Quote Originally Posted by AssHatZombie View Post
What does this have to do with the June 2003 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court on affirmative action?

First, what did they decide? By a vote of 5-4 the majority ruled that universities may continue to discriminate against white males by taking race and gender into account when admitting students. Writing for the majority, Reagan appointee Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote: “If admissions decisions were based primarily on undergraduate GPAs [grade point averages] and LSAT [Law Student Achievement Test] scores, . . . a critical mass of underrepresented minority students could not be enrolled.” Indeed, if race were not considered in admissions at the University of Michigan Law School, and minorities not granted preferences, their admission rate would drop from 35 percent of the applicants to a mere 10 percent—and they would compose a tiny 4 percent of the student body. Therefore, the admissions officers “had to consider the race of applicants” in order to enroll a critical mass of such students. University officials defined “critical mass”—and O’Connor quoted them—as “meaningful numbers” and “mean-ingful representation” so underrepresented minorities can “participate in the classroom and not feel isolated.”2 With a critical mass “racial stereo-types lose their force because non-minority students learn there is no ‘minority viewpoint’ but rather a variety of viewpoints among minority students.”3

Even by her own standards, this seems untrue. Stanley Rothman and others in a recent study report that most students and faculty believe educational quality is lowered when large numbers of affirmative action students are on campus.4 Furthermore, ridiculous stereotypes of blacks as intellectually incapable are more likely to be reinforced—among whites, Asians, Hispanics and blacks—when large numbers of lesser-qualified minorities cannot uphold their end in classroom discussions, in the laboratories or on exams. O’Connor’s arguments in behalf of racial preferences in admissions are as spurious as her conclusion—that race preferences to obtain a diverse student body are a “compelling state interest.”


http://www.anthonyflood.com/murrayaaelitewar.htm

THis is yoour response? A puff piece that begins-“There is a war against the white male, the traditional American working class and middle class, conducted by the elites of labor, the captains of capital, the chiefs of the military and the celebrities of ‘academedia.’”

See his related articles: Affirmative Action and the Nazis, The Case against Affirmative Action, and Who’s to Blame for the Affirmative Action Fiasco?”

Anthony Flood


Certainly no bias was used here in writing this stuff. I asked you for specific policy and you present a OPINION. No wonder you seem lost- Try reading up on the program for yourself. will you?