You understand people have bigger problems than people being taller than them right?
Yes, which is why I gave the Jim Crow South example. Unquestionably these laws, in large part progressive policies with the addendum of abject racism, were a detriment to these communities. Abortion? Created as a covert eugenics program. Minimum wage? Touted by dixicrats as a means to price blacks out of the workforce and limit the cost of discrimination.
Just because race was removed from the equation in the 60's doesnt mean those policies stopped having those direct effects 😂.
Again, from 1950-1970, wealth in the black community grew at its highest rate in history, one of the fastest growths actually, the middle class in that demographic was doing great, and the rates of single parenting were still reasonable(24%)
Then comes the 60's and now these communities have access to that welfare. Abortion clinics start being put en masse in minority communities(Sanger and her eugenics). Now what do we have? A demographic with single parenting accounting for 74% of households, and generational poverty in which mother's are dependent on the government, and fathers have eschewed their responsibility cause the government is handling it. This not to mention loads of other initiatives put into place by the "War on Poverty", which was never needed because between 1950 and 1970 poverty rates dropped by near half and have remained static around the 17% mark since.
It appears that the generous welfare system allowed women to, in essence, marry the government -- and it allowed men to abandon their financial and moral responsibility, while surrendering the dignity that comes from being a good provider. Psychologists call dependency "learned helplessness" for a reason.
Sounds to me like the obvious conclusion is that the solution to poverty does not lie in government and preferential programs. This is further reinforced by Affirmative Action, which tends to result in the student admitted due to said legislation dropping out because they arent keeping up with their peers who were admitted on merits.
For example, if you have a student with a 650 SAT on their Math section, being admitted to a university such as MIT for a mathematics related degree, where students are usually in the 750+ range on that section. That student is likely to drop out, because they will percieve themselves as incapable, due to being of current lower capabilities than everyone else around them. Nor will the curriculum be at all conducive to them learning.
However, if say they were to be rejected, and end up say admitted to Boston College, a fine school in its own right, they will be around students who also scored similar on that section, which means the curriculum will be tailored for their current skills, and they are thusly all the more likely to persevere.
But, as it stands, a vast majority of minority enrollments in university, particularly blacks, start out in STEM fields, but most end up either dropping out, or changing their major to a less stringent fields in the humanities, and angry at the system that set them up for failure, despite its noble intent to afford them the opportunity to study at a premier school.