HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

exposingleftists.com has a bunch of these.

Have to admit, I wrote a ton of reactionary shit here, and I felt like I was devouring myself writing it. Deleted it all .. Truth is, I hate affirmative action. I hate it. It was created to counter the racist hiring practices which do still exist today, but no one should ever be hired based on race. If there are disparities in qualifications between races then we need to address the social issues that cause that. Not hire people based on skin color to shore up the numbers. I think the fact that the disparity still exists means we aren't committing enough to education, especially in urban areas. We have to re-double our efforts to assure that everyone who is willing to work to get an education and an opportunity gets exactly that.

I do think it's shitty that this video compares someone's "right" to play on a basketball team to someone who can't feed his family because he won't be hired for a job based on his skin.

how is athletics different to academics?.

Maybe because nothing is going to keep someone from participation in athletics if they have the required skill-set, however in academics given people's assumptions & prejudices towards a persons class, race, gender or religion this could ultimately spell the end of a gifted academic students chance to fulfill their dreams before it even gets started.

Affirmative action in Britain is simply known as "positive discrimination."

I can't deny that societal issues are still a problem - poor income areas still have poor quality schools, which means you can't do anything with your poor education and stay in the poor area with a poor job. However, if you wait until college applications are sent in or people are applying for jobs, the damage has already been done and you're just transferring discrimination to a different group.

Further, blanket rules (using race as an equalizer) just discriminate in different ways. There are some wealthy & affluent minorities who will benefit even more from affirmative action though they never needed it. There are also plenty of poor whites who will suffer even more. All Eastern European, Russian, & Jewish immigrants would still be classified as 'white' and be on the losing end of affirmative action even though they may need even more than some minorities here.

Societies do have a responsibility to their weaker members, but affirmative action is a terrible misapplication of a good intention. Instead, address the issue at its root - by the time people are applying for college and/or jobs, it's too late and not doing anything. Try bringing up the educational values of grade schools (I mean, before even high school) in affected areas.

Does anybody here think that an equally capable Jewish ball player would have less of a chance to make the team?

Does anybody here seriously contend that there is not culturally pervasive affirmative action for white people?

The fact that these college students have not thought about this in depth is an indication that people don't think about things in depth, it has no bearing on the appropriateness of the thing they don't properly understand.

The fact that there is, in practice, affirmative action for whites has resulted in conscientious people who believe in meritocracy attempting to balance that with affirmative action for non-whites.

When white people dismantle their affirmative action program, then we can take down its tiny adversary. Until then it makes no sense to appeal for the creation or abolition of affirmative action in principle, having both affirmative action systems is preferable to having only the big and powerful one.

Agree with dgandhi: get rid of racial preferences for whites in America, and we can discuss dismanteling affirmative action.

I don't think any white person who complains about affirmative action would trade places with someone who would qualify for that program.

Racial discrimination happens to people regardless of income. Noone checks your bank account or your credit when they decide to act on their prejudice against you.

Anyone in America who qualifies as "white" benefits from white privilege.

>> ^Morganth:
Affirmative action in Britain is simply known as "positive discrimination."
I can't deny that societal issues are still a problem - poor income areas still have poor quality schools, which means you can't do anything with your poor education and stay in the poor area with a poor job. However, if you wait until college applications are sent in or people are applying for jobs, the damage has already been done and you're just transferring discrimination to a different group.
Further, blanket rules (using race as an equalizer) just discriminate in different ways. There are some wealthy & affluent minorities who will benefit even more from affirmative action though they never needed it. There are also plenty of poor whites who will suffer even more. All Eastern European, Russian, & Jewish immigrants would still be classified as 'white' and be on the losing end of affirmative action even though they may need even more than some minorities here.
Societies do have a responsibility to their weaker members, but affirmative action is a terrible misapplication of a good intention. Instead, address the issue at its root - by the time people are applying for college and/or jobs, it's too late and not doing anything. Try bringing up the educational values of grade schools (I mean, before even high school) in affected areas.

Most of what's been said in the comments above this isn't true because Asian Americans outperform Whites, even though Asian Americans are a minority, were very recently more poor than any groups in the US, and had greater language disadvantages than anyone in the US.

