Aggregates

Evidence: High: 0 Medium: 0 Low: 0 No Data: 31

Theme Radar

Meekro 2022-11-02 23:32 UTC link

kube-system 2022-11-02 23:33 UTC link

Yeah, I agree that it is important to take into account disadvantages that people may have unfairly experienced due to no fault of their own.

But, why do we need to use race as a proxy? Presuming something about someone based on their skin color is prejudice regardless of your intentions.

If people are disadvantaged, let's measure those disadvantages directly and adjust for those factors.

kareemsabri 2022-11-02 23:33 UTC link

Race is very easy to focus on without making any structural changes in society. A black man was president. So long as it's the right black man, it doesn't change much.

danenania 2022-11-02 23:39 UTC link

Class can be a big part of racism--often what appears to be racism is really more about class. There are many people who look down on anyone they perceive to be "low class", regardless of race, and who will accept people of other races if they perceive them to be "high class". In areas where the lower classes are over-represented by racial minorities, this can look like racism, when classism is much more the culprit.

quantified 2022-11-02 23:40 UTC link

> Nothing the Supreme Court says about the consideration of race in college admissions will affect the more basic problem, that too few Americans from poorer families are sufficiently prepared to apply to college.

About sums it up. Though if there are any visible disparities in the populations that produce poor children who are prepared, I expect a loud argument.

daxfohl 2022-11-02 23:41 UTC link

Because how easy it is to move to / stay in a higher class is highly dependent on race? https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/19/upshot/race-c...

defterGoose 2022-11-02 23:51 UTC link

Some NPR correspondent: "...and we all know how this disproportionately affects black and brown communities." /s

nonrandomstring 2022-11-02 23:52 UTC link

Race, class, gender, age, intelligence, wealth... there are infinite partitions on humankind, used to divide us. But the future is not split between the "have" and the "have nots." It will be between the "will" and the "will nots". Those who submit to domination and those who choose to remain human.

etempleton 2022-11-02 23:56 UTC link

Part of the American dream is that the feeling that there is no rigid social class. Everyone is a millionaire down on their luck. You only need to work harder or be more clever—ideally both.

To some extent, it is true. Realistically, however, it is rare to move more than one or two income brackets from where your parents were when they were your age.

Race in America, however, is fraught. The history of racism is recent, overt, and systemic. It is impossible to deny the history of racism unless you are an idiot. The question is what, if anything, can be done about it that actually improves things. The answer is probably very little. Affirmative action is problematic and has some negative side effects, but it has probably been a net positive for society. It will also probably be struck down as it is now negatively and unfairly impacting another minority group.

coyotespike 2022-11-03 00:17 UTC link

Here in Texas, any student from the top 10% of their high school is guaranteed a place at the flagship University of Texas at Austin.

This is widely understood to be a form of affirmative action. Naturally, high schools in underprivileged areas - rural or urban - will produce students who are nowhere nearly as prepared as students from elite or wealthy schools. We ignore that difference as a policy matter. Top 10% is top 10%.

Maybe the Ivies will move to a similar system in the wake of the current SCOTUS case.

favorited 2022-11-03 00:21 UTC link

I've always loved how succinctly LBJ put it:

"If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."

lo_zamoyski 2022-11-03 00:27 UTC link

These sorts of quotas generally do nothing but paper over the fundamental problems and truths that affect various groups. It's a way of concealing failures of education and culture. By making admissions blind to anything but merit (we can talk about how to define merit, of course), it forces people earlier in the chain of causes to confront failure close to home. By keeping responsible parties in the hot seat, you stand a better chance of fixing bad schools and bad cultural norms and accepting truths that those lacking in humility have a hard time swallowing. (Politicians get elected by flattering their base, of course...)

okwubodu 2022-11-03 00:47 UTC link

The second order effects of affirmative action's repeal are going to be very entertaining. You can get a sneak peek by taking a look at the student body at a school like UT Austin where, by law, 75% of students must be in-state and automatically admitted according to class rank (GPA). https://admissions.utexas.edu/explore/freshman-profile

You'll notice that when comparing Harvard and UT's student bodies to the US and Texas' demographics, respectively, Harvard's system was closer to the mark in terms of black and white representation. https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics

Most interesting is UT's 40/60 M/F gender ratio. Remember: that 40% of males is almost certainly being boosted by the 25% of admits UT has any real control over. Once AA is overturned, that's it—hands off the scale. I think half the population suddenly realizing they were beneficiaries of affirmative action this whole time—and subsequently understanding the nuances of discrimination in this country—will ultimately be a good thing.

partiallypro 2022-11-03 02:42 UTC link

IMO, this is by design and why politicians and media types play to race instead of class. Because if middle/lower class Hispanic, Black and White people figure out they have a lot more in common with each other than their rich counterparts, it would not be good for the current status quo.

kvathupo 2022-11-03 02:42 UTC link

One of the most pernicious consequences of this fixation on race is the definition of a person by an arbitrary social construct. Although they all check the same box, they have very different experiences and cultural backgrounds:

* Black descendents of slaves vs African immigrants [1]

* Chinese Americans vs Hmong Americans (a higher poverty rate than Black Americans! [2])

* A Korean who grew up in Koreatown LA vs one who grew up in Utah

* A Boston Brahmin vs an impoverished White Virginian whose family members were targeted by eugenic boards

That said, Affirmative Action can reasonably make those from marginalized groups feel more welcome. In elementary school for example, I felt very out place among the largely affluent members of my accelerated math class. By contrast, I related much more to the mischievous truants who would later go on to be low-level criminals.

[1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/24/us/top-colleges-take-more...

[2] - https://tcf.org/content/commentary/misleading-data-policies-...

RigelKentaurus 2022-11-03 02:51 UTC link

Indian-American father here, living in the Bay Area. My wife and I came to this country with a few hundred dollars between us and have worked hard to reach where we’re at. We're far from privileged.

I am 100% against affirmative action on the basis of race. I think there should be some measure of AA on the basis of economic status. It's quite personal for me this year.

My 17-year old is applying to universities to study CS for fall 2023. We live in a highly competitive school district. He's hardworking and studious, as reflected in his 4.0 GPA and perfect 1600 SAT score (thankfully, some schools like MIT have brought back the SAT.) He has always taken the hardest possible AP and college-level classes and has strong extracurriculars. In a normal world, his chances of getting into top-ranked CS programs (Stanford, Berkeley, MIT) would be decent, but we're Indian-American and are considered over-represented on elite college campuses.

Our school counselor and other parents we've have spoken with have flat-out advised us to: Apply to more lower-tier schools. Amongst the elites, target "hard STEM" schools like MIT, Caltech, Harvey Mudd, where he’s more likely to get a fair shot (Asians are 40+% of the incoming class at these places.) Forget the Ivies — the last thing they want is “another smart Indian male” (the counselor's words, not mine.) You see, that won’t help with “diversity.”

Also — we use a system called Collegevine to keep track of applications. Applicants can input their GPA, SAT scores, extracurriculars etc. to understand their acceptance rate at specific universities based on historical data. For my son, keeping everything else the same but simply changing his race from Asian to Black/Hispanic increases his chances of getting in at the above elite schools from 4-8% to 60+%. I am not making this up — you can test this yourself.

Is it fair to penalize my son for working hard and being an excellent student?

worik 2022-11-03 05:37 UTC link

For some of us (me included) living in a racist society is like a fish swiming who does not notice water. I only noticed when I became intimate with a person from a minority race and saw how they were treated. That is when I noticed I live in a racist society.

I love the economist. Their writing is so good, they are biased but know it, and acknowledge it. Biased, but not bigoted. nYet this article misses the point, IMO, or racial quotas in professional schools. They have the liberal individualistic bias, and have not noticed that one. It is their water (I am a liberal myself, but I have had that particular bias removed by my experiences.)

Here (Aotearoa) the point of quotas is not to allow some groups the same access to the privilege of the profession, but it is to help the consumers of professional services get what they need.

For doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants (yes) etcetera being from a similar community as your clients is very helpful for your clients. This is not a benefit to the individual professional, it is a benefit to the community.

There is a secondary benefit to the professions themselves. A cultural milieu helps bring new ideas forward.

Whether or not the system in the USA is fit for purpose or not, I do not know. But when deciding I hope the American judges think not, only, of benefit to the individuals but the wider effects on our communities.

jriot 2022-11-03 14:37 UTC link

Eight years ago I was accepted to do a PhD in either economics or mathematics at a local state school, no where near any ranking list. However, I had just separated from the military a year prior after 11 years as enlisted member. I was the first one in my family to graduate college, let alone be accepted for a PhD program.

