for the poor, funding mental health programs in urban neighborhoods, monitoring and reducing discrimination against colored people in the court systems, actually investing in poorer neighborhoods, funding quality public transportation, seriously funding low-income schools, enacting regulations against companies that take advantage of the poor (payday loans, for-profit colleges). The list goes on and on and on. Affirmative action has effectively increased the white power structure in this country by reducing the power of Asians, while simultaneously used a delaying tactic for real justice for poor African Americans.
HarryHirsch 11y ago
fields like medicine should have only the best of the best getting through I'd like to offer up the contrarian view. In music or basketball there is no way to arrive at the top unless you began studying your craft at the age of 3. Unlike high-level basketball or music at a very high level, medicine is quite plebeian, just watch your physician do his thing next time you get sick. In everyday medicine good enough is in fact good enough, you don't need the very best to advance the state of the art. If it wasn't the case we'd hear that <insert ethnicity here> physicians are dangerous to life, and we'd see them lose their licenses more often than average.
- DanBlake 11y ago
  Since you bring up basketball, should we have AA there also? I feel like asians, native americans and jews are being extremely discriminated against in the sport. Or is it OK to say 'fuck those other minoritys' in that case? If a applicant is jewish but misses 50% more freethrows over another identical black candidate, who should get the spot?
Retra 11y ago
We all have to make decisions with imperfect information. That can be assumed outright with little contention. Yes, AA is fundamentally flawed, but that is because it is a biasing correction to a pre-existing and difficult to manage bias. You might be tempted to think "if the goal is to eliminate bias, you shouldn't introduce more bias" but the fact is, a counter bias can mitigate another. No, it won't work in a utopia, but we don't live in a utopia. And maybe it can't even help create one. But it doesn't actually prevent any progress. > "What is worrying is that the truly great minority leaders/thinking/doers/etc.." Well, don't worry about the truly great leaders, thinkers, and doers. They are truly great, so they will overcome. It is results that make one great, not rewards.
- pcthrowaway450 11y ago
  Prove that there is in fact a 'bias' and not simply a reflection of the number of blacks and latinos who have the aptitude to become a doctor.
  - Retra 11y ago
    There is nothing about being a doctor that requires one to be a particular race or gender.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  There is a pretty easy way to eliminate bias in medical school admissions: blind applications. This is widely cited as a success for orchestral auditions (which resulted in women being hired at a higher rate) and a demonstration that bias exists, yet strangely the solution is opposed by most activists. It's almost as if those same activists are afraid a blind application process might reveal admissions are biased the other way for medical schools.
  - Retra 11y ago
    The problem is not a matter personal/selection bias, but of historical or cultural bias. I.e., if some communities are given poorer educations, they will naturally perform worse when tested against it. The solution is not to exclude them from opportunities that value education, because then they will be incentivized to avoid furthering their educations. Additionally, a small amount of fear can cause a lot of damage. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, which results in undervalued education, and more unqualified minorities. AA in this sense provides a measure of reassurance. (Even if people are racist, you may still get a job in spite of that, so you might as well still put in the effort.) Which is better than fostering whole minority culture that has given up on success. Because that tends to lead to crime, selfishness, and hopelessness. Secondly, the goal isn't simply to hire the top performers. That's short-sighted. The goal is to produce a better performing society in the long run. To do that, your orchestra will have to hire worse performers for now.
protomyth 11y ago
"Why should a native american kid who did shitty all through high school get to go to med school and a asian kid who got a perfect 4.0 and did extra curricular things not." Maybe because you decide Native American was the safest race to use in your example? Also, your example is pretty much BS since you still have to make the school test minimums even with AA, and a Native American who did "shitty" isn't going to apply anyway.
CJefferson 11y ago
I am not knowledgable in race issues, but I can speak about students going to university from schools with lower average grades. A student with BBB (for example) from a bad school will (on average) get a higher final degree score than a student with BBB from a very good school. This (to me) is not a surprise. Therefore universities sometimes offer lower grades to students based on their school, under the expectation the students will do as well at university.

gkop 11y ago

I agree with you that liability for abuse is not a significant problem with AA. I am not convinced one way or the other on the overall cost/benefit, but lean in favor of AA because it helps with my white guilt.

pcthrowaway450 11y ago

Don't worry Dan, the word 'minority' has been redefined to not include Asians. I was informed of this the other week by an Asian friend who's a college student. She mentioned it in passing like it was just basic knowledge.

theorique 11y ago
People use the term "NAM", or non-Asian minority, to separate out minorities who are affirmative-action target populations from non-Whites as a whole.
gkop 11y ago
When's the last time an unarmed Asian youth was gunned down in the streets by police officers?
- peterfirefly 11y ago
  When was the last time a huge unarmed criminal Asian youth tried to take the gun from a police officer?

napoleond 11y ago

Maddox put forward a interesting question about women getting paid less then men- He said "You know how I know that this is bullshit? Because if there was a way companies could instantly save 30% of their wages and get the same output, who in their right minds wouldn't do it" My thoughts on the actual issue are sadly ill-informed, but the logic here seems problematic: "People say X phenomenon occurs. You know how I know it doesn't? Because it seems like it would benefit the people in charge!" Did I mis-understand the quote?

gizmo686 11y ago
The implication is that companies would only hire women, as they are cheaper than men.
mikeash 11y ago
That's the idea. The problem is that it ignores other consequences. A company might save 30% on wages by hiring only women, and then find themselves with no clients because all of the potential clients are sexist. For a more concrete example, consider the old South, and whether stores there unfairly discriminated against black people. The equivalent argument would be: this is obvious bullshit, because if there was a way companies could instantly expand their customer base by 30% (or whatever the proportion of black people living in the South was), who in their right minds wouldn't do it! This argument ignores the fact that a store which admits black people might lose a large portion of their white clientele. Of course, the 30% figure is wrong. Women do earn 30% less than men, but not for the same work. Most of the earnings gap is because women work different jobs than men. There is a wage gap for the same jobs, but it's substantially smaller. But the fact that the conclusion happens to be correct doesn't make the argument not nonsense.

dasil003 11y ago

Of course AA is flawed, but the status quo is flawed too. That's the point of AA. It's supposed to be a counter weight to structural imbalances in order to let minorities get a foot in the door with the hopes that in the future it will not be necessary. Note that I'm not claiming that AA works or is for the best, I really don't know. But just that you can't have this discussion honestly without acknowledging that there are subconscious biases working against certain groups of people. The whole basis of Maddox's quote assumes that people are objective and have no biases—that's a myth, just like the idea that all players in an economy have perfect information and are rational. This is where the whole "check your privilege" thing comes in. From one white man to another, we are not qualified to judge how much hard work and talent is required for a woman or a black person to succeed and be recognized.

tomp 11y ago
You could achieve just as much, and more, by using affirmative action to target people who are actually disadvantaged, i.e. the poor. It would target mostly the same people (blacks and hispanics), but not thosethat don't need assistance. Obama, a black man, surely needs help from the government much less than the genious poor white kid from the ghetto. Plus, it's not racist, so you win twice!
interesting_att 11y ago
This is such a weak argument. It's misleading to include white people in the discussion of affirmative action, because, almost paradoxically, the program only strengthens the white-power hierarchy. There are millions of things we can do to reduce racial inequality that don't involve discrimination against Asians: ending the drug war and funding rehabilitation programs, reducing police brutality and discrimination, ending for-profit prisons, voting rights for previously convicted, quality hospitals and healthcare access for the poor, funding mental health programs in urban neighborhoods, monitoring and reducing discrimination against colored people in the court systems, actually investing in poorer neighborhoods, funding quality public transportation, seriously funding low-income schools, enacting regulations against companies that take advantage of the poor (payday loans, for-profit colleges). The list goes on and on and on. Affirmative action has effectively increased the white power structure in this country by reducing the power of Asians, while simultaneously used a delaying tactic for real justice for poor African Americans.