All the people in the above comments who support racist discrimination against Asian Americans don't believe in personal accountability and are in favor of a permanently hyper-racialized society. http://videosift.com/poll/Is-discrimination-against-Asian-Americans-in-college-admissions-good-or-bad

This comment could be disproved if you can show that Asian Americans didn't have greater linguistic and financial barriers to overcome than any groups in the US, or that they don't outperform White people.

Has Yao Ming seen this vid?

BTW where does one sign up for "white privilege?" If you budget your time and $, watch less TV, read books, study, perhaps attend classes of any kind beyond high school, show up for a job on time every day and work hard, the "privilege" gap seems to go away on its own.

But I'm always looking for shortcuts.

>> ^longde:

Racial discrimination happens to people regardless of income. Noone checks your bank account or your credit when they decide to act on their prejudice against you.
Anyone in America who qualifies as "white" benefits from white privilege.
>> ^Morganth:
Affirmative action in Britain is simply known as "positive discrimination."
I can't deny that societal issues are still a problem - poor income areas still have poor quality schools, which means you can't do anything with your poor education and stay in the poor area with a poor job. However, if you wait until college applications are sent in or people are applying for jobs, the damage has already been done and you're just transferring discrimination to a different group.
Further, blanket rules (using race as an equalizer) just discriminate in different ways. There are some wealthy & affluent minorities who will benefit even more from affirmative action though they never needed it. There are also plenty of poor whites who will suffer even more. All Eastern European, Russian, & Jewish immigrants would still be classified as 'white' and be on the losing end of affirmative action even though they may need even more than some minorities here.
Societies do have a responsibility to their weaker members, but affirmative action is a terrible misapplication of a good intention. Instead, address the issue at its root - by the time people are applying for college and/or jobs, it's too late and not doing anything. Try bringing up the educational values of grade schools (I mean, before even high school) in affected areas.

^haha, no need to apply QM, you're already a full-fledged member of the club.

In fact, most members are like you: blissfully unaware that they receive benefits.

However, some of us have been in a position of doing everything you listed, and being passed over for subqualified yokels who happen to hold membership.

Dude, really, the positive experiences of some east Asian groups does not negate the negative experiences of other visible minorities, nor does it disqualify their claims for justice. There is no zero-sum, or black/white (no pun intended) on this issue.

I'm glad that those asian groups don't experience discrimination or prejudice despite the fact that some come to the table without the required language skills or adequate income. Bully for them. Some of us have fluent and native english skills, and have all the supposed advantages of being in the middle class, yet somehow get passed over.

I also love that fact that you lump all Asian groups together to muddy the issue again. Hmong and Japanese groups have vastly different household income, health outcomes, education levels, discriminatory experiences, and so on. They are not the same in any way, yet you can use extremes in either group to create a distorted picture of the "Asian" experience.

And this video is just ridiculous. Who cares about the fucking NBA/NCAA? Let it all be white and chinese for all I care. That's not what really matters in our society for most people. Aside from the fact that making a jump shot is a direct measure of performance in basketball; no way to manipulate it, either you can or you can't. SAT, GPA, and other measures of so-called "merit" are deeply flawed.

>> ^chilaxe:
Most of what's been said in the comments above this isn't true because Asian Americans outperform Whites, even though Asian Americans are a minority, were very recently more poor than any groups in the US, and had greater language disadvantages than anyone in the US.
All the people in the above comments who support racist discrimination against Asian Americans don't believe in personal accountability and are in favor of a permanently hyper-racialized society. http://videosift.com/poll/Is-discrimination-against-Asian-Americans-in-college-admissions-good-or-bad
This comment could be disproved if you can show that Asian Americans didn't have greater linguistic and financial barriers to overcome than any groups in the US, or that they don't outperform White people.

@longde

1. What do you mean Asian Americans don't experience discrimination? They're demonstrably racistly discriminated against as a matter of official policy.

2. Most Asian Americans aren't Hmong, and the group averages are still true. Feel free to stop making references to Whites, Latinos, or Blacks, since those groups have much variance within them, and then we can finally make affirmative action based on income instead of self-reinforcing tribalistic concepts.

3a. Everybody has to develop their human capital if they want to be skilled in advancing in the business world. I read a dozen books (or audiobooks) per year on how to do it, and I think about it constantly, trying new things, writing down my thoughts, and improving on my (many) past mistakes.