During the orientation process I had to speak with a young woman about grants and scholarships. She was showing me what was available pulling up a grant or scholarship, each one she selected was for women, people of color, or women of color. After seeing these for ten minutes in a row without one I could I apply for, I made the joke, there doesn't seem to be a lot here for white males. She said I can just apply and let them know I was a white male and I would get like we do for everything else. I ended the process there with a sour taste left in my mouth.

She was unaware of my background, growing up on an island in Alaska in housing built during WWII that was eventually condemned in our last year. Moving to rural NC for my last two years of high school, then spending time in the military, separating from Turkey literally months before the attempted coup.

She saw my race not the diversity I would bring from my experiences.

smcg 2022-11-03 15:38 UTC link

For the entire history of this country the elites have pitted the working class against itself along racial lines. The failure of Reconstruction to enable Black agency or punish slaveholders deeply scarred the country and it may never heal from it.

The media and political class continually manufactures the racial divide. We see this now with the culture war about crime narratives.

A Americans lack class consciousness in part because a plurality of Americans do not have the lived experience of the "working class". The decimation of the labor movement over the past 50 years didn't help either. And those who experience class divide the most, the very poor and homeless, are totally politically disenfranchised.

laomai 2022-11-03 19:49 UTC link

I’ve heard it said on some podcast that race cropped up as an intentional structure to obfuscate class distinctions:

- post slavery, many formerly enslaved people had better skills than poor white people

- to prevent poor white people from joining forces with these formerly enslaved people as a large class of “the poor” vs. small class of “the wealthy” racial distinctions began to be used more frequently

- this had the effect of basically allowing the “poor white man” to side with “wealthy whites” (regardless of if something was in their best interests or not) because he could console himself with “I may be poor but at least I’m white” — even though the rich whites often advanced laws and regulations that were generally detrimental to the poor as a “class group”.

Is there any hard data on this or is it just heresay/opinion?

kenjackson 2022-11-02 23:44 UTC link

The main rationale is that it is complicated. :-)

Controlling for income doesn't work well, because whites at the same income level tend to have much more wealth than blacks at the same income level. Controlling for wealth, blacks still tend to poorer access to resources (clean water, prenatal care, etc...).

It would be a great achievement if we could simply say that poor blacks were finally as well off as poor whites, but we're still quite a ways away from that.

That said, I don't think the country has the stomach to realistically try to fix that problem any longer.

notch656a 2022-11-03 00:03 UTC link

There is still structural codified racism within US borders. For instance, it's illegal for non-native US nationals/citizens to own most property in American Samoa, in effect perpetuating racism against outsiders who are also US nationals.

akomtu 2022-11-03 00:06 UTC link

If 50% of the nation's wealth was mine, I'd talk about race, skin color, eye color, haircut styles - I'd talk about anything to distract attention from the only fact that matters.

zeroonetwothree 2022-11-03 00:11 UTC link

There’s only ~5 income brackets so moving “more than two” is indeed mathematically challenging for anyone in the middle.

juve1996 2022-11-03 00:11 UTC link

> But, why do we need to use race as a proxy?

Because historically race was used systemically to limit opportunities for people of color. The last school to be desegregated was in 1963. Think about that.

geoduck14 2022-11-03 00:23 UTC link

The top 10% of the good high schools don't go to University of Texas

briHass 2022-11-03 00:24 UTC link

> Realistically, however, it is rare to move more than one or two income brackets from where your parents were when they were your age.

You state that like it's a bad thing. If you can bump a bracket or two per generation, 2 generations can take you from near-penniless to upper-middle class.

Spooky23 2022-11-03 00:33 UTC link

Everyone should read Robert Caro’s biographies of LBJ.

The destitution and most importantly shame that he experienced as a boy shaped him, both in the amazing way he was able to seize control of the Senate and defeat the racist reactionaries who mentored him, and in the negative way that he embraced and wielded unbridled power and corruption.

Spooky23 2022-11-03 00:39 UTC link

Race often enhances that effect.

anyonecancode 2022-11-03 00:42 UTC link

I've read speculation that this could find itself on shaky legal foundations depending on how SCOTUS rules on the latest affirmative action case? Not a lawyer so can't really tell if that's just FUD or a real concern. I think the TX approach is really interesting and would hate to see it ended.

nemothekid 2022-11-03 00:42 UTC link

>Maybe the Ivies will move to a similar system in the wake of the current SCOTUS case.

