Scholarships for minorities?

[Tim]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

 

[kelvin070]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

Well said. Thank You!

 

[SgtSpike]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

Why, specifically, did minorities have almost no chance of getting into college years ago?
And what, specifically, are the "unfair disadvantages" minorities face around the country today?

As far as I can tell, they have just as much opportunity and ability to get into a college as I do. Well, actually, they have a better opportunity because of these racist scholarships.

 

[Alien Allen]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

I think we should move beyond race as far as affirmative action and change it to help the poor that want to further themselves. we are not perfect but we are also not like we were 30 or so .years ago when the programs started..

the problem is that this is like the issue of welfare. it took a long time to get the changes which happened during Clintons tenure. It will take a democrat president to change affirmative action. A president can afford to take the political risk to piss off those most effected which would be democrat. The congress if democrat would never pass anything meaningful regarding affirmative action. That would be to toxic a thing for them support.

 

[Strauss]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

You seem to think that we have reached the end of the need for affirmative action scholarships. At least that is how it sounds at the beginning of your post but you end it with a claim of unfair disadvantage still exists. So which is it?

Additionally, assuming you do away with preference in scholarships what about just in admissions? Set asides to meet arbitrary racial quotas?

 

[Fox Mulder]

Scholarships for minorities and affirmative action were definitely needed in this country. I think they have worked very well and in a lot of cases they were abused. But time has changed things and I think that these programs need to be looked at again and adjusted accordingly. But to say that it isn't fair to you because you're white, please. Years ago it was so one sided that a minority had almost no chance in hell of getting into a college or university. And it was like that for many years. So programs that helped minorities catch up to the rest of us were created to help accelerate the equality we see today... well almost. Minorities still face some unfair disadvantages around the country and that's why some of these programs are still in place. That's why I think we need to evaluate these programs again. To make sure it's not too one sided.

If they are still in place, then they violate the law--at least as it is now. The Supreme Court has decided that race as an overt criteria for admissions violates the Constitiion (it does and it did years ago when it was commonly done--its just that you had bad judges then that put politiical correctness and ideology above the Constitution and the law). The school is allowed to consider race as a criteria but still has to make individualized decisions. They can't simply admit based on racial preferences like they used to do (i.e., a black person is given x amount of points for being black--that doesn't fly anymore).

Frankly, even the "criteria" standard is unconstitutional in my view (as well as 4 of the Justices on the SC). This is more social engineering bullshit that does nothing more in my view than foster racial tensions and diminish the achievements of minorites. That was a pet peave of Justice Thomas (who is black) -- that he always felt people wondered whether his achievements were based on his own merit or affirmative action.

The time for this bullshit to end is now so we can start the healing process and the devastating effects that affirmative action have had on race relations. And I'm not really commenting one way or another on whether affirmative action actually helped achieve equality or not, just that its effects overall--even if it helped achieve greater equality in schools and the work place, was detrimental and will continue to be detrimental until a generation of minorities have existed after it is finally put to rest.

 

[Strauss]

One might ask now that a (semi-)black president has been elected are any form of affirmative actions, quotas or the like still needed?

 

[Alien Allen]

Mulder do you think aff act was ever necessary??

I did and still do. Same as I feel about unions. Both served their purpose but time to make changes

 

[Fox Mulder]

Mulder do you think aff act was ever necessary??

First, it doesn't matter whether I thought it was necessary or not--its unconstitutional--plain and simple. Its the age-old addage that two wrongs don't make a right. The discrimination in the first place was wrong and so was the reverse discrimination. It served no useful purpose (overall), but even if it did, it was still unconstitutional. I believe that we'd be better off and minorities would have just as many opportunities today (maybe more) had it never been put in place.

As to unions, the problem isn't unions, its the unfair advantages they are given by Congress. Eliminate the handcuffs on employers and make unions bargain with something significant at risk like the employers have to do and you'd see a lot less problems and a lot more jobs.

 

[kelvin070]

OK, lets talk about cricket now. Its kinda related to the above topic.
South African cricket to abandon race-based selection

By JAMIE PANDARAM and ALEX BROWN - SMH | Thursday, 04 December 2008
To read more CLICK HERE

 

[Fox Mulder]

Mulder do you think aff act was ever necessary??

I did and still do. Same as I feel about unions.

No one gives a fuck what you think!!! :cool

 

[SgtSpike]

OK, lets talk about cricket now. Its kinda related to the above topic.
South African cricket to abandon race-based selection

By JAMIE PANDARAM and ALEX BROWN - SMH | Thursday, 04 December 2008
To read more CLICK HERE

Now we need a new headline to appear... something along these lines:

"United States to Stop Race-Based Aid for College Students"

 

[Tim]

You seem to think that we have reached the end of the need for affirmative action scholarships. At least that is how it sounds at the beginning of your post but you end it with a claim of unfair disadvantage still exists. So which is it?

Additionally, assuming you do away with preference in scholarships what about just in admissions? Set asides to meet arbitrary racial quotas?

I do think they have come close to an end. I believe they were needed and they did their job, but the job isn't fully complete. So it still needs to be in place, but scaled back.

If they are still in place, then they violate the law--at least as it is now. The Supreme Court has decided that race as an overt criteria for admissions violates the Constitiion (it does and it did years ago when it was commonly done--its just that you had bad judges then that put politiical correctness and ideology above the Constitution and the law). The school is allowed to consider race as a criteria but still has to make individualized decisions. They can't simply admit based on racial preferences like they used to do (i.e., a black person is given x amount of points for being black--that doesn't fly anymore).

Frankly, even the "criteria" standard is unconstitutional in my view (as well as 4 of the Justices on the SC). This is more social engineering bullshit that does nothing more in my view than foster racial tensions and diminish the achievements of minorites. That was a pet peave of Justice Thomas (who is black) -- that he always felt people wondered whether his achievements were based on his own merit or affirmative action.

The time for this bullshit to end is now so we can start the healing process and the devastating effects that affirmative action have had on race relations. And I'm not really commenting one way or another on whether affirmative action actually helped achieve equality or not, just that its effects overall--even if it helped achieve greater equality in schools and the work place, was detrimental and will continue to be detrimental until a generation of minorities have existed after it is finally put to rest.

Really? Unconstitutional? They have been in place for decades and not once was it challenged at the supreme court level? Are the justices in the habit of allowing unconstitutional laws rule the land? Please, give me a fucking break. I much more inclined to believe the rulings of the supreme court than to listen to the rantings of some random forum personality. You can't convince me that it's unconstitutional when there are thousands of brilliant lawyers out there and not one of them challenged it. I'm just saying

 

[kelvin070]

Now we need a new headline to appear... something along these lines:

"United States to Stop Race-Based Aid for College Students"

That headline is needed across the board and not just for scholarships

 

[SgtSpike]

I do think they have come close to an end. I believe they were needed and they did their job, but the job isn't fully complete. So it still needs to be in place, but scaled back.

Really? Unconstitutional? They have been in place for decades and not once was it challenged at the supreme court level? Are the justices in the habit of allowing unconstitutional laws rule the land? Please, give me a fucking break. I much more inclined to believe the rulings of the supreme court than to listen to the rantings of some random forum personality. You can't convince me that it's unconstitutional when there are thousands of brilliant lawyers out there and not one of them challenged it. I'm just saying

If white people were given special scholarships because they were white, you can guarantee there'd be a whole bunch of people up in arms about it. So why is it ok that other races get special scholarships?

What specifically is the job of these scholarships, which is almost, but not fully complete according to you? What are they supposed to be accomplishing?

How is it NOT unconstitutional? It's inequality based on race, which is racism, which is unconstitutional.

 

[SgtSpike]

That headline is needed across the board and not just for scholarships

So true... :thumbup

 

[Tim]

This was a very good piece I read that addresses this very topic.

Sigh.
I guess I should have expected it, seeing as how it's nothing new. I write a piece on racism and white privilege (namely, the recently viral This
is Your Nation on White Privilege), lots of folks read it, many of them like
it, and others e-mail me in fits of apoplexy, or post scathing critiques on
message boards in which they invite me to die, to perform various sexual acts
upon myself that I feel confident are impossible, or, best of all, to "go live
in the ghetto," whereupon I will come to "truly appreciate the animals" for whom
I have so much affection (the phrase they use for me and that affection, of
course, sounds a bit different, and I'll leave it to your imagination to conjure
the quip yourself).
Though I have no desire to debate the points made in the
original piece, I would like to address some of the more glaring, and yet reasonable, misunderstandings that many seem to have about the subject of white privilege. That many white folks don't take well to the term is an understatement, and quite understandable. For those of us in the dominant group, the notion that we may receive certain advantages generally not received by others is a jarring, sometimes maddening concept. And if we don't understand what the term means, and what those who use it mean as they deploy it, our misunderstandings can generate anger and heat, where really, none is called for. So let me take this opportunity to explain what I mean by white privilege.

