Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard in discrimination case

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1964
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4353
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: 3 FUE hair transplants (5124 grafts), 5% minoxidil, Nizoral shampoo, hope.
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
Contact:

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard in discrimination case

Post by Admin » 1 month ago

Hairblues wrote:
1 month ago
Lol you say I make a good argument and then make sure you toss in that I’m on left implying I can’t think for myself.
Ah come on @Hairblues, I was not implying that at all in that post.

I can't think for myself either, who does? One's values have to come from somewhere, and mine come from a 2000 year old book ;).

It is a good argument and it's not that easy to pierce it. It's right to an extent, which is why I'm hoping that the free market, or reality will take care of the problem.
"Along the way some boys started making fun of him by shouting, “Go away, baldy! Get out of here!” Elisha turned around and stared at the boys. Then he cursed them in the name of the Lord. At once two bears ran out of the woods and ripped to pieces 42 of the boys." - 2 Kings 23-24

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard in discrimination case

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago
Ah come on @Hairblues, I was not implying that at all in that post.

I can't think for myself either, who does? One's values have to come from somewhere, and mine come from a 2000 year old book ;).

It is a good argument and it's not that easy to pierce it. It's right to an extent, which is why I'm hoping that the free market, or reality will take care of the problem.
You can think for yourself. You can force yourself to look at things from multiple angles.

I do think these schools will lose some power. Basically how many people (Americans) can actually afford them or even want to take on the cost of them? I think that’s shrinking. I’m curious if enrollment is up or down over the past 10 or 20 years. They are key for certain professions. But I think this fraud scandal is definitely going to weaken them. That’s why it is relevant to the over all discussion. They are using irresponsible admission process across the board.

Fuck them. 😂

User avatar
yettee
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 466
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1236
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: Minoxidil

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by yettee » 1 month ago

pjhair wrote:
1 month ago
I am not really sure why you felt the need to state this to me.
I said it in reaction to this:
pjhair wrote:
1 month ago
Unlike diversity, "legacy" is not upheld as some ultimate virtue that must be hued to no matter what the cost.
For me, it's utterly irrelevant if legacy is "not upheld as some ultimate virtue that must be hued to no matter what the cost". You're right, no one is out there screaming about how wonderful and important it is to maintain legacy admissions - because it's utterly indefensible. But you know what? It's happening, at all the ivys and the majority of US universities. It's very widespread and a huge deal to those who are unfairly kept from attending college as a result, just as it's a huge deal to a white person, an Asian, or anyone else who is kept from attending college due to race-based admissions. In the eyes of those who support it, affirmative action exists in part to combat this. What matters is what happens on the ground, not what people feel they're able to defend. So what I wrote was in reaction to what you wrote above.
Last edited by yettee 1 month ago, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1845
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4600
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 1 month ago

The largest form of affirmative action into elite American universities is that of legacies, rich kids, and athletes. The effect of admitting a few more African Americans or whoever is in contrast a minor quantitative perturbation, and the way that large parts of the right perseverate on that undermines their entire world view. But that is typical of the American right: if they see a banker steal 10,000 mortgages, and a black kid steal a piece of bread, they'll characterize the former as virtuous or reward him with even more money (tax cuts, subsidies, etc), and be enraged by and obsessed with the latter.

It's also, separately, the case that a university education is largely about the student body, and who the students interact with. They will get a superior education simply from being in an environment with a less homogeneous group of people. Given that providing an education is the purpose of these institutions, it is sensible to broaden the student body. I've been to several good institutions, where I've interacted with people from several countries, several cultures, several classes, and built lasting bonds with them. That has definitely broadened my education and made me a better person relative to the alternative, where I would have been surrounded by a homogeneous group.

I actually knew a rich white person who got into Harvard on legacy. That simply did not serve society. Though be wasn't a terrible person (professionally speaking), he was a mediocre one. He's done sone work, it's just neither very good work, nor is it a lot of work.
PhD in Internalized Incelism.

"I do still post to criticise others" - Rudiger.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1964
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4353
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: 3 FUE hair transplants (5124 grafts), 5% minoxidil, Nizoral shampoo, hope.
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
Contact:

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Admin » 1 month ago

yettee wrote:
1 month ago
In the eyes of those who support it, affirmative action exists in part to combat this.
There is absolutely no evidence that affirmation action helps in any way, to the contrary, it's just another form of unfair discrimination.

I've been a victim of it several times, and based on how I felt afterwards, there's no better way to build resentment and push white people (or those Asians for that matter!) towards the right, or worse, the far right.
Afro_Vacancy wrote:
1 month ago
The effect of admitting a few more African Americans or whoever is in contrast a minor quantitative perturbation.
So I hope that you include more people being pushed towards the right in that 'minor perturbation'. I hope you realize that's what's happening all over the Western World. What's scary is that the left is not accepting it (see impeachment 9.0).

Their unfair policies lead to those results, and then they start calling for violence after calling right-wingers nazis. Again, I look at the results and then infer the motivation.

I get it, you yearn for a fairer and better world and you think those policies are the way to go about it. But then you forfeit the right to complain about what they actually do in the real world when implemented.
"Along the way some boys started making fun of him by shouting, “Go away, baldy! Get out of here!” Elisha turned around and stared at the boys. Then he cursed them in the name of the Lord. At once two bears ran out of the woods and ripped to pieces 42 of the boys." - 2 Kings 23-24

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

yettee wrote:
1 month ago
I said it in reaction to this:

For me, it's utterly irrelevant if legacy is "not upheld as some ultimate virtue that must be hued to no matter what the cost". You're right, no one is out there screaming about how wonderful and important it is to maintain legacy admissions - because it's utterly indefensible. But you know what? It's happening, at all the ivys and the majority of US universities. It's very widespread and a huge deal to those who are unfairly kept from attending college as a result, just as it's a huge deal to a white person, an Asian, or anyone else who is kept from attending college due to race-based admissions. In the eyes of those who support it, affirmative action exists in part to combat this. What matters is what happens on the ground, not what people feel they're able to defend. So what I wrote was in reaction to what you wrote above.
It’s also relevant because if there were no such thing as legacy admissions, then this Asian discrimination may not even be an issue as their would be more seats available to merit- deserving students.

User avatar
yettee
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 466
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1236
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: Minoxidil

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by yettee » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago
There is absolutely no evidence that affirmation action helps in any way, to the contrary, it's just another form of unfair discrimination.
It IS unfair discrimination, I agree. But what I am saying is that it is in reaction to other unfair discrimination, legacy admissions.

@Hairblues just wrote this:
"It’s also relevant because if there were no such thing as legacy admissions, then this Asian discrimination may not even be an issue as their would be more seats available to merit- deserving students."

This is exactly what I meant with what I just wrote above.

And by the way thank you for responding to me rather than calling me a Marxist (lol) and saying I'm not worth responding to. I understand things can get a little heated but I wouldn't debate you or anyone else if I didn't respect your point of view and intelligence and I hope for the same.

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago
There is absolutely no evidence that affirmation action helps in any way, to the contrary, it's just another form of unfair discrimination.

I've been a victim of it several times, and based on how I felt afterwards, there's no better way to build resentment and push white people (or those Asians for that matter!) towards the right, or worse, the far right.



So I hope that you include more people being pushed towards the right in that 'minor perturbation'. I hope you realize that's what's happening all over the Western World. What's scary is that the left is not accepting it (see impeachment 9.0).

Their unfair policies lead to those results, and then they start calling for violence after calling right-wingers nazis. Again, I look at the results and then infer the motivation.

I get it, you yearn for a fairer and better world and you think those policies are the way to go about it. But then you forfeit the right to complain about what they actually do in the real world when implemented.
Again, it’s the first impeachment not 9.0 and it’s based off an actual documents people can read for themselves. It’s in print and pretty hard for people to defend credibly (see Kevin McCarthy 60 minute interview, was laughable)

@yettee made a great point the other day that Mueller a republican, was a special council appointed by a republican.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1964
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4353
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: 3 FUE hair transplants (5124 grafts), 5% minoxidil, Nizoral shampoo, hope.
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
Contact:

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Admin » 1 month ago

yettee wrote:
1 month ago
But what I am saying is that it is in reaction to other unfair discrimination, legacy admissions.

And by the way thank you for responding to me rather than calling me a Marxist (lol) and saying I'm not worth responding to. I understand things can get a little heated but I wouldn't debate you or anyone else if I didn't respect your point of view and intelligence and I hope for the same.
Then I will put forward another argument that I often put on the table.

Is there any solid evidence that this unfair discrimination is even happening? I'm being purposefully provocative here.

My personal anecdotal evidence on the matter is that I see around me plenty of minorities (women, Muslims, gay people, etc.) having great careers and wonderful lives, barely experiencing any discrimination, barring a few insulting remarks that actually happen quite rarely.

