DISQUS

Bears Necessity: Why Aren’t There More Black Bloggers? Equality For All!

  • Chris Smyr · 2 years ago
    AA does not use quotas, nor does it make judgment on what minimum numbers entail diversity; it instead creates a more holistic approach to hiring and enrollment that strives to transcend racial and gender divides. It's fairly easy to see that we do not live in a society that is fair in its treatment of different backgrounds, so how are we maintaining equality by maintaining the status quo?
  • Avinash · 2 years ago
    'It’s fairly easy to see that we do not live in a society that is fair in its treatment of different backgrounds.'

    Huh? We don't? Can you elaborate on that statement?
  • Chris Smyr · 2 years ago
    Do you think that racism does not exist? Do you think that oppression does not impact a person's ability to succeed?

    I blog about it (somewhat) often:

    http://thecatalytictriad.blogspot.com/search/la...
    http://thecatalytictriad.blogspot.com/2006_10_0...
    http://thecatalytictriad.blogspot.com/2006_08_0...

    And there's plenty to find outside of just my writing.
  • Avinash · 2 years ago
    I was assuming you referred to the Berkeley bubble culture, which is as fair as you get in terms of that 'diversity' everyone talks about. I think the big problem that you outline isn't racism (which now only exists on the fringes of culture), but it's more of subtle cognitive biases that we all share. Many of us still skew our decision-making in favor of people who look more like us and are wary of people who don't look like us--it's implicit in our minds. It's kind of a stretch to blanket society as closet racists, since it's just more the way our brains work than anything.

    As for affirmative action, equal opportunity does not imply equal representation. It's very difficult for students from poorer educations to come and succeed in a place like Berkeley, and I think it's better if minorities (especially black people) work their way up towards societal change through state schools, rather than advocating for these artificial barriers. Berkeley is a fine university, but it's not as if they're losing anything by getting rejected from here. They can also add to the diversity of the state schools, which have been somewhat drained from affirmative action policies and started to emerge as predominantly white. Build your way up. Don't force your education.
  • Chris Smyr · 2 years ago
    "Subtle cognitive biases". That's a new one.

    Defending preferences for certain cultures of people and promoting stereotypes and fear toward other cultures is racist and harmful to our society, even if it's commonplace. It's not "equality" when people have to struggle with this in varying degrees based on innate characteristics of who they are. The kneejerk response continues to be along the lines of "What? I'm not racist!" but it's that perception that allows race and culture to continually define people, for better or worse.

    Students from low-income communities are able to do just as well as any other student with the right support in their studies. Teach For America is evidence for this. With the right opportunities, they can succeed here in Berkeley like anyone else.

    To say that minorities need to "work their way up" disregards all of the work they have already done to succeed in their lives. Minorities often must struggle with more trying circumstances in their development, this being fueled by those "subtle biases" you referenced. To not take that into consideration when admitting qualified applicants is implicit racism.
  • Avinash · 2 years ago
    These are interesting (and if I may emphasize, emotional) arguments you bring up. But do they hold up under closer scrutiny?

    Bringing up terms like 'racism' and 'harmful' swells your advocate of AA to an emotional context. Just because something 'should' be this way doesn't mean it will actually bring the result that you are expecting to bear out. So let's throw out those terms in this debate, since having the so-called moral high ground detracts from what's really important.

    The real question is, does affirmative action have an empirical effect that benefits black scholars? Have poor minorities actually improved their status? Are poor minorities even the ones given the chance to attend higher-tier colleges, or does that just go their richer/middle class bretheren who can afford such an education? What about poor white children who have also had to suffer similar economic misfortune?

    Do the people who advocate for affirmative action do so because they are interested in the results of such social policies? Or do they advocate them for this need for diversity and for moral standing without considering whether there's any noticeable impact?

    Here is an article summing up the shortcomings of AA more succinctly: http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/30104...
  • Chris Smyr · 2 years ago
    My arguments were rooted in logic and empirical data, and they were prompted by your initial incorrect definition of Affirmative Action, your handwaving of racism as "subtle biases", and your implication that minorities haven't worked hard enough to get ahead in life, but if you want to ignore these arguments then that is your decision.

    There is data that suggests both sides of the debate, that AA is helpful and harmful. Citing one report does nothing to change this standoff as I could cite another. What's more important is understanding what obstacles are already inherent in our society. We need to come to an understanding of the problems before we can debate their solutions.