HarryHirsch 11y ago

fields like medicine should have only the best of the best getting through I'd like to offer up the contrarian view. In music or basketball there is no way to arrive at the top unless you began studying your craft at the age of 3. Unlike high-level basketball or music at a very high level, medicine is quite plebeian, just watch your physician do his thing next time you get sick. In everyday medicine good enough is in fact good enough, you don't need the very best to advance the state of the art. If it wasn't the case we'd hear that <insert ethnicity here> physicians are dangerous to life, and we'd see them lose their licenses more often than average.

DanBlake 11y ago
Since you bring up basketball, should we have AA there also? I feel like asians, native americans and jews are being extremely discriminated against in the sport. Or is it OK to say 'fuck those other minoritys' in that case? If a applicant is jewish but misses 50% more freethrows over another identical black candidate, who should get the spot?

Retra 11y ago

We all have to make decisions with imperfect information. That can be assumed outright with little contention. Yes, AA is fundamentally flawed, but that is because it is a biasing correction to a pre-existing and difficult to manage bias. You might be tempted to think "if the goal is to eliminate bias, you shouldn't introduce more bias" but the fact is, a counter bias can mitigate another. No, it won't work in a utopia, but we don't live in a utopia. And maybe it can't even help create one. But it doesn't actually prevent any progress. > "What is worrying is that the truly great minority leaders/thinking/doers/etc.." Well, don't worry about the truly great leaders, thinkers, and doers. They are truly great, so they will overcome. It is results that make one great, not rewards.

pcthrowaway450 11y ago
Prove that there is in fact a 'bias' and not simply a reflection of the number of blacks and latinos who have the aptitude to become a doctor.
- Retra 11y ago
  There is nothing about being a doctor that requires one to be a particular race or gender.
yummyfajitas 11y ago
There is a pretty easy way to eliminate bias in medical school admissions: blind applications. This is widely cited as a success for orchestral auditions (which resulted in women being hired at a higher rate) and a demonstration that bias exists, yet strangely the solution is opposed by most activists. It's almost as if those same activists are afraid a blind application process might reveal admissions are biased the other way for medical schools.
- Retra 11y ago
  The problem is not a matter personal/selection bias, but of historical or cultural bias. I.e., if some communities are given poorer educations, they will naturally perform worse when tested against it. The solution is not to exclude them from opportunities that value education, because then they will be incentivized to avoid furthering their educations. Additionally, a small amount of fear can cause a lot of damage. If people have an impression that they can't get accepted because of their race, they tend to avoid even trying, which results in undervalued education, and more unqualified minorities. AA in this sense provides a measure of reassurance. (Even if people are racist, you may still get a job in spite of that, so you might as well still put in the effort.) Which is better than fostering whole minority culture that has given up on success. Because that tends to lead to crime, selfishness, and hopelessness. Secondly, the goal isn't simply to hire the top performers. That's short-sighted. The goal is to produce a better performing society in the long run. To do that, your orchestra will have to hire worse performers for now.

protomyth 11y ago

"Why should a native american kid who did shitty all through high school get to go to med school and a asian kid who got a perfect 4.0 and did extra curricular things not." Maybe because you decide Native American was the safest race to use in your example? Also, your example is pretty much BS since you still have to make the school test minimums even with AA, and a Native American who did "shitty" isn't going to apply anyway.

CJefferson 11y ago

I am not knowledgable in race issues, but I can speak about students going to university from schools with lower average grades. A student with BBB (for example) from a bad school will (on average) get a higher final degree score than a student with BBB from a very good school. This (to me) is not a surprise. Therefore universities sometimes offer lower grades to students based on their school, under the expectation the students will do as well at university.