Posted on 07/04/2023 12:16:48 AM PDT by Its All Over Except ...
BREAKING - YOUR REACTION: A legal activist group has just filed a complaint demanding that the federal government put an end to Harvard University's special admissions treatment for students with alumni parents or family members who have made donations. This practice has been compared to "affirmative action for the rich." It is also known as legacy admissions. It has mainly favored wealthy or well connected white students. It is not based on any merit or grades, but mainly because your parents or grandparents attended the school, you qualify above others.
The complaint argues that this policy discriminates against Black, Hispanic, and Asian applicants in favor of less qualified white candidates who have connections to the university.
The complaint comes in the wake of the Supreme Court's recent ruling that severely limits race-conscious admissions. The group contends that rewarding children based on privileges and advantages inherited from previous generations, such as family name and wealth, should not influence the college admissions process, as they are not measures of merit.
I am with most people here. If we say merit, let it be merit; remove skin color, legacy, money, etc. I must admit that the people who follow me are the most rational people I have ever seen. Also, I would like to say that we are having conversations people on TV are not having, or when they do, it's just an 'expert' who is allowed to give their opinion. Here we table everything and say, let's discuss!
...
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Simon Ateba
7/3/23
YOUR REACTION: New poll finds that most Americans support Supreme Court decision restricting race in college admissions.
52% approve, 32% disapprove, and 16% unsure.
75% of Republicans and 58% of independents approve, while only 26% of Democrats are in favor.
https://twitter.com/simonateba/status/1675854823688634369
Tucker Carlson spoke with Simon Ateba about the ill-treatment he received from KJP:
The reason why the left wants an end to legacy admissions is because they don’t have a parent who is a university professor. If they had one, they would take advantage of it.
It costs the donor parent well outside the cost of tuition to get his loser kid into university, if he’s unqualified. There is also no guarantee he will graduate.
Universities can say goodbye to donorship if the court rules in favour of the left.
But are legacy admissions merit-based?
Not usually. The kid gets in, but I think the kid still has to earn his degree by the time he graduates. Many of them get tutored all the way to that point.
As long as the kid had to earn his diploma, I really don’t care how he gets. The number of these kids that get in are pretty insignificant overall to really do any harm.
Not as many places do this as used to. Cornell does not do it, either at the statutory or the endowed colleges.
If the legacy admissions have poorer grades compared to other applicants the other applicants should get in, not the legacy admissions, regardless of race as meritocracy is aligned more with conservatism than it is with liberalism, though this lawsuit is probably being generated out of revenge more than anything.
Nonetheless, merit-based is the way to go, be it on this or something else, which is why both legacy admissions and affirmative action are both bad for America and go against conservative policies.
Not allowing legacy admissions will raise the price of tuitions for all. It would also force the university to have to rely on more donations.
I agree that meritocracy is the way to go, in terms of earning the degree. I’m fine with giving some kid an admission in lieu of a million dollar donation, but the kid has to earn the degree himself.
That’s just me. Donations help all students in the end.
If Harvard receives federal dollars then I believe the federal government (Congress?) could intervene.
Perhaps the same would be done concerning Princeton, Yale, etc.
Sure, there will be repercussions, so they can compensate for this by no longer paying deans, professors, etc, high 6 and 7 figure dollar salaries, many of whom who couldn’t procure a job in the private sector to save their lives.
2nd, merit should apply to both admissions and earning the degree after admissions.
Clearly anti semitic
If kids want good paying jobs with high demand for their skills, the trades are the way to go and have been for years.
There’s nothing quite like guaranteeing an income stream like having a marketable skill.
And there’s also a lot to be said for being self-sufficient especially if things collapse.
Joe Biden Used White Privilege, govt Influence, to Get Hunter Biden’s Daughter into U of Penn
Re: USSC’s decision on racial preferences in college admissions,
Slowjoe Biden vigorously denounced practices like
(a) legacy admissions (of alumni relatives), and,
(b) other college systems that expand “privilege” instead of opportunity.
Yet hypocrite Biden reportedly used his privileged govt position and his influence
(a) to pressure U Penn to admit parasite Hunter’s marginal daughter, and even attended her graduation,
(b) Biden then flaunted white privilege, appointing the Penn president to a tax-paid, wealth-creating ambassadorship.
Joe Biden is the very picture of “white privilege”.
He has used his privileges and govt power all the way...from Senator to VP and President.
He has advanced a select few-——
mostly Bidens and people who suck up to Bidens,
via every wrong decision he has ever made.
A politically clever complaint, but one that disregards the source of revenue for the given admittance.
Not to mention that you can teach your children and have them earn a considerable income between 14 and 18, as they take on duties that you’ve trained them to do.
Mike Holmes was able to build his own home, including all the wiring and such be the time he was 18, because he worked at his dad’s side when his dad was a general contractor.
Add this to the affirmative action decision and pretty soon Harvard will actually be graduating intelligent humans... Instead of over privileged inbred’s and borderline retard’s.
The Statutory colleges are already saddled (rightly) with an obligation to give preference to in-State folk, with the result that one could tell the difference between an in-state and out-of-state Aggie, for example, at least back around ‘90, and more generally take a stab at guessing whether a student was in an endowed or private college.
So long as one is dealing with accomodations and not modifications, this is a mistake. If rich people want to pay for poor people to be seemingly well educated as part of the price of allowing their marginally exceptional offspring to be educated with people who are somewhat more exceptional generally, why not?
And if New York wants to educate the cram of the crop of other people’s farmers along with a broader swath of their own farmers, who am I to judge? I had a cousin the same age who was also thinking of Cornell, but had been active in the FFA and was ultimately really interested in farming specifically—the two best Ag colleges in the nation at the time were Cornell’s and OSU (Oregon)—we were from Oregon so in his case remaining in-state made sense.
(BLL—for once I side with Ithaca)
(Arts and Science, ‘91).
Haven’t clicked on your link yet. May I ask what “KJP” refers to? Kitchen Joe Project? Thanks.
Schools love legacy admissions because they are typically among those students who are paying the full freight to attend the school.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.