Board 8 > Chris' political topic. Where Chris posts super casually about political stuff.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Felt HARDCORE snide to me if you know what I mean.

See this topic is going well, we're very casual about the news here.
---

Also diversity is a desirable situation for any college, from a we are opening your mind to new things and preparing you for the real world perspective.

When you foster a group of people with no experiences with culture other than their own, you get /pol/
---

I disagree that race should be used in any form, same with sex or other characteristics.

Jobs should go to the best qualified. Admission slots should go to those who are most deserving.

Characteristics of applicants shouldn't matter, and to be honest, shouldn't even be allowed to be asked or compiled.

It is no different than discriminating by race.
---

Corrik posted...

I disagree that race should be used in any form, same with sex or other characteristics.

Jobs should go to the best qualified. Admission slots should go to those who are most deserving.

Characteristics of applicants shouldn't matter, and to be honest, shouldn't even be allowed to be asked or compiled.

It is no different than discriminating by race.

What happens if you do all that but still end up in a society where black people are significantly worse off, in a society that is proven to be racist by study after study?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

I disagree that race should be used in any form, same with sex or other characteristics.

Jobs should go to the best qualified. Admission slots should go to those who are most deserving.

Characteristics of applicants shouldn't matter, and to be honest, shouldn't even be allowed to be asked or compiled.

It is no different than discriminating by race.

What happens if you do all that but still end up in a society where black people are significantly worse off, in a society that is proven to be racist by study after study?

Then it is not racism but merit.

Just like white people have no cause to bitch if they do things the right way and blacks are over represented.

It is a merit system. It never should have been anything other.
---

yo Corrik you are wrong and not accurate with your phrenology theories
---

Jakyl25 posted...

yo Corrik you are wrong and not accurate with your phrenology theories

Ok thanks
---

Naw dawg racism isnt racism
---

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?
---

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup
---

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Because such a system disproportionately rewards students from better financial backgrounds.

And in America, black families are disproportionately from poorer financial backgrounds.

So you perpetuate the cycle of black people being an underclass, a situation that was created by whites people in the first place
---

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup

Never seen a college interview. Ever. ???
---

Corrik posted...

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup

Never seen a college interview. Ever. ???

If Corrik hasn't seen one, it must not exist.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup

Never seen a college interview. Ever. ???

If Corrik hasn't seen one, it must not exist.

Are you able to make posts without a hostile tone? No one said this.
---

I don't know what you mean, I was agreeing with you.
---

This is what I deal with all the time. *Sigh*

Anyways.
---

Corrik posted...

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup

Never seen a college interview. Ever. ???

They happen at private schools but not usually at public schools. Those places arent very selective so Im kinda guessing thats not what is being talked about. I applied at 5 schools and 3 required interviews.
---

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

neonreaper posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Colleges do interviews at least they did when I was a young pup

Never seen a college interview. Ever. ???

They happen at private schools but not usually at public schools. Those places arent very selective so Im kinda guessing thats not what is being talked about. I applied at 5 schools and 3 required interviews.

Is that east coast? I went to a private college my first stint and public my second. I never even stepped foot on campus until orientation and I had an academic scholarship to the private school.
---

One of them was in Pittsburgh!

But yes all east coast
---

I don't think college interviews are really a thing anymore. I applied to 5-10 schools both for undergrad and for my PhD and never once had to do an interview.

I'm sure they still exist somewhere, but I don't think it's at all common.

I will say that my applications were mostly, but not entirely to public schools. I also think I only applied to schools in the midwest or the west coast.
---

Well shit
---

neonreaper posted...

One of them was in Pittsburgh!

But yes all east coast

Which school in Pittsburgh?
---

Carnegie Mellon
---

I had one interview and it was optional.
---

neonreaper posted...

Carnegie Mellon

That's an ivy league school. I am sure that could be a different monster.
---

pyresword posted...

I don't think college interviews are really a thing anymore. I applied to 5-10 schools both for undergrad and for my PhD and never once had to do an interview.

I'm sure they still exist somewhere, but I don't think it's at all common.

I will say that my applications were mostly, but not entirely to public schools. I also think I only applied to schools in the midwest or the west coast.

They're a thing (or at least were a thing 10 years ago when I applied?) for undergrad at the top private schools. I didn't have to interview for the one public school to which I applied.

For grad school I'm under the impression that it varies by field. I did none for physics, but I think my friends applying for bio-ish degrees had to do them.
---

Looks like they are optional now. I imagine they had to remove non-standardized questions and everyone just has the same canned responses to the standard questions now. Companies are finding the same sorts of issues, from my experience.
---

I think they were optional when I did them too, but he understanding I had was that they were likely to help you unless you bombed them (especially if you looked borderline on paper)
---

I just had to write an essay.
---

Epa less shitty now.
---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Epa less shitty now.

Coal lobbyist now heading it.

*Shrug*
---

Yeah its doubtful the EPA will make any improvements toward functioning like it was intended. He doesnt have anything interest in the EPA working.

Hes just hopefully less garbage of an individual.
---

Hopefully he continues scaling back the EPA overreach.
---

Casual Friday: this timeline is silly.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Because such a system disproportionately rewards students from better financial backgrounds.

And in America, black families are disproportionately from poorer financial backgrounds.

So you perpetuate the cycle of black people being an underclass, a situation that was created by whites people in the first place

Corrik, please tell me you read this post and understand the argument.
---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Because such a system disproportionately rewards students from better financial backgrounds.

And in America, black families are disproportionately from poorer financial backgrounds.

So you perpetuate the cycle of black people being an underclass, a situation that was created by whites people in the first place

Corrik, please tell me you read this post and understand the argument.

Yes. I just disagree with it.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Yeah its doubtful the EPA will make any improvements toward functioning like it was intended. He doesnt have anything interest in the EPA working.

Hes just hopefully less garbage of an individual.

^

Less blatantly corrupt, not less shitty.
---

Supposedly Pompeo is bringing the NK Leader a gift from Trump that is "The Rocket Man" CD signed from Donald Trump. Lol
---

Corrik posted...

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Because such a system disproportionately rewards students from better financial backgrounds.

And in America, black families are disproportionately from poorer financial backgrounds.

So you perpetuate the cycle of black people being an underclass, a situation that was created by whites people in the first place

Corrik, please tell me you read this post and understand the argument.

Yes. I just disagree with it.

Specifically on which point does the logic fail for you? Blind applications disproportionately benefit kids from financially stable families, or black families being disproportionately less financially stable?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

How can it be racism if you would be admitting students whose races you do not know?

Because such a system disproportionately rewards students from better financial backgrounds.

And in America, black families are disproportionately from poorer financial backgrounds.

So you perpetuate the cycle of black people being an underclass, a situation that was created by whites people in the first place

Corrik, please tell me you read this post and understand the argument.

Yes. I just disagree with it.

Specifically on which point does the logic fail for you? Blind applications disproportionately benefit kids from financially stable families, or black families being disproportionately less financially stable?

I disagree specifically that it is "racism" when you blindly do not apply to race.

I also think it IS racism to choose a black person of poor financial background over a white person of poor financial background simply because of race.

One is making a decision based on race. One is not.
---

Do you think it is always wrong to make a decision where race is a factor?
---

I feel like the difference in views here is more subtle than either of you guys are letting on. (If I'm putting words in either of your mouth's then let me know, and I'll delete/edit my post so as not to spread misinformation)

It seems to me like Jakyl is viewing colleges primarily as an institution which provide services to society as a whole, a lens through which it appears racist to set up the institution in a way which systematically favors one race over another, when examining the aggregates.

On the other hand, it seems to me like Corrik is viewing colleges primarily as an institution which provide services to individuals, a lens through which it appears racist to favor one particular individual over another particular individual on the basis of race.

I'm not sure what I think the correct way to view this issue is. My gut reaction to say that it should be the former framing for publicly funded institutions, but for privately funded institutions it probably depends?
---

Great analysis and conclusion
---

Corrik posted...

