Posted on 08/09/2017 10:20:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
Affirmative action is once again in the news. This time because of a leaked Justice Department memo indicating possible action regarding complaints from Asian-American groups that Harvard University is discriminating against Asian-Americans in its admissions policies.
As this story was breaking, Harvard released news that, for the first time in history, the majority of its incoming freshman class will not be white. Per the story, 50.8 percent of Harvard's class of 2021 will not be white.
Here's Harvard's spokesperson: "To become leaders in our diverse society, students must have the ability to work with people from different backgrounds, life experiences, and perspectives. ... Harvard's admissions process considers each applicant as a whole person, and we review many factors, consistent with the legal standards established by the U.S. Supreme Court."
As the law stands today, although quotas and other quantitative approaches to considering race in admissions policies are prohibited, universities may consider race as a factor in admissions toward the goal of diversity.
I agree with the Supreme Court and Harvard about the importance of diversity. But we differ about what kind of diversity we're looking for and whether the law should mandate it.
Do we have diversity in a class of students whose hues cover the full spectrum of the rainbow, whose ethnic roots span the globe, but who are taught one way of thinking and chastised if they don't toe the line?
It's not news that university faculties are skewed heavily to the political left. Harvard is no exception.
Per analysis done by the university newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, over the three-year period from 2011 to 2014, 84 percent of political contributions from Harvard faculty, instructors and researchers went "to federal Democratic campaigns and political action committees."
At Harvard Law school it was 98 percent and at Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences, which includes Harvard College, it was 96 percent.
Does this pronounced faculty bias make its way into the classroom?
Yes, according to Harvard University Professor of Government Harvey Mansfield, a Republican. "The only debate we get here is between the far-left ... and the liberals," says Mansfield. "It gives students a view that a very narrow spectrum of opinion is the only way to think."
Per findings of the Harvard Public Opinion Project, done at Harvard's Institute of Politics, 51 percent of college students say they "feel comfortable sharing my political opinions at my college without fear of censorship or negative repercussions."
Barely more than half of students feel comfortable expressing their political sentiments on campus -- that doesn't sound to me like an environment where priority is given to diverse thought and discussion.
And according to this survey, 21 percent of Republican students, compared to 8 percent of Democrat students, said they do not feel comfortable expressing themselves.
I have enough personal experience speaking on university campuses to know that embracing diversity and tolerance doesn't include conservative thinking.
No, I am not advocating affirmative action for conservatives. I am advocating education based on the premise of the uncompromising pursuit of truth. This will produce humility, mutual respect, ideals, excellence and diversity.
When education becomes about politics and indoctrination, when politicized university administrators decide what the world should look like and choose to create a world in their image, rather than in the image of God, no one, even those who suffer from the legacy of racial injustice, are served.
There are, unfortunately, still many parts of our society where the legacy of racial injustice limits opportunity. Let's discuss how to stop it and how to open the doors for every American to reach their God-given potential.
But undermining equal treatment for all and compromising standards of excellence in the pursuit of knowledge is not one of those ways.
Yeah, yeah, a lot of them would have degrees in soc, poly sci, black studies, women studies, gender studies, etc.
About the hardest thing in those programs is setting aside one's common sense, and being able to regurgitate the bs without going nuts.
Make that percentages since they dumped the SATs as a requirement.
The latest I saw was that a Prof was letting his students choose their own grades so they didn’t get triggered or anxious. Formula for success- NOT!
They would get a student body that could succeed at Harvard without dumbing down the classes. No one should be looking at color before, during or after the acceptance process. If they want diversity they can select for diverse life experience, that is not a color or racial divider.
Blah blah blah...
I agree with the Supreme Court and Harvard about the importance of diversity.
Of course you do.
heh, that’s an impolitic thing to wonder about....
bfl
Affirmative Action is just a code word for racism.
No. There aren't.
The doors of opportunity have been open wide. "Affirmative action" has been getting minorities admitted into college in excessive numbers.
If they are not succeeding, then "racial injustice" is not the issue. The issue is something else, and it will never be solved as long as "racial injustice" is promoted as an excuse. If you don't name the problem correctly, you can't solve it.
Fine, if you want to squeeze God out.
You are playing the pride game, that oh you have such a superior philosophy. I don’t do that. I just make a point of knowing a superior God, and it’s your own fault if you won’t do that yourself.
But anyhow as I might have also pointed out.
When Jesus said you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free, that wasn’t about Pi even though as a good carpenter He would have to know about Pi.
Therefore this was a certain kind of truth. A salvational one.
So sue me if it is not clear to you. It’s clear to me.
Agree.
Not only is it BS, but studies (by liberals!) show that greater diversity creates greater social problems and less financial prosperity. So there is no big diversity bonus, only a diversity penalty.
I’m not against diversity, but I am 100% against discriminating in order to create forced diversity.
“Diversity” for “diversity’s” sake has much to do with the problems in the USA. It manifests itself in education, employment, crime, tokenism, drugs, bureaucracy, taxes/cost of living/insurance, neighborhoods, and attitudes that someone is somehow “owed” for alleged “past discrimination”
Oh wait, the “past discrimination” is old hat now. It’s that “Diversity” is a beautiful thing, remember ‘our strength DEPENDS on our ‘diversity’”
Such BS to rationalize for incompetence and laziness.
We’ve now matured to part II of the problem, where handing out unearned degrees leaves “graduates” unable to pass professional licensing exams anyway. Friends describe tokens unable to pass a bar exam in one case and an engineering exam in another. How many “preferred minority” lawyers and engineers can companies be forced to hire as basically admin assistants?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.