Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

The whole premise of the argument is that Asian kids are being rejected from Harvard for being Asian because lesser qualified kids are being accepted who aren’t Asian. But statistically Asians are over represented, as pointed out a couple of pages back. Are you even listening?!

DP
It seems that "statistically," Asians achieve at a higher rate than others. Does this mean that they can be discriminated against?

DP. No but it is interesting to contemplate what the tipping point would be if the most selective colleges admit an unlimited number of Asian that far outstrips their percentage of the population. Wealthy whites may start feeling that they are being discriminated against--not by "undeserving" Blacks and Hispanics but by Asians.

Jewish folks and Asian folks are over represented. But also value studying and education. Hopefully ethical as well.

Others don’t? So these two groups are the only smart and studious kids?

Comparatively, yes. Look and the average # hours spent doing homework. It correlates with academic success. Unless you want to argue that spending more time studying isn't causal to academic success?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

No. What has been explained in this thread is that Asian Americans want to be evaluated on their personal merits, and not based on their race. Harvard is free and welcome to prefer whatever they want over academics and free to reject anyone they seem to be gunners with no personality. They can give bonus points for socioeconomic status or hardships applicants had to overcome. What they can't do and shouldn't do is reject someone based on race.

Please actually explain why this is a problem. For those harping on how schools will be overrun with rat racers who have no personality and own interests/brain, you are basically saying you don't think Asians are capable of being well rounded human beings. That is not only racist but goes against the findings in the Harvard case, which was that the Asian applicants scored higher across all categories, including extracurriculars and personality. The admissions office simply overrode the true personality scores by people who actually met the applicants and made up their own.

There are important factors to admission in addition to scores. Harvard wants diversity of thought and experience. If it looks like every Asian student is the same, how does that add to the student body?

If Harvard wants diversity of thought, then they will seek to admit students who think differently. Why is that hard to do without discriminating by race?

They don't want diversity of thought. They don't consider that "diversity."
Diversity is defined by skin color, according to liberals.
Not thought. Not socioeconomic status. Not anything but skin color.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell bad for the cool Asians with engaging personalities who aren’t math and science nerds.

Is it a crime to be math and science enthusiasts?

Clownish response. You wouldn’t last a semester in any field requiring logic or comprehension.

Says a moron who couldn't even crack watered down SAT?

You are very wrong. You are arguing badly and illogically with a white male Princeton grad from a public high school and no preference category who majored in Philosophy. I have nothing against the STEM students but the History, English, and other liberal arts and humanities majors are no less valuable to the school, the country, and the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

The whole premise of the argument is that Asian kids are being rejected from Harvard for being Asian because lesser qualified kids are being accepted who aren’t Asian. But statistically Asians are over represented, as pointed out a couple of pages back. Are you even listening?!

DP
It seems that "statistically," Asians achieve at a higher rate than others. Does this mean that they can be discriminated against?

No but why do you think the other kids accepted aren’t worthy and those spots should go to only Asian kids? I don’t think any race has cornered the market on exceptionalism. Seems Asians do though.

If you look at their achievements individually and also their highly developed civilizations and cultures in Cjina, Japan, Korea, etc, they have a right to be proud.

South Korea and Japan can thank the USA for heavily investing funding and intellectual assistance after those countries devastation at the end of WW2 and Korean wars. China can thank Nixon and Kissinger for opening up trade channels that lifted that country out of a feudal economy. Highly developed indeed only because of USA help. Otherwise those countries would be on the level of North Korea and Cambodia.

PP here. I'm referring to their cultural heritage and achievements in art, science, technology, writings, etc going way further back than what you mentioned--as in hundreds of years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

No. What has been explained in this thread is that Asian Americans want to be evaluated on their personal merits, and not based on their race. Harvard is free and welcome to prefer whatever they want over academics and free to reject anyone they seem to be gunners with no personality. They can give bonus points for socioeconomic status or hardships applicants had to overcome. What they can't do and shouldn't do is reject someone based on race.

Please actually explain why this is a problem. For those harping on how schools will be overrun with rat racers who have no personality and own interests/brain, you are basically saying you don't think Asians are capable of being well rounded human beings. That is not only racist but goes against the findings in the Harvard case, which was that the Asian applicants scored higher across all categories, including extracurriculars and personality. The admissions office simply overrode the true personality scores by people who actually met the applicants and made up their own.

