[MikeCF]

(07-13-2012 12:45 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Your "hard working" middle class white applicant is more likely to get his lunch stolen by an affluent, well pedigreed, white lacrosse player from New England than he is by a minority. For all the bitching you go on about AA, there really aren't that many of us here.

Correct.

I am a kid who grew up poor white trash and now has some cash and runs in rich circles. I know how people like them view people like the whites on this forum.

Middle class whites aren't even middle class. You are working class. You are one medical emergency or car accident away from bankruptcy.

The rich want want nothing to do with you.

Would George W. Bush invite you to his BBQ? How about Mitt Romney?

The rich steal from you in many ways. Do you have a 401k? Hidden fees and market manipulation is one of many ways people steal from you.

You whites have more in common with a black guy than with rich white pricks.

But you only see skin color.

Goldman Sachs thanks you for your racism.

Goldman knows what would happen if you working class whites stopped hating blacks and started paying attention to who is really taking your jobs and stealing your money.

[Icepasian]

This debate is going nowhere civil but the fact remains that we should all be mutually respectful of one another. Every racial, ethnic, cultural, and religious group has been oppressed at some point and place in the past. Obviously, these past transgressions still leave open wounds(African-Americans against "White" Americans, Greeks against Turks, Irish against English, Chinese against Japanese, etc) but allowing this hatred to continue to simmer is just going to lead to more transgressions in the future. We must move forward as individuals and move beyond our past so that we can be happy and prosperous in the future.

I think West Coast had the right idea in saying that we should just continue on and do what we must for ourselves without taking anyone else down. We're all bros here, there's already enough hate in this world.

[durangotang]

Athlone, you are correct, we are not going to agree. In your own words, under legal equality hard work will not be rewarded for minorities in America, because of their race. You previously stated "it isn't about who you are-it is about your race." And you say this with a straight face at a time when we have a popularly elected black president of the United States. So your solution is to support legal advantages and special rights, based not upon merit, qualification, or character, but upon the color of your skin. You have no regard for the disadvantage this may place upon my family, or my children, because of some "unearned societal advantage" you believe we posses, and you have no desire to implement a legally system based upon equal rights. Not only that, you are arrogant about it.

I suspect your ivy league "education" has somehow indoctrinated you into this ideology. In any case, I disrespect you for it, and I fail to see how your ideology is any different than that of a feminist. The irony that you espouse these beliefs on this forum is truly incredible. If we simply change race for sex, we see that you are no different than a radical feminist. For the feminist, under legal equality, hard work will not be rewarded due to male privilege. They seek special legal advantages and rights based not upon merit, qualification, or character, but based upon their sex. To them, the same as you, equal rights are seen as a threat, and they seek to create special rights and privileges to ensure outcome equality, not legal equality, whether deserved or not, at the expense of men.

This will be my last post in this thread. I have made my case. Athlone, I leave the last word to you.

[MikeCF]

(07-13-2012 04:56 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

Snip

See, kid, here's where you miss the point.

Even if it's true that the black man is genetically inferior and can only get ahead by affirmative action, so what?

The real money is being stolen by rich white pricks.

Blacks aren't outsourcing your jobs.

Blacks ain't taking in record CEO pay while lower-end workers are being fired.

Blacks weren't bailed out for trillions of dollars.

Blacks didn't cause the LIBOR crisis.

Blacks aren't polluting the environment with pesticides.

So everything you say has no real world value.

It's racist garbage.

Guys like you are the best foot soldiers rich white fucks could ask for.

Keeping fight the wrong enemies.

Again, Goldman Sachs thanks you for your efforts.

[Samseau]

Mike, you also miss a point. Affirmative Action is how rich liberals keep out lower class white males from competing with their inferior white offspring.


Rich liberal's son: "Welcome to Harvard."

Poor white boy: "Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our black, Hispanic, Asian, and female quotas."

Since most conservatives are poor white males, it follows that affirmative action hurts conservatives the most.

Elite schools are in it for the money.  They will always take rich offspring as their family will be more likely to donate back to the school.

Elite schools don't give a fuck, and that's why they don't care if white males are excluded; white, black, female, asian, indian, whatever, as long as it's poor it's all the same to them.



Affirmative Action is how liberal whites try to maintain an generational economic upper hand against conservative whites.

[Samseau]

I don't support the rich, and that's why I don't support the liberals.

[MikeCF]

(07-13-2012 05:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Rich liberal's son: "Welcome to Harvard."

Poor white boy: "Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our black, Hispanic, Asian, and female quotas."

Ten times as many legacies/people whose parents bought their kids way in (through "donations") took the poor white kid's spot.

So that's another red herring.

You are a smart kid.

But you are not rich but don't hang out with the rich. You don't know what's going on, man.

Yeah, that sounds a little curt and some nerds may say it's a logical fallacy. But it's a fact. If you had rich friends, you would see with your own eyes how the system works.

How much does it cost to buy a kid's way into Harvard?

That's an interesting question, isn't it?

Why isn't the media asking it?

Hint: Look at who the reporters are. Or look at their parents.

The same people getting you white kids pissed off about the black man aren't going to have you looking behind the curtain at them.

[MikeCF]

http://chronicle.com/article/10-Myths-Ab...cy/124561/

10 Myths About Legacy Preferences in College Admissions

1. Legacy preferences are just a "tie breaker" in close calls.

While some colleges and universities try to play down the impact of legacy preferences, calling them "tie breakers," research from Princeton's Thomas Espenshade suggests that their weight is significant, on the order of adding 160 SAT points to a candidate's record (on a scale of 400-1600). Likewise, William Bowen, of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and colleagues found that, within a given SAT-score range, being a legacy increased one's chances of admission to a selective institution by 19.7 percentage points. That is to say, a given student whose academic record gave her a 40-percent chance of admissions would have nearly a 60-percent chance if she were a legacy.

The children of alumni generally make up 10 to 25 percent of the student body at selective institutions. The proportion varies little from year to year, suggesting "an informal quota system," says the former Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Golden. By contrast, at the California Institute of Technology, which does not use legacy preferences, only 1.5 percent of students are children of alumni.

[MikeCF]

Do rich people really pay their way into Harvard?

http://www.quora.com/Harvard-University/...to-Harvard

[Icepasian]

(07-13-2012 06:07 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 05:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Rich liberal's son: "Welcome to Harvard."

Poor white boy: "Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our black, Hispanic, Asian, and female quotas."

The same people getting you white kids pissed off about the black man aren't going to have you looking behind the curtain at them.

I believe the misunderstanding here is that instead of African-Americans blaming the upper-class White minority, they end up including the middle and lower class White majority despite the latter's lack of influence in most aspects of society by comparison.

The vast majority of lower and middle class Whites could not get into an Ivy League university for example and do not have any kind of alumni relation to them, getting in is akin to winning the lottery for most.

To get to the point, I don't think Samseau is debating whether African-Americans have it rough but whether African-Americans should be directing their anger towards the lower 95% of the White population that have little societal influence instead of the "elite" that have great amounts of societal influence.

[kosko]

Its funny because rich white folks (the oligarchs and elites) are the sole reason for 80% of Americas messes. There is indeed a reason people always look the other way. When Obama says "tax the rich" he does not mean tax the ultra rich he means tax upper-middle class and upped class Americans whom are all shades and hues. If he really tried to "tax the rich" ...he would not have a job.

How much do rich kids pay to go to Harvard?

How about how much do wealthy kats pay in taxes?

I can bet Romney does not even pay his reported 13%... I'd say maybe 6 or 7%.

[joehoya]

(07-13-2012 04:17 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(07-13-2012 12:45 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

Your "hard working" middle class white applicant is more likely to get his lunch stolen by an affluent, well pedigreed, white lacrosse player from New England than he is by a minority. For all the bitching you go on about AA, there really aren't that many of us here.

Correct.

I am a kid who grew up poor white trash and now has some cash and runs in rich circles. I know how people like them view people like the whites on this forum.

Middle class whites aren't even middle class. You are working class. You are one medical emergency or car accident away from bankruptcy.

The rich want want nothing to do with you....

Gotta agree with both Athlone and MikeCF here. I really don't think the majority of poor and middle class whites realize how little regard upper income whites have for them.

This hit me in the face during college. I was on a mailing list (this was back in the mid '90s, when email was still novel) with friends of mine from prep school who had gone off to elite universities later on, along with other guys I didn't know from prep schools on the east and west coasts, who were also at elite schools (every Ivy was represented by at least 2 people).

It was basically just folks across the country (though mostly on the east and wests coasts) from similar backgrounds (upper middle class or upper class families, prep school, and elite university) to communicate with each other.

We talked about random shit, but eventually the topic turned to "guidos", "white trash", "wife beaters", and low income whites in general. The level of venom and disgust for poor/working class whites displayed on that mailing list was amazing. Not only where they completely insulting and disrespectful toward working class whites, but THEY WERE PROUD OF IT. One guy kept referring to them as "SJYs". I later found out this stood for "slacked jawed yokels".

I am black, and I was offended by their comments. That is how bad it was. I knew the types of folks they were talking about from my brief period at a small state school. The only thing those white kids were guilty of was being poor. Yet I could almost hear the banjo music playing in my upper class white friend's head whenever he had to interact with them. Keep in mind, if I told you these kids' last names, and you were fairly familiar with the last names of prominent political and industrial families you would recognize several of them.

This event and SEVERAL others like it completely changed my views on race. Race is one big shell game that is used to control the masses. People bitch about affirmative action, but no one bitches about legacies and folks getting into schools because of donations.

People bitch about illegal immigration, but how many of the republican candidates were vocal about heavy penalties on the CORPORATIONS that use illegal aliens as labor? Not a peep. Just a bunch of bullshit about building a giant electric fence.

These topics are just red meat to throw the masses to get them riled up and to direct their anger toward the goals of their masters. Remember the Tea Party? Does anyone remember that the Tea Party was originally formed in protest of the bank bailouts? What happened? I'll tell you what happened. They got co-opted by big money donors.

[MikeCF]

How many poor white kids died in the Vietnam War?

Were blacks responsible for those dead names on the Wall?

The same rich pricks (white) who got bailouts started the Vietnam War.

Listen to some Vietnam era music.

The parallels are there.

Here's a good book to read: "The Best and the Brightest."

Nothing so brilliantly crystallized and clarified the epic true story of how the American people were led into the tragedy of Vietnam better than did this classic book by David Halberstam. Already famous for his journalistic overview in "The Making of a Quagmire", Halberstam riveted the nation with his absorbing, literate, and very detailed account of how the arrogant, insular, technocratically well educated, and affluent sons and daughters of the Power Elite in this country led us into the unholy miasma of Vietnam. This is a classic story superbly told by a journalist with impeccable credentials.

Halberstam already had a wealth of personal experience as a correspondent in Vietnam before initiating the research for this book, and he draws a number of fascinating, intimate, and quite absorbing in-depth portraits of the major figures involved in this fool's errand formerly referred to as French Indochina. From the feckless and perhaps clueless Robert McNamara to McGeorge Bundy, brother William Bundy, former Oxford Scholar Dean Rusk, George Ball, William Westmoreland, Maxwell Taylor, and Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, all these alumni of the best schools and best families (with the single exception of LBJ, an accidental president) pranced their pseudo-macho way toward the single most disastrous series of military decisions this side of Pearl Harbor.

Unlike those of us who actually saw the jungles of Vietnam up close and personal, these men were neither ignorant, nor provincial (at least not in the ordinary use of that term), nor poorly informed; rather, they both considered themselves and were considered by others to be the most outstanding, capable, and effective members of the contemporary "Power Elite" i.e. the best of the then contemporary ivy League graduates Kennedy could lure from the bastions of the academic, business, and corporate world into the magic and presumptuous world of Camelot. In essence, these guys were seen as the best and the brightest of their generation. Just how their elite educations, presumptuous world-views, and de-facto actual ignorance and lack of what we would now refer to as "street-smarts" led them to conclude it was in the nation's interests to fight what others have called "the wrong war in the wrong place with the wrong foes at the wrong time" is an epic tale of arrogance, insular thinking, and mutually sustained delusions.

Through their efforts they embroiled us in an unwinnable war, a conflict that the rest of us paid so dearly for in blood, sweat and tears. They led a nation then so singularly blessed with affluence and peace into a bottomless cauldron of dissent, inter-generational strife, and almost pitched us off the precipice of social and political revolution. It is important to better understand what kind of men they were, and why they led us so carelessly into such sustained disaster. Why did they react to defeats by escalating, even when the evidence clearly indicated (as McNamara has recently admitted) doing so was futile? Who led whom down the primrose path in the meetings in which these decisions were repeatedly argued, hammered out and finally refined?

All these questions and many more are answered in this wonderfully documented and exhaustively detailed account of how it is that so few individuals engaged in a series of such disastrous policy decisions that led America into the quagmire of Vietnam. By the way, after carefully re-reading the book I am more convinced than ever that McNamara and Westmoreland (among others) should be indicted and tried as war criminals. Let them spend their dotage in federal prison. After all, there is no statute of limitations on conspiracy to commit murder, and I have dozens of friends gone too soon based on nothing more than the deliberately callous and reckless decisions made by these men as outlined in this book. I highly recommend it.

