Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Anonymous wrote:Asians want clear transparent rules, no discrimination, and fair competition. Is that too much to ask?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Fencing, rowing, lacrosse, golf, filed hockey, cross country, etc. etc. et.
These should be considered nothing much more than good ECs

Anonymous wrote:Asians want clear transparent rules, no discrimination, and fair competition. Is that too much to ask?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

The article in OP's link talks about Asian Americans benefitting from legacy these days. It's not just whites who get legacy.

Ultimately, Asian Americans are playing a big role in the lawsuits against affirmative action in college admissions. Much more so than whites, if we want to be honest about it. It probably has much to do with that white Americans don't idealize or seek out elite college admissions to the extent that Asian Americans do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Athletic recruiting is so teams are viable. It favors people who are good at sports.

Legacy is next generation so if admits evolve so will legacy -- if it stays.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.

As an Asian American we’re not so stupid to think that once you take care of this that the next step isn’t to turn on us. We notice that in the crusade for admissions on academic merit that this group is conspicuously silent on athletic recruiting and legacy, both of which overwhelmingly favor white applicants. And we hear the constant perjoative labels of robots and strivers thrown our way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since people are obsessed with racial demographics, according to the article:

Asians: 29.9
Black: 15.3
Latino: 11.3
Native American: 2
Hawaiian: .5

Total: 59%

Implication: whites are 41%

US racial demographics- tried to find current data and found this for 18-24 y/o as of 2021: https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/11207-young-adult-population-ages-18-to-24-by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/2048/68,69,67,12,70,66,71,7983/21595,21596

Asians: 6%
Black: 14%
Latino: 23%
Native American: 1%
Hawaiian: .5%
White: 53%

Interesting. Technically speaking, whites are visibly underrepresented, as are Latinos, if the goal is to have Harvard's student body mirror national demographics. We could add an overlay of faith but that gets tricker so let's leave it aside for now. We all know Harvard doesn't admit on merit, so it's not really clear what they're looking for in the ideal student body as they also don't have proportional racial demographic mix either.

For all you Asian parents who think whites are your ally, this is how it starts. Who do you think is in their crosshairs for being overrepresented?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asians were used by a wealthy activist named Ed Blum who has a pretty clear agenda. He's the financial backer for the recent cases (Texas, UNC, Harvard) and uses students as his mascots.

His last project was dismantling the voting rights act.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/19/us/affirmative-action-lawsuits.html

Mr. Blum is not a lawyer. But he is a one-man legal factory with a growing record of finding plaintiffs who match his causes, winning big victories and trying above all to erase racial preferences from American life.

Mr. Blum, 65, has orchestrated more than two dozen lawsuits challenging affirmative action practices and voting rights laws across the country. He is behind two of the biggest such cases to reach the Supreme Court: one attacking consideration of race in admissions at the University of Texas, which he lost; the other contesting parts of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, widely considered one of this country’s most important pieces of civil rights legislation, which he won.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/30/politics/scotus-affirmative-action-college-admissions-edward-blum/index.html

Blum had previously enlisted White students to sue over race-based admissions at the University of Texas – and lost. He added a new dimension to the Harvard case, claiming that high-achieving Asian American applicants were unlawfully disadvantaged by screening policies that favored traditionally underrepresented Blacks and Hispanics.

A former stockbroker who never went to law school, Blum, now 70, has a talent for fashioning cases that appeal to the increasingly conservative high court. Using many of the same lawyers over the years, he engineered a series of lawsuits against the 1965 Voting Rights Act culminating in Shelby County v. Holder, the 2013 decision that curtailed the reach of the Voting Rights Act over designated states with a history of discrimination.

I know some angry activists want to blame the resistance to racial based admissions to white supremacists, but Asians are also firmly opposed to it, especially on this scale as is evident at Harvard where the barrier for Asian heritage students is much higher. If you live and work among Asian Americans, it's a major complaint during college admissions, as well as the concerns over getting rid of magnet programs and tracks for high performing students in the name of equity.

Your attitude is the more racist because you refuse to acknowledge people of different races are capable of having their own experiences and views and can only be manipulated by cackling evil white supremacists.