AFAICT, the ivies don't have a problem with filling their graduating class. I believe a place like Harvard even considering the top 10% of students would increase the applicant pool. I'm reciting these numbers from memory, but apparently the size of the incoming class at Harvard is roughly 2,000 students, but there are ~5,000 applicants that scored 95th percentile of the SAT. (Edit: This source [3] says there are 22,000 students who scored in the top 1% percentile; Harvard could likely admit every perfect scorer if it pleased).

While I believe there is belief that Harvard is accepting C-students over asians A+ students I think the reality is much closer; they are rejecting students with perfect scores and accepting students who scored in the 98th percentile.

The real problem is the size of the undergrad class for these select elite schools have remained the same (The harvard class size of 1992 was 2,200[1] compared to 1,954 today[2]), while the US population has grown almost 30% in the same time frame. You have more and more qualifying students fighting for the same number of spots and an organization that is more than happy to split imaginary hairs to keep the class size the same.

[1] https://www.thecrimson.com/column/a-new-day-at-harvard/artic...

[2]https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2022/4/1/admissions-class...

[3] https://go.collegewise.com/how-many-people-get-a-perfect-sat...

weaksauce 2022-11-03 00:57 UTC link

> I think 50% of the population suddenly realizing they were beneficiaries of affirmative action this whole time—and subsequently understanding the nuances of discrimination in this country—will ultimately be a good thing.

I doubt that if they haven't figured out it's a nuanced thing by now that they will figure that out after the second order effects come into play.

colordrops 2022-11-03 01:00 UTC link

I was going to point out that class blindness is an intentional ploy but probably wkuld have been downvoted for being a conspiracist. You (or LBJ rather) said it much better.

givemeethekeys 2022-11-03 01:00 UTC link

And, it'll be awesome. In the short term, the few black kids and women who end up in engineering will get respect for making it into the program.

And, hopefully a few years later, they'll no longer be looked at as diversity hires.

duvenaud 2022-11-03 01:05 UTC link

As a STEM academic, I can say that I've never seen or heard of ongoing AA for men in any STEM program in any institution whose policies I'm acquainted with. So it seems to me to be misleading to claim, or at least hard to believe, that very many men in college have been beneficiaries of AA for men.

marcusverus 2022-11-03 01:08 UTC link

> Affirmative action is problematic and has some negative side effects, but it has probably been a net positive for society.

I'm interested to see that you consider it to have been net positive for society. What tangible benefits outweigh the obvious negatives?

jiscariot 2022-11-03 01:15 UTC link

It could be a story about mushroom cultivation or mid-century architecture, and NPR would find a way to make it about disparate impact in the black community. The game I play now, is I'll listen until they start in on identity politics. It usually doesn't take longer than 3-4 minutes.

627467 2022-11-03 01:16 UTC link

> Part of the American dream is that the feeling that there is no rigid social class. Everyone is a millionaire down on their luck. You only need to work harder or be more clever—ideally both.

Recently I have been thinking in this vein too... This "American dream" is such a repeated cliché that some may think it's just that: a cliché in the minds of even Americans. But my current hypothesis is that many (most) Americans actually believe it. To the point of being blind of the actual nature of this "meritocracy".

This blindness to the fact that individual agency is not really as powerful as the "dream" states basically reinforces the idea that certain hard to change property of an individual (ie. Race? Gender identity? Sexuality?) must be the core reason for lack of success/progress: the biggot believes not all people are what it takes to succeed, and the biggot's prey believe their core nature/mark is the main reason why others don't support their progress.

jimmygrapes 2022-11-03 01:32 UTC link

I like how you edited the actual words

scarface74 2022-11-03 01:40 UTC link

I’m in the top 10% of income percentile. But I still got looked at suspiciously as a Black person living in a county that’s 3% Black and as recently as the late 80s was a famous “Sundown town” (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eYKQdPMeJjk)

I once took my team to lunch and the waitress asked would we be on one check or separate, I spoke up and said one, started reaching for my wallet and she still handed the check to the older looking White guy that I hired.

No matter how much money I have, there will always be assumptions about me. I have seen this a lot more when working for companies in the South than I do now when I travel to customer meetings now that I work for BigTech and I’m leading projects.

Thought experiment: if I walk into a convenience store with a visible gun in an open carry state and a “lower class” White person does the same and a policemen happens to be in the store, who do you think will be harassed?

cycomanic 2022-11-03 01:55 UTC link

That misses how even being rich does not protect you from significant racism. Just look at the well documeted experiences comparing a white or black person driving an expensive car. The black person is multiple times more likely to get stopped by police.

gnicholas 2022-11-03 02:15 UTC link

The Supreme Court is not deciding anything with regard to sex-based discrimination right now. I would be surprised if it even mentioned anything in dicta (non-binding comments not necessary to the holding) about this topic.

Also, if/when the question comes up, there is a different standard for sex-based discrimination than race-based. The former is subject to intermediate scrutiny, whereas the latter is subject (in general) to strict scrutiny.

So it is plausible that the Court would determine that some sex-based discrimination is acceptable, and simultaneously determine that no race-based discrimination is acceptable.

rayiner 2022-11-03 02:50 UTC link

Different waves of immigration also makes a huge difference. I’m part of the wave of people from the subcontinent who came here from 1970-1995, largely before H1B was created. Most Indians I knew growing up were doctors or business owners who moved to southern states. Like most Asians until 2000, they voted Republican. Indians who came to Silicon Valley or NYC after 2000, by contrast, are a very different group who assimilated into a different domestic culture and had a different experience.

kamaal 2022-11-03 03:26 UTC link

>>Everyone is a millionaire down on their luck. You only need to work harder or be more clever—ideally both.

Race is an unchangeable, decided at-birth deal. Class on the other hand changes based on how you succeed to that end. People do feel class as something that is not fixed, and can be changed.

In some way getting rid of Racism means changing other people, and changing class requires one to change one's own ways.

dmix 2022-11-03 03:45 UTC link

I don’t see a problem with more women getting into university if they have better grades. They already dominate humanities and STEM won’t be affected anyway, so job outcomes won’t be heavily affected.

If we want to fix that then we need to help boys in elementary school, not dumbing down the admissions process.

Sometimes reality is exactly what society needs to confront.

I have the same view with censorship. I’d rather let the dummies embarrass themselves in public than hiding them in the shadows and pretend they wont all still believe that crap and never having the opportunity to have their ideas challenged.

Taping over problems often hides the root causes while doing nothing to deal with it.

nonethewiser 2022-11-03 04:05 UTC link

> This is widely understood to be a form of affirmative action.

That's a misunderstanding then because that's not affirmative action. Affirmative action is targeting specific groups of people to achieve some desired makeup. That's literally what affirmative action means.

It doesn't ensure you get all the best students. That's true. But that doesn't make it affirmative action.

nonethewiser 2022-11-03 04:10 UTC link

Meanwhile, president of 50k/year liberal arts college says student debt "gets a bad wrap" and warns that alternatives include colleges having to "eat the cost" https://www.marketwatch.com/story/debt-gets-a-bad-rap-as-a-c...

nonethewiser 2022-11-03 04:12 UTC link

> Yeah, I agree that it is important to take into account disadvantages that people may have unfairly experienced due to no fault of their own.

>But, why do we need to use race as a proxy?

There are two possibilites:

1. They dont see the logical fallacy, perhaps because they are clouded by empathy.

2. They fully understand that they are discriminating by race and think its good.

nonethewiser 2022-11-03 04:23 UTC link

This seems so plainly obvious. I wonder why people don't see it. It seems like there is often a battle between empathy and reason, with empathy winning out. I wish it would stop being taught as an absolute virtue.

pmonks 2022-11-03 04:35 UTC link

What makes you think he’s only going to get a great CS education at the Ivies, Cal, Caltech, Stanford, etc.? Very few of the best graduates I’ve worked with in my ~30 year career studied at those schools - it was places like UW, UBC and Waterloo that stood out to me as producing a high number of high quality, socially adapted graduates.

[edit] and before anyone asks, no I’m not Canadian

Epistemic Quality

Propaganda Flags

0 techniques detected

Solution Orientation

Emotional Tone

Stakeholder Voice

Temporal Framing

Geographic Scope

Complexity

Transparency