Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (democratic socialist) wins NY primary

[Jonah]

I would refer to a true meritocracy as an ideal, but the notion of the US as a meritocracy is a myth. Is that what you meant?

Yes, that’s what I meant. It might be fine as an ideal but it’s not possible in practice. It suffers from what Marx liked to call an internal contradiction. In current discourse meritocracy is little more than a propaganda term used by and for the benefit of elites.

“The equality of opportunity that meritocracy promises will inevitably be overwhelmed by inequality of outcome. The people who do well from meritocracy will invest the proceeds from their success in working the system to make sure that they and their kids have the resources they need to continue to do well.”

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2016/10/13/13259860/twilight-elites-trump-meritocracy

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

It is illegal to make race the only reason you accept a lower-scored applicant over a higher-scored one. Therefore, no one who actually does diversity hiring/enrolling claims race is the only factor.

How would you explain this data?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

How would you explain this data?

I know this is not directed towards me but I'll take a stab at it.
It seems fairly clear that athleticism factors into this, and should have it's own category.
It's hard to do these jobs and those with lower scores and GPA's need a little athleticism to be able to recover from bad positioning on any given play.

Sorry, I'm prone to terrible jokes.

 

[One Brow]

How would you explain this data?

Why is that data something to explain?

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Why is that data something to explain?

 

[Archie Moses]

 

[One Brow]

@Joe Bagadonuts,

Where is your evidence that race was even a primary reason for the test score differential? Where is your evidence that those admitted with lower MCAT scores are worse candidates? Right now, all I'm seeing is a single data point and a lot of whining and hot air from you.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

@Joe Bagadonuts,

Where is your evidence that race was even a primary reason for the test score differential? Where is your evidence that those admitted with lower MCAT scores are worse candidates? Right now, all I'm seeing is a single data point and a lot of whining and hot air from you.

If you don't think medical schools have a deep history of purposefully admitting URM then you are living under a rock. The AARM actively campaigned against California Prop 209 and Washington Prop 200 with race baiting ads. They openly pushed for higher URM acceptance rates and pushed goals of graduating certain numbers of minorities before California SC and other states' ruled against these practices. This isnt exactly some well kept secret or mysterious phenomenon that has other embedded reasons.

Yet here you stand getting ignorant with a poster for pointing out where Asians are discriminated against to the benefit of blacks (450% higher benifit), Hispanics (140%), and whites (small %).

Shame on you for blatantly turning a blind eye to racial discrimination when it goes against your agenda.



BTW, for those who care, this discrimination has also been shown to accept blacks from families making over $100,000 at the expense of more qualified whites from families living under the poverty line. If OB truly cared about equal opportunity then he'd be the first voice speaking out for the underpriveledged here.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

One day a charismatic person is going to come along that speaks to the millions described in this article, and beyond, and they are going to obliterate their competition. It’ll be a political blood bath and mark real change. One day...

All you'd really need to do is arm yourself with talking points on how whites in the large "liberal" states have found ways to segregate their children from blacks in schools and communities, then claim others living in rural America are racist KKK members. Talk to some New Yorkers. Dodging color in their children's schools is their way of life. The ones who move here attempt to continue the same with private school enrollment and neighborhood choice.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Does it have to be one or the other?

I was also lazy, but will add this in now. It wasn't just upon whom money is spent, it is that the reward go to the person that earned the reward, and the decision to do whatever with that reward is up to that person.

I do agree that there should not be roadblocks or speed bumps in the way of any people in their efforts to get there. I do also think help can and should be given to people in difficult circumstances to help them get to where they want to be. I see much of the disagreement today as to what the definition of help is vs what is too much. I have seen in life that things that are merely given to someone that does not need to work for it, they don't appreciate it nor use that opportunity the way someone that poured their heart and soul into getting there would. A doctor that had it handed to them compared to one that scratched and clawed and fought imo would not be as good of a doctor, it wouldn't mean as much to them.

I don't think the agency topic is mutually exclusive.

One of the big reasons why doctors treat poor and marginalized people like **** is because they most frequently descend from wealth and privilege theswmlves.

Why? In systems where you need money to pay for tuition, and aren’t stipended to take on opportunities and volunteering that wealthier kids can take (not to mention the social and cultural capital needed for the application process), only wealthy kids generally make it through. So you’re not rewarding the “hard working”— you’re rewarding those who got the biggest head start. Meritocracy in capitalism is a total ****ing sham.


Source: I’m a medical student

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

@Joe Bagadonuts,

Where is your evidence that race was even a primary reason for the test score differential? Where is your evidence that those admitted with lower MCAT scores are worse candidates? Right now, all I'm seeing is a single data point and a lot of whining and hot air from you.

It's obvious that you have an agenda and are not interested in data that doesn't support it. I am not leaping to some unreasonable conclusion here. If the column labeled black in that data was instead labeled white you would be having a hissy fit because it would be clear to you that racial discrimination is the only reasonable explanation for the differences.

 

[Siro]

Isn't affirmative action type of policies outlawed in more liberal counties like Scandinavia's? I remember reading something about their opposition to "positive discrimination".