Complaint ag Harvard Re Legacy Admissions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Expect Congress to introduce legislation tying this to school’s tax exempt status and maybe also tax preferences for their endowments. I know lobbyists already working on it.

Give me a break. Congress can barely keep the government running. They can’t agree on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m all for it! (And was pleased with the sc decision.)

Who would be against this other than ALDC folks??

I think the Military Academy carve outs make it clear exactly what our government thinks -
It is fine to have race based considerations for the leaders of the enlisted (mostly POC) - but for leaders of industry we can not have race based considerations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience with competitive Asian parents and kids is that they’re just as “racist” and exclusionary as the whites and others they bash. Asians aren’t applauding the SC decision because they’re more morally upright, but because they see a competitive advantage. That’s fine, but let’s just be honest about motivations here.

Of course everyone wants fair share.
They don't ask for freebies like URMs and ALDC at least.

Asians already are disproportionately represented at America’s best colleges. We’re not concerned about your smarts but your numbers. There are more Asians in the world that want a US education than seats we have to offer. Get it?

Get what? I'm with you that we have to limit international students. American colleges are for Americans. Asian
American is about 7% in the US. I'm not sure what you are trying to say overall.

Get what? Read the earlier poster. They said Asians want their fair share of seats. I responded that they already have a disproportionate share.

Everyone should be evaluated as an independent individual. Nobody should be penalized because of their skin color. That's the fair share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With sports, at least the kid did something.
With legacy, the kid just was born into a certain family. Zero effort.

and with preferences for things like squash - fencing - equestrian
These are all sports that are historically overly represented by Caucasian students at the college level.
It is a way to get preference - and if you have a lot of money - you can make it happen

[Anonymous]

Is it now illegal to charge tuition? After all, ability to pay is not evenly distributed by race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since legacy - aka white affirmative action - would adversely impact most on DCUM, there won't be much noise here supporting this case.

+1

Between 2014 and 2019, 69% of the legacy admissions to Harvard were white.

Where's the "merit" in that?

They didn’t get in because they were legacies or because they were white. Legacy is a factor but not a decisive one.

Or are you arguing that whites are intrinsically un-meritorious and nobody can have merit unless they’re non-white? 🙄

This has to be one of the dumbest retorts ever in a DCUM forum.

You’re so dumb you don’t know how legacy admits work. It is NOT just “oh legacy, he’s in” you moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With sports, at least the kid did something.
With legacy, the kid just was born into a certain family. Zero effort.

and with preferences for things like squash - fencing - equestrian
These are all sports that are historically overly represented by Caucasian students at the college level.
It is a way to get preference - and if you have a lot of money - you can make it happen

You can’t just buy your way into a team. You actually have to be good at the sport, ie, you must have merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Expect Congress to introduce legislation tying this to school’s tax exempt status and maybe also tax preferences for their endowments. I know lobbyists already working on it.

Congress lives and dies by favors, connections, and nepotism. Be prepared for them to do absolutely nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience with competitive Asian parents and kids is that they’re just as “racist” and exclusionary as the whites and others they bash. Asians aren’t applauding the SC decision because they’re more morally upright, but because they see a competitive advantage. That’s fine, but let’s just be honest about motivations here.

And if they think this ruling restores a "meritocracy" they will be sorely mistaken.

Absolutely, those taking a victory lap are going to be very surprised when the demographic composition of college classes next year and going forward is near identical to this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience with competitive Asian parents and kids is that they’re just as “racist” and exclusionary as the whites and others they bash. Asians aren’t applauding the SC decision because they’re more morally upright, but because they see a competitive advantage. That’s fine, but let’s just be honest about motivations here.

And if they think this ruling restores a "meritocracy" they will be sorely mistaken.

Absolutely, those taking a victory lap are going to be very surprised when the demographic composition of college classes next year and going forward is near identical to this year.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/harvard-admits-record-number-asian-american-students-black-latino-admi-rcna77923

Asian student number has been increasing since the lawsuit.

My bet is now with the ruling, there will be more upward pressure.

[Anonymous]

I love it. Strike it down.
The only thing that makes sense to me is athletics - given that athletics is too big of a business to colleges and it's not all one race. And no my kid is not an athletic recruit so I don't have a dog in that fight but college sports is business and they cant really field a team not knowing if they have any incoming players. College sports would become comical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love it. Strike it down.
The only thing that makes sense to me is athletics - given that athletics is too big of a business to colleges and it's not all one race. And no my kid is not an athletic recruit so I don't have a dog in that fight but college sports is business and they cant really field a team not knowing if they have any incoming players. College sports would become comical.

Is rowing fencing lacrosse etc. really a business?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience with competitive Asian parents and kids is that they’re just as “racist” and exclusionary as the whites and others they bash. Asians aren’t applauding the SC decision because they’re more morally upright, but because they see a competitive advantage. That’s fine, but let’s just be honest about motivations here.

And if they think this ruling restores a "meritocracy" they will be sorely mistaken.

And it’s never been a meritocracy defined by test scores. Harvard wants successful people. That typically includes smart people, but more typically smart people with other characteristics too. American colleges are about more than academics, so those who wish for a pure ranking of test scores and a cutoff will (hopefully) be eternally disappointed.

I'd be willing to bet that Harvard could admit a class 10x what they do and most of those kids would be "successful". One might ask (as did a recent documentary), how Harvard gets away with not paying taxes, having a massive endowment, and not expanding their class size substantially in decades. I am sure there are some kids that clearly stand out, but the next level down could be a lottery with likely the same end results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience with competitive Asian parents and kids is that they’re just as “racist” and exclusionary as the whites and others they bash. Asians aren’t applauding the SC decision because they’re more morally upright, but because they see a competitive advantage. That’s fine, but let’s just be honest about motivations here.

And if they think this ruling restores a "meritocracy" they will be sorely mistaken.

And it’s never been a meritocracy defined by test scores. Harvard wants successful people. That typically includes smart people, but more typically smart people with other characteristics too. American colleges are about more than academics, so those who wish for a pure ranking of test scores and a cutoff will (hopefully) be eternally disappointed.

I'd be willing to bet that Harvard could admit a class 10x what they do and most of those kids would be "successful". One might ask (as did a recent documentary), how Harvard gets away with not paying taxes, having a massive endowment, and not expanding their class size substantially in decades. I am sure there are some kids that clearly stand out, but the next level down could be a lottery with likely the same end results.

But what’s your point? You seem to think it’s a good student’s birthright to get a Harvard stamp on their forehead. It isn’t. Harvard is one school. They can admit whom ever they want as long as they follow the law. They can also keep their school as large or small as they want. Why do you feel the need to dictate what Harvard does? The world is a big place. Open your eyes. Explore what you see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With sports, at least the kid did something.
With legacy, the kid just was born into a certain family. Zero effort.

and with preferences for things like squash - fencing - equestrian
These are all sports that are historically overly represented by Caucasian students at the college level.
It is a way to get preference - and if you have a lot of money - you can make it happen

Fencing actually has many Asians.