L4sBotAfter gutting affirmative action, Republicans target minority scholarships
TokenBoomerI wonder what their final solution will be for diversity?
To shower all the minorities in glory?
SternThe Rs are all about merit. They believe in pulling yourself up by your bootstraps. Like the old saying goes, "Arbeit macht frei"
doctortofuFinal solution… I think I’ve heard that somewhere, I wonder where… Might have been in another language, German maybe…
XeeleeAch Quatsch! Das bildest du dir nur ein!
Seems like their final solution is to stop basing scholarships, awards, and college placement off of the color of a person’s skin or their race.
snooggumsActually it is to change it back to basing it off of wealth, family connections, and other things white people have more of than minorities.
So race based outcomes without saying it out loud.
nightauthorYeah man, these fucking minorities need to pick themselves up by their great great grandparents bootstraps.
exohumanYeah, because eliminating cultural support programs does that.
Flying SquidMedian white household income in the U.S. - $74,262
Median black household income in the U.S. - $46,400
Maybe, possibly, black people need more help paying for college than white people?
Let me guess, that lower income is their own fault. Black people need to collectively pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I wonder if education has a part to play in that?
Why can’t they just leave us alone?
2fat4thatBecause someone told them they were special and that they deserved more. And against a lifetime of insurmountable evidence to the contrary, they still believe it.
Because if we gain power, they lose it. Hierarchy must be maintained. When everyone has power, no one does. And that’s not “fair.”
ProdSlashBut don't you dare call the GOP racist!
It’s not racism to not want different rules for different races. Make scholarships for people from underprivileged families, not from race.
Just because something is helping out a race that you want it to help out doesn’t make it free from racism.
It’s my understanding that diversity scholarships generally put those below the poverty line first.
Intention will be all over the place.
What it actually did was put middle class minorities in higher end colleges at the cost of middle class white kids. It did very little for anyone who couldn’t afford the costs.
SkeletorThe GOP is garbage, AND, giving people special privileges based on skin color or race is fucked.
Want to empower those who have less? Change the criteria to economic, and remove race from the equation.
How anybody thinks otherwise, this Skeleton can’t quite understand.
Kids from poor White schools still don't face as much of a headwind as kids from poor Black or Latino schools. Systemic racism is still present in k-12 education, and needs to be addressed before declaring victory at the college admission level and going home.
Quite the blanket statement you’ve made there.
Who’s going home and calling it a day? Affirmative action in its previous methodology is the only way to fight systemic racism? That’s black and white, a false dichotomy.
It’s obvious that fighting discrimination with discrimination is self-defeating, but people don’t want to acknowledge when their thinking sucks. Instead the shouting just gets louder, and round and round we go.
All the while the class warfare rages on.
Good. Racial discrimination is bad. It has no place in a modern society.
In a world where people are good and decent, there would be no racists, bigots, xenophobes, misogynists or homophobes. These behaviors come exclusively from conservatives. Our world would be a much better place without conservatives.
Of course they are. So, I’m a white guy, am I a bigot if I absolutely despise white, Republican men? It’s not bigotry to hate bigots, right?
That’s known as the paradox of tolerance. Society can’t tolerate the intolerant even if tolerance is our goal.
Tom the Dancing Bug has a good cartoon about this situation. boingboing.net/…/tom-the-dancing-bug-class-of-28-…
queermunistThey want a world where only the children of the rich are allowed to go to universities, while everyone else goes to vocational school or directly into the labor force.
This is why they accuse slippery slope on everything, because that’s what they intend to do.
Is this a US thing I don’t get? How are diversity scholarships not affirmitive action?
There it is! Check.
But to answer your bad faith conservative argument, affirmative action is typically in regards to admission, not ability to pay.
Which is also funny when it works the other way: black people are technically allowed, see we met the law, but the tuition is too much. Whoopsies, how embarrassing, I guess black people can’t attend, no issues here, teehee. Hey let’s do the same thing with k-12 and defund public schools. Land of opportunity, if you can pay, teehee.
First, to clarify: I live in the EU and kind of don’t care aboutt this stuff. We are doing pretty well on the nondiscrimination here.
But I find it funny how often the democrats make bad faith arguments by redefining words. Affirmitive action is a race motivated decision that is supposed to be positive for an otherwise discriminated against minority to presumably undo discrimination. This would clearly clarify.
I live in Canada, but it’s hard to not watch the dumpster fire.
I made a comment about slippery slope, how the conservatives project slippery slope on everything because that’s what they intend to do. And this is the perfect example of it. They came for affirmative action in admissions, and once they got that, they are now going after anything else they can. That is slippery slope.
That was my point.
You try to change this to being about affirmative action itself. Whether it’s good or bad, or should be allowed or not. But that was not my original point. My original point was slippery slope and how conservatives project that because that’s what they do. And I am correct in that. Your bad faith argument is trying to change my topic.
Shall I explain it another way? For now let’s accept that this is all affirmative action. Admissions is one topic. Scholarships is another topic. And they have slid right from one to the next! That is exactly my point with how they project slippery slope on to everyone else, because that’s what they intend to do.
Something tells me you’re going to try to change from my point about slippery slope again.
No, I just don’t think it is slippery slope when they say from start what they want to do. Slippery slope would apply if they pretended to compromise and then tried to move it again after agreeing to compromise.
It is just one of the clickbait definitions of slippery slope to call anything that is gradual slippery, so I kinda get it. Its just te media misusing words to generate controversy and outrage.
For me, saying no discrimination either way (affirmitive or negative) and working towards it is normal. Saying you want religious freedom when they don’t allow teaching religious topics in schools and then when they get it trying to undermine real science and hang up commandments in classrooms. That is slippery slope that I am outraged about. I don’t want to water to words down by these clickbaits, hence my comment.
This is not quickbait, this is what slippery slope is.
Btw, at risk of you accusing me of changing the topic, they didn’t go after Legacy admissions. Legacy admissions is not the strongest candidate, or the best candidate. It’s the children of people who went there before, take a guess who benefits from that.
For me, saying no discrimination either way (affirmitive or negative) and working towards it
If you believe that you’ve been duped. Ever wonder why their public schools are in shambles?
You should watch “Beau of the fifth column” on YouTube.
Legacy admissions are some real BS. I guess it does not ring alarm bells in my head as immediately because its not obviously unconstitutional. But it is a rather nice roundabout way of discriminating. For any school that takes public funds, legacy admissions should be forbidden.
Guess which one is much, much larger.
At its core, legacy admission is discrimination. We don’t have to twist ourselves into knots about legal definitions, we can all see that at its core it’s discrimination. (Or selective picking, if you’d rather use that term, that is not based on merit.) If the heart of this is fairness then why aren’t Republicans chasing after that?
Yes, I agree. Or rather, I think favoritism is a better word. They prefer the children of their “friends” (alumni). Which is kind of ok as long as it is just their own money, not public funds.
MiddleWeighBut who’s gonna do my yard work, and other menial tasks? Cmon now. I need to step on someone ffs!
Unfortunately these bills were really never going to stand up in court and I'm surprised they lasted as long as they did. The best way forward is to reintroduce the same scholarships and admittance but make them income based.