I disagree specifically that it is "racism" when you blindly do not apply to race.

I also think it IS racism to choose a black person of poor financial background over a white person of poor financial background simply because of race.

One is making a decision based on race. One is not.

Jakyl's point is that making a decision based on socioeconomic status is linked to basing a decision on race. That's not malevolent racism, it's statistics.

If you choose to ignore statistics when making such decisions, then you are choosing to ignore that your practices overwhelmingly benefit white people over black.

I think we can all agree in general that things would be better off if we could find better ways to reduce poverty. It would certainly help people of all races.
---

Also, affirmative action benefits poor white people too. Poor black kid vs poor white kid is probably not a real situation. Middle class white kid would lose to both of them.
---

There are some real easy ways to reduce poverty, we just choose not to do them <_<

Any political system where corporations can legally buy off politicians through donations is doomed to result in unethical practices that perpetuate a system of extreme wealth inequality.
---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Corrik posted...

I disagree specifically that it is "racism" when you blindly do not apply to race.

I also think it IS racism to choose a black person of poor financial background over a white person of poor financial background simply because of race.

One is making a decision based on race. One is not.

Jakyl's point is that making a decision based on socioeconomic status is linked to basing a decision on race. That's not malevolent racism, it's statistics.

If you choose to ignore statistics when making such decisions, then you are choosing to ignore that your practices overwhelmingly benefit white people over black.

I think we can all agree in general that things would be better off if we could find better ways to reduce poverty. It would certainly help people of all races.

Like Han says, it is simple statistics that bear this out. I posted some earlier in this topic showing how college completion and socioeconomic status both favors white people.

Just taking college completion by itself, even ignoring socioeconomic factors, black people complete college at significantly lower rates than white people. It isn't close. Now, there are two conclusions you can draw from this. Either black people are dumb or worse than white people in some way when it comes to education, or there is something that we as a society are doing wrong. Some flaw that disadvantages black people as a whole. Possibly not even intentionally, mind you. Not even malicious overt racism where a college administrator somewhere is ripping up applications from black individuals.

There is no reason to believe the former, so it must be the latter.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Either black people are dumb or worse than white people in some way when it comes to education, or there is something that we as a society are doing wrong. Some flaw that disadvantages black people as a whole.

The specific way you framed this makes it kind of both I think.

Black kids lag behind other races in education because they disproportionately live in poorer areas, which have poorer public education.

Its a REALLY vicious cycle. Its by no means exclusive to black kids, but yeah, public education is woefully failing kids whose parents cant afford better.
---

For the record I wouldn't say I'm totally on-board with affirmative action myself.

For most of my life I've actually been opposed to it, and have only in the past 2 years or so decided that I think it is actually addressing a problem and is better than doing nothing. It still doesn't totally sit well with me though and it seems like there is likely a better solution out there. What that is I don't know. From a theoretical standpoint it makes sense to basically do affirmative action but explicitly on the basis of socioeconomic background rather than race (so poor white applicants receive the same preferential treatment as poor minority applicants), but there could easily be practical hurdles to actually implementing such an idea.
---

Also the whole "we need to base this only on merit and merit alone because that's all that matters" in a weird argument for a couple of reasons. First, that is what we are arguing too. Second, it is never the valedictorians making this argument. It is never the best of the best that is coming out strongly against this. Why? Because they get in already. They aren't kicking the top students out. It is the borderline cases, where they are tied or almost indistinguishable from a student with a far worse socioeconomic advantage. So it isn't really a tie.

It is so entitled to be like "but they took my spot!" It wasn't your spot. Stop being a whiny entitled brat. We have no reason to celebrate your mediocrity. Do better so you can't be turned down. They aren't kicking out highly qualified candidates, so you just weren't qualified enough.

(Again, not directed at Corrik, but rather to all those whiny high school students looking for a scapegoat because they weren't good enough to get into their top choice of school)
---