8 in 10 Asian Americans who oppose affirmative action believe it’s racist, survey reveals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

You have absolutely no knowledge that this is occurring.

Go check out the names of all the "Black" kids at HYPS.. Most are first gen African kids whose parents are middle class+. Sure, they are qualified, but so were the Asians that were overlooked so the schools can meet their "quota".

PP again. We are better off with a system that forces all colleges to allocate a certain % of seats to Blacks (descended of slaves on both sides) and Native Americans (both sides) subject to a higher wealth/income threshold. There should be another set aside based on wealth/income (at a lower threshold than the previous group). Assuming both of these together adds up to 10%, the remaining 90% should be open competition, metrics-based admissions.

No we don't need racial quota in the 21st century

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

You have absolutely no knowledge that this is occurring.

Go check out the names of all the "Black" kids at HYPS.. Most are first gen African kids whose parents are middle class+. Sure, they are qualified, but so were the Asians that were overlooked so the schools can meet their "quota".

You should reach some of the research by Roland Fryer who is an African American economist at Harvard. See a quote from an October 2022 OpEd below. He actually believes in Affirmative Action, but it is not being employed correctly.

"But affirmative action is very often not targeted at individuals who, because of disadvantage, are achieving below their potential. Seventy-one percent of Harvard’s Black and Hispanic students come from wealthy backgrounds. A tiny fraction attended underperforming public high schools. First- and second-generation African immigrants, despite constituting only about 10 percent of the U.S. Black population, make up about 41 percent of all Black students in the Ivy League, and Black immigrants are wealthier and better educated than many native-born Black Americans."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

So we should only allow % reflecting group's population? Good lord.

Agree with you on this. Admission should be a color blind and ethnically blind process. Let kids in because they qualify.

I don't pick my surgeons based on the color of their skin, their gender or anything else that is superficial. I pick them because they are good at their work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

So we should only allow % reflecting group's population? Good lord.

Agree with you on this. Admission should be a color blind and ethnically blind process. Let kids in because they qualify.

I don't pick my surgeons based on the color of their skin, their gender or anything else that is superficial. I pick them because they are good at their work.

Many have to go to the doctors their insurance companies allow them to go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

So we should only allow % reflecting group's population? Good lord.

Never said that. Even with AA, Asian Americans are over represented and Blacks are underrepresented at most schools.

So? Who cares that they are over-represented? They are over-represented because they are smarter and work harder. Certainly not due to nepotism and athletic scholarships.

Its true. Since more AA kids play basket ball, they are over represented in NBA, since more rich white kids can play lacrosse, they are over represented there.

This^. Why Asians don't get representation where they are in minority. Why ivies aren't selecting Asian basketball, football to add diversity in their teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

So we should only allow % reflecting group's population? Good lord.

Never said that. Even with AA, Asian Americans are over represented and Blacks are underrepresented at most schools.

Maybe they are better qualified. I don't suppose you would accept that possibility.

I am going to leave it to colleges to decide who is qualified. Many seem to believe academics (which I assume is what you mean by qualified) are only one of the many things an applicant can contribute to create a robust student population at a school.

What if colleges decided the core qualification for admittance was being white? Would you still be fine with leaving it up to colleges to decide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

So we should only allow % reflecting group's population? Good lord.

Agree with you on this. Admission should be a color blind and ethnically blind process. Let kids in because they qualify.

I don't pick my surgeons based on the color of their skin, their gender or anything else that is superficial. I pick them because they are good at their work.

Many have to go to the doctors their insurance companies allow them to go.

Type of insurance isn't not race based. Healthcare is based on greed of companies and impotence of government.

[Anonymous]

What needs to be done is to improve quality of K-12 education for every poor kid, social engineering at elite colleges to benefit a select few isn't helping masses. It only makes look like blacks don't deserve what they get even when they make it on merit. It also takes away from how ivies are filling up schools with kids of alumni, wealthy, internationals, powerful, connected and famous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

Why should you get to decide what qualifications matter for a private college?

