>> IT APPEARS THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS NOW TARGETING
UNIVERSITIES THAT IMPLEMENT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AS A WAY OF
ADMITTING STUDENTS INTO THEIR INSTITUTIONS.
THIS WAS A REPORT
BY THE WASHINGTON POST WHERE THEY REALIZE THERE WAS AN
INTERESTING GOVERNMENT JOB LISTING FOR LAWYERS.
THEY ARE
NOT GOING TO WORK WITH THE EXPERTS THAT USUALLY DEAL WITH
CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES WITHIN THESE INSTITUTIONS, THEY ARE GOING TO
GO AHEAD AND HIRE OUTSIDE LAWYERS TO COME IN AND
ESSENTIALLY TARGET UNIVERSITIES THAT IMPLEMENT AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION.
>> I AM AGAINST AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, BUT UNDERSTAND WHY THEY
ARE HIRING THOSE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS.
THEY ARE CAREER
STAFFERS THAT WORK IN CIVIL RIGHTS, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO GO
AND HURT CIVIL RIGHTS.
AND THIS IS NOT ñ PROTECTING WHITE CIVIL
RIGHTS WHEN WHITES HAVE ENORMOUS POWER IN THIS COUNTRY IS NOT A
CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE.
IT IS LIKE SAYING ñ I WILL USE TURKEY AS AN
EXAMPLE ñ IF YOU WANT TO PROTECT KURDISH CIVIL RIGHTS THAT MAKE
SENSE BECAUSE THEY ARE A MINORITY IN TURKEY.
SAYING YOU
ARE GOING TO PROTECT TURKISH CIVIL RIGHTS AGAINST THE KURDS
MAKES NO SENSE BECAUSE THE TURKS ARE A HUGE MAJORITY AND CONTROL
GOVERNMENT ON ALL LEVELS OF POWER.
DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M
SAYING?
THAT DOESN'T MEAN EVERY WHITE PERSON IS DOING GREAT.
BUT
IT'S NOT LIKE POOR WHITE PEOPLE, THEY ARE BEING OPPRESSED AND
NEITHER CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTED.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T
AGREE WITH THE TRUMPET MINISTRATION ON AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION WHICH IN SOME WAYS I DO, BUT I AM TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY
ARE APPLYING CIVIL RIGHTS.
>>THEY ARE USING A CIVIL RIGHTS COMPONENT OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT, TURNING IT ON ITS HEAD AND USING IT AGAINST
MINORITIES, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF STEVE BANNON IS BEHIND THIS
BUT IT REEKS OF STEVE BANNON.
BUT THAT IS SPECULATION.
>>EITHER WAY IT FITS IN WITH THE THEME OF THE LAST TWO
WEEKS, BASE, BASE, BASE.
WE WILL DO ANTI-IMMIGRATION STUFF, ANTI-TRANS-, ANTIGAY, AND
NOW WE WILL TARGET MINORITIES ON THE ISSUE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
>>EVEN IF STEVE BANNON IS NOT INVOLVED, THIS IS COMING FROM
THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, JEFF SESSIONS.
WE KNOW WHAT THE
INTENTIONS ARE.
THERE ARE OTHER INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE STUDYING
THIS PARTICULAR ATTEMPT TO TARGET THESE COLLEGES AND THEY
ARE SAYING THIS IS A WAY OF INTIMIDATING THESE UNIVERSITIES
AND SCARING THEM.
WHAT I DO KNOW IS THERE SEEMS TO BE A COMPLETE
MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DOES.
I THINK
THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO THINK COLLEGE ADMISSIONS, THEY WILL
SEE A BLACK STUDENT AND SAY WELL, YOU ARE FAILING AT
EVERYTHING BUT SINCE YOU ARE BLOCK WE WILL ADMIT YOU OVER THE
WHITE STUDENT.
THAT IS NOT HOW IT WORKS.
SOMEONE'S RACE OR
CULTURAL HERITAGE IS ONE OF MANY FACTORS THAT PLAY A ROLE IN
THEIR DECISIONS IN TERMS OF WHO THEY ADMIT AND DON'T ADMIT.
ONE
OF THE THINGS COLLEGES TRY TO DO IF THE COLLEGES IMPLEMENT
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT IS DIVERSE AND
REPRESENTATIVE OF AMERICA.
THAT WAY YOU ARE NOT IN A COLLEGE
THAT IS JUST FULL OF ONE DEMOGRAPHIC.
>>THE SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT DIVERSITY IS A LEGITIMATE
FACTOR TO CONSIDER AMONG MANY, IT CANNOT BE THE ONLY IN
ADMISSIONS.
DIVERSITY IS NOT JUST TO HELP AFRICAN-AMERICANS
OR LATINOS, IT IS TO HELP EVERYONE AT THE COLLEGE TO GET A
MORE RICH EXPERIENCE.
I WOULD NOT HAVE DONE IT THROUGH THE
CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION, I THINK IT IS INSULTING.
I AGREE WITH
THE SUPREME COURT.
ME PERSONALLY POLITICALLY I THINK AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION IS ñ IT IS NOW COUNTERPRODUCTIVE.
IT WAS
NECESSARY AT A TIME WHEN THERE WAS NO WAY FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS
TO BREAK INTO ROLES THAT WERE HANDED DOWN THROUGH GENERATIONS
OF FAMILY.
WHETHER IT WAS LEGACIES, OR BLUE-COLLAR JOBS
WHERE YOU GET YOUR SON A JOB AS A LONGSHOREMAN.
THAT'S WHY
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION WAS NEEDED AT ONE POINT.
BUT NOW, IT ROBS
LEGITIMACY OF MINORITIES FOR ALL THEIR ACHIEVEMENTS.
