Reply to Harvard Rejects Trump Admin’s Demands, Going to Court

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Harvard Rejects Trump Admin’s Demands, Going to Court"

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]Tax exempt status next.

It's absurd the Harvard pays no taxes and gets $9B of federal money.  Meanwhile their class sizes remain tiny, while they talk about equity and privilege, and play racial discrimination games where a black student has 10x the odds of getting in than an Asian American student with similar stats across all achievement deciles. [/quote]

Please share a post SCOTUS ruling source for that statistic.

I happen to disfavor affirmative action too, but am often surprised how many rail against that while fine with athletic recruiting. They have the highest admit rates of all, and these are supposed to be [i]academic[/i] institutions. Some people are just born more athletic; an average person  can’t get recruited with just hard work the way they can get good grades or test scores with just hard work. [/quote]

They haven't released all their admissions data to the general public.  But what days we have shows pretty dramatic racial discrimination.  [b]Why are you giving them a pass from stuff they were doing just a few years ago?[/b][/quote]

Because it wasn't illegal then. 37% Asian for the class of '28 and you're still claiming they are racist against Asians? By the way, most of the Asians who work and study at top institutions, and there are a lot of us, are firmly anti-Trump, because we know better than to think he is on our side. 
[/quote]

It was always illegal.  The opinion says explicitly:

"For the reasons provided above, the Harvard and UNC admissions programs cannot be reconciled with the guarantees of the Equal Protection Clause. Both programs lack sufficiently focused and measurable objectives warranting the use of race, unavoidably employ race in a negative manner, involve racial stereotyping, and lack meaningful endpoints. [B]We have never permitted admissions programs to work in that way, and we will not do so today. [/B]"

It was never legal to discriminate like that.

I don't like trump and I didn't think he is on our side.  But I think Harvard was discriminating against Asians and it's weird that you have so much trouble admitting this very obvious fact.

Also, you are either lying or stupid if you are arguing that being overrepresented means you aren't being discriminated against.  [/quote]

I'm not even in favor of race-based affirmative action, though I can understand why others argue for it. However, it is one thing to be in favor of race-blind admissions, and an entirely different thing to get behind a dictator-wanna-be who wants to clamp down on free speech, defund science, start tariff wars, alienate us from former world allies, and impose various other ill-informed and anti-intellectual policies to ruin this country. You have to be delusional to believe that what MAGA is doing is in the interest of Asian Americans, or in the interests of the country at large. Moreover, you have to be immoral to support an administration who deports an innocent man without cause and sends him to a brutal foreign prison. And then even, though it was clearly done in error, said administration doubles down and refuse to bring him back. Are you really so fixated on the fact that it was harder for Asians to get into Harvard that you are willing to approve of what this guy is doing to ruin a democracy?[/quote]

So you don't really like racial discrimination but you can understand the argument for it?

OK, is that any different from saying I don't really support trump but I can understand why they support him.

Similarly, I don't like defunding research and I wish he had simply moved the research from harvard to some flagship state schools but I didn't get elected president.  If you don't like it, try not losing so many goddam elections.

If you can tolerate racial discrimination against asians for decades and understand why others argue for it, perhaps you can tolerate the persecution for an institution as privileged as harvard for a few years and bring yourself to understand why people are arguing for their reformation.

In the end, this particular move is not really hurting trump with the constituency he cares about.  The working class voters from Minnesota to Pennsylvania do not have a lot of love for harvard.  They think of harvard and the liberal elites as part of the problem.  And as long as trump can keep the voters, he will control the republican party whether he is president or not.[/quote]

I can certainly understand the possible good intention of boosting minority applicants in a pool to encourage underrepresented groups as well as low income groups, which is not the same as malice towards Asian people or white people or Jewish people. Just like trying to balance gender ratio at liberal arts colleges is not the same as being anti-female, or trying to balance gender ratio at Caltech is not the same as being anti-male. [b]You can disagree with practice, but instead of just campaigning for admissions reform[/b], you're content to see the best research institutions razed to the ground, and willing to see a whole lot of Asian scientists lose their funding. I also hope you realize that a significant portion of his stakeholders want to stop the "Asian invasion" of tech, medicine, and higher ed. [/quote]

I wonder if you realize during the height of democrat and shockingly somewhat bipartisan support for stopasianhate during covid, republican senators introduced a bill amendment that threatened to strip federal funds from universities that discriminated against asians. That's all it did.

https://www.congress.gov/amendment/117th-congress/senate-amendment/1456

Literally every single democrat except one (absentee) voted against it.

Campaigns don't get much higher than a senate bill during the apex of pro-asian support in the US. If it didn't happen there, it basically wasn't going to happen in our generation, and it was basically uninamously rejected by democrats. I used to think that democrats were simply oblivious to anti-asian discrimination in colleges, but that was just cope so I could justify supporting them. They were aware of it and subverted discussion of it intentionally so it didn't look like they had self-conflcting values.

So there is no "campaigning" for admissions reform - that vote made it exceedingly clear it was impossible to go that route. If we wanted a solution, the choice was a faustian deal with the republicans. And considering this is probably #1 or #2 on issues that east asians [i]actually[/i] care about, if there was ever a time to make a faustian deal, that was it.

[/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