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

In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

news.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 363 posts

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#231

Post by tomrod »

lliamander wrote: post #218
tomrod wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The highest IQ people tend to be libertarian. Libertarian, the conservative ideology, or classical liberal, the much more diverse group of folks? Both are funded by Kochs and others at the end of the day, but having attended meetings by both groups my experience has been that classical liberals are very intellectually honest (and absolutely the smartest folks I've met) even when we agree to disagree. Libertarians,…

Could you clarify the distinction between libertarian and classical liberal? I know many libertarians treat these terms as synonyms, and I know there is a diversity of attitudes within the libertarian camp, but I'm not sure how they match up with what you are saying.

Classical liberalism overlaps in politics with some of the Libertarian party. The little (l) libertarians in the US are, recently in the age of Trumpism, conservatives embarrassed with the GOP as a conservative party and their support for authoritarianism/traditionalism. They adopt big (L) name, but typically aren't informed on a lot of classical liberalism thought and history.

Classical liberalism is a large umbrella and incorporates principles from the left and right. It's defining characteristic is eschewing authoritarianism.

For a very casual introduction, check out the Political Compass [0]

[0] https://www.politicalcompass.org/test

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#232

Post by tomrod »

GenerocUsername wrote: post #122

Kuntz Law: in ANY/ALL resource constrained systems, giving advantage to 1 individual directly gives disadvantage to another. This is true whether it is seats on a bus, distribution of aid money, or college admission. You cannot give race based preference without simultaneously race based discrimination

Seems like the justification for group-based preference would have to be a well-defined final outcome, like socioeconomic improvement years post-graduation, than simply being representative of the population as a whole.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#233

Post by antonymy »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #20

How many Yale students are there because of donations or connections. Nepotism is often the source of preferential treatment.

If they ended the legacy system they could kiss all donations from millionaire and billionaire alumni goodbye. In the first place, this whole "racial diversity" thing is a diversion in order to maintain their legacy system. Can't accuse them of being elitist and exclusionary if they regularly admit a quota of non-legacy applicants deliberately selected for racial diversity.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#234

Post by apress »

hotpotamus wrote: post #198
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I would say the Ivy League is doing something very wrong. When California and Washington passed ballot initiatives prohibiting race-conscious admissions, demographics shifted a bit but black admissions were nowhere near zero.

Is that to say the California and Washington schools now have the appropriate demographics? I'm curious to know what those numbers are.

In CA at least, there is a large gap: Despite those changes and others, the proportion of freshmen from underrepresented racial groups, including Blacks, Latinos and women, attending the UC campuses, averaged 20% before Prop 209, then dropped to 15% in 1998, then slowly increased over the next 20 years, reaching a peak of 37% in 2016, according to the system. However, the percentage of underrepresented students graduating from high school had doubled to over 56% by 2016. Source: https://edsource.org/2020/students-at-californias-top-tier-u...

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#236

Post by yucky »

tomrod wrote: post #228
nailer wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the US, race is very much tied to socioeconomic status and class. Great! So looking at socioeconomic status will also address socioeconomic status caused by racial discrimination. Glad you understand and agree with the parent.

How do you identify socioeconomic class? Tax returns? Paystubs? Accounting for wealth generally? Wealthy folks typically don't make a large wage, they receive a dividend on investments and large loans against collateral. Note that this is critical to consider if we are to discriminate based on socioeconomic class.

>How do you identify socioeconomic class?

How do you identify race? After all, it's just a social construct. We're not DNA testing and doing the one-drop rule are we? Its' self-reported. At least with socioeconomics we can look at household income and tax returns.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#237

Post by tomrod »

yucky wrote: post #236
tomrod wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you identify socioeconomic class? Tax returns? Paystubs? Accounting for wealth generally? Wealthy folks typically don't make a large wage, they receive a dividend on investments and large loans against collateral. Note that this is critical to consider if we are to discriminate based on socioeconomic class.

>How do you identify socioeconomic class? How do you identify race? After all, it's just a social construct. We're not DNA testing and doing the one-drop rule are we? Its' self-reported. At least with socioeconomics we can look at household income and tax returns.

Got it. So we likely agree that wealth identification will be difficult here if we're only going with household income and tax returns.

It's definitely a thorny process whichever factor one adopts to benchmark process outcomes against.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#238

Post by yucky »

GenerocUsername wrote: post #122

Kuntz Law: in ANY/ALL resource constrained systems, giving advantage to 1 individual directly gives disadvantage to another. This is true whether it is seats on a bus, distribution of aid money, or college admission. You cannot give race based preference without simultaneously race based discrimination

>You cannot give race based preference without simultaneously race based discrimination

If this is true, would that by extension mean the official platform of the Democratic party openly supports and endorses racial discrimination?

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020-Democr...

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#239

Post by HelloMcFly »

samatman wrote: post #183
HelloMcFly wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a doctrine that discriminating against Whites is very good and correct, because they deserve it. This is an argument put forth in bad faith. The thought - agree or disagree - is white individuals in America have systemic advantages that persist due to historical social practices the manifest across many years of education and just existence in life in America. It's not about "deserving less" but about acknowledging…

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't think my characterization is "merely rephrasing" what you said. If you believe policies and practices people are trying to disadvantage white people in decision-making because white people "deserve" less, you're wrong.

I think you can debate the morality of helping mitigate structural disadvantages (which I hope you acknowledge exist) that many underrepresented groups face with intentional, procedural advantages for those same groups. I won't do it with you, but I think ignoring structural disadvantages created by a history of racism isn't the solution. I don't know what the solution is.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#240

Post by yucky »

tomrod wrote: post #237
yucky wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>How do you identify socioeconomic class? How do you identify race? After all, it's just a social construct. We're not DNA testing and doing the one-drop rule are we? Its' self-reported. At least with socioeconomics we can look at household income and tax returns.

Got it. So we likely agree that wealth identification will be difficult here if we're only going with household income and tax returns. It's definitely a thorny process whichever factor one adopts to benchmark process outcomes against.

No, it's far easier to determine socioeconomics. After all, if you're going to favor a specific race, how do you prove their race? What percentage of their bloodlines needs to be from that race? We really start getting into yellow badge territory eventually, and at best all it does is create racial animosity and resentment, which we see now: https://news.gallup.com/poll/318851/perceptions-white-black-...

Meanwhile, everybody pays taxes so we have the data we need to not use racial discrimination.

Post reply on HN