3b. People can use anything as a crutch, and when something goes wrong, which is a constant part of life, they attribute it to that crutch. They then won't develop their full potential. We should probably have affirmative action based on height, beauty, and likable personality (if you believe in affirmative action), and if we'd rather be born as Will Smith (Hollywood's highest paid actor) than Paul Giamatti, these are more significant crutches than what sub-culture we belong to.

Moving this video to chilaxe's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by blankfist.

>> ^dgandhi:

Does anybody here think that an equally capable Jewish ball player would have less of a chance to make the team?
Does anybody here seriously contend that there is not culturally pervasive affirmative action for white people?
The fact that these college students have not thought about this in depth is an indication that people don't think about things in depth, it has no bearing on the appropriateness of the thing they don't properly understand.
The fact that there is, in practice, affirmative action for whites has resulted in conscientious people who believe in meritocracy attempting to balance that with affirmative action for non-whites.
When white people dismantle their affirmative action program, then we can take down its tiny adversary. Until then it makes no sense to appeal for the creation or abolition of affirmative action in principle, having both affirmative action systems is preferable to having only the big and powerful one.


Does anybody here think an equally capable black student would have less of chance of being accepted to a university?

You do realize your so-called "culturally pervasive affirmative action for white people" was enforced by law for almost a century after the end of slavery? And now since those laws have been abolished, we should support more discriminatory laws to "balance" the cultural remnants of society's bigotry?

Fuck that. Anyone that supports AA in a attempt balance racism is openly saying they are racist and the only way to fight racism is with racism: Fucking lunacy.

Upvote for simplistic thinking surrounding a complex topic. Weeeee

There are more blacks on the basketball team because they are better than the whities Despite the unequal socioeconomic playing field, not because of it. The students interviewed clearly haven't thought this trough, but I refuse to believe that the producers of the video don't see the fallacy in the logic they are presenting.

I would slap a 'lies' tag on this video, if I didn't think it would get pulled right off.

..and by the way, if this were just an economic issue, then women wouldn't be working shittier jobs and getting paid less then men of equal ability.

@grinter

Are you saying Jews/Latinos/Asians don't need to have the opportunity to be on basketball teams because they're naturally not as good at it? Wouldn't that mean that if Asians and Jews were naturally better at academics, they should be able to occupy all the seats at the top universities? I don't think that's what we want to argue.

@grinter

In order to prove gender discrimination, you need to control for occupational choice, hours worked, maternity leave, and differences in assertiveness, negotiation skills and perceived pay entitlement, etc.

Most people don't control for such issues on this topic, so take such discussions with a grain of salt.

>> ^marbles:

Does anybody here think an equally capable black student would have less of chance of being accepted to a university?

Yes. Exceptional students of all "races" will get in easily, but when we get near the average, like it or not, being black in america is a significant disadvantage.

>> ^marbles:

You do realize your so-called "culturally pervasive affirmative action for white people" was enforced by law for almost a century after the end of slavery? And now since those laws have been abolished, we should support more discriminatory laws to "balance" the cultural remnants of society's bigotry?

Do you believe that there is no longer any socially enforced advantage for white people in america? Do you believe that the data indicates that two otherwise identical men, one white and one black have the same chance of success in american society? If that is your contention, you are demonstrably wrong.

>> ^marbles:

Fuck that. Anyone that supports AA in a attempt balance racism is openly saying they are racist and the only way to fight racism is with racism: Fucking lunacy.


We have racism, the implicit institutional form that nobody has to build an office for, or makes any argument to support, that is reality. Are you suggesting that it is less racist to allow that force to determine the distribution of opportunity unchecked?

What is your better solution?

@dgandhi
dgandhi>> Yes. Exceptional students of all "races" will get in easily, but when we get near the average, like it or not, being black in america is a significant disadvantage.


No, it's not. With AA, being any minority is a significant advantage. How would a college know what race an applicant was to begin with if they weren't asking? So why are they asking? diversity quotas? hmmm


dgandhi>> Do you believe that there is no longer any socially enforced advantage for white people in america? Do you believe that the data indicates that two otherwise identical men, one white and one black have the same chance of success in american society? If that is your contention, you are demonstrably wrong.


Well that's not the argument at hand. AA doesn't fix that anyway. Just like every other social problem in the past century, the government's solution has done more harm than help.


dgandhi>> We have racism, the implicit institutional form that nobody has to build an office for, or makes any argument to support, that is reality. Are you suggesting that it is less racist to allow that force to determine the distribution of opportunity unchecked?

What is your better solution?


Opportunity isn't distributed. Anyway it's not the role of government to be distributing anything. Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.

Better solution? Stop subsidizing poverty and end drug prohibition would be a good start.

It's all perception, Dude. Compared to the 60s, race is a very minor factor...subqualified yokels (a hilariously apt term) are EVERYWHERE and all colors of the rainbow. Only in government/political circles are race and gender (and now Gay) overemphasized and CRITICAL for appearances at jobs that exist solely to expand government sloth by putting asses in seats (literally and figuratively).

Though the length and breadth of our disappointments in life differ, by weight or volume most of us have more in common than we do differences. You were probably less devestated than I was that Ivanka Trump has been both married off and knocked up in the past 3 years.


>> ^longde:

^haha, no need to apply QM, you're already a full-fledged member of the club.
In fact, most members are like you: blissfully unaware that they receive benefits.
However, some of us have been in a position of doing everything you listed, and being passed over for subqualified yokels who happen to hold membership.

>> ^marbles:

With AA, being any minority is a significant advantage.
No it is not. If we lived in some egalitarian society where race had not been a massive limiting factor for centuries, and where decisions like going to college took place in a fairy land where money, the schools you went to, the opportunities you had earlier and familial obligations play no part, then you might have a point. We don't live in that world.
>> ^marbles:

Opportunity isn't distributed.
Yes it is. If its more than twice as hard to get a job because your skin is dark (it is), if your family doesn't have money to allow you the freedom, to have a safe environment in which to grow up, to allow you to get a good education or to start your own business because they too have suffered financially and socially from the legal and social forces that distribute the power to choose, then you are being denied opportunity for non-meritocratic reasons, and those opportunities are being given to others, for non-meritocratic reasons.
>> ^marbles:

Just like every other social problem in the past century, the government's solution has done more harm than help.
Sure, property rights and national defense are terrible impositions on personal sovereignty, and if we dispensed with both of them then AA would probably not be needed, but I don't really care about fairyland politics, I'm only concerned with reality and how to realistically address problems within it
>> ^marbles:

Anyway it's not the role of government to be distributing anything.
Um... except that they distribute EVERYTHING. Property is a government system that codifies the distribution of resources. They set land boundaries, they arbitrate disputes, what the hell are you talking about?
>> ^marbles:

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.
Social Convention is not reason or eloquence either, it is force just the same. I would rather the bullies fight each other, then just let the less accountable one loose to beat the shit out of us.
>> ^marbles:

Better solution? Stop subsidizing poverty and end drug prohibition would be a good start.
"subsidizing poverty" I presume is a reference to social programs that allow poor families to have a stable enough environment that their kids can have some opportunities. How exactly does trapping future generations in poverty solve the disproportionate racial distribution of class privilege?

drug prohibition is only tangentially related, consider:

1) All classes do drugs at similar rates
2) poor people get caught more often
3) non-white people get convicted more often

The double whammy of historical poverty and racist jurisprudence are the problem. The insane "war on drugs" certainly has racist consequences, but they are symptomatic of a larger problem that decriminalization will not solve.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'college, students' to 'college, students, diversity, basketball, affirmative action, discrimination, race' - edited by xxovercastxx

@dgandhi

Does anybody here seriously contend that there is not culturally pervasive affirmative action for white people?

The fact that these college students have not thought about this in depth is an indication that people don't think about things in depth

My friend, I must disagree. While explicit guidelines and laws exist -- pushing racial diversity and punishing racial discrimination-- that benefit non-whites, the advantages in this society are still firmly in the hands of whites. Most of the advantages today are unspoken and subtle, but undeniable; especially if you are on the outside looking in.

I live in Asia now, and when you are away from the country for a while, and return, the racial bias that Americans have in public and private places becomes even more stark in comparison, and even more intolerable for me.

Anyway, this may all be a moot point if these idiot politicians kill the dollar and my 401k this week, by defaulting the government. Then there will be no more perks to squabble over.
>> ^quantumushroom:
It's all perception, Dude. Compared to the 60s, race is a very minor factor...subqualified yokels (a hilariously apt term) are EVERYWHERE and all colors of the rainbow. Only in government/political circles are race and gender (and now Gay) overemphasized and CRITICAL for appearances at jobs that exist solely to expand government sloth by putting asses in seats (literally and figuratively).
Though the length and breadth of our disappointments in life differ, by weight or volume most of us have more in common than we do differences. You were probably less devestated than I was that Ivanka Trump has been both married off and knocked up in the past 3 years.
>> ^longde:
^haha, no need to apply QM, you're already a full-fledged member of the club.
In fact, most members are like you: blissfully unaware that they receive benefits.
However, some of us have been in a position of doing everything you listed, and being passed over for subqualified yokels who happen to hold membership.

