Daily Bruin Article... wth

<p>Just wondering if any of you at UCLA read this article:
<a href="http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=38302%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/news/articles.asp?id=38302&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>A modest proposal for an immodest proposition
By Jed Levine
DAILY BRUIN CONTRIBUTOR
<a href="mailto:jlevine@media.ucla.edu">jlevine@media.ucla.edu</a></p>

<p>Over a hundred students gathered in Meyerhoff Park last week to express discontent with the University of California admissions policy.</p>

<p>Protestors chanted such slogans as, "UC Regents, I see racists," and criticized UCLA for not doing enough to increase diversity.</p>

<p>But they missed the point entirely.</p>

<p>Why focus on the "racist" UC Board of Regents? Why go after something so cliche as "The Man"?</p>

<p>I empathize with members of the Black Student Union and MEChA who spoke at the rally. As a fellow underrepresented minority at UCLA, I agree that it's hard to find other white people I can identify with on a campus that feels more like Taipei than L.A.</p>

<p>Yes, white people are an underrepresented minority here at UCLA; while they make up 44 percent of the California population, white students only constitute 34 percent of UCLA's student population.</p>

<p>ARIEL ALTER/daily bruin</p>

<p>Asian-Americans, on the other hand, make up only 12 percent of the state of California and 38 percent of UCLA students.</p>

<p>That's 300 percent over-representation: Welcome to UCLAsian.</p>

<p>I agree with the chair of MEChA that the UC Regents are using unfair means to admit UC students. Using grades and test scores as a measure of academic success is clearly just a way to show preference to Asian-American students, who are better at both, and thus promote the status quo.</p>

<p>Why else would they focus on such erroneous admissions criteria as grades and test scores?</p>

<p>What is this, an academic institution? I certainly hope not.</p>

<p>Fortunately, last week's rally has given us a chance to dwell on the critical topic of affirmative action – the practice of using race in university admissions.</p>

<p>Some might point to socio-economic inequality and the poor state of California's inner-city schools as key parts of the larger problem, and that low numbers of white, black and Latino students are simply a symptom of these larger issues.</p>

<p>By fixing these inequalities, they say, we can change the dynamics of our society and increase minority enrollment.</p>

<p>But these people are wrong. Affirmative action makes sense, because, as any pre-med will tell you, treat the symptom, not the disease.</p>

<p>How can we fix this gross inequality and make sure that UCLA better reflects the racial makeup of California? How can we curb the Asian invasion?</p>

<p>Considering that Proposition 209, passed by California voters in 1996, effectively banned any form of affirmative action at the UC, you might think this would be a tough feat.</p>

<p>According to speakers at last week's rally, the only thing standing in our way – aside from Prop. 209 – is those racists running this sham of a social experiment that we call the University of California.</p>

<p>Still, we have an excellent opportunity to reform the admissions process to benefit underrepresented minorities without violating Prop. 209 and directly using race.</p>

<p>For example, we could easily decipher potential Asian-American applicants by checking what student groups they are involved in, such as Asian cultural organizations or Key Club.</p>

<p>I hear some liberal arts colleges accept head shots from applicants, and I think a similar program at UCLA would be monumentally successful at helping us weed out the young Maos and Kim Jongs from potential Mandelas, Lincolns and Estefans.</p>

<p>By keeping the Asian-American student numbers under control and more accurate to their representation in California, we can free up 26 percent of the student body for members of underrepresented groups.</p>

<p>The result is a win-win situation: fewer rolling backpacks, more diversity.</p>

<p>These overflow Asians could then be funneled into a new UC campus where they can be free to explore their identities. Indeed the UC system has a brand new campus that fits the bill perfectly.</p>

<p>Say hello to the UC Merced Pandas.</p>

<p>Some might accuse the BSU and MEChA of wasting their time kicking a dead horse by supporting an idea that California voters shot down in 1996 and have no intention of voting back again.</p>

<p>But I think this problem is more pertinent than ever, and it's time to wake up and smell the bamboo. </p>

<hr>

<p>WTH.</p>

<p>lol yeah, I don't read newspapers much so I was a bit surprised to find a satirical article in the daily bruin</p>

<p>lol. satire. poorly executed satire, but satire nonetheless.</p>

<p>the sad thing is, some people actually feel that way.</p>

<p>this is also true.</p>

<p>Would it have been easier to tell that it was satire if the author suggest we eat Asians instead?</p>

<p>Does "A Modest Proposal" not sound familiar at ALL? =_=;</p>

<p>At least that might've been somewhat entertaining. </p>

<p>And yeah. Perhaps a slightly clearer reference. I mean, I think it's clear that he's TRYING. He's just not succeeding. </p>

<p>Obviously.</p>

<p>Keywon- of course. but since he didn't really reference it at all except for in the title, he does a pretty poor job of portraying that satire. Any decent writer would've tried a little harder to get the message across. </p>

<p>But some people just aren't good at writing sardonically/satirically/sarcastically. I have friends like this. They think it's obvious and hilarious and maybe it is in their head, but it doesn't come across on paper. This guy is totally one of them.</p>

<p>I think good satire shouldn't be immediately obvious.</p>

<p>It shouldn't. But this guy's was just crappy. Like you knew where he was trying to take it but it really, really just didn't get there.</p>

<p>LMAO HAHAHAH...this read was...no comment</p>

<p>" ... and I think a similar program at UCLA would be monumentally successful at helping us weed out the young Maos and Kim Jongs from potential Mandelas, Lincolns and Estefans .. "</p>

<p>:/</p>

<p>I know. it's BAD. Not funny. Offensive. </p>

<p>And crappy writing to boot (which tends to offend me most of all).</p>

<p>sidenote: did anyone go to the sculpture garden and hear clinton speak this morning?</p>

<p>yeah i saw him, does anyone have any pictures from that?</p>

<p>This was one of Jed Levine's better articles. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
The result is a win-win situation: fewer rolling backpacks, more diversity.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>WT? I've never seen an Asian with a rolling backpack. Imbeciles!!!</p>

<p>nikkei,</p>

<p>I've seen some exchange students (read: Asian-Asians) with those annoying backpacks. But most American-Asians had either cool messenger bags or the latest in sexy Jansport bags.</p>

<p>I admit it. I had a rolling backpack during junior year (heaviest courseload in HS blahblahblah). People used to kick my bag in the halls and yeah I later converted to normal bags.</p>