Monday, December 19, 2005

Liberals Continue To Fight For Discrimination

It is rather astonishing that 41 years after Congress passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which was to “prevent discrimination in federally assisted programs,” that liberals still insist on the government discriminating against certain American citizens. This discrimination is in the form of a federally assisted program, called Affirmative Action, which enables high school students to be admitted into college ahead of other students simply because of their race. Affirmative Action is not only unconstitutional, but it is also harmful to the ideal society founded upon hard work which America prides itself on. The philosophical idea that race or ethnicity can be the determining factor over your credentials is not only absurd but also flat out discriminatory.

The major reason why Affirmative Action (AA) is wrong is because it goes against everything and anything blacks fought for in the 1960s. It is a system based upon letting kids into college because of the color of their skin. At its core, AA is reverse discrimination. The justification of this reverse discrimination is that we need to be lenient on blacks because of their past, because of their history of slavery and segregation. Yet, if we look at blacks in college today, we find that 99.9% of them were born after the Civil Rights Act of 1964. To say that the historical nature of segregation and slavery is cause for discriminating against whites today is unfounded simply because no black in college has been segregated from schooling, or has felt the shackles of slavery.

If we look beyond the obvious discrimination of the policy, we see many other fallacies with this plan. If AA was working, would we not see a greater movement of “institutionalized” blacks from the ghettos and into colleges? Also, this policy implies we should see less conflict between blacks and whites, yet many studies show that this is not the case. Whites have only become increasingly negative about this evident discriminatory policy and it has amplified tensions between the two races, producing exactly the opposite of what the policy proponents of this plan have sought to achieve. It has created more ethnocentricity, and less acceptance and dialogue between races and ethnicities. This is not what society should be advocating.

Another major problem with AA is what it does to those who are benefiting towards the policy. Affirmative Action places a stigma on the race in which it is assisting. For example, blacks or Hispanics at Ivy League schools are sometimes looked upon, unrightfully so, as “second tier” students to most of their colleagues. The reason is because the perception of many whites is that blacks or Hispanics are only at the school because of AA and therefore are not as worthy as the rest of their colleagues. This is a major drawback from what AA is hoping to achieve. Although the belief that someone is inferior because of their race is wrong, and most people should never feel or think that way, it happens because of this program. But why shouldn’t the belief come about from students and others, the people backing this policy are obviously believing that blacks and Hispanics cannot get accepted into college without a racially preferred program like Affirmative Action. It is my assertion that the believers in this policy actively seek to uphold the inferiority gap in which many blacks, through history, have kept in the back of their minds. This gap needs to be broken, and AA only obstructs the process of it being destroyed.

The last reason on why AA is inherently wrong is because of its actual policy. Was America not founded upon the principle of individualism and self-autonomy? The mere fact that I will get turned down from a college of my choice because of race and not actual credentials is downright cruel and unusual punishment. It once again is unconstitutional. The fact that this policy implies the admissions officer for every college is racist is also flat out ignorant. Our society is based upon the belief that hard work will pay off, and since this policy actively seeks to undermine this belief, then I believe motivation and innovation amongst students, will become damaged as well.

Supporting Affirmative Action is an indefensible argument. If you are in fact supporting AA, you are a discriminatory person. If you support AA you are implying that blacks and Hispanics are inferior to whites. If you support AA, you are increasing racial tensions in society. If you support AA you are placing a stigma on blacks and Hispanics. If you support AA you are destroying the fabric of individualism and the belief in merit. Last but not least, if you support AA, you are a hypocrite to the very nature of what America has voiced for the last 41 years.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

I comepletely disagree with you and am a strong believer in Affirmative Action. I also think that you do not truly understand the experience of being black and not having the opportunities that the majority (although albiet, not all) of whites enjoy with respect to education opportunities. However, we live in America, and I respect your right to voice this opinion, and I also respect that you attempt to be mature in voicing it. My question for you- what do you propose we do to equalize the huge education gaps between blacks and other races? This problem needs to be solved, regardless, otherwise you are arguing white supremacy. Without "AA" the number of blacks in higher education would probably decline, causing even less blacks to obtain college degrees, further perpetuating the huge margin in education between races. So do you have an alternative solution to solve this problem? I truly am curious!

CaptainAmerica said...

You are correct in your assertion that I do not 'know' what it feels like to be black, but your assumption that blacks are second-class citizens still is uninformed. I will admit that discrimination does in fact, still exist in America. However, through the passing of legislation and the rulings in courts over the past 35 years, America has shifted towards eradicating discrimination in any form; whether the discrimination is in the form of employment, admissions process, or other various aspects of life.

