grandpakhalif wrote:blah blah blah I'm a child who knows nothing but bullshit blah blah blah
What a lovely oversimplification of affirmative-action. Bravo, kid—you’ve managed to regurgitate pithy Fox News talking points. Affirmative-action was created because of the systemic obstacles that people of color face due to white privilege and general racism. As Tim Wise writes, “we really shouldn’t think of affirmative action as a matter of racial preference, so much as a preference based on a recognition of what race means, and what racism has meant in American life. It is a preference that takes into consideration the simple and indisputable fact that people of color have not been afforded truly equal opportunity. Whereas old-school discrimination against people of color was (and is) predicated on actual value judgments about the ability, character, and value of black and brown folks, affirmative action is predicated on no personal or group-based judgments whatsoever, but rather, upon the judgment that the social structure has produced inequities that require our attention and redress.”
In addition, I don’t know where you anti-affirmative action activists live, but in the real world, black unemployment doubles white unemployment:
According to the bureau, 8.4 percent of black men with college degrees were unemployed in 2009, compared to 4.4 percent of white males with college degrees.
Also, it’s completely erroneous that minorities rake in more scholarship money than whites:
Do minority students get more than a fair share of college scholarships?
That myth reared its head earlier this year after a Texas nonprofit, the Former Majority Association for Equality announced plans to give scholarships only to white males. The group claimed that white males are disadvantaged because they don’t “fit into certain categories or ethnic groups.” So Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of Fastweb.com and FinAid.com, put that idea to the test, and found that white students actually “receive a disproportionately greater share of private scholarships and merit-based grants.”
Kantrowitz crunched data (PDF) from both the 2003-04 and 2007-08 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, which showed that white students are 40 percent more likely to win private scholarships than non-white students. And Kantrowitz finds several college-specific scholarships only for white students, like UCLA’s 66-year-old Werner Scott Scholarship, worth $4,000, which is “restricted to Caucasian students from Hawaii who are not of Polynesian blood.”
Even when a scholarship doesn’t explicitly note a racial preference, white students are still at an advantage since scholarship sponsors “select for characteristics, activities and talents of interest to them.” Black students, for example, are much less likely to participate in equestrian, water, and winter sports than their white peers, which makes them ineligible for scholarships related to those areas.
White students, even those who “have no demonstrated financial need,” are also at an advantage when it comes to receiving funding directly from universities.Kantrowitz found that they get more than 76 percent “of all institutional merit-based scholarship and grant funding, even though they represent” less than 62 percent of the student population.
Dear God, please take me to this magical Negro-appreciating realm that gives black people infinite employment opportunities and globs upon globs of free money, because I can assure you that it ain’t here.
To your point about Martin: If a black male had killed a seventeen year old white kid, it wouldn’t have taken the police months to arrest him, nor would it have taken outside pressure to prompt the arrest; in fact, if a black male had killed a white child, the police would have shot him right then and there. Also, how many cases of police brutality towards whites do you come across in the news? How many times have you read about police brutality towards whites? What about the fact that the majority of drug-abusers in America are white, and yet the majority of those convicted for drug-abuse happen to be black?
Although with approximately two thirds of crack cocaine users being white or Hispanic, a large percentage of people convicted of possession of crack cocaine in federal courts in 1994 were black. In 1994 84.5% of the defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession were black while 10.3% were white and 5.2% were Hispanic. While possession for powder cocaine was more racially mixed with 58% of the offenders being white, 26.7% black, and 15% Hispanic. Within the federal judicial system a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute of powder cocaine carries a five year sentence for quantities of 500 grams or more while a person convicted of possession with intent to distribute of crack cocaine faces a five year sentence. With the combination of severe and unbalanced drug possession laws along with the rates of conviction in terms of race, the judicial system has created a huge racial disparity.
In addition, I don’t read anything from 4chan, but your readership of that website does seem to explain why you’re such a basement-dwelling troll.