There are important factors to admission in addition to scores. Harvard wants diversity of thought and experience. If it looks like every Asian student is the same, how does that add to the student body?

If Harvard wants diversity of thought, then they will seek to admit students who think differently. Why is that hard to do without discriminating by race?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell bad for the cool Asians with engaging personalities who aren’t math and science nerds.

Is it a crime to be math and science enthusiasts?

Clownish response. You wouldn’t last a semester in any field requiring logic or comprehension.

Says a moron who couldn't even crack watered down SAT?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

No. What has been explained in this thread is that Asian Americans want to be evaluated on their personal merits, and not based on their race. Harvard is free and welcome to prefer whatever they want over academics and free to reject anyone they seem to be gunners with no personality. They can give bonus points for socioeconomic status or hardships applicants had to overcome. What they can't do and shouldn't do is reject someone based on race.

Please actually explain why this is a problem. For those harping on how schools will be overrun with rat racers who have no personality and own interests/brain, you are basically saying you don't think Asians are capable of being well rounded human beings. That is not only racist but goes against the findings in the Harvard case, which was that the Asian applicants scored higher across all categories, including extracurriculars and personality. The admissions office simply overrode the true personality scores by people who actually met the applicants and made up their own.

There are important factors to admission in addition to scores. Harvard wants diversity of thought and experience. If it looks like every Asian student is the same, how does that add to the student body?

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS: let’s just ignore racism. This has worked out so well in the past. I also don’t understand how taking affirmative action points away from Blacks and Latinos makes Asians score higher on personality?

Anonymous wrote:Remember when the Democrats said they aren't your kids, they're ours?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

The whole premise of the argument is that Asian kids are being rejected from Harvard for being Asian because lesser qualified kids are being accepted who aren’t Asian. But statistically Asians are over represented, as pointed out a couple of pages back. Are you even listening?!

DP
It seems that "statistically," Asians achieve at a higher rate than others. Does this mean that they can be discriminated against?

No but why do you think the other kids accepted aren’t worthy and those spots should go to only Asian kids? I don’t think any race has cornered the market on exceptionalism. Seems Asians do though.

If you look at their achievements individually and also their highly developed civilizations and cultures in Cjina, Japan, Korea, etc, they have a right to be proud.

South Korea and Japan can thank the USA for heavily investing funding and intellectual assistance after those countries devastation at the end of WW2 and Korean wars. China can thank Nixon and Kissinger for opening up trade channels that lifted that country out of a feudal economy. Highly developed indeed only because of USA help. Otherwise those countries would be on the level of North Korea and Cambodia.

Today, America is the only superpower. Our military and industry dwarfs all other countries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

The whole premise of the argument is that Asian kids are being rejected from Harvard for being Asian because lesser qualified kids are being accepted who aren’t Asian. But statistically Asians are over represented, as pointed out a couple of pages back. Are you even listening?!

DP
It seems that "statistically," Asians achieve at a higher rate than others. Does this mean that they can be discriminated against?

No but why do you think the other kids accepted aren’t worthy and those spots should go to only Asian kids? I don’t think any race has cornered the market on exceptionalism. Seems Asians do though.

If you look at their achievements individually and also their highly developed civilizations and cultures in Cjina, Japan, Korea, etc, they have a right to be proud.

South Korea and Japan can thank the USA for heavily investing funding and intellectual assistance after those countries devastation at the end of WW2 and Korean wars. China can thank Nixon and Kissinger for opening up trade channels that lifted that country out of a feudal economy. Highly developed indeed only because of USA help. Otherwise those countries would be on the level of North Korea and Cambodia.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with the ruling. The open racism
against Asian students boggled my mind. There has also been a large anti white male issue happening and now less white males even go to college than before.The differences in criteria have been unfair. You even see this in kids who grew up on same street and parents make same money but are various ethnicities. Like many things people push things until enough people say no. I do think the SAT will be gone soon because schools will look to find away around this. FWIW I always thought the SAT was also unfair because you need to spend so much money in tutoring and for every genius that doesn’t need it you have thousands more kids who need the tutoring to get over these crazy scores.

