<p>
[quote]
what you're saying shows that you didn't really read what I said or that you completely misunderstood what I said.</p>
<p>I will make it simpler since you don't seem to understand it.</p>
<p>an Asian candidate has the "stereotypically Asian set of ECs" like math team and debate and violin.
say a white or URM candidate has the EXACT SAME ECS. </p>
<p>both candidates would have the exact same interests and contribute the exactly same "diversity of interest" to the class.</p>
<p>yet one will be given far more consideration than the other.</p>
<p>how do you justify this?
[/quote]
no. i understand what you are saying; it's just a poor argument. i said, "how would it be stereotypical of an African American applicant to have a set of stereotypical/common Asian activities?" you just don't get how that question shows how your logic is flawed and that you are missing the point of this discussion. it's common for an Asian to do do "Asian activities;" that's why they are considered "Asian activities."</p>
<p>i do not understand how an Asian doing "Asian activities" would add to the diversity of the campus more than a non-Asian doing "Asian activities." that's like saying an Asian who is really into hip hop, and African American culture doesn't add more diversity to a student body than an African American who's into the same thing. one's a dime a dozen; the other is not. </p>
<p>that said that's not the issue. the issue we are talking about right now is that too many Asian kids are pursuing "Asian ECs." (the reason why they are called Asian ECs is because they are ECs that Asians typically do.) as a result of this, a lot of Asians have similar applications. when this happens colleges have to figure out a new way to compare them to each other. i don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that colleges start to rely more heavily on test scores and grades when trying to create the Asian segment of the student body.</p>
<p>
[quote]
no, what you actually mean to say, as evidenced by your previous statments, is that you must differentiate yourself from primarily others of your race- NOT the general population of applicants.
[/quote]
i would say that you are compared with people from your region of the country, and of course your race. your region, because, if that was not the case, hardly any midwestern/southern kids would get into top schools. by race, because schools want to create an adequately racially diverse student body. within the various pools, colleges seek to find diversity of interests, socioeconomic class, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
so should Asian varsity football players get exponentially more consideration than African American varsity football players?
or does differentiating yourself from your race only work against certain groups.
[/quote]
do you want to continue having a serious discussion, or not? since when were we talking about football? last time i checked football and education were two totally different things.</p>
<p>i hate when people bring this point up when talking about AA. it's such a stupid point to make. it's much easier to objectively figure out who the best football players are than to figure out who the best students/leaders/future leaders/inventors/thinkers/etc. are.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Somesenior gets it. Tyler and Newjack, do not.
[/quote]
just curious... what exactly is it?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Tyler, I did not "selectively" read anything.
[/quote]
well then you've been rather lax with your quoting what Tyler and I have been saying.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My argument is, as has always been, that AA is a sham based solely on race.
[/quote]
lol. this doesn't even make sense! why is it a "sham?" i think the reason why you think it is a sham is because you don't understand its purpose or how it works.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have provided concrete examples with links or references.
[/quote]
ehhh i was going to let this one slide but look at what you said, "They turn away thousands of poor white kids that apply. Why? They're white." this must be one of your numerous "concrete example with links or references," right?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I appreciate Newjacks attempts, aside from his constant reference to being "dramatic", yet without concrete evidence, his versions simply do not correlate with what is seen in actual practice.
[/quote]
LOL! ummm... i think i know a lot more than you do on this topic. i mean you said, "My argument is, as has always been, that AA is a sham based solely on race." what kind of position is that to have on an issue like Affirmative Action?</p>
<p>also, how does my version not correlate to its actual practice? my understanding of AA comes straight from an admissions officer from Notre Dame, from researching Affirmative Action lawsuits and Supreme Court Cases (mainly the from the justices' opinions), and from college websites' FAQ's.</p>
<p>EDIT:
i agree with collegealum314 on the politics thing. but NearL is correct on some stuff too though. there is a definite correlation between being educated and being liberal.</p>