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.

Asian-Americans (specially first and second generations) are more into academics and hard work. Also having intact and super involve parents helps, even in poor and less educated families.

Yes, and let’s talk about why other minority groups are less likely to have intact families.

I am not saying it is wrong for Asian Americans to be over represented in colleges. And I did not deny that on average, they have hire test scores than other groups. What I am saying is that (1) academics does not need to be the sole determining factor in college admissions of the colleges does not want that, and (2) whether for diversity or social justices, increasing the rate of admission of all underrepresented minorities groups is a net positive for society. And I don’t think that any of those things are racist. Apparently a majority of young Asian/Asian Americans agree.

And I suspect most of the people arguing against AA in this thread are not Asian or Asian American. I suspect they are whiny, white, privileged conservatives who are mad and latching onto this cause because it benefits them.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Um I'm in NYC... you don't think Asian American teens here are scared of getting pushed onto subway tracks? Have never been openly mocked while minding their business? Have a harder time getting jobs because they're perceived as having less "personality"? For some reason discrimination against certain groups is A-OK.... because of people like you...

Not the same poster to whom you responded...

Are you really comparing the examples of discrimination you listed--all of which are not okay, of course--to slavery?

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.

Asian-Americans (specially first and second generations) are more into academics and hard work. Also having intact and super involve parents helps, even in poor and less educated families.

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.

Actually, it is a well known fact. “Seventy-one percent of Black, Latino, and Native American students at Harvard come from college-educated homes with incomes above the national median; such students are in roughly the most advantaged fifth of families of their own race.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/supreme-court-harvard-affirmative-action-legacy-admissions-equity/671869/

Where is your evidence that they are stealing a spot from a more qualified, poor, Asian American applicant?

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.

Um I'm in NYC... you don't think Asian American teens here are scared of getting pushed onto subway tracks? Have never been openly mocked while minding their business? Have a harder time getting jobs because they're perceived as having less "personality"? For some reason discrimination against certain groups is A-OK.... because of people like you...

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.

Um I'm in NYC... you don't think Asian American teens here are scared of getting pushed onto subway tracks? Have never been openly mocked while minding their business? Have a harder time getting jobs because they're perceived as having less "personality"? For some reason discrimination against certain groups is A-OK.... because of people like you...

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.

Actually, it is a well known fact. “Seventy-one percent of Black, Latino, and Native American students at Harvard come from college-educated homes with incomes above the national median; such students are in roughly the most advantaged fifth of families of their own race.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/supreme-court-harvard-affirmative-action-legacy-admissions-equity/671869/

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.

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?

By that reasoning we should NEVER have had affirmative action. In a zero-sum game, giving something to one person necessarily means someone else won't get it. Whichever justice said that is either being disingenuous or ignorant.