Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

They won't have racial quotas. The "personality" thing was just their beaurocratic excuse for limiting the number of Asians, but now discrimination based on race in college admissions is illegal.

They don’t have racial quotas. The way admissions work is based on points. Affirmative Action candidates were given points. Other candidates gets points for being legacies, volunteer work, extra curriculars, employment, all get points based on SATs, grades, essay, interview, area of the country, and then they must group by major.

Design me a quota without using the word quota.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

They won't have racial quotas. The "personality" thing was just their beaurocratic excuse for limiting the number of Asians, but now discrimination based on race in college admissions is illegal.

They don’t have racial quotas. The way admissions work is based on points. Affirmative Action candidates were given points. Other candidates gets points for being legacies, volunteer work, extra curriculars, employment, all get points based on SATs, grades, essay, interview, area of the country, and then they must group by major.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:getting rid of affirmative action is not going to stop white people from thinking people of color are taking their spots. As a black person, I got a 168 on my LSAT. had a 3.8 GPA, worked 4 campus jobs, worked an internship EVERY summer and I still got shady comments from white students how they would be screwed compared to me because they were not minority. As if my qualifications were less. some of the folks saying this didn't even crack 160 or have a 3.5 GPA and barely did 1 internship.

In law school I was in top 8% of my class. but folks swore I was at the bottom taking job offers from y'all. 14 years into my career I'm a partner at a big law firm. Y'all would assume it is only for diversity reasons and overlook all the cases I won, big business I brought in and top billing. It's funny how folks use to clutch their pearls in disbelief that I was in the top 3 producing associates 7 consecutive years. Like it wasn't possible for a black person to do this. no matter what the merits are, white people love to ASSUME that no one else could ever possibly achieve more than them. So even without AA folks will still find a way to complain about people of color taking their jobs or getting into top universities.

I am a black lawyer who did not do great on the LSAT. I am sure that I got into law school because of affirmative action. However, I finished in the top 5% of my class. Clearly, I deserved to be there. Personally, I don't care what white people think of me. I know that I am the CEO of a company and I'm pretty sure that given its success, it is not because I was a diversity hire, but because I'm damn good at what I do.

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?

You say that Asian students are not a monolith but you assume every Asian student was discrinated against because they were rejected by Harvard? Make it make sense.

PP is not saying they were discriminated against. And, pp is not saying ALL Asian students are discriminated against.
The reason the law was changed was because the Supreme Court found that Asian students were discriminated against. Based on the evidence presented to the court. And, they were. Just as they are at other schools. And, not only universities.

Oh please. The SC wanted to get rid of affirmative action and put a target on the backs of Asian kids. Why is it that most Asian students at Harvard did not agree with this case, nor did any of the Asian civil rights groups. They knew that Asians were being used.

+1. South Asian here. Expect to see the right-wing now turn against the Asians and claim that they make universities "too competitive". One only needs to look at the Real Estate Forum and see how people are uncomfortable with the growing Indian communities in eastern Loudoun County.

This is exactly what's going to happen. A few Asians decided to be used by the right wing and then will be discarded by the right wing. They got what they wanted and used Asians to get it. They only cared about getting rid of affirmative action. They would have used anyone to do it. The SC could care less about Asian students.

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?

You say that Asian students are not a monolith but you assume every Asian student was discrinated against because they were rejected by Harvard? Make it make sense.

PP is not saying they were discriminated against. And, pp is not saying ALL Asian students are discriminated against.
The reason the law was changed was because the Supreme Court found that Asian students were discriminated against. Based on the evidence presented to the court. And, they were. Just as they are at other schools. And, not only universities.

Oh please. The SC wanted to get rid of affirmative action and put a target on the backs of Asian kids. Why is it that most Asian students at Harvard did not agree with this case, nor did any of the Asian civil rights groups. They knew that Asians were being used.

+1. South Asian here. Expect to see the right-wing now turn against the Asians and claim that they make universities "too competitive". One only needs to look at the Real Estate Forum and see how people are uncomfortable with the growing Indian communities in eastern Loudoun County.

Anonymous wrote:getting rid of affirmative action is not going to stop white people from thinking people of color are taking their spots. As a black person, I got a 168 on my LSAT. had a 3.8 GPA, worked 4 campus jobs, worked an internship EVERY summer and I still got shady comments from white students how they would be screwed compared to me because they were not minority. As if my qualifications were less. some of the folks saying this didn't even crack 160 or have a 3.5 GPA and barely did 1 internship.

In law school I was in top 8% of my class. but folks swore I was at the bottom taking job offers from y'all. 14 years into my career I'm a partner at a big law firm. Y'all would assume it is only for diversity reasons and overlook all the cases I won, big business I brought in and top billing. It's funny how folks use to clutch their pearls in disbelief that I was in the top 3 producing associates 7 consecutive years. Like it wasn't possible for a black person to do this. no matter what the merits are, white people love to ASSUME that no one else could ever possibly achieve more than them. So even without AA folks will still find a way to complain about people of color taking their jobs or getting into top universities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who ever thought it was a good idea to use race as a college admissions factor? What a disgustingly backwards thought in the 21st century.

