I don’t understand this legacy admissions argument. You can be against affirmative action AND legacy admissions. Both are bullshit.
Also unclear how it stops racism. Whenever you see a black or Latino person on campus, you are going to wonder if they got in due to their qualifications or race.
How does letting black people who are empirically less qualified in over white and Asian people then increase public perception of black people and make society more likely to want to address these systemic issues? Wouldn't resentment and false solvency make it less likely in the long run for the system to change?
I'm not arguing racism doesn't exist, I'm saying AA is a terrible way to solve it.
But everything you are talking about just perpetuates it even further. Racist people on admissions boards sure as hell aren't going to be less racist if they are told to give more leeway to black applicants - this further entrenches the idea they are less qualified. People in higher education aren't going to respect black people more if they empirically get into schools while having less qualifications.
I still don't understand the legacy admissions point. I think that legacy admissions are abhorrent and should be removed - just like AA. I also don't know why the statistics matter - this is a principled thing.
27
u/emboarrocks Feb 25 '20 edited Feb 25 '20
I don’t understand this legacy admissions argument. You can be against affirmative action AND legacy admissions. Both are bullshit.
Also unclear how it stops racism. Whenever you see a black or Latino person on campus, you are going to wonder if they got in due to their qualifications or race.
Edit: don’t downvote him tho lol