Whites are less likely to be admitted to college than blacks when all other admission criteria are equal.
Did you actually go there, Silyak?
With the exception of HBCU’s…have you looked at the make-up of American Colleges and Universities?.
A handful of people don’t get in…they sue to the Supreme Court…and all of a sudden there is this wide-spread “reverse discrimination” against whites?
And by the way. American Colleges have never, EVER just admitted on “merit”. Look at the history of women and poor being admitted to U.S. institutions of higher learning (to name a few)…especially graduate education.
Not to worry, though. Your concerns are being taken care of in fast order. (Now…if we could just eliminate all that admission discrimination when it comes to Football and Basketball players).
1 Like
Both.
There are so many, it’s difficult to know where to begin. Here’s a nice intro, which starts off by contrasting racism vs white privilege:
Are you suggesting this stems from historical, institutional biases against white people, and that it continues to affect white admissions to this day? Because that’s the sort of thing we’re talking about here–not Affirmative Action.
Do you have any stats for this one?
I’m curious what you are referencing. You mentioned the social, cultural, and economic power structures are heavily tilted to the advantage of white folk. Surly when you are saying this you aren’t talking about shampoo and pantyhose like the article you linked to.
Yes, some of the initial examples are telling-but-trite. But they become more substantive deeper in the link.
Not that I care to look for right now. If affirmative action didn’t affect admission rates, why are there so many people and organizations that defend it in court? Either it does nothing or it increases certain race admission rates at the expense of other races. Either way, it’s indefensible.
A little bit of whattaboutism going on here.
I went there because the question was asked and has a fairly straightforward answer. Starting your response by asking such a question with rhetorical disbelief doesn’t really help your argument so much as make you look hysterical that not everyone blindly believes.
Where did you define what type of racism we are talking about? You asked what white issues in America necessitate organizing. College admissions seems important and relevant. Not sure why it’s outside of the scope of your question.
Frankly, assuming that it’s outside of the scope is basically the point. The tendency to scope the definition of racism so that discrimination against blacks is “racism” and discrimination against whites is just something else less important that we don’t really need to talk about right now is exactly why many white people feel the need to organize. The dialog is often cast in such a way that black issues are important and need to be talked about and any white issues are by definition extraneous because “white people don’t experience racism.”
Here:
Because there is no historical, institutional, generation-spanning legacy of whites being denied college admission on account of their skin color.
To the extent this is true (and it is, among certain individuals), it reflects a misunderstanding of the difference between racism and discrimination on the part of those individuals. The two are not synonyms in this context.
Put simply, to even hint that any racism ‘suffered’ by white people deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as that endured by AAs is beyond offensive and absurd. (Note that I’m not saying you are doing this.) Again, I realize that there are white people who feel this way (ie, feel that white people have suffered significant racism in this country). But they’re wrong. Just because you (the royal you) feel a certain way doesn’t mean those feelings are an accurate/fair reflection of reality. Those feelings should be acknowledged, but in the context of a dialogue regarding what racism actually means.
Not hardly.
It’s more reality…and my response to revisionist history. (Like ED…this is NOT a personal attack, Silyak…but these “arguments” get old, especially as one gets to the reality of the way things actually are).
1 Like
I was more curious on how extensively whites are “less likely to be admitted” and whether or not there was any actual data behind it.
I don’t agree with some of AA, but I still don’t think I’d ever call it indefensible. People underestimate other people’s abilities to be assholes (especially in regards to race).
While affirmative action in college admissions does hurt people, it isn’t the qualified and excluded whites/asians/jews that get hurt. They will do well wherever they go.
It’s the minority applicants that don’t have the academic chops in the first place that get hurt. They end up failing or needing remedial classes because they weren’t ready to be there.
Regarding white interest groups, that dog won’t hunt. Is enshrining race based policies in law equal protection under the law? No. Is there something inherently unjust about that? Yes. Does that matter? No.
People who are going to be successful will do so regardless of obstacles. Losers will keep losing. Selling the “society is keeping me down” excuse to people is popular regardless of the targets’ identity politics. It will not enrich their lives, only hobble them so they will blame others for their outcomes and have no agency in their life.
For levity sake:
1 Like
Well, yes. Likewise, people who are not going to be successful won’t be, regardless of attempts to make them so. Neither of these truisms is particularly helpful regarding the real issue, which is: Is there a cohort of individuals who could be successful if they are given a hand-up, but who won’t be successful if they’re not? Relatedly, how large is this cohort? Further, are the costs (direct and indirect) associated with a hand-up worth the benefits that accrue from it?
While society is keeping me down may be too strident a description circa 2017, there are certainly individuals for whom society places impediments to success in front of them, and who have to climb out of a multi-generational socioeconomic hole before they can even start the process of being successful.
For some individuals, probably.
I can get my head around this argument, BG.
It’s the “Reverse Discrimination” stuff that gets me going.
Think about the people it hurts. Imagine a 4.5 GPA White/Asian/Jew student that has all the extracurriculars to get into Harvard, but they aren’t the best/the cream of the crop. So a minority student gets in ahead of them with a 3.5GPA.
That “injured” student is going to get into any “almost” ivy league school no problem. If you can work hard enough to be hurt by affirmative action, then your life is going to be okay regardless.
1 Like
By the way…I hate…HATE the term “White Privilege”…
White Liberals and SJWs need to cut this shit out…
2 Likes
Obviously, historical oppression of Black people in the US far exceeds historical discrimination of white people.
The question is whether or not historical oppression is a valid justification for modern discrimination. If we accept that we can justify a certain amount of discrimination to ‘correct’ for past wrongs, I question how we determine when enough is enough.
If you have an alternative term that captures the phenomena, I’m all ears.
1 Like
Socioeconomic privilege?
IMO, the question is whether the current, tangible, measurable sequelae of historical oppression justifies modern discrimination. It has nothing to do with ‘correcting past wrongs.’
That’s an easy one. ‘Enough is enough’ when the sequelae can no longer be detected.
Consider: The Irish (among other whites) suffered outrageous systemic/institutional bigotry for many years. However, I seriously doubt a study of the socioeconomic status circa 2017 re people of Irish ancestry would be able to detect any trace of that oppression. Hence, despite their undeniable history of oppression, current folks of Irish descent have no legit claims to government-mandated forms of redress. (Someday, the same will be true of people of AA descent.)
No doubt, there is such a thing. However, it is qualitatively different from white privilege, and thus doesn’t capture it. (It’s important to remember that, just as a dog can have ticks and fleas, so too can multiple sources of privilege exist simultaneously, even in the same person.)
In this regard, the following short essay is very interesting:
http://occupywallstreet.net/story/explaining-white-privilege-broke-white-person
ED:
My problem with the term is that it tends to shut down all discussion…except between other SJWs…and other Liberals.