I mean maybe it was because our country was created based on racist ideas? Could it be that we have not achieved a colorblind society in 50 years for a country that practiced slavery for 400 years. Could that be it? I mean, maybe?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who ever thought it was a good idea to use race as a college admissions factor? What a disgustingly backwards thought in the 21st century.

I mean maybe it was because our country was created based on racist ideas? Could it be that we have not achieved a colorblind society in 50 years for a country that practiced slavery for 400 years. Could that be it? I mean, maybe?

I believe the USA became a country in 1776.

The US became a nation in 1964. Before that, it was a confederation of states that were allowed to do whatever they wanted to and a bunch of them were racist police states with the national government doing nothing about it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's think about this honestly. You can be against affirmative action, but a black or brown kid did not take your spot.

Let's see how this works at an ivy league school: the vast majority of students come from legacy, athletics (club sports like crew, lacross and squash), donors and faculty. Then, you have early admission, but you have to have the funds to commit. All of which, I might add, have NOTHING to do with merit.

That leaves the rest to fight for a spot. Do you think those above are coming from black and brown students? Absolutely not.

So, your kid is still going to have a terribly difficult time getting into an ivy unless you fit one of those categories.

So in effect, the SC did what America has done throughout its history - create division among all of the have nots.

Yes absolutely Asians were losing spots to URMs.

"Harvard itself found in a 2013 internal study that, if it admitted applicants solely on the basis of academic merit, its share of Asian American students would explode from 19 percent to 43 percent. Preferences for legacies and athletes have propped up the white share of students admitted. (One analysis finds the effect of those “pales in comparison” to the diversity benefits stemming from racial preferences.) Asian Americans are punished by both forms of preferences."

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/02/the-left-is-gaslighting-asian-americans-on-school-admissions.html

In one of the concurring opinions: JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR apparently believes that race conscious admission programs can somehow increase the chances that members of certain races (blacks and Hispanics) are admitted without decreasing the
chances of admission for members of other races (Asians). This simply defies mathematics.

Test scores are not the only or even the best measure of merit. Stop making that bad-faith inference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's think about this honestly. You can be against affirmative action, but a black or brown kid did not take your spot.

Let's see how this works at an ivy league school: the vast majority of students come from legacy, athletics (club sports like crew, lacross and squash), donors and faculty. Then, you have early admission, but you have to have the funds to commit. All of which, I might add, have NOTHING to do with merit.

That leaves the rest to fight for a spot. Do you think those above are coming from black and brown students? Absolutely not.

So, your kid is still going to have a terribly difficult time getting into an ivy unless you fit one of those categories.

So in effect, the SC did what America has done throughout its history - create division among all of the have nots.

Yes absolutely Asians were losing spots to URMs.

"Harvard itself found in a 2013 internal study that, if it admitted applicants solely on the basis of academic merit, its share of Asian American students would explode from 19 percent to 43 percent. Preferences for legacies and athletes have propped up the white share of students admitted. (One analysis finds the effect of those “pales in comparison” to the diversity benefits stemming from racial preferences.) Asian Americans are punished by both forms of preferences."

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/02/the-left-is-gaslighting-asian-americans-on-school-admissions.html

In one of the concurring opinions: JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR apparently believes that race conscious admission programs can somehow increase the chances that members of certain races (blacks and Hispanics) are admitted without decreasing the
chances of admission for members of other races (Asians). This simply defies mathematics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who ever thought it was a good idea to use race as a college admissions factor? What a disgustingly backwards thought in the 21st century.

I mean maybe it was because our country was created based on racist ideas? Could it be that we have not achieved a colorblind society in 50 years for a country that practiced slavery for 400 years. Could that be it? I mean, maybe?

I believe the USA became a country in 1776.

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?

You say that Asian students are not a monolith but you assume every Asian student was discrinated against because they were rejected by Harvard? Make it make sense.

PP is not saying they were discriminated against. And, pp is not saying ALL Asian students are discriminated against.
The reason the law was changed was because the Supreme Court found that Asian students were discriminated against. Based on the evidence presented to the court. And, they were. Just as they are at other schools. And, not only universities.

Oh please. The SC wanted to get rid of affirmative action and put a target on the backs of Asian kids. Why is it that most Asian students at Harvard did not agree with this case, nor did any of the Asian civil rights groups. They knew that Asians were being used.

+1. South Asian here. Expect to see the right-wing now turn against the Asians and claim that they make universities "too competitive". One only needs to look at the Real Estate Forum and see how people are uncomfortable with the growing Indian communities in eastern Loudoun County.

Anonymous wrote:Let's think about this honestly. You can be against affirmative action, but a black or brown kid did not take your spot.

Let's see how this works at an ivy league school: the vast majority of students come from legacy, athletics (club sports like crew, lacross and squash), donors and faculty. Then, you have early admission, but you have to have the funds to commit. All of which, I might add, have NOTHING to do with merit.

That leaves the rest to fight for a spot. Do you think those above are coming from black and brown students? Absolutely not.

So, your kid is still going to have a terribly difficult time getting into an ivy unless you fit one of those categories.

So in effect, the SC did what America has done throughout its history - create division among all of the have nots.