How Harvard discriminates against Asian Americans in college admissions

[Anonymous]

Leave Harvard alone - they're doing a good job of maintaining the influence of their institution. There are plenty of places for the rejects to get a good education. Why do you think getting the government involved is going to improve anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is Harvard different from any other business. Lets say I run a large department. I cant hire all Chinese people, all Indian, All Spanish. Diversity is good it brings out new ideas and fosters collaborations. And if Harvard was all Chinese what would be point of going?

Then you and your's are free to not apply. There are some colleges that are 90% white, some are majority Black. Cal is 40% Asian, but whites and others still apply to Cal, same for CalTech. This is a dumb argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leave Harvard alone - they're doing a good job of maintaining the influence of their institution. There are plenty of places for the rejects to get a good education. Why do you think getting the government involved is going to improve anything?

Jeez, why get the government involved in any discrimination case. Why can't businesses then start to discriminate against blacks? They are private, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Leave Harvard alone - they're doing a good job of maintaining the influence of their institution. There are plenty of places for the rejects to get a good education. Why do you think getting the government involved is going to improve anything?

Just when I think DCUM posters coukdnt get more unintelligent, an imbecile like PP comes along to lower the bar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then make Affirmative Action tailored and specific to multigenerational groups that have suffered discrimination. Why the heck should a Columbian's kid who migrated here 30 years ago, get a leg up for admission. His family probably effed over the native Americans in Columbia and now they come here and get to enjoy special preferences? Why the hell should a conquistador's descendent be allowed to migrate from Mexico to the US and get preferential treatment in college admissions? They were the privileged a*holes in their country, but the minute they step on this side of the fence they become oppressed. BS

Because racial balance in college admissions is not done to make reparations; it is done because colleges feel they are better if they have a representative racial balance. The background of the student's ancestors is irrelevant to that mission. Why is that so hard to understand?

That person can't even spell Colombian correctly, why are you arguing with them?

[Anonymous]

DP. Sometimes people respond to a post not because they hope to persuade the belligerent idiot who wrote it, but because they want to do what they can to counter the idiocy so that other readers recognize false premises, factual errors, etc.

[Anonymous]

Hint: All Asians is not diversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then make Affirmative Action tailored and specific to multigenerational groups that have suffered discrimination. Why the heck should a Columbian's kid who migrated here 30 years ago, get a leg up for admission. His family probably effed over the native Americans in Columbia and now they come here and get to enjoy special preferences? Why the hell should a conquistador's descendent be allowed to migrate from Mexico to the US and get preferential treatment in college admissions? They were the privileged a*holes in their country, but the minute they step on this side of the fence they become oppressed. BS

Because racial balance in college admissions is not done to make reparations; it is done because colleges feel they are better if they have a representative racial balance. The background of the student's ancestors is irrelevant to that mission. Why is that so hard to understand?

God, it is so hard arguing with morons. Affirmative Action is a set of laws, policies, guidelines, and government-mandated and government-sanctioned administrative practices, including those of private institutions, intended to end and correct the effects of a specific form of discrimination. It seeks to end the effects of discriminatory practices that violate the inherent equality of persons who, because they share certain attributes such as sex or skin color, have been denied opportunities on the grounds that they are inferior or different.

Without Affirmative Action, we wouldn't even be having this case against Harvard. Everything depends on the premise that Affirmative action is needed. And because that is why Harvard can even legitimately claim to have a different bar for different races, they should not be allowed to have a different bar for Blacks and Hispanics who were never subject to these indignities in the first place. That Nigerian immigrant has no business getting a leg up from Affirmative Action nor does the descendent of the Conquistador. Get it?

Without past discrimination, there would be no Affirmative Action and any admission policy based on race would be illegal, so we would not even be discussing this. Since Affirmative action was and is still the law of the land and is based on past discrimination ( otherwise why not include White protestants in the calculation for diversity?) Immigrant Blacks and Hispanics should be dis qualified. Harvard is a despicable institution for trying to wave the Affirmative Action flag on the shoulders of Black and Hispanic immigrants

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then make Affirmative Action tailored and specific to multigenerational groups that have suffered discrimination. Why the heck should a Columbian's kid who migrated here 30 years ago, get a leg up for admission. His family probably effed over the native Americans in Columbia and now they come here and get to enjoy special preferences? Why the hell should a conquistador's descendent be allowed to migrate from Mexico to the US and get preferential treatment in college admissions? They were the privileged a*holes in their country, but the minute they step on this side of the fence they become oppressed. BS

Because racial balance in college admissions is not done to make reparations; it is done because colleges feel they are better if they have a representative racial balance. The background of the student's ancestors is irrelevant to that mission. Why is that so hard to understand?

God, it is so hard arguing with morons. Affirmative Action is a set of laws, policies, guidelines, and government-mandated and government-sanctioned administrative practices, including those of private institutions, intended to end and correct the effects of a specific form of discrimination. It seeks to end the effects of discriminatory practices that violate the inherent equality of persons who, because they share certain attributes such as sex or skin color, have been denied opportunities on the grounds that they are inferior or different.