EVERY TIME
SOMEONE ACHIEVES WHO WAS A MINORITY THEY SAY IT MUST'VE
BEEN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
YES, THEY MUST UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS BUT I AM WORRIED IT
IS TOXIC.
>> LET ME RESPOND.
HATERS ARE GOING TO HATE.
PEOPLE THAT WHINE
AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THAT AND CRITICIZE MINORITIES WHO ARE
SUCCEEDING ARE GOING TO WHINE AND COMPLAIN ANYWAY.
IF WE LIVE
OUR LIVES WORRIED ABOUT THE CRITICS THEN WE WILL NOT GET
ANYTHING DONE.
I WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT ONE THING.
I WOULD
BE MORE IN FAVOR OF DOING AWAY WITH AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IF
PEOPLE IN AMERICA WERE ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD.
LET'S START
WITH GRADE SCHOOL.
A LOT OF PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE
FUNDED PRIMARILY THROUGH PROPERTY TAXES.
WE LIVE IN
SEGREGATED NEIGHBORHOODS, MINORITIES ARE MORE LIKELY TO
LIVE IN A LOWER SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS AND LIVE IN POOR
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT UNDERFUND SCHOOLS.
IF THINGS WERE EQUAL
THEN I WOULD SAY WE LIVE IN A MAGICAL WORLD OF EQUALITY.
AS A
RESULT WE ALL HAVE A FAIR SHOT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS NO
LONGER NEEDED.
BUT I DON'T THINK WE LIVE
IN THAT
WORLD, WE ARE NOT EVEN CLOSE.
>> WHEN I SAY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION I MEAN BASED ON RACE.
IF YOU ARE
A POOR KID IN LOGAN, WEST VIRGINIA, AND YOU ARE WHITE, AND
YOU DON'T HAVE BOOKS TO TAKE HOME OR YOU ARE PACKED IN
SCHOOLS, AND DON'T HAVE RESOURCES THAT RICH FAMILIES IN
BEVERLY HILLS DON'T HAVE, BUT YOU STILL GOT GOOD GRADES THAT
SHOWS ME I AM NOT DOING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION BECAUSE I
WANT TO TILT THE SCALES IN YOUR FAVOR.
I'M DOING IT TO REALIZE
HOW AMAZING A JOB YOU DID IN THE CONTEXT THAT YOU WERE BORN INTO.
WHETHER THEY ARE WHITE, BLACK, OR LATINO, I DON'T CARE.
BUT I DO CARE IF YOU OVERCOME TOUGH SOCIOECONOMIC
PHYSICIANS I THINK THEY SHOULD LOOK AT THAT.
THEY WOULD BE CRAZY NOT TO LOOK AT THAT.
>>I AGREE.
LEGACY ADMISSIONS, HOW ABOUT WE TALK ABOUT THAT.
SO
YOUR DAD CAME TO THIS UNIVERSITY?
I DON'T GIVE A FUCK.
WHITE PEOPLE NEVER TALK ABOUT THIS.
YOU NEVER HEAR THEM
COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS.
TO ME THAT IS A BIGGER ISSUE THAN
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
JUST BECAUSE PAPA WENT TO THIS UNIVERSITY DOESN'T MEAN YOU
GET AN EASIER OPPORTUNITY GETTING AN.
>> I HAVE FRIENDS WHO WORK IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS NOW AND
LEGACY ADMISSIONS ARE HUGE.
I WANT MY KIDS TO GO TO SCHOOL
THAT I WENT TO, BUT THAT IS NOT FAIR THAT THEY GET TO HAVE AN
ADVANTAGE BECAUSE THEY HAPPEN TO BE MY KIDS AS OPPOSED TO SOME
POOR KID IN THE MIDDLE OF KANSAS WORKING HIS ASS OFF.
HE SHOULD
GET AN EQUAL SHOT.
YOU SHOULD REWARD HOW WELL HE DID GIVEN THE
SITUATION.
DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY COLLEGES CARE SO MUCH ABOUT
LEGACY ADMISSIONS?
IT TURNS OUT THE NUMBER ONE INDICATOR IS IF
TWO GENERATIONS OF YOUR FAMILY WENT TO THAT SCHOOL.
IT IS ALL
ABOUT THE MONEY LEBOWSKI.
LEGACY ADMISSIONS NEVER COME UP, AND
THAT IS GROSSLY UNFAIR.
THAT IS IF YOU HAVE AN ADVANTAGE THEY
GIVE YOU A BIGGER ONE.
BEING INTELLECTUALLY HONEST, THEN WE
CAN HAVE A LEGITIMATE CONVERSATION
THAT I AM HOPING WE
HAVE ON THE ISSUE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
ON THE FIRST AFFIRMATIVE ACTION STORY I
WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW WHAT THE REAL
EFFECTS ARE.
CALIFORNIA ENDED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SO THE JURY
IS IN.
IT ENDED IN THE MID-1990S.
MINORITY ENROLLMENT
DID GO DOWN FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS AND LATINOS.
AS AN EXAMPLE AT UCLA HISPANIC ENROLLMENT PEAKED AT 16.1% IN
1995, AND WENT DOWN TO 12 1/2% BY 2000.
BUT THE THING THAT WENT
ON THE MOST WAS WHITE ENROLLMENT.
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO IN 1990 IT WAS 57%, BY 2005 IT DROPPED TO
33%.
DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY?
WHO IS TAKING ALL THE POSITIONS?
ASIANS.
IT IS TRUE THAT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DISCRIMINATES
AGAINST ASIANS, IT DOES.
BUT THE NUMBER ONE BENEFACTOR,
ESPECIALLY IN RAW NUMBERS FROM AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IS WHITE
AMERICANS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHERE THE SUPREME COURT
TURNED AROUND AND SAID YOU KNOW AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, NOT SO BAD.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS BECAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét