this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
130 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
1025 readers
1 users here now
@politics on kbin.social is a magazine to share and discuss current events news, opinion/analysis, videos, or other informative content related to politicians, politics, or policy-making at all levels of governance (federal, state, local), both domestic and international. Members of all political perspectives are welcome here, though we run a tight ship. Community guidelines and submission rules were co-created between the Mod Team and early members of @politics. Please read all community guidelines and submission rules carefully before engaging our magazine.
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not a fan of this ruling. Not on the merits, but on the results.
Affirmative Action fell into the "Equity" column in that "Equality - Equity - Justice" spectrum. Remember that comic with the baseball game, a fence, and 3 kids of varying heights trying to watch?
Equality says they can all go to the fence and try to watch, and everyone gets a box to stand on, though, even with the box, the shortest kid can't see over the fence.
Equity says that everyone gets boxes of varying heights so they can all see over the fence.
Justice advocates replacing the fence with a chain-link fence tat everyone can see through without the need for boxes in the first place.
It's nice to pretend that we don't need boxes, and racism is "over", but that's just pretending.
I'm not american, so I don't have a horse in this race. But I believe that being racist to fix equity is a terrible compromise. It's putting people of a certain ethnicity (white & asian) into their own little box with more competition.
Give black & hispanic people monetary aid. Aid them more in high school by assisting black majority schools. But if the system lets you say the sentence "I would have gotten into X university if I was a different race", then the system is broken.
Finally, it's not usually "black people" vs "white people", it's "poor people" vs "rich people". Black/hispanic people might be over-represented in the poor group, which is a huge problem. But aiding the poor is completely non-racist, benefits virtually everybody, and has the side effect of slowly reducing the amount of poor black/hispanic people
I'm not american, so I don't have a horse in this race. But I believe that being racist to fix equity is a terrible compromise. It's putting people of a certain ethnicity (white & asian) into their own little box with more competition.
Give black & hispanic people monetary aid. Aid them more in high school by assisting black majority schools. But if the system lets you say the sentence "I would have gotten into X university if I was a different race", then the system is broken.
Finally, it's not usually "black people" vs "white people", it's "poor people" vs "rich people". Black/hispanic people might be over-represented in the poor group, which is a huge problem. But aiding the poor is completely non-racist, benefits virtually everybody, and has the side effect of slowly reducing the amount of poor black/hispanic people.