NYTimes Article on Asians at Cal

<p>WHEN Jonathan Hu was going to high school in suburban Southern California, he rarely heard anyone speaking Chinese. But striding through campus on his way to class at the University of California, Berkeley, Mr. Hu hears Mandarin all the time, in plazas, cafeterias, classrooms, study halls, dorms and fast-food outlets. It is part of the soundtrack at this iconic university, along with Cantonese, English, Spanish and, of course, the perpetual jackhammers from the perpetual construction projects spurred by the perpetual fund drives.
Skip to next paragraph</p>

<p>Too Many? Not Enough? Some say Asian-Americans are being denied spots at top colleges to keep their numbers in check (Asians make up 5 percent of the population). Click for percentages of Asian undergraduates at selected colleges.
Multimedia
Berkeley BubbleSlide Show
Berkeley Bubble
East Meets West
East Meets West
Education Life
Go to Special Section ?</p>

<p>“Here, many people speak Chinese as their primary language,” says Mr. Hu, a sophomore. “It’s nice. You really feel like you don’t stand out.”</p>

<p>Today, he is iPod-free, a rare condition on campus, taking in the early winter sun at the dour concrete plaza of the Free Speech Movement Cafe, named for the protests led by Mario Savio in 1964, when the administration tried to muzzle political activity. “Free speech marks us off from the stones and stars,” reads a Savio quote on the cafe wall, “just below the angels.”</p>

<p>There are now mostly small protests, against the new chain stores invading Telegraph Avenue, just outside the campus entrance, and to save the old oak trees scheduled for removal so the football stadium can be renovated. The biggest buzz on Telegraph one week was the grand opening of a chain restaurant — the new Chipotle’s, which drew a crowd of students eager to get in. The scent of patchouli oil and reefer is long gone; the street is posted as a drug-free zone.</p>

<p>And at least on this morning, there is very little speech of any kind inside the Free Speech Cafe; almost without exception, students are face-planted in their laptops, silently downloading class notes, music, messages. It could be the library but for the line for lattes. On mornings like this, the public university beneath the towering campanile seems like a small, industrious city of ?ber-students in flops.</p>

<p>I ask Mr. Hu what it’s like to be on a campus that is overwhelmingly Asian — what it’s like to be of the demographic moment. This fall and last, the number of Asian freshmen at Berkeley has been at a record high, about 46 percent. The overall undergraduate population is 41 percent Asian. On this golden campus, where a creek runs through a redwood grove, there are residence halls with Asian themes; good dim sum is never more than a five-minute walk away; heaping, spicy bowls of pho are served up in the Bear’s Lair cafeteria; and numerous social clubs are linked by common ancestry to countries far across the Pacific.</p>

<p>Mr. Hu shrugs, saying there is a fair amount of “selective self-racial segregation,” which is not unusual at a university this size: about 24,000 undergraduates. “The different ethnic groups don’t really interact that much,” he says. “There’s definitely a sense of sticking with your community.” But, he quickly adds, “People of my generation don’t look at race as that big of a deal. People here, the freshmen and sophomores, they’re pretty much like your average American teenagers.”</p>

<p>Spend a few days at Berkeley, on the classically manicured slope overlooking San Francisco Bay and the distant Pacific, and soon enough the sound of foreign languages becomes less distinct. This is a global campus in a global age. And more than any time in its history, it looks toward the setting sun for its identity.</p>

<p>The revolution at Berkeley is a quiet one, a slow turning of the forces of immigration and demographics. What is troubling to some is that the big public school on the hill certainly does not look like the ethnic face of California, which is 12 percent Asian, more than twice the national average. But it is the new face of the state’s vaunted public university system. Asians make up the largest single ethnic group, 37 percent, at its nine undergraduate campuses.</p>

<p>The oft-cited goal of a public university is to be a microcosm — in this case, of the nation’s most populous, most demographically dynamic state — and to enrich the educational experience with a variety of cultures, economic backgrounds and viewpoints.</p>

<p>But 10 years after California passed Proposition 209, voting to eliminate racial preferences in the public sector, university administrators find such balance harder to attain. At the same time, affirmative action is being challenged on a number of new fronts, in court and at state ballot boxes. And elite colleges have recently come under attack for practicing it — specifically, for bypassing highly credentialed Asian applicants in favor of students of color with less stellar test scores and grades.</p>

<p>A natural consequence of allowing only the best and brightest in, I wouldnt have it any other way, underacheivers do not deserve side entrances into our nations universities. All states should follow our lead.</p>

<p>No. Admission to UC should be based entirely on one test administered to all high school seniors. The results should then be broken up by ethnicity. The percentage that is admitted from each ethnicity should correspond to the percentage of California residents who belong to that ethnicity. Of course, only the highest percentage of scorers from each ethnicity should be admitted. In this way, we could have both equality, in terms of admissions criteria, and inclusion, in terms of demographic trends.</p>

<p>dobby,</p>

<p>What you describe is not, in my opinion, "academic equality," but rather racism. Are we to 'officially' acknowledge that different ethnicities perform, as a whole, differently academically-- that certain ethnic groups truly, inherently are less capable than others?</p>

<p>Bring AA back, now! it is the only way to make the campus more representative of the state of California. Asians SHOULD NOT be represented at 4X their overall population</p>

<p>Jhg888, no, thats obviously not what he's saying. Its not that some ehtnic groups are "inherently less capable," rather that they have been put at a disadvantage through years of oppression and have had access to inferior educational opportunities and have most likely not been pushed into pursuing higher education. People do as they see and Asians in Asian communities see hard workers, whereas Blacks in Black communities see people working at minimum wage jobs. Asians ARE DEFINETLY NOT smarter than Blacks. They just work MUCH harder in their academics.</p>