Of course, the original piece only mentioned examples of white privilege that were
directly implicated in the current presidential campaign. It made no claims
beyond that. Yet many who wrote to me took issue with the notion that there was
such a thing, arguing, for instance that there are lots of poor white people who
have no privilege, and many folks of color who are wealthy, who do. But what
this argument misses is that race and class privilege are not the same
thing.Though we are used to thinking of privilege as a mere monetary issue, it
is more than that. Yes, there are rich black and brown folks, but even they are
subject to racial profiling and stereotyping (especially because those who
encounter them often don't know they're rich and so view them as decidedly not),
as well as bias in mortgage lending, and unequal treatment in schools. So, for
instance, even the children of well-off black families are more likely to be
suspended or expelled from school than the children of poor whites, and this is
true despite the fact that there is no statistically significant difference in
the rates of serious school rule infractions between white kids or black kids
that could justify the disparity (according to fourteen different studies
examined by Russ Skiba at Indiana University).

As for poor whites, though they certainly are suffering economically, this doesn't mean they lack racial privilege. I grew up in a very modest apartment, and economically was far from privileged. Yet I received better treatment in school (placement in advanced track classes even when I wasn't a good student), better treatment by law enforcement officers, and indeed more job opportunities because of connections I was able to take advantage of, that were pretty much unavailable to the folks of color I knew growing up. Likewise, low income whites everywhere are able to clean up, go to a job interview and be seen as just another white person,
whereas a person of color, even who isn't low-income, has to wonder whether or
not they might trip some negative stereotype about their group when they go for
an interview or sit in the classroom answering questions from the teacher. Oh,
and not to put too fine a point on it, but even low-income whites are more
likely to own their own home than middle income black families, thanks to past
advantages in housing and asset accumulation, which has allowed those whites to
receive a small piece of property from their families.

The point is, privilege is as much a psychological matter as a material one. Whites have the luxury of not having to worry that our race is going to mark us negatively when looking for work, going to school, shopping, looking for a place to live, or
driving for that matter: things that folks of color can't take for granted.

Let me share an analogy to make the point.Taking things out of
the racial context for a minute: imagine persons who are able bodied, as opposed
to those with disabilities. If I were to say that able-bodied persons have certain advantages, certain privileges if you will, which disabled persons do not, who would argue the point? I imagine that no one would. It's too obvious, right? To be disabled is to face numerous obstacles. And although many persons with disabilities overcome those obstacles, this fact doesn't take away from the fact that they exist. Likewise, that persons with disabilities can and do overcome obstacles every day, doesn't deny that those of us who are able-bodied have an edge. We have one less thing to think and worry about as we enter a building, go to a workplace, or just try and navigate the contours of daily life. The fact that there are lots of able-bodied people who are poor, and some disabled folks who are rich, doesn't alter the general rule: on balance, it pays to be able-bodied.

That's all I'm saying about white privilege: on balance, it pays to be a member of the dominant racial group. It doesn't mean that a white person will get everything they want in life, or win every competition, but it does mean that there are general advantages that we receive.

So, for instance, studies have found that job applicants with white sounding names are 50% more likely to receive a call-back for a job interview than applicants with
black-sounding names, even when all job-related qualifications and credentials
are the same.Other studies have found that white men with a criminal record
are more likely to get a call-back for an interview than black male job
applicants who don't have one, even when all requisite qualifications, demeanor
and communication styles are the same.
Others have found that white women are far more likely than black women to be hired for work through temporary agencies, even when the black women have more experience and are more qualified.Evidence from housing markets has found that there are about two million cases of race-based discrimination against people of color every year in the United States. That's not just bad for folks of color; the flipside is that there are, as a result, millions more places I can live as a white person.

