What's wrong with Affirmative Action? Because it's imposes quotas? Quotas are explicitly banned. Oh, so you say they're pseudo-quotas? What's wrong with a university wanting a diverse student campus? Why are using holistic measures bad in determining student admission? If we had a meritocracy for universities, half of Yale would be Asian. But is this really because Asians are smarter than other races or is it because they have unreasonably strict parents and cultures that force them to study 40+ hours a week? In Japan, nearly every high school student goes to cram schools. Koreans go to Hagwan to study 5+ hours every day, right after class ends. Compare this to the white, black, hispanic, et cetera students that may take that free time to focus on family, health, leisure activities, et cetera.
At the end of the day, these are kids. Their grades are fundamentally influenced by their parents. A white hick boy that has an alcoholic father that beats him does not have the same opportunity to make good grades as the asian kid with parents that actually force him to sit down and study a bit after school. You know how much I studied after school when I was in high school? Pretty much zilch. My (single) mom never gave me rote or discipline, I had to learn that myself when I went to university. Plenty of kids are deprived of tools necessary to climb the merit poll. In black communities, kids are actually punished by their peers and parents for being a "book nerd". I'm sorry Zhou, but you're going to have to go to Penn instead of Yale, Ledasha here had to deal with a lot of shit to get that 1400 SAT score and there's barely any black representation.
reminder to sage retard threads do not interact just sage
Jason Cox
Notable people become less notable Worthy people of all stripes (including the 'helped' group) find it more difficult to get by. Unworthy people who get in as a result of affirmative action don't see as much benefit as they would in a position where they are capable of succeeding.
And #1 You're encoding into law a specific configuration. Even if your law is intended to counteract that configuration, by encoding it into law you inescapably create it. In this case I've already pointed out how you create exactly the issue you intend to avoid with affirmative action.
Brody Brooks
Come on dude, I'm being serious here. I know so many under privileged rednecks that had so much potential squashed because of their parents. These aren't fully grown adults making decisions and commitments before they apply to college, these are kids. College is more than curriculum.
Lucas Lewis
That's why quotas are bad. If you have quotas, that makes it systematic and a crutch. But if you have holistic measures and allow alumni interviewing applicants to say "Hey, I think this kid deserves a chance. He has potential," then the situation becomes akin to extending a hand to help the kid get up than giving him a piggy back ride.
Chase Smith
It's not even just quotas Take Canada's law that any law 'intended' to 'reverse' the 'effects of systemic bias' can violate the no racism law. So you have laws that specificily by race give out free shit, and that free shit encourages specifically the people who are getting it to not work to get that shit themselves. So they always need the free shit.
Either that happens, or the free shit puts the people getting free shit over the top, and the whole fucking system flips because we have laws specifically redistributing toward the dominant group.
Carter Hill
I think affirmative action places too much emphasis on race. I think it really should be based on socioeconomic status. I think the system right now only lets the best asians from the most secured families raise to the top while many FOBs can't do anything other than open a convenient store. Plus I'm not talking about laws in particular, just about affirmative action in college admissions. Colleges should be free to select students based on many factors, including race (albeit less so than is the case right now).
Evan Fisher
>But is this really because Asians are smarter than other races or is it because they have unreasonably strict parents and cultures that force them to study 40+ hours a week? Those Asians should be effectively punished for busting their fucking asses their entire lives? What if niggers aren’t genetically superior to whites at football and basketball, they just train five times harder because it’s their only way out of the ghetto? How come no diversity mandates in sports?
Josiah Jackson
>too much emphasis on race. I think it really should be based on socioeconomic status
It literally does not matter. Whatever group you encode into law as being inferior will either remain inferior or have some sort of fascist/violent revolution where they become superior with the help of law. One of these things is tyranny and the other is about one month from it.
>Plus I'm not talking about laws in particular, just about affirmative action in college admissions. Fair, but again it doesn't really matter. Law or guideline, if people follow it it still creates the same world.
>including race (albeit less so than is the case right now). Doesn't matter how little you go. Anything beyond 0 is destructive for the reasons I've laid out already.
Leo Morgan
We need quotas and affirmative action in jobs where blacks dominate like NBA/NFL. The lack of whites and asians in these job sectors must not continue. They need to implement new scoring systems that double the points when a whitie or asian scores, it counts for twice as much. It will then drive these teams to hire more whites and asians. This is the only way to bring diversity to niggerball.
Lucas Bell
Not punished but not encouraged. We shouldn't allow this culture of destroy the individual and turn them into a worker bee to persist. It simply should not be allowed. Asian parents need to start understanding that there's more to life than an exam grade. There's drive/motivation, circumstance, personal achievements, et cetera. The asian kid that benches 250 lbs at 5'5'' and has a 1400 SAT score is a much more well rounded student than the asian kid that is skinny fat and has a 1600 SAT score.
The problem with laws is that they don't care about circumstance. That's why government ruins economies and creates group inequalities through legislation, it's a system that is gamed. But if you have alumni and committees that make decisions with large discretion, then it is less prone to be systematic. Let's judge each student, case by case. It'll be much more organic and a lot less prone to the unintended consequences you list if it's less so based on policy and more so based on individualized decision making.
Aaron Reyes
In the NBA, it's all about the score. Sports are competition. Schools should not be competition, they are education.
Bentley Collins
>then it is less prone to be systematic tell that to nepotism
>Let's judge each student, case by case. Two things before I can agree with this. #1. These universities need to stop getting all government money, directly or otherwise. This means no government backed student loans either. Otherwise your legal system is simply too intertwined with your selection system to actually expect a consistent and lastingly fair environment.
#2. The case by case decision can not be made on race. Or gender, or even socioeconomic status. The only thing worth anything is what you build for yourself.
I'm all for giving people opportunities. I'm all for giving more attention to people who need it more, but if you make these decisions based on anything other than merit, you create a world where something other than lack of merit is inferior.
Humans are real shit at keeping useful, long lasting, and non-destructive ideas of inferiority. Give them an inch they'll take a mile.
Justin Lopez
I too want to be treated by a nigger doctor who made it into med school because he was born in jungle
David Sullivan
you posted the best example of why is sucks, op
Gavin Baker
>These universities need to stop getting all government money, directly or otherwise. This means no government backed student loans either. Otherwise your legal system is simply too intertwined with your selection system to actually expect a consistent and lastingly fair environment. Deal. It's not like Yale needs money from the government anyways.
>I'm all for giving people opportunities. I'm all for giving more attention to people who need it more, but if you make these decisions based on anything other than merit, you create a world where something other than lack of merit is inferior. SAT scores really aren't a result of just merit. They're a result of merit, early childhood development, rigor, practice, and a myriad of other factors. Thinking grades are a reflection of pure merit is a lie 99% of the time.
If I'm a drunk hick father that beats you everyday, it doesn't matter how much merit you have. Your grades will drop. Picking people only on merit is just as bad as picking people only on race. It means that children from overtly strict families will be chosen while the kids from unstable households will fall.
Parker Parker
Not only because he was born in the jungle. But because he was born in the jungle, secured a pretty decent SAT score, and managed to change his destiny. I'd much rather have that kind of doctor than Dr. Zhou (whom I can barely understand because he was never graded on his pronunciation).
Nobody is going to die because Ledasha got into Yale instead of Zhou. I'm not rooting for affirmative action in jobs.
Gavin Cruz
Do you believe in the concept of survival of the fittest?
Angel Gutierrez
>They're a result of merit, early childhood development, rigor, practice, and a myriad of other factors I agree they aren't perfect but they're a good indicator of success in the school and later in life. Those things that go into them also go into success in school and later in life. If you take someone who can't succeed in the school and stick them there because you adjusted their SAT scores for them being starved as a kid, they still aren't going to be able to succeed in the school. Like i said at the start, the unworthy people who get in through pity don't do as well as they could in a place where they could build something for themselves. I'll agree we can definitely do better than SAT scores, and our idea of 'merit' always has room to improve. But we can't be trying to push statistics in that way.
It's like this. The way the world is results in statistical effects that we observe, and attach names like 'early child development, income, rigor' If you look at those observations, it might be tempting to believe they are all there is. You might come up with the idea of forcing a 'fix' over what you deem to be unfair. The fact is though, it's the rules that give rise to the statistics, and heavy handing statistics never happens in a vacuum. Either the statistics do not change because the rules were too stable, or the rules change in a way that creates the new statistics.
Either the poor kids with shit upbringings fail out, or the school rapidly becomes worth what the poor kids could have gotten into on their own accord.
Charles Robinson
Yes, it's a concept in biology. No, it should not be how we base our lives. This isn't Thunderdome.
Nolan Johnson
And both of the 'either' options I provided are destructive and non-prosperous.
Joshua Cooper
>it should not be how we base our lives That isn't for you to decide. That's for the constraints on reality that exist independent of our suggestive experiences to decide.
Look at the call for action against every fucking state that dares to have more than 80% white populations. It is ALL quotas. Affirmative action does not care about the actual demographics, because those demographics in and of themselves are unjust.
I don't care what you think, it is unconstitutional and illegal
James Edwards
>I agree they aren't perfect but they're a good indicator of success in the school and later in life. Maybe in school, but I don't think they're a good indicator of who will be successful later in life. That's why Ivy league schools are placing an emphasis of picking kids on more than just grades. There are a ton of worker bees that make sub $60k salaries even though they went Yale. Schools like Harvard and Yale survive because the alumni that do make it big end up giving millions back to the school. Having half your population be Han Chinese isn't a very diverse investment portfolio.
That pure-merit system is not good and it only encourages more narrow minded child rearing. SATs can't test personality, intuitiveness, creativity, or any other holistic factors that are fundamental to the success or failure of humanity. It is necessary to incorporate those aspects into student admission. I won't even argue that this should be the case for grad school where, at that point, the student's success is narrowed down to how well they survive in R&D. Undergraduate schooling is just about a lot more than grades.
>Either the poor kids with shit upbringings fail out, or the school rapidly becomes worth what the poor kids could have gotten into on their own accord. The unintended consequence is that you miss out on a lot of potential because you picked kids that had the circumstance of having parents that reared their children to be good at school. There are plenty of kids from dysfunctional families that still do well because they have fantastic skill in studies. But these are exceptions more than the rule itself. It's not inevitable that the kid will need help forever. I know plenty of students that went down a rigorous path only after they left their parents household and went into university. Just as you said, this isn't a vacuum. When you let a kid in only based on merit, you're essentially judging him for his rearing as well.
Jonathan Perry
School isn't just about grades.
Not talking about jobs.
Jace Reyes
I don't know how it works so i'm not the best to argue against it but there is a burger in my university course who 'claims' it's like this:
Let's say there are only two places left on a degree.
One applicant is white, the other is black.
The white man has better grades than the black man but the university accepts the black to make the university more diverse.
Why is this right? They tried to do something similar in Scotland by getting more lower class students into university by lowering exam passes but now they have a brain drain, our education system wen't down in the world rankings, and university drop out rate rose.
Or is the American in my classes explaining it wrong?
Liam Peterson
>Not talking about jobs.
Understood. You can substitute the word "Jobs" with anything you'd like and it'll still apply.
Aiden Moore
>That's why Ivy league schools are placing an emphasis of picking kids on more than just grades. Grades are not SAT scores and yes you're right many more things go into our current best idea of 'merit' than SAT scores and grades.
>Schools like Harvard and Yale survive because the alumni that do make it big end up giving millions back to the school. And it isn't magic that this happens. It costs Yale reputation every time they have an unsuccessful student. Less reputation brings less good students, brings less success. Yale survives on the back of its good admission process, (and government money at times) and it will die on the back of a corrupt admission process. (after taking a lot of government money)
>That pure-merit system is not good and it only encourages more narrow minded child rearing. Only if you don't know how to rear your child to make them meritorious. The Christians had a pretty good idea of that but we threw that baby out with the bathwater.
>SATs can't test personality, intuitiveness, creativity, or any other holistic factors that are fundamental to the success or failure of humanity Meaningless platitudes. Sorry but poorer people are not more holistically good than richer people. Meritorious people are more holistically good than non-meritorious people. That is the definition of merit.
>Undergraduate schooling is just about a lot more than grades. Stop reducing my argument.
>The unintended consequence is that you miss out on a lot of potential because you picked kids that had the circumstance of having parents that reared their children to be good at school. Except you don't. The poor kid doesn't get as much as the wealthy kid could, and a wealthy kid doesn't get what they could because a poor kid does. The return on investment, even in 'societal, holistic' terms is less.
Poorer people are not in any way morally superior to wealthier people.
Lucas Brooks
cont.
>There are plenty of kids from dysfunctional families that still do well because they have fantastic skill in studies. But these are exceptions more than the rule itself. You seem to agree with me here. If it's the exception then you can't make a policy of it. Poorness does not bring success or merit.
>When you let a kid in only based on merit, you're essentially judging him for his rearing as well. That's because rearing is the absolute beyond a shadow of a doubt (maybe IQ competes) the MOST IMPORTANT factor for merit and success. You can't wish this away because you consider it unfair. You can die as a society/culture trying to deny it though.