And for the 1Mth time, colleges do not have racial qualifications to "right wrongs". They do it to achieve their mission and build the class they want. But you don't care about that, you just want to stir up trouble for your cause. You haven't read a single book on the subject, you haven't talked to a single adcom or college administrator about it, and you don't understand what you are talking about. If you truly cared you would do those things.

But you don't care.

So you're fine with universities only admitting whites? That was a commonplace practice prior to desegregation, you're fine with bringing it back? If not, why should you decide what "qualifications" matter for private colleges?

Also, race by definition is not a qualification.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

NP. Look, no one thought about less qualified white guys who passed right over more qualified (women/gay/black/hispanic/etc.) for any number of things: college admissions, jobs, judges, elected representatives, POTUS for 200 years. Now all of a sudden they have to share but now it's hand wringing that someone less qualified may "Steal" their spot. GMAFB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

Why should you get to decide what qualifications matter for a private college?

And for the 1Mth time, colleges do not have racial qualifications to "right wrongs". They do it to achieve their mission and build the class they want. But you don't care about that, you just want to stir up trouble for your cause. You haven't read a single book on the subject, you haven't talked to a single adcom or college administrator about it, and you don't understand what you are talking about. If you truly cared you would do those things.

But you don't care.

So you're fine with universities only admitting whites? That was a commonplace practice prior to desegregation, you're fine with bringing it back? If not, why should you decide what "qualifications" matter for private colleges?

Also, race by definition is not a qualification.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

NP. Look, no one thought about less qualified white guys who passed right over more qualified (women/gay/black/hispanic/etc.) for any number of things: college admissions, jobs, judges, elected representatives, POTUS for 200 years. Now all of a sudden they have to share but now it's hand wringing that someone less qualified may "Steal" their spot. GMAFB.

It is precisely because the system was so wrong for so long, that I, for one, don't want to perpetuate racial favoritism over a meritocracy. Two wrongs don't make a right. And we're talking about schools that are either public institutions (UNC) or "nonprofits" that take a lot of public funds and get big tax breaks (Harvard, etc). So no, they can't just do whatever they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

Why should you get to decide what qualifications matter for a private college?

And for the 1Mth time, colleges do not have racial qualifications to "right wrongs". They do it to achieve their mission and build the class they want. But you don't care about that, you just want to stir up trouble for your cause. You haven't read a single book on the subject, you haven't talked to a single adcom or college administrator about it, and you don't understand what you are talking about. If you truly cared you would do those things.

But you don't care.

So you're fine with universities only admitting whites? That was a commonplace practice prior to desegregation, you're fine with bringing it back? If not, why should you decide what "qualifications" matter for private colleges?

Also, race by definition is not a qualification.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

As someone inside of a university, I can safely say you are totally misrepresenting university admissions goals and processes using the same newspeak that we do - "holistic evaluation." The reality is, at the ground level and in almost every admissions meeting we have, there most certainly are racial targets for most programs, albeit somewhat flexible ones. The standards for black and hispanic applicants is officially lower. For example, in admissions to one of our programs, we cut off asian student applicants at a 95th percentile test score (I won't say what test because I don't even want to risk people knowing what area I am in), we cut off whites at 90th percentile, and we cut off black/hispanic at 80th percentile. Admitting less qualified URM applicants is literally part of the fundamental process in "holistic admissions." If you've also done admissions then I challenge you to refute what I'm saying. I am happy to go into more detail and debate the facts. But let's not resort to propaganda, which I think you and the other holistic folks do constantly (including our own admissions office - because admitting the truth would expose us to legal liability, potentially)

That is all really useful information. I take your explanation as how a public policy goal (have a diverse class for the benefit of the school as a whole) meets the practical means of achieving that goal (if the goal requires have representation for various groups, divide the applications and determine the parameters for consideration to get the best students from those groups). If the starting point is a minimum level of achievement for success in a particular college, as long as every student is above that minimum level, making distinctions after that based on qualities other than academic achievement does not bother me. I say this as the parent of a high achieving UMC white DD who probably will not get into her reach school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am fine with affirmative action, but I am NOT fine with limited the number of qualified Asian kids who get in. My kids are not college-aged yet, but my nieces all have white friends who had worst grades, worst test scores, and less impressive extracurriculars who got into better schools. And when I say less impressive, I'm not just talking about STEM - one of my nieces is an opera singer, that's not typical for Asian-American girls.