 

[Tim]

Or consider criminal justice. Although data from the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration indicates that whites are equally or more likely than blacks or Latinos to use drugs, it is people of color (blacks and Latinos mostly) who comprise about 90 percent of the persons incarcerated for a drug possession offense. Despite the fact that white men are more likely to be caught with drugs in our car (on those occasions when we are searched), black men remain about four times more likely than white men to be searched in the first place, according to Justice Department findings. That's privilege for the dominant group.

That's the point: privilege is the flipside of discrimination. If people of color face discrimination, in housing, employment and elsewhere, then the rest of us are receiving a de facto subsidy, a privilege, an advantage in those realms of daily life.
There can be no down without an up, in other words.
None of this means that white folks don't face challenges. Of course we do, and some of them (based on class, gender, sexual orientation, disability status, or other factors) are systemic and institutionalized. But on balance, we can take for granted that we will receive a leg-up on those persons of color with whom we share a nation.

And no, affirmative action doesn't change any of this.Despite white fears to the
contrary, even with affirmative action in place (which, contrary to popular belief does not allow quotas or formal set-asides except in those rare cases where blatant discrimination has been proven) whites hold about ninety percent of all the management level jobs in this country, receive about ninety-four percent of government contract dollars, and hold ninety percent of tenured faculty positions on college campuses. And in spite of affirmative action programs, whites are more likely than members of any other racial group to be admitted to their college of first choice.* And according to a study released last year, for every student of color who received even the slightest consideration from an affirmative action program in college, there are two whites who failed to meet normal qualification requirements at the same school, but who got in anyway because of parental influence, alumni status or because other favors were done.
Furthermore, although white students often think that so-called minority scholarships are a substantial drain on financial aid resources that would otherwise be available to them, nothing could be further from the truth. According to a national study by the General Accounting Office, less than four percent of scholarship money in the U.S. is represented by awards that consider race as a factor at all, while only 0.25 percent (that's one quarter of one percent for the math challenged) of all undergrad scholarship dollars come from awards that are restricted to persons of color alone. What's more, the idea that large numbers of students of color receive the benefits of race-based scholarships is lunacy of the highest order. In truth, only 3.5
percent of college students of color receive any scholarship even partly based on race, suggesting that such programs remain a pathetically small piece of the financial aid picture in this country, irrespective of what a gaggle of reactionary white folks might believe.**

In other words, despite the notion that somehow we have attained an equal opportunity, or color-blind society, the fact is, we are far from an equitable nation. People of color continue to face obstacles based solely on color, and whites continue to reap benefits from the same. None of this makes whites bad people, and none of it means we should feel guilty or beat ourselves up. But it does mean we need to figure out how we're going to be accountable for our unearned advantages. One way is by fighting for a society in which those privileges will no longer exist, and in which we will be able to stand on our own two feet, without the artificial crutch of racial advantage to prop us up. We need to commit to fighting for racial equity and challenging injustice at every turn, not only because it harms others, but because it diminishes us as well (even as it pays dividends), and because it squanders the promise of fairness and equity to which we claim to adhere as Americans.
It's about responsibility, not guilt. And if one can't see the difference between those two things, there is little that this or any other article can probably do. Perhaps starting with a dictionary would be better.

Sure it's long, but well worth the read.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Well written, but personally I think it's bullshit from one standpoint. You cannot govern ignorance.

To try o impress upon anyone, that they are required to offer opportunity to any race, based on that alone is reverse racism.

And I am not sure where those stats came from, but they aren't true where I live and work. Now wether it's not true because companies are so afraid of litigation they promote strictly on the notion of EEOC or qualification we'll never know.

Mandating blanket hiring, and offering advantages to anyone, regardless of color or backround throws the playing field off balance for everyone.

 

[SgtSpike]

Good read Tim, and I'm surprised that much of that is still happening. Still, it does not warrant any government aid. At all. That's still racism. It has nothing to do with how people treat them or how many jobs they are or are not able to get or whatever other statistic you want to throw our way, it's still racism. It's still saying, "You're black, so we're going to aid you because of it. And we're not going to aid white people because they are white."

That's the very definition of racism, and, last I checked, racism was against the constitution.

People need to get over the whole color/race thing. Just treat everyone equally (government included), and the world will be a better place. The government needs to start by setting an example of treating everyone equally, which right now, they are not.