Harvard admits record number of Asian American students while Black and Latino admits drop

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

[Anonymous]

I don't know if Harvard actually breaks down their international student population by race publicly, but you can figure out this information by looking at student visa data. There was a report in the last couple of years that said the largest international student populations at Harvard come from China, India, and Canada. My guess is that a significant percent of their international population is Asian. These folks have BIG money. Harvard is happy to take them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since people are obsessed with racial demographics, according to the article:

Asians: 29.9
Black: 15.3
Latino: 11.3
Native American: 2
Hawaiian: .5

Total: 59%

Implication: whites are 41%

US racial demographics- tried to find current data and found this for 18-24 y/o as of 2021: https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/11207-young-adult-population-ages-18-to-24-by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/2048/68,69,67,12,70,66,71,7983/21595,21596

Asians: 6%
Black: 14%
Latino: 23%
Native American: 1%
Hawaiian: .5%
White: 53%

Interesting. Technically speaking, whites are visibly underrepresented, as are Latinos, if the goal is to have Harvard's student body mirror national demographics. We could add an overlay of faith but that gets tricker so let's leave it aside for now. We all know Harvard doesn't admit on merit, so it's not really clear what they're looking for in the ideal student body as they also don't have proportional racial demographic mix either.

For all you Asian parents who think whites are your ally, this is how it starts. Who do you think is in their crosshairs for being overrepresented?

No ally ship needed. The script is flipped. And will stay flipped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Fencing, rowing, lacrosse, golf, filed hockey, cross country, etc. etc. et.
These should be considered nothing much more than good ECs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

The article in OP's link talks about Asian Americans benefitting from legacy these days. It's not just whites who get legacy.

Ultimately, Asian Americans are playing a big role in the lawsuits against affirmative action in college admissions. Much more so than whites, if we want to be honest about it. It probably has much to do with that white Americans don't idealize or seek out elite college admissions to the extent that Asian Americans do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

The article in OP's link talks about Asian Americans benefitting from legacy these days. It's not just whites who get legacy.

Ultimately, Asian Americans are playing a big role in the lawsuits against affirmative action in college admissions. Much more so than whites, if we want to be honest about it. It probably has much to do with that white Americans don't idealize or seek out elite college admissions to the extent that Asian Americans do.

How many Asians went this extent to shove their kids into elite colleges.
https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/2040/791046.page

The last page has names of the folks.
I see one Asian sounding last name 'Chen'.
Maybe a few more from India or something that I'm not familiar with, but overall the extent that Whites folks going to get their kids to elite schools is amazing.

[Anonymous]

Asians want clear transparent rules, no discrimination, and fair competition. Is that too much to ask?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asians want clear transparent rules, no discrimination, and fair competition. Is that too much to ask?

Elite schools don’t care about test scores, they care about leadership qualities, grit & sociability. Part-time jobs in high school are important, too.

[Anonymous]

Given that kids who are mixed race White and Asian, Blasian, etc. are often advised NOT to put down Asian on the admissions application, I suspect that there may actually be MORE Asians at Harvard than these statistics show!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Fencing, rowing, lacrosse, golf, filed hockey, cross country, etc. etc. et.
These should be considered nothing much more than good ECs

Nothing is stopping you from sending your kid to a university without sports

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Asians want clear transparent rules, no discrimination, and fair competition. Is that too much to ask?

In a sense, yes. If you're asking schools that have been around for over 300 years which grew up in one specific cultural and historical context to now remake their systems so that they more closely resemble the admissions procedures in Chinese universities, etc. then you're asking too much. And you're not entitled to ask for it just because it's what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Thereby proving the point that whites will defend anything that benefits them. There is ALWAYS an excuse.

[Anonymous]

Well as an Asian American I don't want to live in a society where my children are limited to only be 6% of any profession or company or group. I think proporational representation as a optical philosophy for a 2%-6% minority is a form of fascist discrimination and I hope the Supreme Court over turns this pidgeonholing by race. I don't see racialized affirmative action as a moral virtue I see it as a reprehensible evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

I would love Asian Americans to address pay disparity since they are so concerned with racial advantages. So what- you don't get into Harvard- you will still make more money because you are Asian, regardless. Ill take that deal ANY DAY.