Bravo. You get it by not scapegoating blacks and Latinos and by realizing that the conservative SFFA and SCOTUS aren't looking out for Asians. They want to maintain the engrained advantages whites ( mostly wealthy) enjoy in college admissions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t mean to sound rude but who cares? I will be perfectly honest that in my view, the goal of affirmative action is to fix the systemic injustices created by slavery (and other racial injustices) where those injustices still exist for minority groups. If one particular minority group is no longer impacted by the past injustices perpetrated against them, then that is not a reason to scrap a policy that helps other minority groups. No longer benefiting from a particular policy aimed to increase social justice and right the past errors that created those injustices is not a reason to throw out the policy as a whole.

yeah but you can't fix one injustice with another injustice. as one of SCOTUS said, when is it enough? how do you know when to stop?

What’s the injustice? That Asian Americans get into a particular school at rates well above their representation in the general population but may lose a few spots to other minorities? I don’t see that as an injustice.

Supreme Court is full of conservative hacks, so I am really not looking to them to provide a good insight into undoing systemic social injustices.

Why should a poor Asian child who is the most qualified lose their spot to a rich URM or a rich African immigrant? That isn’t righting ANY wrongs.

You have absolutely no knowledge that this is occurring.

Go check out the names of all the "Black" kids at HYPS.. Most are first gen African kids whose parents are middle class+. Sure, they are qualified, but so were the Asians that were overlooked so the schools can meet their "quota".

PP again. We are better off with a system that forces all colleges to allocate a certain % of seats to Blacks (descended of slaves on both sides) and Native Americans (both sides) subject to a higher wealth/income threshold. There should be another set aside based on wealth/income (at a lower threshold than the previous group). Assuming both of these together adds up to 10%, the remaining 90% should be open competition, metrics-based admissions.

No we don't need racial quota in the 21st century

Quotas are better than what is currently policy

Quotas are more transparent

Hyps should be 40% ados

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intelligent.com, an online resource focused on higher education planning and online degree rankings, polled 1,250 Asian Americans on Nov. 9 and found that roughly half (49%) of them oppose race-based admissions in colleges and universities.

The detractors cited several reasons for their positions. A whopping 81% said they oppose the policy because it is racist; 32% said it increases racism against Asian Americans; 30% said it hurts their odds of getting into their chosen schools and 25% said it perpetuates stereotypes against the community.

In terms of age, older Asian Americans were more likely to oppose affirmative action, with 61% of those aged 54 and above saying they “somewhat” or “strongly oppose” the policy. Meanwhile, 45% of those aged 18 to 24 and aged 25 to 34 expressed opposition to the policy.

A quarter (26%) of respondents expressed support for affirmative action . Thirteen percent said they “strongly support” the policy, while 21% said they “somewhat support.”

The survey also looked into the impact of affirmative action on the respondents’ motivation to vote in the recent midterm elections, as well as their choice of candidates, with 58% of midterm voters who voted Republican reporting that they did so for the first time.

An earlier survey conducted by The Economist and British analytics firm YouGov showed that a majority of U.S. adults (54%) also oppose affirmative action.

https://news.yahoo.com/8-10-asian-americans-oppose-211419571.html

I don't know if this is news to you. The age thing above is least surprising. As you get older (and your kids approach college age), older folks' sentiment change. The see, feel, and smell how AA affects their kids directly.

I don’t know exactly what you mean. My kids 15 and 23 see the unfairness surrounding Black Americans. They understand why affirmative action is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What needs to be done is to improve quality of K-12 education for every poor kid, social engineering at elite colleges to benefit a select few isn't helping masses. It only makes look like blacks don't deserve what they get even when they make it on merit. It also takes away from how ivies are filling up schools with kids of alumni, wealthy, internationals, powerful, connected and famous.

Sure, as soon as every kid in the country has access to an education equal to that offered in Arlington and Montgomery counties, I agree that it would be okay to drop affirmative action in education (but not employment). But not one day before that happens.