There is absolutely no evidence that discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation (the preferred characteristic of the neomarxist left for some reason) is any more widespread and harsher than good old discrimination we all face because well, life is unfair.

I've talked on the chat about my first job interview after I quit my job. I was merely being myself for the whole interview and the main problem it seems what that they had a certain culture, and I was simply not a fit but they framed it as me being the problem. Now I was hired by another company that was very enthusiastic about what the value I could bring to them.

Should I lift my fit at the sky and curse that other company for not being able to see my true value? How unfair is that! Is there any activist group that will defend me? No. Because that's just life. Again, I understand how people think they're making the world better by applying arbitrary corrections to it, but it's simply isn't working, it's doing the exact opposite. So please, try to stop and think for a second.

No worries, I responded because I saw something worth responding to. When I read some posts, I can more or less tell beforehand, "this is just going to lead to an endless argument in circles". And I said neomarxist, not Marxist, two different things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Marxism
Wikipedia wrote:Neo-Marxism comes under the broader framework of the New Left. In a sociological sense, neo-Marxism adds Max Weber's broader understanding of social inequality such as status and power to Marxist philosophy. Examples of neo-Marxism include critical theory, analytical Marxism and French structural Marxism.
Neomarxism is the idea that inequality is not only a matter of economics but driven but the differences in privileges between dominant and oppressed group in society. So that's what that qualifier was referring to. You believe that minorities are facing unfair discrimination (and in this post, yes, I'm questioning that) and that's why affirmative action exists. Postmodernist refers to your tendency of inverting reality by taking the anomaly and making it the norm for rhetorical purposes, something like: "See, they do it to, it's the same!". So believe me, I don't use those words lightly or as cheap ad hominems ;).
"Along the way some boys started making fun of him by shouting, “Go away, baldy! Get out of here!” Elisha turned around and stared at the boys. Then he cursed them in the name of the Lord. At once two bears ran out of the woods and ripped to pieces 42 of the boys." - 2 Kings 23-24

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago


No worries, I responded because I saw something worth responding to. When I read some posts, I can more or less tell beforehand, "this is just going to lead to an endless argument in circles". And I said neomarxist, not Marxist, two different things.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Marxism



Neomarxism is the idea that inequality is not only a matter of economics but driven but the differences in privileges between dominant and oppressed group in society. So that's what that qualifier was referring to. You believe that minorities are facing unfair discrimination (and in this post, yes, I'm questioning that) and that's why affirmative action exists. Postmodernist refers to your tendency of inverting reality by taking the anomaly and making it the norm for rhetorical purposes, something like: "See, they do it to, it's the same!". So believe me, I don't use those words lightly or as cheap ad hominems ;).
From the link you provided

Toward the end of the 20th century, neo-Marxism and other Marxist theories became anathema in democratic and capitalistic Western cultures and the term attained negative connotations during the Red Scare. For this reason, social theorists of the same ideology since that time have tended to disassociate themselves from the term neo-Marxism. Examples of such thinkers include David Harvey and Jacque Fresco,[2] with some ambiguity surrounding Noam Chomsky, who has been labelled a neo-Marxist by some, but who personally disagrees with such assessments.[3][4] Some consider libertarian socialism an example of rebranded neo-Marxism.[5]

Sounds like a simple way of discrediting a person who may be making some sense by using a fancy jargon label that doesn’t necessarily fit them.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1964
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4353
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: 3 FUE hair transplants (5124 grafts), 5% minoxidil, Nizoral shampoo, hope.
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
Contact:

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Admin » 1 month ago

Hairblues wrote:
1 month ago
Sounds like a simple way of discrediting a person who may be making some sense by using a fancy jargon label that doesn’t necessarily fit them.
I'm not trying to discrediting, I'm attacking the argument.

Marxism failed, because the tide of capitalism ended up making everyone richer and more prosperous.

Neomarxism was a way for them to afford to keep playing the same game: "Oh but it's not economics then, it's invisible structural power, it's systemic racism, it's discrimination!"

And yeah I know, it's also part of the game to play with definitions, I've seen that so much in the interviews of Jordan Peterson that I got tired of it: "What you talk about, does it even exist, where is the definition? Show me!" It doesn't matter what they label themselves, what matters is whether the terms refers to a directly observable reality, and boy it does.
"Along the way some boys started making fun of him by shouting, “Go away, baldy! Get out of here!” Elisha turned around and stared at the boys. Then he cursed them in the name of the Lord. At once two bears ran out of the woods and ripped to pieces 42 of the boys." - 2 Kings 23-24

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago
I'm not trying to discrediting, I'm attacking the argument.

