diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'article/atom.xml')
| -rw-r--r-- | article/atom.xml | 100 |
1 files changed, 100 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/article/atom.xml b/article/atom.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bd2ee74 --- /dev/null +++ b/article/atom.xml @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?> +<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"> + <channel> + <title>Andrew Yu's Personal Articles</title> + <link>https://www.andrewyu.org/#articles</link> + <description>Rants, opinions, technical stuff, all mixed together</description> + <generator>vim</generator> + <!--lastBuildDate></lastBuildDate--> + + <atom:link href="https://www.andrewyu.org/article/atom.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /> + + <item> + <title>Affirmative Action</title> + <link>https://www.andrewyu.org/article/affirmative-action.txt</link> + <pubDate>Sat, 08 Jul 2023 14:14:28 +0000</pubDate> + + <guid>21</guid> + <description><pre>Subject: Affirmative Action +From: Andrew Yu &lt;andrew@andrewyu.org&gt; +Message-Id: &lt;CTWUQHND92OE.31YJ2FM2GHPTB@andrewyu&gt; +Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2023 14:14:28 +0000 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +X-Mailer: aerc 0.14.0 +X-Article-ID: 21 + +(Slightly modified for "publication") + +Here is my attempt at the Harvard/UNC affirmative action question, +though I can't guarantee it's comprehensive, objective or developed, and +the language here is deadly plain. Be aware that there's a fair bit of +ethics, political philosophy and (minimal but still) US politics ahead. +Also, since I'm Asian myself (of course, disadvantaged under the AA +policies), perhaps I'm biased. + +Firstly, let me declare my unconventional "stance". I believe that +affirmative action based on race is generally useless and may backfire; +however if I were a supreme court justice, I would vote with the +Liberals, to not interfere with the affirmative action policies of the +universities. + +I'll start with why I believe that the court shouldn't interfere with +the universities' policies. Harvard and UNC are private universities. +They have their own ideals, and as long as they're not causing active +harm to society (in my opinion, that'd be violating other people's +negative liberty in the traditional interpretation by Isaiah Berlin--I am +aware that there are paradoxes but it's the closest to a consistent +theory of political philosophy that I can reach for now). Simply +speaking, the students they admit is irrelevant to the government/state. +If we consider public universities on the other hand, then sure. The +government funds them, is supposed to set their goals and policies, and +is responsible for their admissions and could rightfully implement +policies that they see fit, but for private educational institutions, my +"small government" mindset comes in. + +However, there are interesting arguments surrounding how "elite" +universities such as Harvard, and to some extent UNC, have substantial +social impact on society, as they are more or less a standard in +defining tertiary education in the US and globally. Other educational +institutions may follow their policies in attempts to bring themselves +to the prestigious "standard" that elite institutions set, these elite +universities are crucial in educational mobility, there might be +potential public investment, etc. However I still intuitively think that +the government shouldn't intervene, perhaps because of how in the US, +court cases set precedents, and a precedent of such intervention would +"allow" for government expansion and potential for the government to dip +their feet into more private business. + +Now I'll briefly argue why I believe that affirmative action based on +race is generally useless and may backfire. There are three main reasons +that I could think of for affirmative action, I'll describe my opinion +on each, one by one. + +First, that affirmative action promotes diversity. I (personally) think +that diversity is an insufficient reason to be potentially racially +discriminating (people with the same academic capability may be +rejected/admitted based on racial quotas, which may be considered a form +of discrimination based on factors that they couldn't control). + +Second, that affirmative action adjusts for educational inequality. I +haven't fact-checked this, but perhaps it's true that African-Americans, +on average, live in poorer communities and have lesser access to good +secondary education. Therefore their grades cannot fully reflect their +academic potential, and universities admissions should compensate for +that. Now aside from how this feels patronizing, race is no longer a +good measure of "lack of educational resources due to financial +situations/etc", with the existence of quite affluent African-American +families. Affirmative action (if any) for +educational-inequality-adjustment could be better implemented by looking +at education and financial situations themselves, not race. + +Third, that affirmative action compensates for past wrongs. Having what +people's ancestors do affect them negatively present-day feels awkward, +although arguably people benefitting from the achievements of their +ancestors means that they also need to take relevant responsibilities. + +Anyways, here are my thoughts, a bit incomplete but might be +interesting. Cheers! +</pre></description> + </item></channel> +</rss> |