SFFA doesn't like the Asian American %

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Race is gone from the nation (illegalized long time ago).
It still exists, you hear about it all the time, lawsuits are everywhere.
In fact, schools are encouraging to write about it in essays LOL SORRY LOL

These schools are notorious about thinking they are above the laws and can do whatever they want.
They need to be monitored, check, and sued for the foreseeable future.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand the Supreme Court's holdings at all.

[Anonymous]

Fix non-marital birth rates of 60-70% for black and Hispanic communities and you will see an increase in elite admissions for these groups. The lack of proportional academic achievement is related to issues that start way before high school and SATs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

Blacks were at peak 20% of the population. A clear minority. It was never 50/50 or remotely close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

Blacks were at peak 20% of the population. A clear minority. It was never 50/50 or remotely close.

Asians are also under 20% of the US population. “A clear minority.” Are you trying to argue that they therefore shouldn’t be allowed in our “homogeneous” institutions?

[Anonymous]

So in your view, the U.S. would cease to be racially "homogeneous" only at 50/50?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So in your view, the U.S. would cease to be racially "homogeneous" only at 50/50?

Yes, the “homogeneous” PP believes that a population that is 12% Black, 12% Asian, and 25% Hispanic is a “homogeneous” white society.

[Anonymous]

PP's head will explode in 20 years when every individual race in the U.S. is a minority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP's head will explode in 20 years when every individual race in the U.S. is a minority.

OK these last two posts are making me LOL.


10-12 hours a week extra study and nobody connected those dots!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

Blacks were at peak 20% of the population. A clear minority. It was never 50/50 or remotely close.

Asians are also under 20% of the US population. “A clear minority.” Are you trying to argue that they therefore shouldn’t be allowed in our “homogeneous” institutions?

The PP said Black people used to make up high percentages of the US. Not true now, nor ever true. If you disagree cite your source. There were not “many Black people from the beginning” in terms of percentages.

[Anonymous]

A high enough percentage that the U.S. couldn't be considered homogeneous. Please keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

Blacks were at peak 20% of the population. A clear minority. It was never 50/50 or remotely close.

Asians are also under 20% of the US population. “A clear minority.” Are you trying to argue that they therefore shouldn’t be allowed in our “homogeneous” institutions?

The PP said Black people used to make up high percentages of the US. Not true now, nor ever true. If you disagree cite your source. There were not “many Black people from the beginning” in terms of percentages.

That PP was responding to the comment that “The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that.” That sounded like someone advocating for a return to Jim Crow, a system that by law excluded Asians as well as Blacks from “homogeneous” white institutions. Under Jim Crow, there were enough Black people in the United States that excluding them from “homogeneous” white institutions required a great deal of violence, some of it extra-legal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pull up pictures of students at best college in China, Japan etc. Notice zero diversity.

Same at the best universities in most countries. Nigeria's best college is almost entirely black. india's best colleges are almost entirely indian. France's best colleges are almost entirely white. Etc.

Diversity simply isn't that important for learning.

It probably isn’t as important in homogeneous countries. Here is the US it’s important and many people value it.

The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that. But for some reason that homogeneity was considered a problem whereas it's not in say, Japan.

Simply not true. The US had always had many black people from the very beginning. Not to mention the native Americans who were already here.

There were called minorities for a reason. Obviously this is very true.

You’re kidding right? Black people used to make up higher percentages of the US and have slowly dropped over time as immigration increased.

Maybe higher but never a significant portion of the population. Always a minority.

What do you think the word “minority” means? The standard definition includes groups that make up as much as 49.999% or a population. A 51/49 group is not “homogeneous” (again according to the standard definition of the word). So saying that a subgroup is “a minority” does not prove that the larger group is “homogeneous.” Not for the standard English definitions of those words.

Blacks were at peak 20% of the population. A clear minority. It was never 50/50 or remotely close.

Asians are also under 20% of the US population. “A clear minority.” Are you trying to argue that they therefore shouldn’t be allowed in our “homogeneous” institutions?

The PP said Black people used to make up high percentages of the US. Not true now, nor ever true. If you disagree cite your source. There were not “many Black people from the beginning” in terms of percentages.

That PP was responding to the comment that “The US was a very homogenous country until relatively recently, and could still go back to that.” That sounded like someone advocating for a return to Jim Crow, a system that by law excluded Asians as well as Blacks from “homogeneous” white institutions. Under Jim Crow, there were enough Black people in the United States that excluding them from “homogeneous” white institutions required a great deal of violence, some of it extra-legal.

Right, so the PP made an erroneous statement that it was “simply not true” due to all the Black people. What point in time is that? Regardless of where the homogenous poster thinks the country is going, there were never that many Blacks, from the beginning, to make that “simply not true”.

[Anonymous]

A country with 80 percent whites and 20 percent blacks is "homogeneous" in your book?