Without Affirmative Action, we wouldn't even be having this case against Harvard. Everything depends on the premise that Affirmative action is needed. And because that is why Harvard can even legitimately claim to have a different bar for different races, they should not be allowed to have a different bar for Blacks and Hispanics who were never subject to these indignities in the first place. That Nigerian immigrant has no business getting a leg up from Affirmative Action nor does the descendent of the Conquistador. Get it?

Without past discrimination, there would be no Affirmative Action and any admission policy based on race would be illegal, so we would not even be discussing this. Since Affirmative action was and is still the law of the land and is based on past discrimination ( otherwise why not include White protestants in the calculation for diversity?) Immigrant Blacks and Hispanics should be dis qualified. Harvard is a despicable institution for trying to wave the Affirmative Action flag on the shoulders of Black and Hispanic immigrants

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Many times this has been posted, and many times it has been ignored. If you had read anything of detail about this, you would understand. But you keep plucking that chicken.

I'll save myself the next post and say it again:

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

[Anonymous]

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Racial criteria would be illegal without affirmative action. It rests on the foundation of affirmative action, remove that foundation and deciding anything based on race would be illegal. Get it? And affirmative action is for redressing past discrimination. So if the court ever rules that affirmative action is illegal or unconstitutional, racial criteria would disappear. DISAPPEAR. GET IT?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Racial criteria would be illegal without affirmative action. It rests on the foundation of affirmative action, remove that foundation and deciding anything based on race would be illegal. Get it? And affirmative action is for redressing past discrimination. So if the court ever rules that affirmative action is illegal or unconstitutional, racial criteria would disappear. DISAPPEAR. GET IT?

Don't know where you come up with this, but it's wrong. Racial criteria is essential for diversity which is lawful: see Fisher v. Univ. of Texas and Grutter v. Bolinger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Racial criteria would be illegal without affirmative action. It rests on the foundation of affirmative action, remove that foundation and deciding anything based on race would be illegal. Get it? And affirmative action is for redressing past discrimination. So if the court ever rules that affirmative action is illegal or unconstitutional, racial criteria would disappear. DISAPPEAR. GET IT?

Sigh... gonna stop, because there is no convincing you or getting you off your agenda, despite your complete and demonstrated wrongness.

[Anonymous]

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

It is just racial discrimination and it violates the only premise on which it could even be justified, i.e. Affirmative action. Affirmative action is a noble goal. Using Racial Criteria to satisfy Affirmative action is despicable and will hopefully be illegal soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Racial criteria would be illegal without affirmative action. It rests on the foundation of affirmative action, remove that foundation and deciding anything based on race would be illegal. Get it? And affirmative action is for redressing past discrimination. So if the court ever rules that affirmative action is illegal or unconstitutional, racial criteria would disappear. DISAPPEAR. GET IT?

Sigh... gonna stop, because there is no convincing you or getting you off your agenda, despite your complete and demonstrated wrongness.

Good. Eff off. You have demonstrated nothing except your mendacious logic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Then make Affirmative Action tailored and specific to multigenerational groups that have suffered discrimination. Why the heck should a Columbian's kid who migrated here 30 years ago, get a leg up for admission. His family probably effed over the native Americans in Columbia and now they come here and get to enjoy special preferences? Why the hell should a conquistador's descendent be allowed to migrate from Mexico to the US and get preferential treatment in college admissions? They were the privileged a*holes in their country, but the minute they step on this side of the fence they become oppressed. BS

Because racial balance in college admissions is not done to make reparations; it is done because colleges feel they are better if they have a representative racial balance. The background of the student's ancestors is irrelevant to that mission. Why is that so hard to understand?

God, it is so hard arguing with morons. Affirmative Action is a set of laws, policies, guidelines, and government-mandated and government-sanctioned administrative practices, including those of private institutions, intended to end and correct the effects of a specific form of discrimination. It seeks to end the effects of discriminatory practices that violate the inherent equality of persons who, because they share certain attributes such as sex or skin color, have been denied opportunities on the grounds that they are inferior or different.

Without Affirmative Action, we wouldn't even be having this case against Harvard. Everything depends on the premise that Affirmative action is needed. And because that is why Harvard can even legitimately claim to have a different bar for different races, they should not be allowed to have a different bar for Blacks and Hispanics who were never subject to these indignities in the first place. That Nigerian immigrant has no business getting a leg up from Affirmative Action nor does the descendent of the Conquistador. Get it?

Without past discrimination, there would be no Affirmative Action and any admission policy based on race would be illegal, so we would not even be discussing this. Since Affirmative action was and is still the law of the land and is based on past discrimination ( otherwise why not include White protestants in the calculation for diversity?) Immigrant Blacks and Hispanics should be dis qualified. Harvard is a despicable institution for trying to wave the Affirmative Action flag on the shoulders of Black and Hispanic immigrants

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

Many times this has been posted, and many times it has been ignored. If you had read anything of detail about this, you would understand. But you keep plucking that chicken.

I'll save myself the next post and say it again:

Racial criteria in college admission is not affirmative action.

you are right - it's just plain old racial discrimination.