Wyatt Walker
Affirmative action is the left admitting they thing non white people are inferior and cannot succeed on their own.
Because it undermines their accomplishments by giving them a handicap because you're implying ineptitude of certain races and gender. That being said financial status may play a factor in getting scholarships to those who are less fortunate but they have the performance to merit it.
Asians get fucked over the most by this system since they perform the best; so in turn their requirements to get in are scaled appropiately. Lowering a difficulty level to get in a college undermines the value or hardwork for everyone. It implies to them without this you're too dumb to get in. People need to know their place; creating an equality of outcome versus an equal opportunity is a huge difference and it is very important.
>Grades are not SAT scores and yes you're right many more things go into our current best idea of 'merit' than SAT scores and grades. What is merit then? Going to a violin recital because your mom forced you?
>Yale survives on the back of its good admission process, (and government money at times) and it will die on the back of a corrupt admission process. (after taking a lot of government money) I was under the impression they mostly lived off alumni charity and less so on government funds. What are the numbers actually?
>Only if you don't know how to rear your child to make them meritorious. The Christians had a pretty good idea of that but we threw that baby out with the bathwater. I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying that being meritorious is more than the autistic "study 40+ hours a week and go to violin lessons" attitude that asian fobs bring?
>Meaningless platitudes. Sorry but poorer people are not more holistically good than richer people. Meritorious people are more holistically good than non-meritorious people. That is the definition of merit. Never said they were better. But that is the true definition of merit, a holistic goodness. Problem is that what asians want isn't merit but a pure competition to the top. Merit also isn't an objective measure, it's also a measure of personal growth.
>Stop reducing my argument. Fine.
>Except you don't. The poor kid doesn't get as much as the wealthy kid could, and a wealthy kid doesn't get what they could because a poor kid does. The return on investment, even in 'societal, holistic' terms is less. Imagine I make two kids race a 100 meter dash. One I weigh down with 25 pound weights on each ankle and the other I weigh down with 5 pound weights. The kid with the 5 pound weights wins, but only by a second. Now I take the weights off and the kid with the 25 pound weights wins. See what I mean by lost potential?
Owen Harris
>You seem to agree with me here. If it's the exception then you can't make a policy of it. Poorness does not bring success or merit. Yes, but it's despite their family upbringing. There are tons of kids that would turn out just as good, if not better, than the kids from good families. However, that is only the case if they are given the opportunity.
>You can't wish this away because you consider it unfair. You can die as a society/culture trying to deny it though. That's essentially how slavery happened. One family did better than another and as the generations progressed, the differences in ability snowballed and eventually one family just happened to own another. We should promote the individual and not the families behind them.
Aaron Davis
>What is merit then? Merit is the set of behaviors and characteristics that bring the most good for yourself and others over the longest period of time in a non-degenerative fashion. We don't know exactly where to draw that line. We've been working for thousands of years (slowly, imo) to find it.
>I was under the impression they mostly lived off alumni charity and less so on government funds. What are the numbers actually? Couldn't tell you but the alumni wouldn't donate if Yale's reputation went to shit. I'm actually curious about the change in those numbers too, given that Yale's rep has dropped precipitously the last couple years.
>Are you saying that being meritorious is more than the autistic "study 40+ hours a week and go to violin lessons" attitude that asian fobs bring? Oh yes. The key is that your definition of merit needs to keep society prospering for thousands of years, it can't cause any form of degeneration, and preferably it should improve the condition of the people who use it. Emotionally neglectful/abusive upbringings don't do that. China's had shit government for 5k years and they've just been taken over again and again and again and again. Merit has more to it than raw productive numbers.
>Merit also isn't an objective measure, it's also a measure of personal growth. No you're wrong. Merit is defined by the rules that shape our universe. It's not a subjective matter what works and what does not.
Samuel Green
cont.
>Imagine I make two ... See what I mean by lost potential? If it worked liked that I'd agree with you. More often than not though it's 5 pounds and 7 pounds and even after you take off both of their pounds the ones who had 5 still come out ahead. I would like for it to be different too, but if we structure society around subjective wishes there is no end to that rabbit hole, and starvation will follow.
