Reply to Stanford apologizes for limiting Jewish students in 1950s

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Stanford apologizes for limiting Jewish students in 1950s"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is so woke. Why are they apologizing for something that occurred 70 years ago?[/quote]
what is the right time to apologize for something so egregious?

The US apologized formerly to Japanese Americans who were placed in interment camps almost 40 years later. 
East Germany apologized to Jews in 1990 - 45 years after the end of WWII.

The Japanese government have never officially apologized for their war mongering, enslaving and forced prostitution of women across Asia.  A lot of Asians still harbor deep resentment of the Japanese over the fact that the Japanese government still refuses to acknowledge what they did in the early 1900s to the end of WWII.

It is never too late to apologize for systemic racism.[/quote]

None of the administrators at Stanford now were in charge when this occurred. They probably were still kids themselves. What’s the point of apologizing? They didn’t do it. Are they enrolling these now 80 year olds at Stanford? This is just performative wokeism. [/quote]

Apologies matter.  If your kid does something wrong, I hope you teach them to apologize.  Even if there is no remedy.  Sometimes the act of taking responsibility is enough.  Apologies are not “woke”.  Or if they are  what you call “woke”, we should all be more woke.  [/quote]

My kids apologize for things they do. They don’t apologize for things they didn’t do. [/quote]

Stanford apologized for what it did.[/quote]

Administrators at Stanford apologized for what previous administrators did seventy years ago. So according to your logic that’s sufficient? The people who actually did it never apologized. And nothing else is being done.

As I said - performative wokeism. [/quote]

Oh you didn't see this 
"Countries, corporations, institutions are legal entities like people.
Every cell in your body is completely renewed in 7 years, but you are still you after 7 years."

So Stanford is Stanford regardless the administrators.
Harvard got sued not the individual administrators.
 [/quote]

Harvard is sued because its current administrators are actively practicing discrimination in college admission.
[/quote]

again Harvard is sued not the current administrators.  
If all the current administrators resigned, and we had whole new administrators, the lawsuit agains Harvard continues.

[/quote]

which is still irrelevant. Harvard isn't going to apologize in either situation. This is not about legal liability, it's about the necessity/use of apologizing for it.[/quote]

The point is administrators are not what defines the entity whether Standford or Harvard, or whether apologized or sued.
[/quote]

and the original contention that this is just performative wokeism still stands. Why apologize for this?  They're not doing anything, changing their behavior today or doing anything else that is concrete. It's putting on a show and apologizing to people who don't even know they might have been wronged. [/quote]

Just because you are ignorant of history does not mean everyone is.

[i]“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” [/i]– George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.[/quote]

if they're so aware of it, why are they doing to Asian applicants exactly what they're apologizing for today? [/quote]

The schools today are not imposing quotas or banning Asians. In fact, the number of Asians at these schools is sizable and well above their percent of the US population.  So maybe your precious genius didn’t get it, but many many qualified Asians did.  And many qualified candidates of other races did too. Like it or not, Asians are not the only people qualified to attend. Furthermore, it is in no one’s interest to have a school that is 70, 80, 90, 100% Asian, which is what some are asking for. I wouldn’t send my white kid to a school that is 70 plus % white. Nor would I send them to a school that is 70 plus % Asian.  That is not the real world.  In the workforce, your child will need to know how to collaborate with others from a different background or race.  And so in college too there needs to be a variety of people, experiences, backgrounds, etc.  That is what education is about.  It’s not just about learning the material, but also learning from peers, growing as an individual, and learning to work and collaborate with a variety of people. If you want a school that’s 100% Asian, send your kid to school in China. But you don’t want to.  You want what you see as a superior education for your kids. And one of the reasons why the universities in the US are so well regarded and viewed as superior is because they have a variety of people with different backgrounds and experiences. 
I personally am not a fan of affirmative action. I agree it is unfair to see others with lower stats get in.  But college shouldn’t be a completely homogeneous experience either. And so colleges do need to have some flexibility so they can create an environment that mimics the real world.[/quote]

WTF so the kids at schools with 80 90% Whites or 80 90% Blacks can't learn from peers, grow as an  individual and can't collaborate woth others?

You sound like very White centered racist. [/quote]

Kids who go to schools that are 80-90% of one race, any race, are loosing out on a crucial part of education.  Yes, that’s the truth.  Sorry if you are so desperate for junior to go to Stanford or Harvard that you can’t see the value in having people of various backgrounds. [/quote]

LMAO so you have perfect ratio for your kid? Whats that? 
60% White 20% Asian 10% Black 10% Hispanic? Something like that?
50% or 60% Asian would be wrong?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics