Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

fivethirtyeight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 119 posts

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#41

Post by bduerst »

gareim wrote: post #18
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument was 'if you ban quotas based on race in favor of other measure which should still help increase diversity, you don't get as good an effect as just quotas'. That it is lower shouldn't be surprising, but how much lower or higher than the expected lower might be surprising.

>which should still help increase diversity I think quotas by income would be a much more interesting experience for college students than quotas by race.

You would still have people complaining that it's not entirely merit based.

The point is that socioeconomic status (correlated with race and family income) has already impacted someone by the time they reach college application age. The idea behind quotas in public institutions is that it gives opportunity to those who did not have them previously.

A better analysis would be based on graduate performance, rather than admission rates, for demonstrating success.

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#42

Post by MisterBastahrd »

cygnus_a wrote: post #12

In other words, not using racial preferences in admissions decisions lets the black college enrollment trends continue; though, as the article doesn't point out, 'not using mandated racial preferences (banning aff. action)' is not the cause of disproportionate representation. I think the argument against affirmative action is more, morally speaking, addressing the question, "should we use racial preference to fight r…

There's no moral question here. We have a disadvantaged group of people who are being actively discriminated against by a majority group. The easiest way as a society to make sure that we treat the group fairly is by creating a system that ensures that they are being represented in the university population. It's good for them, it's good for their classmates, it's good for the university, and it serves long-term goals by putting more educated people in their demographic.

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#43

Post by yummyfajitas »

rmxt wrote: post #39
yummyfajitas wrote: post #33

The article presents an interesting fact. The article claims minority (presumably non-Asian) enrollment drops 23% when AA is banned. The converse of this is that 23% of non-Asian minorities are only there due to affirmative action, and would not be there under a meritocratic system. I was previously told it's racist to believe things like this. The article also begs another question: “The Court expects that 25 years…

"The converse of this is that 23% of non-Asian minorities are only there due to affirmative action, and would not be there under a meritocratic system." AA and meritocratic systems are not mutually exclusive. Some combination of the two is what is currently used in most college admissions processes. It is inaccurate to say that none of the people in question would be there were it not for AA.

It is inaccurate to say that none would be there without AA. It's completely accurate to say that only 77% of those currently present would be there without AA.

It's true that AA is a non-meritocratic hack on top of an otherwise meritocratic system (modulo other small hacks, e.g. large donations and alumni preferences).

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#44

Post by MisterBastahrd »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #27
MisterBastahrd wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has nothing to do with this issue.

It has as much to do as bitwize's comment.

No, it really doesn't. Even if someone had an ancestor who was enslaved, they probably couldn't so much as identify the group that enslaved them, and for the vast majority white people making this asinine statement, their ancestors CERTAINLY weren't being enslaved by the government they live under, nor were they being denied the right to be represented until a few generations ago.

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#45

Post by Lawtonfogle »

danharaj wrote: post #35
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whomever you are, you have had ancestors that enslaved and ancestors that were enslaved.

Chattel slavery was a fairly unique and brutal phenomenon.

How was it more brutal than many of the other instances of slavery throughout history where the owner were allowed to do what they wished with their slaves?

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#46

Post by dghf »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #33

The article presents an interesting fact. The article claims minority (presumably non-Asian) enrollment drops 23% when AA is banned. The converse of this is that 23% of non-Asian minorities are only there due to affirmative action, and would not be there under a meritocratic system. I was previously told it's racist to believe things like this. The article also begs another question: “The Court expects that 25 years…

> The article claims minority (presumably non-Asian) enrollment drops 23% when AA is banned. The converse of this is that 23% of non-Asian minorities are only there due to affirmative action, and would not be there under a meritocratic system.

That assumes that without AA the system would be meritocratic, and not biased in favour of people from particular backgrounds.

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#47

Post by bduerst »

bitwize wrote: post #6

"A society which has for hundreds of years done something special against the Negro must now do something special for the Negro." --Martin Luther King, Jr.

In context to society at the time this was said, being able to sit wherever you want on a public bus was considered special privilege.

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#49

Post by scott_s »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #28
drabiega wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, this is irrelevant. Things like affirmative action do not exist as revenge or compensation for some past act, they are there to undo some of the still present damage from those acts.

>they are there to undo some of the still present damage from those acts. In which case income/wealth/SES are the better metrics, as they ensure those who are damaged get help instead of relying on some other measure as a proxy for damage.

Income is easy to measure, but it does not capture wealth very well. Even if we measure all total assets, there is still an enormous amount of unmeasured wealth: can you go to a family member or friend for financial help in an emergency? Even when we compare people with the same income and total assets, that latter question tends to be different for white people versus black people.

In America, black people suffered organized, systemic oppression for generations which prevented them from accumulating wealth. That fact is not well capture by just looking at someone's income, or even all of their assets. That's also a question of all accumulated assets of all of their family and close friends.

A recent Pro Publica piece covers this very well: "The Color of Debt: How Collection Suits Squeeze Black Neighborhoods", https://www.propublica.org/article/debt-collection-lawsuits-.... I originally heard it on This American Life: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/573/s...

I also think Ta-Nehisi Coates' famous piece covers the history of systemic financial oppression well, "The Case for Reparations", http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case...

Re: What Happens When You Ban Affirmative Action in College Admissions

#50

Post by tadfisher »

Steko wrote: post #38
yummyfajitas wrote: post #33

The article presents an interesting fact. The article claims minority (presumably non-Asian) enrollment drops 23% when AA is banned. The converse of this is that 23% of non-Asian minorities are only there due to affirmative action, and would not be there under a meritocratic system. I was previously told it's racist to believe things like this. The article also begs another question: “The Court expects that 25 years…

Yes it's racist to hold one race down for centuries and then claim the system is entirely meritocratic.

Please be careful with your attribution; the GP presumably does not own slaves and did not prop up Jim Crow.
Post reply on HN