Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

PhillyB

let's have a calm, rational discussion about scholarships for minorities

95 posts in this topic

Anyone have a link to stats on the numbers of applicants for schoalrships, the acceptance rate for those applicants and broken down by ethnicity would be even better.

Be interesting to see the total number of White, Hispanic, Oriental or what have you and their success rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's have a calm, rational discussion about scholarships for minorities

In this forum? Good luck with that :lol:

Lemme ask ya a quick question. If I were to ask you to choose between two goals...

1) a system in whose fairness you have confidence, though it's method and administration may not suit all sides meaning it's likely to be challenged in court at some point

2) a system in which you see flaws, but set up in a way that pleases all parties, lessening the likelihood it will be challenged by one side or another

Which of those outcomes would you prefer?

Which of the two seems like a more realistic goal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"heh calm rational discussion? in this forum? HEH GOOD LUCK WITH THAT

now let me set up this false dichotomy and try not to vomit out thinly veiled racist poo this time"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it could be considered a form of institutionalized racism. Against minorities. By elevating minorities you are unintentionally keeping them down.

that's what's honestly befuddling about the issue at its core to me. when you look at it, strictly speaking, it IS a form of institutionalized racism. in that sense, those opposing scholarships for minorities have a point. to me the question isn't whether or not those scholarships are inherently fair synchronically - that is, viewing them at a single point in time - but rather diachronically, over a broader context. when one views it as the former, yeah, it's racism. when one views it as the latter, it becomes more a matter, as GS quoted, of making sure marginalized groups have equal shots at success and representation.

i guess what annoys me about this is that there are a billion and a half social injustices happening nationally and abroad, and while this might be a technical injustice to your white priviledged self, if you really want to see change and justice globally you have your choice of issues to focus on and make a difference with... why focus on one that gives some poor native american kid born into umpteen generations of abject poverty a shot at getting a college education that he'd never otherwise dream of landing? it strikes me as unbelievably petty and self-serving, which is especially poisonous because it's done under the guise of good citizenship, desiring equality and destroying perceived evils. some of the worst evils are committed with otherwise good intentions (as is the case here i think.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i also think it's really interesting that conservatives line up to lampoon liberals for not realizing that life isn't fair and you can't be all egalitarian and poo and that life is just exclusionary by nature, but in this case exclusivity is the world's greatest evil that must be eradicated at all cost.

i guess what i ultimately can't understand is why america has been unfair to minorities for centuries under the backing of white conservative oligarchy and the moment the legal basis for that oppression is lifted it's this warp speed migration to the other end of the spectrum and "whoa whoa whoaaaa can't be unfair here and if we help you minorities more than other people that's unfair and that's just wrong."

also mike adams is a total weiner.

that's all i got

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the question is. Is this really about making things fair and creating equal access or righting generational wrongs with similar institutional methodology?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

I do think it can be tweaked to improve the success rate. Too much status quo when it comes to race or God forbid a whiter person is the one starting a conversation about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distribute scholarships based on population percentages.

If half the population is white, then half go there, 8% Asian? then 8% go there. And on down the line.

This might not be perfect, but would give a representative number in each ethnicity the same shot at a scholarship.

Probably not the best way overall to do it, but could can some of the finger pointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ultimate goal should be to eliminate all racially based preferences for a merit based system of selection. Unfortunately, if the last four years are any indication, we still have several generations to go before a merit based system will be a viable alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ultimate goal should be to eliminate all racially based preferences for a merit based system of selection. Unfortunately, if the last four years are any indication, we still have several generations to go before a merit based system will be a viable alternative.

how would a merit based system work? I ask because there are many versions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all a question of opportunity. Most agree that it would be great if everyone had the same opportunity at birth and then all success or failure would be directly related to ability and hard work. Because of the increasing chasm between rich and poor, opportunity is shrinking every year for the poor.

So what is the right way to level the field a little? As a libertarian I am required to say that the welfare system is broken but I am not sure what the viable alternative is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites