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.

Go check out the names of all the "Black" kids at HYPS.. Most are first gen African kids whose parents are middle class+. Sure, they are qualified, but so were the Asians that were overlooked so the schools can meet their "quota".

PP again. We are better off with a system that forces all colleges to allocate a certain % of seats to Blacks (descended of slaves on both sides) and Native Americans (both sides) subject to a higher wealth/income threshold. There should be another set aside based on wealth/income (at a lower threshold than the previous group). Assuming both of these together adds up to 10%, the remaining 90% should be open competition, metrics-based admissions.

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.

Go check out the names of all the "Black" kids at HYPS.. Most are first gen African kids whose parents are middle class+. Sure, they are qualified, but so were the Asians that were overlooked so the schools can meet their "quota".

Do African Americans wish that slavery never happened, and they are in Africa right now?

Slavery lol

It's 21st century already wtf

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.

Maybe they are better qualified. I don't suppose you would accept that possibility.

I am going to leave it to colleges to decide who is qualified. Many seem to believe academics (which I assume is what you mean by qualified) are only one of the many things an applicant can contribute to create a robust student population at a school.

And yet, Asian Americans students are exceling in not only Academics but ECs, Social work, Volunteering, Internships, Jobs. And they also come from all economic strata and many have the language barriers at home.

Affirmative Action is actually not benefiting URMs (Blacks and Hispanics) in significant ways and I do not believe that they are negetaviely impacting Asian Americans in a big way (because there are not too many URMs chasing the degrees in the first place).

However, in the guise of Affirmative Action, Asian Americans are not given admission and seats are given to underqualified White candidates. If the seats were actually going to qualified URMs, I would not have a problem.

I feel that academics being reasonably equal, we must give a chance to poor and middle class students first. It will cover many URMs and poor White and Asian students.

But, if such modifications does not happen, I would want to have affirmative action remain. I do not want any of our civil rights eroded.

- Mom of Asian American high achieving student.

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.

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?

Are YOU serious? How about Japanese American Interment camps in the 1940s is that worthy?

That was an atrocity, certainly, and I'm very sorry if your family was impacted by it. But it's not the same as two centuries of involuntary servitude followed by another century of deliberate efforts to keep an entire race from being allowed to participate fully in our democracy.

What you don’t get is no one is equating the two. The OP is basically saying Asians (looking at them as a monolith) aren’t worthy of being treated as a minority. Who cares if they are negatively impacted, sure they are in fact a minority, but shouldn’t be treated as one.

Affirmative action doesn't seek to help 'minorities'. It seeks to help those who have historically been deliberately excluded from educational opportunities, jobs, etc.

And I disagree with you. The person who listed admittedly horrible things that have happened to or are happening to those of Asian descent IS trying to equate those things with slavery in order to try to make a case for Asians to receive favorable treatment, too.

My question is: should only African Americans and Native Americans benefit here? Should Latinos also be removed from the category? It is well documented that Chinese and Japanese immigrants were discriminated against, including in educational settings.

https://www.history.com/news/chinese-american-segregation-san-francisco-mamie-tape-case

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.

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?

Are YOU serious? How about Japanese American Interment camps in the 1940s is that worthy?

That was an atrocity, certainly, and I'm very sorry if your family was impacted by it. But it's not the same as two centuries of involuntary servitude followed by another century of deliberate efforts to keep an entire race from being allowed to participate fully in our democracy.

What you don’t get is no one is equating the two. The OP is basically saying Asians (looking at them as a monolith) aren’t worthy of being treated as a minority. Who cares if they are negatively impacted, sure they are in fact a minority, but shouldn’t be treated as one.

Affirmative action doesn't seek to help 'minorities'. It seeks to help those who have historically been deliberately excluded from educational opportunities, jobs, etc.

And I disagree with you. The person who listed admittedly horrible things that have happened to or are happening to those of Asian descent IS trying to equate those things with slavery in order to try to make a case for Asians to receive favorable treatment, too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Intelligent.com, an online resource focused on higher education planning and online degree rankings, polled 1,250 Asian Americans on Nov. 9 and found that roughly half (49%) of them oppose race-based admissions in colleges and universities.

I guess I don't have to read this garbage thread since I'm one of the 51% of Asian Americans who support race base admissions in colleges. Thanks to divisive OP who titles the thread with a misleading title. So out of 49% of the 1250 people they surveyed, answered that they were opposed to affirmative action with 8 our of 10 of that percentage feeling that affirmative action is racists.

Let's see, that would be approx. 40% ( I rounded up for you, OP ) of the people polled, so 500 people (another round up for your benefit, OP)

40% is not an overwhelming number, though concerning and I'd want to know more about the people they polled to be sure that 500 people were representative of all the immigrants from a giant continent.

There is systemic racisim. I have seen other people hurt by it when I have been spared. Affirmative action is not perfect, but anyone who wants to get rid of it has no solution to this issue. They just want their cut to be fair, while denying others that same opportunity.

Why should Asian American college students be punished for systemic racism? Are 18 year old Asian Americans the ones perpetuating systemic racism?

Ironically, discrimination against Asian Americans in the university admissions systems is actual systemic and (currently) legalized racism.

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.

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.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

You said that people shouldn't comment on private colleges using racially discriminatory criteria for admissions because it's up to them to build the class that they want. Would it be fine for private colleges to only admit whites because they want to build a class of pure Aryan descent? Perhaps they want to minimize racially mixed people to preserve the white race and do what they can towards that goal by only admitting those of pure Nordic stock to minimize racial intermingling, would that be fine?

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.

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.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

As someone inside of a university, I can safely say you are totally misrepresenting university admissions goals and processes using the same newspeak that we do - "holistic evaluation." The reality is, at the ground level and in almost every admissions meeting we have, there most certainly are racial targets for most programs, albeit somewhat flexible ones. The standards for black and hispanic applicants is officially lower. For example, in admissions to one of our programs, we cut off asian student applicants at a 95th percentile test score (I won't say what test because I don't even want to risk people knowing what area I am in), we cut off whites at 90th percentile, and we cut off black/hispanic at 80th percentile. Admitting less qualified URM applicants is literally part of the fundamental process in "holistic admissions." If you've also done admissions then I challenge you to refute what I'm saying. I am happy to go into more detail and debate the facts. But let's not resort to propaganda, which I think you and the other holistic folks do constantly (including our own admissions office - because admitting the truth would expose us to legal liability, potentially)

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.

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?

Are YOU serious? How about Japanese American Interment camps in the 1940s is that worthy?

That was an atrocity, certainly, and I'm very sorry if your family was impacted by it. But it's not the same as two centuries of involuntary servitude followed by another century of deliberate efforts to keep an entire race from being allowed to participate fully in our democracy.

What you don’t get is no one is equating the two. The OP is basically saying Asians (looking at them as a monolith) aren’t worthy of being treated as a minority. Who cares if they are negatively impacted, sure they are in fact a minority, but shouldn’t be treated as one.

Anonymous wrote:Intelligent.com, an online resource focused on higher education planning and online degree rankings, polled 1,250 Asian Americans on Nov. 9 and found that roughly half (49%) of them oppose race-based admissions in colleges and universities.

I guess I don't have to read this garbage thread since I'm one of the 51% of Asian Americans who support race base admissions in colleges. Thanks to divisive OP who titles the thread with a misleading title. So out of 49% of the 1250 people they surveyed, answered that they were opposed to affirmative action with 8 our of 10 of that percentage feeling that affirmative action is racists.

Let's see, that would be approx. 40% ( I rounded up for you, OP ) of the people polled, so 500 people (another round up for your benefit, OP)

40% is not an overwhelming number, though concerning and I'd want to know more about the people they polled to be sure that 500 people were representative of all the immigrants from a giant continent.

There is systemic racisim. I have seen other people hurt by it when I have been spared. Affirmative action is not perfect, but anyone who wants to get rid of it has no solution to this issue. They just want their cut to be fair, while denying others that same opportunity.

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.

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?

Are YOU serious? How about Japanese American Interment camps in the 1940s is that worthy?

That was an atrocity, certainly, and I'm very sorry if your family was impacted by it. But it's not the same as two centuries of involuntary servitude followed by another century of deliberate efforts to keep an entire race from being allowed to participate fully in our democracy.

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.

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?

Are YOU serious? How about Japanese American Interment camps in the 1940s is that worthy?

I'm Japanese American and I wouldn't ever equate internment during the war to slavery. Both were terrible, yes, but if you can't recognize the distinction, then you're beyond help.

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.

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.

Who said that? Don't put words in my mouth, you dishonest interlocutor. That's 100% strawman, completely irrelevant and incendiary.

You make a dumb dishonest response to my post because, as I pointed out, you are not informed about the process and why colleges do it.

And sadly, you don't WANT to be informed about it.

I’m the OP you originally responded to. I didn’t post this. I agree that it is indeed a straw man. I will also remind you of how intellectually weak you sound with your insults and claims someone doesn’t “want to be informed.” Can you please add something other than insults and your hysteria? Like facts? I’m the one quoting Harvard, Princeton…