WHY ARE PEOPLE AGAINST IVY LEAGUE RACIAL QUOTAS if...?

Question

Why are "PEOPLE" against educational - affirmitive action creating quotas for Ivy League universities to recruit hispanics, blacks and asians with excellent grades from poor socioeconomic backgrounds into schools like Princeton and Harvard when "THOSE SAME PEOPLE" who went to those schools were able to get in because of :

#1 family contributions
#2 powerful family members (congress, executives,etc)
#3 RICH family members

and not neccesarily their "stellar" grades.


Do you really thing W' Bush got into his university, stayed in it and graduated with his C Average?

I'm 100% certain Bush was able to get into his university and graduate because of HIS FATHER'S POWER rather than his own intelligence.

I didn't use a specific race when I said "PEOPLE" because I'm not going to accuse anybody of anything. Your own guilt will do that for me.

Answer 1

I'm liberal, but I have a deep deep problem with affirmitive action. I feel like, at it's face value, it's a great idea, but in practice, it's not.

My problem stems from the fact that the retention rate for students who were picked using affirmitive action is pretty low at most schools (especially when it involves students of very low socio-economic status). What ends up happening is the kids go to the school for a year or so and then drop out for a number of reasons, including their inability to pay or handle the courseloads, or get used to the very rigorous academic climate. Sure, "regular" students drop out too, but if you compare the percentages, it's quite staggering.

With that said, I think that in order for AA to be successful, there needs to be more money and analysis put into it so that those students who ARE struggling are able to get the help they deserve.

Answer 2

I'm an Ivy grad (Brown University) so I think I've got some insights you might be interested in. First, no one I know thinks very highly of rich people getting into college just like people don't think highly of racial preferences. Also, asians do not receive preference from AA, only blacks and hispanics (asians are very well represented in colleges, and in many instances more than whites).

That said, I disagree with current AA programs because I believe they're poorly directed. The main contribution to one's secondary school education is determined more by socioeconomic status than by race (property taxes pay for schools in the area, so if you're in a poor community, the schools are poorer). There are many whites who live in such situations (I did, for example....Hinkley, CA, for anyone who cares). But because I am white, it doesn't matter (under current standards) that I grew up in a poor community. That is why I take issue with AA (just like I take issue with rich kids getting in because Daddy made a contribution). Ultimately we're favoring a system that favors the wealthy and the poor minorities.....poor whites get the shaft. That's not a system I agree with (in fact, my ultimate career goal is to get into university administration, and I'll be targeting this program once I'm there). There are positives, but I think making your determination based on socioeconomic status (as opposed to race) would be more appropriate.

Answer 3

Racial quotas mean that some people who deserve to get into a college on their own merits can't. If any racial person has the excellent grades to make it an Ivy League school then there should be ways to help them through and I think there are.

The idea of racial quotas is that people who are not qualified on the merits of their own record get in ahead of people who are qualified on the merits of their own record strictly because of their race.

No. 1, , 2, and 3, are going to get in anyway.


These are not the people that racial quotas hurt.