[MikeCF]

How many of you white guys who post on race threads have a 401k?

Is the Black Man stealing from your 401k?

Watch this video:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/401k-hid...s-16462619

Hating blacks is doing exactly what Goldman Sachs wants you to do.

Imagine what would happen if white and black men united?

That would be something.

[kosko]

(07-13-2012 07:25 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

How many of you white guys who post on race threads have a 401k?

Is the Black Man stealing from your 401k?

Watch this video:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/401k-hid...s-16462619

Hating blacks is doing exactly what Goldman Sachs wants you to do.

Imagine what would happen if white and black men united?

That would be something.

Its been what they have been trying to stop for 40 years now. In the 60's White people got past the indoctrination and were step to step with blacks for the most part only a crazed minority we're still stubborn and opposed. Vietnam brought a lot of people together both realized all colors were dying for some bullshit.

Remember MLK got gunned down when he started to bridge together whites and blacks over opposition to the war. They let him do his church talks to black because they never viewed that as a threat. The minute he became a legitimate leader for all races on THAT issue... they took him out.

[Excelsior]

(07-13-2012 04:56 PM)durangotang Wrote:  

I suspect your ivy league "education" has somehow indoctrinated you into this ideology.

Common misconception. My school is much more conservative than you think.

Quote:

So your solution is to support legal advantages and special rights, based not upon merit, qualification, or character, but upon the color of your skin. You have no regard for the disadvantage this may place upon my family, or my children, because of some "unearned societal advantage" you believe we posses, and you have no desire to implement a legally system based upon equal rights.

As if you're concerned about me and my children? If you were, the following would not apply:

(07-13-2012 07:11 PM)joehoya Wrote:  

This event and SEVERAL others like it completely changed my views on race. Race is one big shell game that is used to control the masses. People bitch about affirmative action, but no one bitches about legacies and folks getting into schools because of donations.

And this right here is my issue.

People will rail on and on with righteous indignation about affirmative action, but they say nothing (and their proposed solutions do nothing) to deal with these preferences that, in quite literally 98% of cases, go directly to whites. Those are a-ok with them.
They don't get into an Ivy? "Probably some black or mexican kid took my spot".

No mention of the mass of affluent legacies who are literally gifted spots at these schools because of their money and connections, and who easily outnumber us here despite the incessant indignity over race-based AA. And their proposed solutions don't do anything about them either-"equality" is their stated purpose, and yet they only care to enforce it when they perceive a non-white offense.

You do not care about bringing about equality, durangutang, and you really could give a damn about my rights or those of anyone else like me. As long as things are a-ok for you and yours and "look" ok via the letter of the law, you will do nothing to protect the rights of those who do not look like you and might suffer a bit because of it (read: "we can't do anything about outcome inequality"). Your ideal system is not a merit based one, but an open field in which all of the racial discrimination you pretend does not exist can run free, while NOTHING is done to curb the privileges that quite a number of whites have enjoyed (and still do).

The aforementioned affluent and/or well connected folks (who are REALLY eating your lunch) are not attacked by you because you really do not care about them-white is right, and they therefore are just fine by you. You want me to show concern for you and yours but if you had your way, so long as your folks were fine, you'd do absolutely nothing to stem (or even acknowledge) the challenges that my own children would face in this society. You'd leave everyone who does not look like you at the mercy of virulent systemic discrimination that you never speak against and, when asked, would simply reply with a "deal with it".
You want someone who has actually lived with this discrimination and seen what it can do to people to give a fuck about you after this?
No, you'll get exactly what you give. I'm not going to stand for this.

Disrespect me as much as you like. I'm finished with you.

[Samseau]

Quote:

Ten times as many legacies/people whose parents bought their kids way in (through "donations") took the poor white kid's spot.

Nah, it's more like

25% legacy
40% merit (white or otherwise)
35% affirmative action

Quote:

To get to the point, I don't think Samseau is debating whether African-Americans have it rough but whether African-Americans should be directing their anger towards the lower 95% of the White population that have little societal influence instead of the "elite" that have great amounts of societal influence.

Exactly.

Of course the rich are pulling all the strings. I'm just trying to explain how they do it.


Affirmative action is how they do it. They use minorities, like peons, against other poor whites who might someday pose a threat.

Liberals like to get them while they're young, because that's when they're weakest.

[joehoya]

(07-13-2012 05:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Mike, you also miss a point. Affirmative Action is how rich liberals keep out lower class white males from competing with their inferior white offspring.


Rich liberal's son: "Welcome to Harvard."

Poor white boy: "Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our black, Hispanic, Asian, and female quotas."

Since most conservatives are poor white males, it follows that affirmative action hurts conservatives the most.

Elite schools are in it for the money.  They will always take rich offspring as their family will be more likely to donate back to the school.

Elite schools don't give a fuck, and that's why they don't care if white males are excluded; white, black, female, asian, indian, whatever, as long as it's poor it's all the same to them.



Affirmative Action is how liberal whites try to maintain an generational economic upper hand against conservative whites.

I think you are missing something critical. Affirmative action isn't an attempt for liberal whites to maintain the upper hand against conservative whites. What affirmative action REALLY does is provide an excuse wealthy elites give to poor and middle class whites as to why they are not succeeding.

Samseau, this isn't about liberal or conservative AT ALL. I know wealthy liberal families and wealthy conservative families. Both have equal disdain toward poor/middle class whites. They don't give a fuck whether you are conservative or liberal. If you're poor, that is bad enough for them.

That is the beauty of affirmative action. When some poor/middle class white doesn't get into a school they can say (just as you stated) "Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our black and Hispanic quotas". They will never say ""Son, your scores are competitive but we need to meet our legacy and major donor quotas" even if those legacies scored LOWER than the blacks or Hispanics.

I have seen this at the prep school, elite university, and Ivy university level. Show me the lowest scoring black or Latino at an elite university who got in solely because of affirmative action. If you give me access to the admissions information, I guarantee you that I will find SEVERAL legacies and children of major donors or influential people that scored significantly lower than him.

Let me give an example. Like I said before, I went to an extremely selective prep school. Admission was based on one thing, standardized test scores. These were percentile based, so if you scored in the 99th percentile that means that you scored better than 99% of the people who took the test. At my school white and Asian women had to score the highest (there were more women that were applying). White men could score 2 points lower than white women. Blacks and Latinos could score 5 points lower than whites, and legacies could score 18 FUCKING POINTS lower than blacks.

Do you get what that means? The difference between the MINIMUM score for a white male and the MINIMUM score for a black person was 5 points, but the difference between the minimum for a non-legacy white and a legacy (who was almost always also white) was 23 points. Yet the poor, working class whites whose children didn't get in were complaining about the blacks and Latinos. None of them said shit about the legacies.

Keep in mind, this was for straight legacies, not major donors. We had folks who were children of major donors that had NO FUCKING BUSINESS at our school. One guy, who was actually a friend of mine, was both a legacy AND the son of a major donor. He was so unprepared for the rigor of the school he wound up transferring to a school that deals with kids that have slight learning disabilities.

Here is the REALLY fucked up part. Most blacks at the school scored as high or higher than the white minimum (I scored in the 99th percentile), yet some broke asshole who never had a chance (affirmative action or no) of getting into my school will point and say "You only got in because of affirmative action."

Athlone has mentioned how high he scored on the SATs (as good or better than the average student to his Ivy League university). Yet I GUARANTEE YOU he is always going to have to deal with some underachiever saying he only got in because of affirmative action. I know because I still have to deal with that shit now. What are we supposed to do about it? Not go to great schools? It is just shit that you have to deal with.

Here is a great example of how influence works in top universities. Keep in mind that this is a flagship STATE university. In theory, they should be LESS prone to this kind of influence than private universities.
University of Illinois clout scandal

I know almost every one of the high schools listed. Not a single one of them is even half black and Latino. In fact, I don't think any are even 20% black. They are majority white, and more importantly, are either top private schools or public schools in upper income suburbs.

[thegmanifesto]

(07-13-2012 08:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

Ten times as many legacies/people whose parents bought their kids way in (through "donations") took the poor white kid's spot.

Nah, it's more like

25% legacy
40% merit (white or otherwise)
35% affirmative action

You always bust out the statistics.

I have always heard that 78.978% of statistics are made up on the spot.

True?

[The_CEO]

(07-13-2012 08:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

Ten times as many legacies/people whose parents bought their kids way in (through "donations") took the poor white kid's spot.

Nah, it's more like

25% legacy
40% merit (white or otherwise)
35% affirmative action

Quote:

To get to the point, I don't think Samseau is debating whether African-Americans have it rough but whether African-Americans should be directing their anger towards the lower 95% of the White population that have little societal influence instead of the "elite" that have great amounts of societal influence.

Exactly.

Of course the rich are pulling all the strings. I'm just trying to explain how they do it.


Affirmative action is how they do it. They use minorities, like peons, against other poor whites who might someday pose a threat.

Liberals like to get them while they're young, because that's when they're weakest.

Samseau, you went to law school right?
Do you believe that Aff. Action thwarted you from achieving your goals or getting accepted into certain schools?

[joehoya]

(07-13-2012 08:18 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

Ten times as many legacies/people whose parents bought their kids way in (through "donations") took the poor white kid's spot.

Nah, it's more like

25% legacy
40% merit (white or otherwise)
35% affirmative action

Dude, you're pulling those numbers out of your ass. They are so far off it is laughable. Name 1 top school that has 35% black, latino, and Native American. Women don't get affirmative action for elite schools because they have to score HIGHER than men to get into top schools. This is due to more women going to college than men and university's desire to keep a gender balance.

For example, Harvard only admitted 10% black and 10% Latino and 1% native American. So only 21-22% of those admitted were even eligible for affirmative action. Are you going to say that EVERY ONE of those students needed affirmative action?

Here is the reality, while some blacks and Latinos at these schools may get in because of affirmative action, a HUGE number don't need affirmative action at all to get in. Athlone matched or beat the test scores of the average student to get into his Ivy. I beat the average test score of the other students at my school. My prom date, who is black, got a PERFECT score on her ACTs and went to Harvard. She out scored BOTH of the white guys from my school who also went to Harvard with her on test scores AND GPA.

Like I said in my previous post. That is the beauty of affirmative action. You actually believe this bullshit about how many women, blacks and Latinos are taking spots from poor white men because of Affirmative Action.

If you don't have exposure to these elite institutions, you don't know. If you don't associate with wealthy people and those in power, you don't know. It is like being stuck in the Matrix. Once you get a GLIMPSE of how things are really run in this country (and in this world) it will blow your mind.

[kosko]

This is true and what I always suspected. The blacks whom do aspire for Ivy League are not getting that help, add to the fact that many of the blacks in Ivy schools are international students and don't qualify for that stuff anyway. You telling me a Nigerian dude tryna look for help to get in to a Ivy league school? Hell no.

[Jevioso]

I think corruption in America is a bigger deal than class or race, but then again very few Americans want to acknowledge that the system is corrupt. They'll admit that they're politicians are incompetent, but few will go all the way and accept that America is run like Vito Corleone's empire. Regardless of which politically party you promote, ultimately, and trust me this is coming from a Nigerian, they don't give a f$#& and they're selling you dreams, while they cash in once they get into their position.

We all live in a nation now where it's about who you know, that's why going to Harvard is a big deal. It's not because you have a great education, it's because out of Harvard, you have a whole bunch of connections, whether it is in government or in private institutions. All affirmative action does is give a few minority groups the chance to be a part of this corrupt system as well. If America was truly merit-based, as the constitution and the declaration of independence suggested it should be, racism wouldn't even be an issue that we would need to discuss or address.

[All or Nothing]

(07-14-2012 04:43 AM)Jevioso Wrote:  

I think corruption in America is a bigger deal than class or race, but then again very few Americans want to acknowledge that the system is corrupt. They'll admit that they're politicians are incompetent, but few will go all the way and accept that America is run like Vito Corleone's empire. Regardless of which politically party you promote, ultimately, and trust me this is coming from a Nigerian, they don't give a f$#& and they're selling you dreams, while they cash in once they get into their position.

We all live in a nation now where it's about who you know, that's why going to Harvard is a big deal. It's not because you have a great education, it's because out of Harvard, you have a whole bunch of connections, whether it is in government or in private institutions. All affirmative action does is give a few minority groups the chance to be a part of this corrupt system as well. If America was truly merit-based, as the constitution and the declaration of independence suggested it should be, racism wouldn't even be an issue that we would need to discuss or address.

This is wrong. America has been pretty much the same since it's inception.

I think people have a tendency to forget that at the inception of the United States, only wealthy white male landowners were allowed to vote. Essentially, the wealthy, white men had all the power. How is modern day America any different? All the old wealth did was adapt as perceptions changed.

[JayMillz]

(07-12-2012 10:57 AM)dragnet Wrote:  

Aaaand it’s here—the war on boys in education has entered its next phase:

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/07/10/quo...n-science/

Another BS libertarian website.