Personal tools
 
Views

Argument: Anomaly of "poor white Appalachian" less important than broad racism

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 22:33, 19 October 2010 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)

← Previous diff
Current revision (18:58, 3 March 2012) (edit)
Myclob (Talk | contribs)
(Supporting quotations)
 
Line 4: Line 4:
==Supporting quotations== ==Supporting quotations==
Opponents of Affirmative Action argue that it is unfair to the "poor white male from Appalachia" to give the wealthy black neurosurgeon's son an advantage in school admittance. Yet, the problem with this idea is that ignores the fact that there are for more poor blacks as a result of institutional racism. This relative disadvantage of blacks is what drives the need for affirmative action. As Charles R. Lawrence III and Mari J. Matsuda write in their 1997 book "We Won't Go Back: Making the Case for Affirmative Action": "All the talk about class, the endless citings of the ‘poor white male from Appalachia,’ cannot avoid the reality of race and gender privilege." Opponents of Affirmative Action argue that it is unfair to the "poor white male from Appalachia" to give the wealthy black neurosurgeon's son an advantage in school admittance. Yet, the problem with this idea is that ignores the fact that there are for more poor blacks as a result of institutional racism. This relative disadvantage of blacks is what drives the need for affirmative action. As Charles R. Lawrence III and Mari J. Matsuda write in their 1997 book "We Won't Go Back: Making the Case for Affirmative Action": "All the talk about class, the endless citings of the ‘poor white male from Appalachia,’ cannot avoid the reality of race and gender privilege."
 +
 +==Opposing arguments==
 +Sure racism is more important than one white person from Arkansas, but this is a bad comparison. We are talking about all the poor non minorities. Exceptions are important. The devil is in the details, and it is wrong for a Rich black kid to be treated better by a college admission board than a poor white kid. You don't just close your eyes and perpetuate another injustice, just because racism is a broad problem. This is why economic affirmative action is just as important as racial.

Current revision

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

Opponents of Affirmative Action argue that it is unfair to the "poor white male from Appalachia" to give the wealthy black neurosurgeon's son an advantage in school admittance. Yet, the problem with this idea is that ignores the fact that there are for more poor blacks as a result of institutional racism. This relative disadvantage of blacks is what drives the need for affirmative action. As Charles R. Lawrence III and Mari J. Matsuda write in their 1997 book "We Won't Go Back: Making the Case for Affirmative Action": "All the talk about class, the endless citings of the ‘poor white male from Appalachia,’ cannot avoid the reality of race and gender privilege."

Opposing arguments

Sure racism is more important than one white person from Arkansas, but this is a bad comparison. We are talking about all the poor non minorities. Exceptions are important. The devil is in the details, and it is wrong for a Rich black kid to be treated better by a college admission board than a poor white kid. You don't just close your eyes and perpetuate another injustice, just because racism is a broad problem. This is why economic affirmative action is just as important as racial.

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.