Your argument for Affirmative Action, as I have interpreted it, is that whites have more of a privileged life than blacks so blacks should get an extra hand in the equation to get into college based on the color of their skin. But why is it only blacks that do not enjoy a privileged life? Can a single white mother be capable of living in a ghetto with three white kids who seem to be just as 'underprivileged' as the black population in the area? The answer is of course they can. The only real argument proponents have of AA that has any merit at all is what you somewhat implied in your question. That is, proponents will argue that blacks do not have as much of the opportunities due to obstacles that have gotten in the way of their education and further development in life. These obstacles can range from a drug addict mother to poor textbooks and facilities in education. So they will continue to argue that since the majority of these underprivileged kids are black, we need to focus on a racial policy to make it easier for them to get into school, often at the expense of white students.

Yet as I states earlier, why can't a poor white kid in the ghetto, who has to deal with the same obstacles of environment that blacks have to deal with, get special treatment into college?

You have asked for a proposal or a solution to further close the gap between blacks and whites with degrees, yet you show no evidence, only a supposition, that blacks have advanced in degree obtaining since this policy was put into effect (after the subsequent decade of course; post 1975)

So here is my proposal, it's called The Economic Action Plan. Tell me what you think, I appreciate you taking the time to read my opinions online.

Economic Action Plan

1. A college admissions department must take into consideration the following under this plan. Where the student is from, where they went to high school, how they did amongst the rest of the classmates, and what their family income has been since the day the child was born, ncluding progress and cumulative amount of revenue into the household. This would weed out all of the kids who have the utilities provided to succeed in life, they just decided to ditch school. The income check will determine if that kid has had to overcome obstacles to deteremine his status as a "good student." This is a way of earning your way into college and provides an incentive for kids who don't have means or access because of poor education or a bad atmosphere.

2. This plan will not just go to blacks and other minorities, but it will also go to caucasion male and females. This will take race completely out of the picture and no longer can the reverse discrimination argument be used, because all races who have a disadvantage which overcome their expectations as students in a predominantly "failed" enviroment should rewarded.

3. This plan will also weed out the blacks who do not need help getting into schools like Michael Jordan's son or daughter, or Oprah's. It will be a fair based system determined by those mentioned in the first number above, where cumulative income has precedent over most factors.

4.This plan would also take the stigma out of society which blacks face among affirmative action, because they many perceive them as weaker with the plan. With this plan, or action, nobody is perceived weaker because it touches amongst all races and ethnicities, as long as you have proven to the administration that you have overcome certain obstacles in your schooling as a child. And, then there are those who will argue, well I live in a suburb and I overcome problems everyday like my mom having cancer, my dad beating my mom, my brother getting arrested for drug use and so on. However, this is where the plan will face its ultimate test in my opinion. The circumstance described by the girl from the suburb, is not an institutionalized problem which was or is ongoing to the effect that work cannot be achieved. If she is indeed in a good school district with a family that makes a average income, she has MORE than enough utilities to strive with the other kids at her school.

5. If someone from the inner city school system who is white overcomes the inner city crap of education, then he deserves a look at, in terms of what his family's income is, and if he had the tools necessary to suceed in a public suburb school, then he would most likely succed with honors.

My plan has flaws, but once implemented, like our Constitution, they will work themselves out, and we will face them head on. This is at least better then the system we have now which is discriminatory.

Anonymous said...

I agree with your views. This whole race thing should go out the window. Many of my italian and irish friends didn't have a lot of money and they got screwed by this. I am pretty liberal but I hate when liberals don't take the time to read what the other people have to say. I agree with your plan and like you said there is no way to make a constituion that does not need to get amended. Affirmative Action should exist for everybody alike, all shades and colors.

Anonymous said...

I agree with your views. This whole race thing should go out the window. Many of my italian and irish friends didn't have a lot of money and they got screwed by this. I am pretty liberal but I hate when liberals don't take the time to read what the other people have to say. I agree with your plan and like you said there is no way to make a constituion that does not need to get amended. Affirmative Action should exist for everybody alike, all shades and colors.

Commie Knight said...

This is a very complex and sensitive issue, but I agree and I am opposed to Affirmative Action. I am sure MLK himself would have opposed it. I am also staunchly against standardized testing of all forms, but especially the ACT. I think standardized testing is inherently racist! Did you know why standardized testing from grade school to high school was largely implemented (as opposed to individual assessments written by individuals, or examinations of an individual student's grades or merits)? The reason is that Social Darwinists (including segregationists) of the early twentieth century wished to prove the intellectual superiority of "Caucasoids" over "Negroids" and "Mongoloids". And of Anglo-American stock over Slavic/Italic immigrants. Although people of Black African and American Indian descent do in fact score lower on average than whites, this is due first off, to social and environmental conditions (differences in wealth, education, culture; NOT genetic or biological, no inherent racial differences) and secondly, due to intentional construction of cultural bias in the test. The plan backfired of course when Asians and Hindu Indians scored higher on average than whites and Jews scored better than Goy. Standardized tests suck, especially the ACT, which unlike the SAT which is at least somewhat more conceptual in nature. The ACT is a racist test!

But yeah, you are right! Affirmative action is a bad idea. Plus it is ironic because it descriminates against whites! I say abolish affirmative action AND standardized testing and just focus on the individual merits of students.