Marxism failed, because the tide of capitalism ended up making everyone richer and more prosperous.

Neomarxism was a way for them to afford to keep playing the same game: "Oh but it's not economics then, it's invisible structural power, it's systemic racism, it's discrimination!"

And yeah I know, it's also part of the game to play with definitions, I've seen that so much in the interviews of Jordan Peterson that I got tired of it: "What you talk about, does it even exist, where is the definition? Show me!" It doesn't matter what they label themselves, what matters is whether the terms refers to a directly observable reality, and boy it does.

The main problem with US economics is the growth of corporations vs middle class.

What caused that?
Deregulation
Less corporate taxes
Fight against unions
Globalization via NAFTA

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1964
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4353
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: 3 FUE hair transplants (5124 grafts), 5% minoxidil, Nizoral shampoo, hope.
Location: Belgium
Age: 30
Contact:

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Admin » 1 month ago

Hairblues wrote:
1 month ago
The main problem with US economics is the growth of corporations vs middle class.

What caused that?
Deregulation
Less corporate taxes
Fight against unions
Globalization via NAFTA
Those used to be the battles of the left.

But now you barely hear about regulations for giants like Facebook or Google because they're doing the radical left's bidding.

When will they finally draw the line between them and those extremists (and please no more Bush articles @yettee :p)?

At least Elizabeth Warren is willing to do something about the big tech behemoths:

https://www.newyorker.com/business/curr ... p-big-tech
"Along the way some boys started making fun of him by shouting, “Go away, baldy! Get out of here!” Elisha turned around and stared at the boys. Then he cursed them in the name of the Lord. At once two bears ran out of the woods and ripped to pieces 42 of the boys." - 2 Kings 23-24

User avatar
Hairblues
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1264
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2393
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Topical minoxidil and finasteride

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by Hairblues » 1 month ago

Admin wrote: Those used to be the battles of the left.

But now you barely hear about regulations for giants like Facebook or Google because they're doing the radical left's bidding.

When will they finally draw the line between them and those extremists (and please no more Bush articles @yettee :p)?

At least Elizabeth Warren is willing to do something about the big tech behemoths:

https://www.newyorker.com/business/curr ... p-big-tech
I don’t know how true that is because many authors and filmmakers and artists I know have a LOT of issues with amazon and Facebook. Mainly their uneven practice of rejecting and sensoring advertisements, products for sale, and algorithms for unfair rank boosting which leads to more sales and exposure.

These aren’t exactly people on the right. Maybe it’s not getting enough exposure yet but I constantly see people on the left who are really unhappy with Facebook and Amazon.

User avatar
yettee
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 466
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1236
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: Minoxidil

Re: Federal judge rules in favor of Harvard

Post by yettee » 1 month ago

Admin wrote:
1 month ago
Then I will put forward another argument that I often put on the table.

Is there any solid evidence that this unfair discrimination is even happening? I'm being purposefully provocative here.

My personal anecdotal evidence on the matter is that I see around me plenty of minorities (women, Muslims, gay people, etc.) having great careers and wonderful lives, barely experiencing any discrimination, barring a few insulting remarks that actually happen quite rarely.
Sure, legacy admissions to universities. It's happening and it's obviously just as unfair as race-based admissions. Every spot that a wealthy kid gets because his daddy made a donation rather than merit takes a spot from someone who can't afford to do that, and this is clearly the definition of class discrimination. Not in the view of a wild eyed Marxist or neo-Marxist (whatever about the distinction, they are virtually the same thing), but in reality. And every time a WASP is admitted because his grandaddy was admitted at a time when certain minorities were kept out entirely, he is benefitting from, and I know you hate this term and don't think it exists but so be it, institutional racism. That's not a wild idea, it's reality, just think about it. It's racism embedded in the system which, despite the laws outlawing such practices decades ago, hasn't shaken loose because it is quite literally a legacy which continues from the past into the present.

I'm glad you see plenty of minorities around you who are having wonderful lives. Obviously many do not. I worked in an inner city slum for a time in the US and I could tell you many stories of people who do not. The situation and history in Belgium regarding legacy admissions, affirmative action and the rest I know nothing about and sure, it may be very different than the US.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests