Quote:
Originally Posted by Xist
Apparently, Northern Arizona University has special funding for Native Americans, and Native American applicants do not need to compete against everybody, just other Native Americans.
Maybe one employer does not look past the name of an applicant.
What do we do?
|
Native Americans are among the most abused group of US citizens. First their land was taken from them, then their self-sufficient culture was replaced with a welfare culture. The more "assistance" that is provided to a group, the less likely they are to "succeed".
I had a sociology professor skip the "culture of poverty" section of the textbook because it differed from her political religion. I studied it of my own volition, especially after seeing how opposed the professor was to sharing the idea with students.
Wealth disparity is a complex phenomenon, and the culture of poverty and welfare are not the only factors contributing to it, but they are certainly significant. Telling people they don't have it within themselves to succeed and giving just enough resources for them to get by deprives them of the confidence they need to try (repeatedly and continually) and makes them just comfortable enough to become complacent.
What I would do if I employed people or ran a university admissions process would be to hide the irrelevant information about each applicant and only consider the relevant criteria. That is, I would hide name, age, gender, ethnicity, religion from the application and admit the best applicants based on objective criteria.
Anything else is actual "discrimination". Ironically, the only example of institutionalized racism, sexism, otherism I'm aware of comes in the form of affirmative action. If there are other specific examples of recent unjust institutional bias, I'm truly interested to be made aware of it.