Many people don't want to admit that Asians, as a group, are very smart. Their intelligence shows up at a very ypung age in preschool and elementary school settings, long before private tutoring or SAT prep.

It’s not even all intelligence related. 99% of your child’s success is due to PARENTING and taking personal responsibility. Asians just have better familial structure, value education more, and respect laws and norms a lot more than most other groups. People don’t want to admit it but it’s true. Go travel to Asian countries where societies are rigid but crime is very low and they push their kids’ educations hard. You don’t see many a Asian parents letting their kids roam like wild animals in the streets at 10 pm on a school night then whine later they need special treatment for getting into college after they get poor grades due to ‘lack of opportunities’. No, maybe you had piss poor grades because your parents suck, let you roam the streets at 10 pm, and skipped school 40% of the time. Parents need to do better rather than ask for handicaps.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you look to see who is leading top US tech firms like NVIDIA, AMD, Microsoft, and Adobe?

I told you how they took over the tech in the US. Once one Indian has a foot in the door, they will bring onboard their friends and cousins and then they only hire Indians, then they promote each other to top positions.

This is how it happened in Silicon Valley. Ask anyone who works there. They know.

Oh for crying out loud. Don't act like white people don't do this. Have you ever heard of the good old boys club? Look at most government contracting companies in the DMV and tell me the white male holding a C-level position didn't bring in their friends for other C-level or leadership positions. I.see.it.all.the.time.

You see, the truth is they don't see it when it's white people doing this. But if a racial group they don't belong to suddenly does it, OMG the world is ending! Though in all seriousness, no one should be doing this.

White people’s nepotism and cronyism is why we need civil rights laws and affirmative action goals in the first place. Universities are more meritorious than any other institutions in the country, because they take the time and effort to assess each individual applicant. Unlike the Supreme Court, which makes decisions according to “who is for, who is against, and which side funds me.”

Great, then do it in a way that doesn't discriminate against Asians like Harvard was doing. You want to do it by income? Go for it. But what Harvard was doing is unacceptable.

I still don't understand...Asians were not under-represented as compared to the general population at Harvard, so how are "they" being discriminated against? If Asians make up 12% of the population and have roughly 12% of the seats, then what is the complaint? I mean, Harvard turns away 98% of their applicants, and it is possible that the number of Asian rejections is higher because there may be more Asian applicants, but I still feel like this was not the right decision.

The Asian community won’t be happy until 100% of Asians who apply are accepted into Harvard. They feel they deserve it when other kids do not. They are arguing that their kids are always superior to others. Anyone else admitted who isn’t Asian is not as bright and only there due to AA or legacy. It’s been well explain on this thread.

Are you even listening to yourself and not embarrassed by what you're saying? The Asian community is NOT a monolith. I repeat. We are not all tiger moms and we're not all rich nor are we all great in math. My kids don't have straight As. They play sports, not chess. We wouldn't even think of applying to Harvard. We'd be happy if they get into UMCP. What the hell is wrong with you? What we don't want however, is for people to discriminate against my kids and make it more difficult for them to get into schools more than non-Asian kids because of some stereotype or racial bias that you hold against us. Got it? Is that too much to ask?

The whole premise of the argument is that Asian kids are being rejected from Harvard for being Asian because lesser qualified kids are being accepted who aren’t Asian. But statistically Asians are over represented, as pointed out a couple of pages back. Are you even listening?!

DP
It seems that "statistically," Asians achieve at a higher rate than others. Does this mean that they can be discriminated against?

No but why do you think the other kids accepted aren’t worthy and those spots should go to only Asian kids? I don’t think any race has cornered the market on exceptionalism. Seems Asians do though.

If you look at their achievements individually and also their highly developed civilizations and cultures in Cjina, Japan, Korea, etc, they have a right to be proud.

South Korea and Japan can thank the USA for heavily investing funding and intellectual assistance after those countries devastation at the end of WW2 and Korean wars. China can thank Nixon and Kissinger for opening up trade channels that lifted that country out of a feudal economy. Highly developed indeed only because of USA help. Otherwise those countries would be on the level of North Korea and Cambodia.