>There are tons of kids that would turn out just as good, if not better, than the kids from good families And that occurs as a proportion less than with the kids from good families. Imagine I'm given the option to determine whether 100 applicants get in. My goal is for the people who I allow to get in to be as successful as possible. If I determine based on my best idea of merit, I get a certain result. If I determine based on my best idea of merit, except the races have to be equal, I get a worse result. I get a worse result because the only way I could get a better one is if I improved my idea of merit. I'm not improving my idea of merit though I'm considering it inadequate. Success, prosperity, and merit are not subjective matters.
>That's essentially how slavery happened. One family did better than another and as the generations progressed, the differences in ability snowballed and eventually one family just happened to own another. No what happened in slavery is Africans enslaved Africans via war, sold those Africans to other Africans and sometimes Jews, who transported those Africans to the states where there wasn't a whole lot of established government to control things. What you're thinking of is debt slavery. It's a real danger, it actually happens. But it doesn't happen in a purely meritorious society. Either the people on top are still meritorious enough to be on top, or they are ousted for not being so.
Cameron Reed
whenever a minority is picked in favour of a white man, and this is exactly what a "pseudo-quota" will allow, all other things being equal, this will lower the chance of that white individual of being chosen. this is active discrimination.
if you truly believe people are equal and should be given opportunities based on merit, then affirmative action will mean white individuals will have to work twice as hard to get the same opportunity, even if the white group gets more of the total opportunities.
Justin Gutierrez
How would you propose we demoralize blacks without affirmative action, head start and voter ID telling them they are stupid?
-T. Democrat
Oliver Gutierrez
>if you truly believe people are equal and should be given opportunities based on merit, That's actually what they're calling into question. It's a pretty compelling conversation too if you wanted to dive into it.
Kevin Perry
what's interesting about it? if you don't have quotas every aspiring kid has the same chances. if you do have qoutas, some races are more equal than others.
Ian White
Hey you got me it's not super compelling in our little echo chamber here, lol.
Michael Rodriguez
i don't care if they want to help the underrepresented, but they don't stop there. they use affirmative action as a cudgel to break up components of white society. they'd prefer to serve anyone before white americans, the people who they were established by and for.
Zachary Gray
and i find it hard to forgive or let go of this. it's a personal matter.
it's not about "merit" or who deserves this or that. it's an intentional fracturing of white hegemony. an attack.
Anthony Diaz
Sure for the leaders, but the followers believe the lies and spouting stuff like that won't convince them otherwise.
Dominic Morgan
We will prove you wrong by shoving a lead pipe down your throat. Might is right. Death to victims Death to parasites Death to the weak
Logan Williams
It is the naive and the weak who are captured by hate. They are the victims, and there is nothing mighty about being ruled by your passions.
Dominic Morgan
It's literally the definition of racism
Evan Howard
i don't know how to convince people who don't already sense that there's something wrong. i don't know what makes people like that tick. i don't understand their psychology.
Easton Reed
Education should be based on merit alone. If that means Asians fill the top schools so be it. If whites can't compete then they deserve to lose.
Elijah Thomas
i agree. most of my resentment is gone but i still can't help being slightly annoyed by these circumstance.
Chase Jenkins
We have encoded within us, either as a gift from God or a result of millions of years of evolution, an idea of 'good'. It's generally right. The problem is 'good' is like a purity system. One lie, one piece of slander, one misrepresentation and the good is consumed.
These people are as good as you and I. They are being held back from seeing the truth because of some piece of misinformation or some misunderstanding. You convince those people by hunting down that piece and helping them to resolve it. If they don't want to resolve it you can only point it out, worry about yourself, and hope they change their mind. If you come at them with hate, or anger, or resentment, then they will not trust you to help them to find truth.
Aaron Ortiz
people have a lot of mental inertia. and what good is it anyway? we've already been routed.
Logan Nelson
Nothings wrong with affirmative action. It helps bring the best of the best from every race. So if less Asian and whites are accepted even when the rejected have lower merit than blacks or Hispanic it just means the Asians and whites who went there are truly the most brilliant minds. The blacks and Hispanic on the other hand , wouldn't matter if they went to Harvard or Yale if you are smart enough you wouldn't hire a black or Hispanic professional since you know the degree they got was based on skin color and not merit. Regardless if a Harvard black or Hispanic doctor , lawyer, or any professional was trying to sell me their service I would only accept if it was discounted since their degrees and work experience mean nothing to me knowing that they got that education because skin color and not brilliance.
Aaron Sullivan
There is no way to prefer one race without oppressing the others. They are two sides of the same coin.
