Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think that Asians have the right to be angry- when the bar is set so much higher than for other people, even whites.

You are the ones who created this “bar” to begin with.

Students with Bs used to get into Harvard in the 90s and everything was chill.

But Asian immigrants figured that they can game the system by packaging kids - A student + test prep + an instrument + math team + science Olympiad = Ivy League..

And now so many of you that no one stands out any more and schools don’t want another packaged kid.

They want genuine kids who have passions, not because they were pushed by their parents.

I just want to point out, it was all created by YOU. This is a product of YOU. You are to blame yourself for the crap you’re creating in your society.

Anonymous wrote:Imagine if schools like Harvard rejected black male candidates because admissions staff gave them negative personality scores for things like ‘probably prone to violence’ and ‘most likely to act unruly and without discipline in the classroom’. How outrageous would that be? Of course it’d be despicable to reject a black man for negative personality scores based on racial stereotypes like that. So why should we tolerate that crap but for Asians? And you wonder why Asians are upset when Affirmative Action setup a system where they have to be judged in their personality, which ended up being based on racial stereotypes of their perceived behavior. I can’t believe we even need to discuss this. Affirmative Action should have died a long time ago based on the monstrosity it morphed into. Maybe at first it had merit, but it just ended up becoming a race based system using stereotypes to judge people.

Anonymous wrote:. Sorry Asians have raised the bar. What a horrible tragedy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Translation: Asians learned how to get into Harvard by valuing education and working hard, but thanks for being a racist ahole trying to cheapen their values.

I can take any kid, literally any kid and drill them to ace tests.

That’s not going to make them a good candidate for a school that looks for creative leaders that will change the world.

NO way. You try that with an IQ range of 70 - 85 and get back to us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Applications should get a number and when the admissions people look they don’t see a name, gender or race. The only one who knows is the person submitting the application They can anonymize the process.

Applications should be submitted by anyone who wants, but admissions should be blind only accepting the best students.

If schools collect tax money they should be not allowed to favor one group over another

The problem is, "a number" is a test score and perhaps a GPA. It says nothing of what that student may contribute to the life of the community, what areas of study that student may want to pursue, etc. If a school is 100% CS majors or 100% art history majors, it may not be a very interesting place. Similarly, if everyone is of a similar background and outlook, there also won't be much interesting discussion in the classrooms or the student unions. It requires a mix of cultures and perspectives to foster a positive college environment. The admissions offices need to be able to pick and choose amongst the tens of thousands of qualified candidates to have a composition that balances the interests.

They can pick and choose without considering race.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Translation: Asians learned how to get into Harvard by valuing education and working hard, but thanks for being a racist ahole trying to cheapen their values.

I can take any kid, literally any kid and drill them to ace tests.

That’s not going to make them a good candidate for a school that looks for creative leaders that will change the world.

Anonymous wrote:

And, you are implying that Asian students have nothing more to offer than the ability to ace tests.
How bigoted can you be? Do you think they have nothing more to offer? Asian kids are not a monolith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racist DCUMers claiming Asians students are basically all the same and all have affluence and tutoring when there are massive differences between people of South East Asian decent vs those of North East and East Asian descent. SE Asians are way more impoverished, yet they get lumped in with the stupidly broad category of 'Asian'. It's almost as if a continent with 3+ billion people is not monolithic and descendants from those areas in our country have vastly different experiences.

Good for Asians for standing up for their rights to not be judged based on their race or ridiculously offensive racial stereotypes that are used to pre-emptiveky judge their character and personality by admissions staff. It's so insane we have to argue over this. The road to hell is always paved with good intentions, but affirmative action led us down the path of using race based discrimination and ridiculous personality stereotypes of Asians to help people reject them from.admisisons and jobs just so they could reach a desired quota.

72% of Asians hold college degrees. Tell me where the discrimination is?!

Still waiting for an answer. Where is the discrimination?

Harvard applied much higher admissions standards to Asian applicants, with the lowest admission rates despite having the highest scores. Blacks, by contrast, have the lowest scores and GPAs but the highest admission rates among races. If that is not discrimination, then there is no such thing as discrimination.

How will this be policed and disclosed going forward? Can't Harvard just use some other fig leaf to get to the same result?

Absolutely. If you think diversity at Harvard is fig leaf and Harvard thinks it is important, why do you want to attend? You do not even agree with their educational mission.

The decision has a dumptruck sized loophole written right into it. The court says that: "Nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life, so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university.” Colleges will just use the applicant essays to do this. That will further privilege wealthy minorities who know how to play this game, and disadvantage poor ones who don't.

It appears elsewhere in the ruling, "But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.” I don't think that loophole is that big. " [W]hat can
not be done directly cannot be done indirectly."

Is SCOTUS going to sit in the Harvard admissions office to police whether the admissions office is making the decision based only on race, or instead based on how their race is tried to their character or ability to contribute?

No idea, but the above quote seems pretty clear that they can't employ affirmative action through other means. I imagine though the liability/litigation factor and potential for having to disclose its admissions data, it will have to lead to some changes. Even if they use socioeconomic data or something else, if the end result is the same, then I'm sure they'll be liable.

The point is that those are empty words. It's not a standard that a court can police or litigate at the individual applicant level.

It can be litigated. The colleges will have to now put in more effort to engage in discrimination. Now colleges might just stop collecting race information on their application, though I think this violates other federal laws that requires reporting.
Anything they do that violates the spirit of the ruling, means the colleges are potentially liable, so they will be a little more careful and eliminate the most egregious conduct. Before public schools would have a program to assign students to school and bus them around based on race, and the Supreme Court banned it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Translation: Asians learned how to get into Harvard by valuing education and working hard, but thanks for being a racist ahole trying to cheapen their values.

I can take any kid, literally any kid and drill them to ace tests.

That’s not going to make them a good candidate for a school that looks for creative leaders that will change the world.

And, you are implying that Asian students have nothing more to offer than the ability to ace tests.
How bigoted can you be? Do you think they have nothing more to offer? Asian kids are not a monolith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Translation: Asians learned how to get into Harvard by valuing education and working hard, but thanks for being a racist ahole trying to cheapen their values.

I can take any kid, literally any kid and drill them to ace tests.

That’s not going to make them a good candidate for a school that looks for creative leaders that will change the world.

And, you are implying that Asian students have nothing more to offer than the ability to ace tests.
How bigoted can you be? Do you think they have nothing more to offer? Asian kids are not a monolith.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Applications should get a number and when the admissions people look they don’t see a name, gender or race. The only one who knows is the person submitting the application They can anonymize the process.

Applications should be submitted by anyone who wants, but admissions should be blind only accepting the best students.

If schools collect tax money they should be not allowed to favor one group over another

The problem is, "a number" is a test score and perhaps a GPA. It says nothing of what that student may contribute to the life of the community, what areas of study that student may want to pursue, etc. If a school is 100% CS majors or 100% art history majors, it may not be a very interesting place. Similarly, if everyone is of a similar background and outlook, there also won't be much interesting discussion in the classrooms or the student unions. It requires a mix of cultures and perspectives to foster a positive college environment. The admissions offices need to be able to pick and choose amongst the tens of thousands of qualified candidates to have a composition that balances the interests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racist DCUMers claiming Asians students are basically all the same and all have affluence and tutoring when there are massive differences between people of South East Asian decent vs those of North East and East Asian descent. SE Asians are way more impoverished, yet they get lumped in with the stupidly broad category of 'Asian'. It's almost as if a continent with 3+ billion people is not monolithic and descendants from those areas in our country have vastly different experiences.

Good for Asians for standing up for their rights to not be judged based on their race or ridiculously offensive racial stereotypes that are used to pre-emptiveky judge their character and personality by admissions staff. It's so insane we have to argue over this. The road to hell is always paved with good intentions, but affirmative action led us down the path of using race based discrimination and ridiculous personality stereotypes of Asians to help people reject them from.admisisons and jobs just so they could reach a desired quota.

72% of Asians hold college degrees. Tell me where the discrimination is?!

Still waiting for an answer. Where is the discrimination?

Harvard applied much higher admissions standards to Asian applicants, with the lowest admission rates despite having the highest scores. Blacks, by contrast, have the lowest scores and GPAs but the highest admission rates among races. If that is not discrimination, then there is no such thing as discrimination.

How will this be policed and disclosed going forward? Can't Harvard just use some other fig leaf to get to the same result?

Absolutely. If you think diversity at Harvard is fig leaf and Harvard thinks it is important, why do you want to attend? You do not even agree with their educational mission.

The decision has a dumptruck sized loophole written right into it. The court says that: "Nothing prohibits universities from considering an applicant’s discussion of how race affected the applicant’s life, so long as that discussion is concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university.” Colleges will just use the applicant essays to do this. That will further privilege wealthy minorities who know how to play this game, and disadvantage poor ones who don't.

It appears elsewhere in the ruling, "But, despite the dissent’s assertion to the contrary, universities may not simply establish through application essays or other means the regime we hold unlawful today.” I don't think that loophole is that big. " [W]hat can
not be done directly cannot be done indirectly."

Is SCOTUS going to sit in the Harvard admissions office to police whether the admissions office is making the decision based only on race, or instead based on how their race is tried to their character or ability to contribute?

No idea, but the above quote seems pretty clear that they can't employ affirmative action through other means. I imagine though the liability/litigation factor and potential for having to disclose its admissions data, it will have to lead to some changes. Even if they use socioeconomic data or something else, if the end result is the same, then I'm sure they'll be liable.

The point is that those are empty words. It's not a standard that a court can police or litigate at the individual applicant level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think that Asians have the right to be angry- when the bar is set so much higher than for other people, even whites.

You are the ones who created this “bar” to begin with.

Students with Bs used to get into Harvard in the 90s and everything was chill.

But Asian immigrants figured that they can game the system by packaging kids - A student + test prep + an instrument + math team + science Olympiad = Ivy League..

And now so many of you that no one stands out any more and schools don’t want another packaged kid.

They want genuine kids who have passions, not because they were pushed by their parents.

I just want to point out, it was all created by YOU. This is a product of YOU. You are to blame yourself for the crap you’re creating in your society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


Translation: Asians learned how to get into Harvard by valuing education and working hard, but thanks for being a racist ahole trying to cheapen their values.

I can take any kid, literally any kid and drill them to ace tests.

That’s not going to make them a good candidate for a school that looks for creative leaders that will change the world.