I'd choose the person with the best performance record, which may or may not be someone who benefited from affirmative action to get into college, or to get a job. I certainly wouldn't go with the doctor that looked the part, out of central casting.

>> BR>If you were diagnosed with a particularly dangerous form of cancer tomorrow, would you seek out the best specialist you could find or would you seek out the best minority specialist you could find?

>> ^xxovercastxx:

This is my biggest problem with AA... it ultimately does nothing to solve the problems it's supposed to address. @Morganth alluded to it in his post. Rather than handicapping white people, we should be addressing the problems that lead to race inequality. AA is like breaking the legs of Olympic athletes so the folks in the Paralympics can keep up.

Except, that's not what it does. AA does not stop the best and the brightest, it simply corrects for preexisting bias that effects the criteria on which the decision is made. What you are describing looks a lot more like unchecked white privilege than it does AA as it exists in the real world.

Allowing people to pursue a career at what they are good at does address the problem. The problem is both material, in the sense of disproportional class disadvantage, as well as societal, in the form of the assumption that "those people aren't good at X". AA lets people work themselves out of poverty, and creates social role models of skilled and successful non-white/male people.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

It runs a few levels deep, too. Putting less qualified people in jobs means the jobs will be done to a lower standard. That ultimately hurts our general standard of living as well as our ability to compete globally.

AA does the exact opposite of this. Consider what unchecked privileged looks like in comparison to meritocracy. The clearest example is blind auditions. Non-blinded auditions disproportional favor men, who everyone "knew" were more likely to be better qualified. Once you remove the knowledge of the sex of the player, the assessment of merit massively changes.

You can't blind college admissions, for example, because they are based on a life history in a classist and racist society. Collage is probably the simplest, though not the best, place to make this adjustment, but making it is better than not.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

If you were diagnosed with a particularly dangerous form of cancer tomorrow, would you seek out the best specialist you could find or would you seek out the best minority specialist you could find?


When white men get positions, this is in no small measure a result of there white/maleness. Knowing this, given the choice of two equally regarded doctors, I would choose the one whose regard is based on their merit, not on their privileged race/sex.

>> ^dgandhi:

Except, that's not what it does. AA does not stop the best and the brightest, it simply corrects for preexisting bias that effects the criteria on which the decision is made.

It depends on what you consider AA. If you're talking Equal Opportunity style policies, then no, I do not consider those harmful or discriminatory. These laws simply say it's illegal to discriminate based on race, sex, ethnicity, etc. I think they are largely unenforceable, but not discriminatory. I do not normally think of EO when someone talks about AA but maybe that's exactly what you're talking about, in which case we don't have a disagreement.

However, any place I've ever seen that implements AA does so via quotas. Quotas should be illegal under the aforementioned EO laws. If I'm the most qualified person, I should get the job. If I'm denied the job because I'm a white male and the company has a quota to meet, then that was not an equal opportunity, it was discrimination.

>> ^xxovercastxx:

However, any place I've ever seen that implements AA does so via quotas. Quotas should be illegal under the aforementioned EO laws. If I'm the most qualified person, I should get the job. If I'm denied the job because I'm a white male and the company has a quota to meet, then that was not an equal opportunity, it was discrimination.


I think this is a boogieman. White people use "quotas" to explain to other white people why they can't just give them a job for being white. I would be interested in some actual evidence that quotas have been used to refuse to hire a clearly more competent candidate more often then racism does so.

If your organization of more than a few dozen people does not look demographically a while lot like your local general population, then your hiring practices are almost certainly racist, even if nobody is making them that way intentionally. Quotas only factor into hiring when your hiring process has already failed to be color-blind, If your organization has been racist, and now they have to play catch up by reversing the bias, that seems fair enough to me.

I'm not a proponent of quotas, but my issue with quotas is that they don't generally address issues of class, having all the black folks moving boxes, and all the white folks sitting in cubicles, does very little to address the disproportionate race/class correlation.