Affirmative Action in Action

How do we know this was due to Affirmative Action and not because their spot was taken by a legacy admission, donor admission, or special recommendation admit (based on money, not merit) admit?

Quote by Chryses

Because the article describes what he thinks happened.

Exactly.

A decision was made by a bunch of ivy league legacy alumni, and even one who benefitted from Affirmative Action, based on what someone thinks about why they weren't admitted to Harvard, with no attention given to the fact that over 70% of White students admitted to ivy league institutions fell under legacy, donation, and special recommendation admissions, but yet Affirmative Action is what was targeted.

Quote by Chryses

The background of the judges is irrelevant.

No, it wasn't "based on what someone thinks about why they weren't admitted to Harvard".

It was taken because the Court judged that all U.S. citizens are entitled to equal protection.

The background of the judges is incredibly relevant. It's the equivalent of having a majority of individuals owning oil stock voting on how the oil industry is regulated.

The reason this case made it to the Supreme Court was because someone decided they were denied entry due to Affirmative Action and no other reason.

And if equal protections and opportunity were truly the concern here, then legacy etc. admissions would have been eradicated as well.

Poor republicans celebrating “merit” based elite college admissions process as they sit in a puddle of piss in podunk, shitsville.

Quote by Chryses

None of the other admissions you complain about violate the Constitution.

edited

Neither did Affirmative Action until a bunch of elitists who got by on privilege instead of merit decided it did, which is why their status as such is relevant. I accept that acknowledging this fact requires a level of honesty of which you're incapable, and we'll end our conversation here. Cheers.

Quote by Chryses

Actually, I haven't seen Democrats this angry since Republicans freed their slaves.

This statement would be more meaningful if the Republicans and their politics of 1860 were the same as present-day Republicans. They're not.

Quote by Chryses

Actually, I haven't seen Democrats this angry since Republicans freed their slaves.

Oh did history stop right after that?

Quote by Chryses

It is discourteous to hide others' posts when they don't please.

Few things:

1. I don't hide posts. I either edit or delete them. If it's edited, it remains. If it's deleted, it's gone for good, and can never be retrieved. Therefore if you can't see a post made by an active account, it's because it's been deleted. This has already been explained to one of your other accounts, so I'm not sure why it's come up again.

2. I don't edit or remove posts based on whether or not they please me. If that were the case, half of the threads in the Think Tank wouldn't exist.

3. If a post is edited or deleted, it's because its content did not contribute to the conversation in a way that's conducive to the conversation at hand. Contribute to the conversation in a way that's conducive to the topic at hand, and your posts won't be edited or deleted.

A couple of interesting things.

California hasn't had affirmative action for a long time. Maybe we don't need it as much as the more racist parts of the country or maybe California racists won that ultimately meaningless battle.

Finland, considered one of the best countries in the world to live in doesn't have a supreme court because they consider non elected officials striking down laws put forth by elected officials representing the people as undemocratic.

There is no possible way this can even be policed. So ultimately meaningless. Will only get younger people to hate the GOP even more.

Quote by Magical_felix

A couple of interesting things.

California hasn't had affirmative action for a long time. Maybe we don't need it as much as the more racist parts of the country or maybe California racists won that ultimately meaningless battle.

Finland, considered one of the best countries in the world to live in doesn't have a supreme court because they consider non elected officials striking down laws put forth by elected officials representing the people as undemocratic.

Affirmative Action and similar systems exist to combat the rulings and whims of the elites. Show me a place that's not overrun by an elite ruling class, and you'll see a place that won't need things like Affirmative Action or a supreme court.

Quote by Dani

Affirmative Action and similar systems exist to combat the rulings and whims of the elites. Show me a place that's not overrun by an elite ruling class, and you'll see a place that won't need things like Affirmative Action or a supreme court.

They can't police it anyway. What are they gonna do? Go in and be like "there are too many blacks, browns and Asians up in this school!" Please.

Quote by Magical_felix

They can't police it anyway. What are they gonna do? Go in and be like there are "too many blacks, browns and Asians up in this school!" Please.

