Umm.. Asian people do not owe you the emotional and educational labor to explain why anti-Asian policies make them angry. Educate yourself please. |
Trust me, the standard of decency is not the support of AA. Embracing diversity implies acceptance of views without passing value judgement. You done exhibit any of that. Most Asians are supportive of diversity but very skeptical when it comes to AA. That is because universities use the veneer of AA to push across discrimination to the detriment of Asian Americans. Once AA is gone, there will be other better mechanisms that emerge to foster diversity and inclusion. But AA is way past its shelf life. |
|
AA =/= diversity
AA = another way to f'k Asians from achieving their dreams |
Diversity through the support in preparing whoever need help to achieve the merit that prizes are based on, not just directly give out prizes so certain quota are met regardless of academic achievement. In practice, states and communities should provide additional tutoring, additional extra curriculum to students that fall behind through K-12. Do whatever we can additionally to help the kids who are behind, but in the end diplomas can only be awarded to those who have achieved the goal the diploma is worth. So is the college admission solely based on merit. This is how we should achieve diversity on college campus, or any other career professions really. |
Exactly. Giving free points just because of certain skin color is not even a quick fix. |
69% of Asians support AA according to the article. The number was right there in front of you. |
+1 A civil rights organization represents itself and a handful of activists, and not the millions of Asian Americans in this country. CA passed Prop 209 - anti affirmative action. CA is a majority minority state. I am not against diversity, but I am against what Harvard is doing in regards to their process of rating applicants "likeability" where they don't even meet the applicant before deciding whether that person is likeable or not. Imagine doing that to a black person. |
+1 another Korean American, but I think it might be generational, too. Young people support affirmative action more than likely because they don't have near college aged children. Older people with teens don't support it as much from what I can see. The vast majority do support aa for first gen and low income families, *just not for race alone*. |
| People can answer surveys however they want to, but when they're sitting in a voting booth, they still vote against affirmative action. It's happened twice in California so far |
DP.. disagree with bolded. Until you can provide evidence that shows that URM were given low "likeability" scores having never met the applicant at a similar rate to Asian Am. students, what Harvard is doing there is very much relevant. It is very much on point regarding the discrimination. Harvard had to find a way to give the Asian Am. applicants lower scores. They couldn't do that for academics, extra curriculuars, leadership, so they picked something that is completely subjective and easy to fudge: likeability. This is *exactly* the method that Harvard used to weed out Jews back in the 1920s, so don't tell me a college wouldn't do that. They probably think it's fine to do that because in this case they are trying to admit a URM group rather than not. Regardless, the ends does not justify the means. It was a discriminatory practice then and it's a discriminatory practice now. I have zero problems giving first gen, low income students priority, but *not by race alone*. |
STILL can't answer the question but want to babble nonsense. Get off the thread Bye. |
Different issue than affirmative action. IF Asians - as a group, not as individuals- were discriminated against in the case ( lower courts said no) with these personal ratings, it would be because of their race, no? IF true, it would imply that the affirmative action narrowly used to consider race one of many factors in college admissions, is still needed to protect Asians - from racial discrimination. If affirmative action is banned, the personal rating methodology still remains. |
Different PP but no. The purpose of college is to educate, not to engage in dubious social experiments. |
This is a good point. People who get into colleges themselves, seems to be happy about their good fortune but not concerned about others. |
People of all races who benefit from special programs, how many of them go back to their communities to make them better? |