Should Asians boycott some elite universities that practice holistic admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scare in the non-Asians is so palpable it is manifesting in the form of denigrating the Asians. If you can't take the heat now just wait and see how hot t gets when your children get to be of your present age and the world they will live in then will be so different from the world you are currently living in. Just think about how the world has changed since your parents were of your current age to the present time. The rate of change going forward will be exponential due to technological advances and increased globalization. If you want to bring up your children to give them the best skills to succeed in their lives, have them love and pursue with passion acquiring knowledge, developing skills and self-learning. Bashing Asians may sooth your anxieties but it will only be temporary.

I agree with all that, but they are very "prestige" oriented - you have to admit that.

Being prestige oriented is a way of compensating for low self-esteem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scare in the non-Asians is so palpable it is manifesting in the form of denigrating the Asians. If you can't take the heat now just wait and see how hot t gets when your children get to be of your present age and the world they will live in then will be so different from the world you are currently living in. Just think about how the world has changed since your parents were of your current age to the present time. The rate of change going forward will be exponential due to technological advances and increased globalization. If you want to bring up your children to give them the best skills to succeed in their lives, have them love and pursue with passion acquiring knowledge, developing skills and self-learning. Bashing Asians may sooth your anxieties but it will only be temporary.

Asians don't have the best skills. They simply have a cultural norm of slavish studying.

The people who really succeed in this world aren't the ones with the best test scores. Instead they are the creative thinkers. .

Tiger Mom missed the memo on this fact. An education is no guarantee of success in the real world, creativity and soft (people) skills are hugely important, but those are not things you learn in a book.

First gen immigrant parents typically are more focused on economic stability for themselves and their children. This has always been true with Americans. Remember the line in the musical describing the young scrappy hungry Alexander Hamilton? This is true with Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scare in the non-Asians is so palpable it is manifesting in the form of denigrating the Asians. If you can't take the heat now just wait and see how hot t gets when your children get to be of your present age and the world they will live in then will be so different from the world you are currently living in. Just think about how the world has changed since your parents were of your current age to the present time. The rate of change going forward will be exponential due to technological advances and increased globalization. If you want to bring up your children to give them the best skills to succeed in their lives, have them love and pursue with passion acquiring knowledge, developing skills and self-learning. Bashing Asians may sooth your anxieties but it will only be temporary.

Asians don't have the best skills. They simply have a cultural norm of slavish studying.

The people who really succeed in this world aren't the ones with the best test scores. Instead they are the creative thinkers. .

Tiger Mom missed the memo on this fact. An education is no guarantee of success in the real world, creativity and soft (people) skills are hugely important, but those are not things you learn in a book.

First gen immigrant parents typically are more focused on economic stability for themselves and their children. This has always been true with Americans. Remember the line in the musical describing the young scrappy hungry Alexander Hamilton? This is true with Asians.

And oh, Hamilton went to then King's College in NEw York, modern day Columbia University.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not just Asians, everyone should boycott universities with intentionally discriminatory admission policies. Even if you 'benefit' from the practice, is that really how you want to win? And do you really want the prize? The racism never stops at the door.

Consider 22 percent Asian is about triple their percent of population. The real issue is harvard discriminates against non-Asians

This percentage of asians in the population is not age-adjusted the correct way to compare is to compare perecentages in the 19-yr old cohort. And then the applicant pool and then the actual real i.e. realistic competative applicant pool. Diluting the young high school asian cohort with 70-yr old white peopke from a whites-only immigration era in the US is not the right comparison.

[Anonymous]

So, again, where does the 22% come from?

[Anonymous]

At Cal Tech, it's 40%+ Asian students. At UC school system where AF has been outlawed, most campuses are 40%+ Asians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

so, do you think affirmative action is "fair?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The scare in the non-Asians is so palpable it is manifesting in the form of denigrating the Asians. If you can't take the heat now just wait and see how hot t gets when your children get to be of your present age and the world they will live in then will be so different from the world you are currently living in. Just think about how the world has changed since your parents were of your current age to the present time. The rate of change going forward will be exponential due to technological advances and increased globalization. If you want to bring up your children to give them the best skills to succeed in their lives, have them love and pursue with passion acquiring knowledge, developing skills and self-learning. Bashing Asians may sooth your anxieties but it will only be temporary.

Asians don't have the best skills. They simply have a cultural norm of slavish studying.

The people who really succeed in this world aren't the ones with the best test scores. Instead they are the creative thinkers. .

Ignoring the fallacy of that statement, creative thinking and high test scores are not mutually exclusive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, again, where does the 22% come from?

Again, as was stated above, it's the percentage of Asians admitted to Harvard the last two years.

Which, again, prompts my question of what rationale (reason, principle) makes this number the dividing line between fair and unfair admissions?

define fair

If non-Asian students with equal credentials are admitted, refusing admission to Asian students with identical credentials is giving less consideration of interest to Asians. Fairness requires giving equal consideration of interest to all students.

No such thing. Do you understand what holistic admissions means? Some are legacies, some have sports, some have parents who are big donors, some are URMs. Asians are not URMs.

"Holistic admission" historically had been used to discriminate against Jewish students and to keep them out of Ivy League. It's a code word for a racist policy.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-discriminating-against-jews-2014-12

and completely legal.