Zone1 Let's Talk About "Merit"

[Meister]

Lol! The acquisition of money has not happened colorblind.

 

[Coyote]

No. I’m going by the statistics. Two out of three blacks admitted to a prestigious college got in due to their color.

But are you saying that my parents, with their exceptionally high grades and scores, could have gone to a lesser school in order to make slots available to lower-scoring blacks kept?

Yes, although not just blacks (which you keep overlooking). As long as those accepted meet the qualifications, I support admissions using a variety of criteria and with the aim of increasing diversity, something that is shown to be benificial and historically lacking in the Ivy League.

Now what I DON’T understand is why you aren’t even more outraged that Harvard admits twice as many legacy students then Black students (which most recently was barely 7%) so why would you want to deny a bright, qualified Black student a chance but not go after the much larger group that benefits from an admissions process originally designed to exclude Jews? I mean it isn’t like QUALIFIED Black students take very many slots to begin with.

Why not let my parents attend the prestige school which they earned with their academic accomplishments, and let the blacks who otherwise would have taken their spots go to the lesser school for which they qualify regardless of race?

Why not let the tiny number of qualified Black admits get a chance at a degree from a prestigious university, particularly since that degree opens the door to opportunities in ways other institutions don’t? And given these students are more likely to give back to their communities which are typically underserved?

 

[IM2]

Yes, although not just blacks (which you keep overlooking). As long as those accepted meet the qualifications, I support admissions using a variety of criteria and with the aim of increasing diversity, something that is shown to be benificial and historically lacking in the Ivy League.

Now what I DON’T understand is why you aren’t even more outraged that Harvard admits twice as many legacy students then Black students (which most recently was barely 7%) so why would you want to deny a bright, qualified Black student a chance but not go after the much larger group that benefits from an admissions process originally designed to exclude Jews? I mean it isn’t like QUALIFIED Black students take very many slots to begin with.


Why not let the tiny number of qualified Black admits get a chance at a degree from a prestigious university, particularly since that degree opens the door to opportunities in ways other institutions don’t? And given these students are more likely to give back to their communities which are typically underserved?

Lisa has a problem. We all know what it is.

 

[IM2]

 

[Lisa558]

Yes, although not just blacks (which you keep overlooking). As long as those accepted meet the qualifications, I support admissions using a variety of criteria and with the aim of increasing diversity, something that is shown to be benificial and historically lacking in the Ivy League.

Now what I DON’T understand is why you aren’t even more outraged that Harvard admits twice as many legacy students then Black students (which most recently was barely 7%) so why would you want to deny a bright, qualified Black student a chance but not go after the much larger group that benefits from an admissions process originally designed to exclude Jews? I mean it isn’t like QUALIFIED Black students take very many slots to begin with.


Why not let the tiny number of qualified Black admits get a chance at a degree from a prestigious university, particularly since that degree opens the door to opportunities in ways other institutions don’t? And given these students are more likely to give back to their communities which are typically underserved?

Are you kidding me? You’re saying that two impoverished yet very bright, academically superior Jewish kids who got into great colleges - and will change their lives with the credentials they will have - should be willing to go to lesser colleges so that blacks who have lower grades and scores can go Instead? Why should my parents be the one to sacrifice going to the top colleges so that kids less qualified can have the best life possible? Why shouldn’t my parents have the best life possible?

Thank Gd my parents went to college before Affirmative Action.

 

[Lisa558]

Lisa has a problem. We all know what it is.

Yes….my “problem” is that I am opposed to racist admissions policies.

 

[Coyote]

Are you kidding me? You’re saying that two impoverished yet very bright, academically superior Jewish kids who got into great colleges - and will change their lives with the credentials they will have - should be willing to go to lesser colleges so that blacks who have lower grades and scores can go Instead? Why should my parents be the one to sacrifice going to the top colleges so that kids less qualified can have the best life possible? Why shouldn’t my parents have the best life possible?

Thank Gd my parents went to college before Affirmative Action.

Why should ANYONE have to sacrifice an opportunity? You are perfectly happy to have two impovrished but bright and academically qualified Black kid's lose out on their measley 7% admission slots rather than challenge the 33% taken by the legacy admits or the other chunk taken by athletes.

 

[Lisa558]

Why should ANYONE have to sacrifice an opportunity? You are perfectly happy to have two impovrished but bright and academically qualified Black kid's lose out on their measley 7% admission slots rather than challenge the 33% taken by the legacy admits or the other chunk taken by athletes.

You are perfectly happy to have two white impoverished kids with top grades and scores rejected to make room for two black kids, impoverished or not, with lower grades and scores - and require the white kids go to the lesser school. The black kids, with lesser grades and scores, should go to the lesser school.

Liberals are always generous with other people’s money, and sacrifices.

 

[IM2]

Yes….my “problem” is that I am opposed to racist admissions policies.

No you aren't. You support polcies that only favor whites.

 

[IM2]

You are perfectly happy to have two white impoverished kids with top grades and scores rejected to make room for two black kids, impoverished or not, with lower grades and scores - and require the white kids go to the lesser school. The black kids, with lesser grades and scores, should go to the lesser school.

Liberals are always generous with other people’s money, and sacrifices.

You have been shown that room gets made for whites with lower and rejected scores while more qualified kids of color are forced to go to a lessor school. And you still cling to that racist belief.

 

[IM2]

Are you kidding me? You’re saying that two impoverished yet very bright, academically superior Jewish kids who got into great colleges - and will change their lives with the credentials they will have - should be willing to go to lesser colleges so that blacks who have lower grades and scores can go Instead? Why should my parents be the one to sacrifice going to the top colleges so that kids less qualified can have the best life possible? Why shouldn’t my parents have the best life possible?

Thank Gd my parents went to college before Affirmative Action.

Your parents got white affirmative action and you got white female affirmative action.

 

[MarathonMike]

Why should ANYONE have to sacrifice an opportunity? You are perfectly happy to have two impovrished but bright and academically qualified Black kid's lose out on their measley 7% admission slots rather than challenge the 33% taken by the legacy admits or the other chunk taken by athletes.

It's not about Racism, it's about MONEY. Legacy admissions means more money flowing to the school from their rich alumni parents. Schools like Stanford with extremely high academic admission requirements somehow manage to admit dumb athletes who can run a 4.4 second forty or dunk a basketball with both hands.

 

[JoeB131]

Why are poor Oriental, and Jewish neighborhoods so well cared for?

First, there are few Jewish neighborhoods. Jews in America are pretty completely assimilated. In the past, though, let's not forget the word "Ghetto" originally described areas in big cities where the Jews lived.

As for Asian neighborhoods. I've been to Chicago's Chinatown and while it's not as blighted as the west side, it's still kind of run down. (My girlfriend, who is from China, really doesn't care for it, either.)

"Asians" include Caucasian demographics, like Arabs that have low average IQ's. "Asians" also includes Mongoloid demographic that are known for low average IQ's too.

I could call Orientals "East Asians," and sometimes to, but that feels like a concession to political correctness, which I hate, because I hate the lies it enforces.

You could do it because it's the decent thing to do. Whenever I hear someone whine about political correctness, it's usually a white dude who realizes he can't act like an ass anymore.

Which in turn was a response to my earlier comment: "Whites and Orientals have had benefited from several thousand years of being selected genetically for the ability to master reading, writing, and arithmetic. Negroes have not."

Yes, and you ignored my response that - UNTIL FAIRLY RECENTLY, MOST PEOPLE WERE ILLITERATE!!! Universal education is a concept that really only emerged in the last few centuries. It's like saying that a race evolved a bottle-opener as a thumb, only to wait for bottles to be invented.

When I quoted those statements on Jared Taylor's website I was flamed. Taylor warned me to stop doing it. Apparently he was allowed to make those statements, but I was not allowed to quote him. We will see if I am allowed to quote him on the U.S. Message Board.

Um, that's because for racists, praise of Asians is only to try to deflect the crime against humanity our treatment of black people has been for 400 years. "See, this minority that we consider relatively harmless and didn't get abused nearly as much has done better." Are there some things in Asian culture African-Americans would do well to emulate? Sure.

Let's take your harping about illegitimacy. Marriage never really became all that important to black people because for most of their experience here, if you had a wife, the Massa could sell her off or have sex with her himself if the fancy struck him. Kind of hard to develop a "sanctity of marriage" concept under those circumstances. (It also didn't help that white churches pushing that excluded blacks and that church is STILL our most segregated institution.)

The success of Orientals in the United States deprives Negroes of their alibi. It is possible for a non white race in the United States to endure persecution and discrimination, and prosper by behaving and performing well.

Again, were Asian people slaves? Were they subjected to systematic rape? Were they regularly lynched? Do the cops pull them over for fun?

The notion that it is somehow our fault that Negroes tend to perform poorly intellectually, and to behave badly by committing lots of crimes and having lots of illegitimate children, is preposterous.

If you ignore history and our criminal justice system, sure. Nothing to see here... Keep moving along.

 

[Coyote]

It's not about Racism, it's about MONEY. Legacy admissions means more money flowing to the school from their rich alumni parents. Schools like Stanford with extremely high academic admission requirements somehow manage to admit dumb athletes who can run a 4.4 second forty or dunk a basketball with both hands.

It doesn’t matter. The effect is racist because it began as a racist process AND it is unfair to more deserving students. Athletic admits are unfair as well.

So if you oppose one policy for being racist, but approve of the other, despite being racist, what does that say? AND…the same policy also takes into account ethnicity as a factor, yet no one complains about Hispanics taking slots away.

 

[JoeB131]

I do not defend legacy admissions, but I can see how universities benefit from them. I do not see how any organization benefits by lowering standards for blacks to admit or hire more of them.

What are the benefits of diversity, equity, and inclusion? One can easily see the benefits of insisting on merit, qualifications, and excellence.

It would be interesting to see how similar companies compare when some emphasize diversity, equity, and inclusion in hiring, while others insist on merit, qualifications, and excellence.

Well, yes, I'm sure you can't see how giving blacks a fair chance and privileges you've enjoyed is a benefit.

You complain incessantly that black people have failed (when we've been hobbling them for the last 400 years) but when you give them a benefit that elevates them, that's horrible. How dare you do that.

Meanwhile, rich guys like Bush and Trump benefit from legacies and privilege, and you are just fine with that.

Here's the thing, If you were to put Bush, Obama, and Trump on Jeopardy!, which one of them do you honestly think would win?

 

[JoeB131]

An organization that wants diversity and merit should hire or admit more Jews and Orientals.

---------

The Wall Street Journal

University of California Will Stop Using SAT, ACT​

Admissions tests, allegedly biased against minority students, will be phased out over five years​

Awesome, they should be. Do you know why? Well, for starters, THIS EXISTS.

How Much Should You Pay for SAT/ACT Tutoring?

How much should SAT/ACT tutoring cost you? What is score improvement worth? Find out in our expert guide.

blog.prepscholar.com

Wow, you mean if you are affluent enough, you can pay someone smart $30-$50 dollars an hour to get your kid to score better?

SAT and ACT has been a blight on our educational system in a number of ways, not the least of which is that it makes teachers teach to the test.

 

[JoeB131]

Nope. That’s why standardized tests were developed.

The SAT was developed by a Eugenicist


Where Did The Test Come From? - Americans Instrumental In Establishing Standardized Tests | Secrets Of The Sat | FRONTLINE | PBS.

Carl C. Brigham, the father of the SAT, became interested in mental testing while a student a Princeton. He later became a psychology professor at the university, where he was an enthusiastic member of the eugenics movement. During the 1920s he developed his own objective admissions test for students applying to Princeton.

Brigham later worked on the Army Alpha Test, an intelligence test given to millions of recruits during World War I. In 1923, he wrote A Study of American Intelligence, which analyzed the findings of the Alpha Test by race. Its conclusion, which Brigham insisted was without prejudice, was that American education was declining and "will proceed with an accelerating rate as the racial mixture becomes more and more extensive."

Eventually Brigham adapted the Army Alpha Test for use in college admissions, renaming it the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Brigham's work interested Henry Chauncey and Bill Bender, assistants to James Conant at Harvard. Starting in 1934, Harvard adopted the SAT to select scholarship recipients at the school.

Brigham later repudiated much of his book, doubting the idea that there is universal human intelligence quotient. He also opposed the formation of the Educational Testing Service.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes….my “problem” is that I am opposed to racist admissions policies.

Uh, Lisa, you freak out when you see too many posters with black people in them at your local mall.

You get upset when they send you fliers with pictures of black models on them.

You pee yourself when you are approached by black people on the street.

Please, please please don't try to sell us that your only concern is "Fairness".

 

[Hector12]

Here's the thing, If you were to put Bush, Obama, and Trump on Jeopardy!, which one of them do you honestly think would win?

That would be a difficult choice. Bush II benefited from a legacy admission; Obama benefited from affirmative action; I read somewhere that Trump may have paid someone to take the SAT for him.

 

[Coyote]

You are perfectly happy to have two white impoverished kids with top grades and scores rejected to make room for two black kids, impoverished or not, with lower grades and scores - and require the white kids go to the lesser school. The black kids, with lesser grades and scores, should go to the lesser school.

Liberals are always generous with other people’s money, and sacrifices.

Two White kids, impoverished or not, have no more right to go to a specific and more notably, PRIVATE university than those two Black kids. The college has a right to consider multiple factors in its admissions policy. No elite college has ever admitted solely on test scores and gpa, nor should.

In the end, there is a big chunk of admissions slots going to White people who may not be as meritorious and you instead go after the tiny proportion of non-Whites.