New study on relative impact of Harvard Admissions Preferences

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a white person out of college, I have to deal with people like you who seems to be the only person who cares what race I am. Why is that any different? Face it, you are the racist here, not me.

since i'm white, does that make both of us racists? i'm confused now.

look, i get that you're incredibly insecure because you didn't to where you are because of merit, but that's just me telling it like it is and not being politically correct. You like that, right?

I realize that you are white. That doesn't make you racist. What make you racist is that you think it is perfectly appropriate to treat people differently because of their race.

I don't accept your accusation that I got to where I am (not that you know where that is) based on my race and not based on merit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Racial preferences at colleges have nothing to do with slavery. Nothing. They are not reparations.

Racial preferences at colleges exist because colleges feel a racial balance that more closely reflects the population better helps them achieve their mission. You can disagree that it does, but implying that the horror of slavery has anything (directly) to do with the current policy is an uninformed position.

If suddenly one year nearly no Asians applied to Harvard, the ones that did would benefit from the policy, as they do at colleges where they are under-represented.

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people. This really goes against pretty much everything that people say these days about racism and racial struggles. The point is that we're all actually the same, and should be given the same freedoms & opportunities as well as the same responsibilities & behavioral expectations, or we're not. We either think the same way and behave the same way, or we don't.

If we're all the same, I don't see why it's so important to have a representative racial mix in each cohort. If we're different, then yes it might be valuable to have a representative sample but then we'd also do a lot of things differently in the way that we educate the groups in schools, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racial preferences at colleges have nothing to do with slavery. Nothing. They are not reparations.

Racial preferences at colleges exist because colleges feel a racial balance that more closely reflects the population better helps them achieve their mission. You can disagree that it does, but implying that the horror of slavery has anything (directly) to do with the current policy is an uninformed position.

If suddenly one year nearly no Asians applied to Harvard, the ones that did would benefit from the policy, as they do at colleges where they are under-represented.

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people. This really goes against pretty much everything that people say these days about racism and racial struggles. The point is that we're all actually the same, and should be given the same freedoms & opportunities as well as the same responsibilities & behavioral expectations, or we're not. We either think the same way and behave the same way, or we don't.

If we're all the same, I don't see why it's so important to have a representative racial mix in each cohort. If we're different, then yes it might be valuable to have a representative sample but then we'd also do a lot of things differently in the way that we educate the groups in schools, etc.

The fact that you don't see it is irrelevant. I can only assume you don't WANT to see it. But I will try to explain anyway.

Morehouse, Spelman and other historically black colleges would love to have a significantly larger applicant pool. To do so would require that they get many white applicants, as well as other races.

They don't -- because most kids don't want to be the only kid of their race on a campus.

It's the same thing at Ivies, or Notre Dame. Notre Dame wants more Asian students so they can get more Asian applicants to build whatever class they want.

Is that clear enough?

And your first sentence:

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people.

Is a strawman, and you have no evidence to support it.

[Anonymous]

I meant to quote, and not bold your statement, sorry, let me try again.

And your first sentence:

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people.

Is a strawman, and you have no evidence to support it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racial preferences at colleges have nothing to do with slavery. Nothing. They are not reparations.

Racial preferences at colleges exist because colleges feel a racial balance that more closely reflects the population better helps them achieve their mission. You can disagree that it does, but implying that the horror of slavery has anything (directly) to do with the current policy is an uninformed position.

If suddenly one year nearly no Asians applied to Harvard, the ones that did would benefit from the policy, as they do at colleges where they are under-represented.

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people. This really goes against pretty much everything that people say these days about racism and racial struggles. The point is that we're all actually the same, and should be given the same freedoms & opportunities as well as the same responsibilities & behavioral expectations, or we're not. We either think the same way and behave the same way, or we don't.

If we're all the same, I don't see why it's so important to have a representative racial mix in each cohort. If we're different, then yes it might be valuable to have a representative sample but then we'd also do a lot of things differently in the way that we educate the groups in schools, etc.

The fact that you don't see it is irrelevant. I can only assume you don't WANT to see it. But I will try to explain anyway.