>Police arrested 18 people after the girls were lured into working at sex parties
>The alleged 'Madame' of the operation was among those detained in the raids
>Liliana del Carmen Campos Puello allegedly recruited the underage girls
>A child prostitution ring where more than 250 underage girls were branded with tattoos by their 'owners' has been broken up after dramatic raids.
>They allegedly raped and tattooed all their underage victims, aged between 14 and 17
>Campos Puello was said to be responsible for recruiting the girls from poor neighbourhoods in Columbia and Venezuela.
>Police arrested 18 people after the girls were lured into coming the Colombian resort of Cartagena under the pretence of working as models there.
>Among those detained was the alleged 'Madame' of the operation - Liliana del Carmen Campos Puello - and several unnamed Israelis who are believed to be the network's ringleaders youtu.be/lIBJFAsYSWQ ..............Based Bellagio vid on thisNew CHN livestream , Isaac Kappy, another Silverman threat, thoughts on Q (A.i)and exposing Hollywood!!! Pedowood news and illuminati movements
I know plenty of asian people who dont fit into that box that you just generalized all asians as. Why should they be punished for their success. HAVE FUN GOING TO A SCHOOL OR JOB YOUR NOT QUALIFIED FOR; ITS NOT GOING TO LAST LONG.
Julian Reyes
>and what good is it anyway a non-zero amount
Your intuition is correct though. There are times that saving someone will also damn you and when that happens you can't fall for the ploy. The most good you can do is to leave your children better than you got. All other forms come second to that.
Lucas Garcia
There are times that *trying* to save someone*
Chase Cruz
i guess. but i don't think my children, should i have any, are going to have it any better than myself unless people get their heads straight. i wouldn't be able to defend them from propaganda and brainwashing. how does someone raise well-adjusted children in today's "normal" environment. it makes people go haywire. you can't look after them all the time.
Owen Davis
affirmative action discriminates against people based on their race.
Jordan Cox
Do black people know that if they simply pass high school and have no criminal record, they will get free tuition to any university?
They don't need rap or sports to "get out of the hood." Universities beg for non-criminal, competent black students.
Christopher Clark
>They don't need rap or sports to "get out of the hood." Universities beg for non-criminal, competent black students.
to the degree where they admit people who really shouldn't be there at the expense of people who really should. it goes far beyond ensuring fair representation.
Nathaniel Ward
Things are hard yes, but you can't let yourself be demoralized. If not better, then the best possible.
We have encoded in us this good. If you recognize this good, if you understand its nature, and if you imbue your children with that knowledge, then you have nothing to worry about. There is a reason Jesus said to do good for the sake of good, and to trust God to deliver you what you need. Try reading the sermon on the mount.
Jeremiah Powell
The whole idea of affirmative action is to stamp out racial imbalances in selection of people from academics to contract workers. However that implies that the system itself is racist, which implies that this is just a band-aid fix to the real, problem, however affirmative action itself is racist due to the profiling of individuals based on race among other factors which can in turn lead to different results. The only real way to stamp out racism is to keep to merit based selection and entirely remove race from the equation by not adding it to a long list of requirements from employers or schools.
Christopher Ward
Yes, the fairness of that can be debated. However, it exists -- so why don't more black people take advantage of that? Every year you see moderately intelligent and non-criminal black people get accepted into muh every Ivy League. Even a below average non-criminal nigger could get full scholarships to lower ranked university, guaranteed.
Camden Wilson
any discussion of "fairness" is beside the point.
and i'm not so much talking about the ivy leagues. maybe you're all ivy league, but i'm not and neither is anyone else i know. we go to local colleges because they're close and we can commute. i don't give a damn if harvard wants every seat filled with a transgender african pygmy. it's none of my concern.
Evan Sanders
Physical differences has been well displayed with conclusives evidences. Black have more rapidity while whites have more strenght. But the evidences are still inconclusives when it come to mental traits. It could be true but still skeptical.
Joseph Reed
>any discussion of "fairness" is beside the point.
well, perhaps i shouldn't say that. but of course, people get too hung up on the details when the conversation goes that way.
Oliver Hughes
>However, it exists -- so why don't more black people take advantage of that?
seems like many do.
Carson Howard
The Ivys get the most media because they're Ivys, but affirmative action happens at every university, from Ivy medical school to community college in Mollie Tibbetts-tier town. If Jerome or Monique graduate high school without a felony or abortion, respectively, they get a free ride to college.
That's a terrific opportunity. If I were a nigger, I'd take advantage of such a system and use that for upward mobility instead of wasting my time rapping or playing sports.