Well absolutely. That's the thing, it's all for show. This ruling is only effective if Affirmative Action only existed to treat people of color special. It didn't, so nothing truly changes. I think this decision is really just laying the groundwork to pull back efforts to address racial disparities and pretending that everyone's truly equal and that racism and its impact is gone, and sends the message that this country will no longer be held accountable for the racism embedded in all of its systems.

Quote by Dani

Well absolutely. That's the thing, it's all for show. This ruling is only effective if Affirmative Action only existed to treat people of color special. It didn't, so nothing truly changes. I think this decision is really just laying the groundwork to pull back efforts to address racial disparities and pretending that everyone's truly equal and that racism and its impact is gone, and sends the message that this country will no longer be held accountable for the racism embedded in all of its systems.

White women have benefited the most from it actually.

Quote by Chryses

Actually, I haven't seen Democrats this angry since Republicans freed their slaves.

Funny! The former slave states are now Republican.

Hmmmm... the old Confederacy is Republican? And it is always Republicans that want to limit voting rights. Hmmmm...

Quote by Buz

Funny! The former slave states are now Republican.

Hmmmm... the old Confederacy is Republican? And it is always Republicans that want to limit voting rights. Hmmmm...

Confederate flags everywhere at the Capitol on 1/6. Must have been a bunch of angry demoncrats who didn't want Biden to win?

Quote by Chryses

The Court, like many others, expects the ruling to reduce the amount of racial discrimination in college and university admissions.

Who was affirmative action racist against, for how long and what were the effects?

Quote by Chryses

It is a straightforward question. Why are you avoiding answering?

Avoid answering what? I was being sarcastic. You can't be this stupid... maybe you can though I guess.

Quote by Chryses

Ah, so what you said was false. I accept that.

That demoncrats are the ones waiving confederate flags?

Yes, that was sarcasm. Very good Chryses 👀

Quote by Chryses

The suit was brought by an organization representing Asian Americans.

And... What have been the effects?

Quote by Chryses

A violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

lol

Quote by Chryses

... chuckling ... You introduced demoncrats. I merely commented that I had not yet seen any - with or without flags.

You are mistaken. You introduced demoncrats while trying to be funny about them losing their slaves and being mad about it.

I didn’t get into any Ivy League universities either. Maybe I should have applied. Problem solved.

Quote by Chryses

Here is what Affirmative Action policies in the Admissions at colleges and universities did to one Asian American.

Affirmative action: Why this teen says he was rejected by top US colleges

"Colleges like Harvard represent a chance to actually build our connection to the country and a chance to make our mark within this world," he told the BBC.

With a resume boasting high test results, work volunteering for political organisations, prestigious leadership awards and the ability to speak five languages, he entered the admissions process with confidence.

He says he applied to 35 different schools, though Harvard was not one of them.

But, he says with a sigh: "I was rejected from all the Ivy League universities."

He applied to 35 different schools, but not Harvard, and he won't say which ones or how many were Ivy league.

It doesn't say it in the story, but Rutvij Holay ended up at Stanford, a top 5 ranked University in the world. He didn't get into the specific college he wanted to, and is blaming Affirmative Action for this with no evidence. This whole article is about a butt-hurt 17-year old.

See, the colleges aren't going to really comply... There is a loophole.

Quote by Magical_felix

See, the colleges aren't going to really comply... There is a loophole.

Like I said, all for show to appeal to their fanbase, and those who celebrate eat this shit up and continue voting against their best interests.

Useful idiots and all that…

Quote by Chryses

You are mistaken.

Those who have not had the time or inclination to read what the court had to say on the matter may not know this part of Justice Roberts’s opinion:
Despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today. (A dissenting opinion is generally not the best source of legal advice on how to comply with the majority opinion.)

You are Miss Taken.

Pretend wizard has the same exact opinion as conservatives regarding affirmative action.

6:48

Quote by Chryses

No, and neither is Justice Roberts.

You are Mrs. Taken

knock if off you two or the thread gets shut down. thanks.