Morehouse, Spelman and other historically black colleges would love to have a significantly larger applicant pool. To do so would require that they get many white applicants, as well as other races.

They don't -- because most kids don't want to be the only kid of their race on a campus.

It's the same thing at Ivies, or Notre Dame. Notre Dame wants more Asian students so they can get more Asian applicants to build whatever class they want.

Is that clear enough?

And your first sentence:

If this is true, then colleges are acknowledging that AA people (for example) are fundamentally different to white people.

Is a strawman, and you have no evidence to support it.

What do you mean, "it's a strawman"? It's everything. If it wasn't important for some reason, then it wouldn't be important. They're not making sure that they have a representative sample of the country when it comes to other physical properties like shoe size, are they? Or their weight? Or even non-physical attributes like their favorite color? Why aren't they doing that?

They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

If a college started admitting students based on their shoe size or weight tomorrow, I doubt you'd still say "oh well, that's what the colleges want so it models the real world". You'd say it was ridiculous, unfair, and probably illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

[Anonymous]

A nerd fight with bad writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

DP: and why is skin color such an important attribute?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

DP: and why is skin color such an important attribute?

You must have missed this:

with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs

Stop typing for one minute and just read the post man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

DP: and why is skin color such an important attribute?

Because systemic racism in the US made it an important attribute. African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans have been historically disadvantaged in the US. AA were subject to slavery, Jim Crow laws, disadvantaged in education, subject to redlining, subject to police harassment, and subject to discrimination in hiring. Hispanics were not slaves, but experienced everything else. Asian Americans were not slaves, but experienced everything else and were also subject to concentration camps during WWII. Both Hispanics and Asian Americans were subject to immigration bans and difficulty in obtaining citizenship.

Those historic policies continue to have effect today. Failing to recognize that some kids have had a harder row to hoe because of their race is the right thing to do.

It is probably also the right thing to do to give some extra help to white kids who grow in poverty or who come from rural areas, as opposed to suburban/urban UMC and UC kids. But that's another argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

DP: and why is skin color such an important attribute?

Because systemic racism in the US made it an important attribute. African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans have been historically disadvantaged in the US. AA were subject to slavery, Jim Crow laws, disadvantaged in education, subject to redlining, subject to police harassment, and subject to discrimination in hiring. Hispanics were not slaves, but experienced everything else. Asian Americans were not slaves, but experienced everything else and were also subject to concentration camps during WWII. Both Hispanics and Asian Americans were subject to immigration bans and difficulty in obtaining citizenship.

Those historic policies continue to have effect today. Failing to recognize that some kids have had a harder row to hoe because of their race is the right thing to do.

It is probably also the right thing to do to give some extra help to white kids who grow in poverty or who come from rural areas, as opposed to suburban/urban UMC and UC kids. But that's another argument.

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They're doing this for a reason. Some say it's to make up for slavery. Others say it's because of something else. The question is, what is that reason?

Yes, some say that.

And they are all wrong.

The people who run colleges say it is for the reason I posted, which you conveniently ignore.

Wanting a representative sample based on an attribute doesn't make sense unless that attribute is meaningful. Can you follow that?

Yes I can. And colleges feel it is extremely meaningful, with a major reason being the one outlined above about HBCs. Can you follow that?

DP: and why is skin color such an important attribute?

Because systemic racism in the US made it an important attribute. African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans have been historically disadvantaged in the US. AA were subject to slavery, Jim Crow laws, disadvantaged in education, subject to redlining, subject to police harassment, and subject to discrimination in hiring. Hispanics were not slaves, but experienced everything else. Asian Americans were not slaves, but experienced everything else and were also subject to concentration camps during WWII. Both Hispanics and Asian Americans were subject to immigration bans and difficulty in obtaining citizenship.

Those historic policies continue to have effect today. Failing to recognize that some kids have had a harder row to hoe because of their race is the right thing to do.

It is probably also the right thing to do to give some extra help to white kids who grow in poverty or who come from rural areas, as opposed to suburban/urban UMC and UC kids. But that's another argument.

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

And same argument would apply to Italian Americans, Irish Americans and others who were also mistreated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.