<p>GoldenBear10,</p>

<p>I don't disagree with your view on asian academic culture. But I fail to see how this would justify AA. Yes, Asian Americans tend to view higher education as a priority-- that is all. You even acknowledge that Asians tend to "work much harder" than their black counterparts.I say, people deserve what they work for. To implement AA would be to undercut their high motivation and to devalue their hard work simply as a result of their race.</p>

<p>I cannot speak for the majority of Asians at Cal, but I would venture to guess that most of them would be very happy with a ethnically diverse campus. But the fact remains, AA just does not make sense and is not a remedy to the problem. For example, AA would not make sense in professional sports, and nor should it.</p>

<p>I am Asian and I grew up in an Asian household. My parents never pushed me to excel academically like the parents of many of my friends. At the same time, I've had asian friends who grew up with divorced parents, broken families, etc. To put it quite frankly, I pushed myself to the limit the entire duration of my k-12 career, taking the hardest classes and performing to the best of my capability. Yes, I was highly motivated, but I believe that was a decision that I made, and a decision most people are capable of making (my situation was quite ordinary. I went to a ethnically diverse High School. I was neither rich nor poor compared to my peers). My parents cared about my grades, but they never pushed me or had high standards like so many asian stereotypes suggest.</p>

<p>I worked my *** off and If I was disqualified from a school I applied to due to the fact that I'm asian, that would be extremely disheartening. I think we often confuse race with socioeconomic issues. A great proportion of blacks and latinos live in poor conditions. But so do some asians. What about very wealthy blacks? They should not be entitled to special treatment simply because they are black. You may say that it is a cultural problem. And this may or may not be true (listen to Bill Cosby). But even if it is, it is another problem, and not one to be addressed by the University, and especially not by AA.</p>

<p>AA seems to be the easiest, most tangible solution to what is an incredibly complex problem. Read the quote by the head of Berkeley's History department he hit the nail on the head - the problem really resides in the public school system (K-12). It's disgusting when you have such a high degree of difference between inner city public education and public education in affluent, suburban neighborhoods.</p>

<p>Teaching kids English would be a start. Kids have no future in life (at least in America) if they are not literate; best test of that is a good writing ability - that's the key to success in higher education. *And once they learn the language, it'd be polite to speak it in public. I appreciate culture just as much as the next guy, but I find it extremely rude for people to talk (and loudly) in foreign languages in crowded, public areas - Asians at Berkeley are the biggest violators of this.</p>

<p>A LIMITED form of AA may be needed, but the real work on this problem must be done on the smaller level, much earlier, in the k-6 years.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Bring AA back, now! it is the only way to make the campus more representative of the state of California. Asians SHOULD NOT be represented at 4X their overall population

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Mm-hmm, why don't we set the % of Asians at Berkeley to 12, exactly the same as the % for the state? And same for the other races? In fact, wouldn't it be nice if we were to do this for all UCs? Let's add in privates too; we can't let that Asian Institute of Technology down South get away with such a travesty. But wait, why stop there? Let's go out and enforce AA to make every single California public high school reflect the exact same racial ratio as the state of California. Private high schools, too.</p>

<p>I thought the point of a prestigious university is to educate bright, achieved students, not educating students based on what race they are.</p>

<p>Anyway, lipanconjuring has a point. There doesn't even need to be any debates over AA if URMs could just perform as well as Caucasians and Asians. But why don't they? Most people ascribe the blame onto their "disadvantaged" backgrounds. Well, do something about their disadvantaged backgrounds instead of complain about lack of AA.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Most people ascribe the blame onto their "disadvantaged" backgrounds. Well, do something about their disadvantaged backgrounds instead of complain about lack of AA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Perhaps a mixture of the two would be the best solution. If right now K-12 got magically equal, then in about two decades, IMO, there would be no legitimate way to justify race-based affirmative action. But what about the time inbetween? How do you "make up" for the inequality in current K-12 if not by affirmative action in current college admissions?</p>

<p>you act like asians aren't affected by bad education policy. sure they have great college acceptance rates, but on employment statistics they're much the same.
AA is treating a symptom, the fact is we need to alter public school funding, and forcefully integrate schools (as Berkeley USD) to create diversity, and make sure rich areas help fund poor areas, after all those rich areas do well off of paying the poor minimum wage; the least they could give is helping to ensure their school's are just as good as those in wealthy areas.
AA is treating a symptom, but on an educational level, it's definately better having diversity. ORM asian might come to cal engineering school, but have a harder time socially or with a job interview, when they can't fit in to more westernized job market.
Integration forces cooperation and diversity creates not only tolerance but communication. This helps all races. But I agree, first we need to equalize funding and fix disparaties in secondary and primary education.<br>
Also, having a predominantly Asian population is detrimental to others; it's alienating to everyone, just as any skewed make up would be.<br>
The purpose of the university is to educate, not just to ensure the BEST get degrees, but that the entire population of California benefits.</p>

<p>I think the best students should get in, no matter their race.</p>

<p>I bet I'm just as diasadvantaged as any black or latino or whatever out there (though I'm Asian), but I've pushed myself. I go to a poor public school, I live in a bad neighborhood, my parents didn't go to college. Why shouldn't I get special treatment? What I'm saying is that if you push yourself hard enough, you can succeed, no matter your race.</p>

<p>Ah, the good ol' protestant work ethic. it's brainwashed millions into thinking that with a little hard work and some good faith in the Lord you too can become wealthy; "The world is paved with acres of diamonds!" right?
This country is builton on people's backs. This country's wonderful system has worked on using ethnicity to cut accross class lines and keep workers from coming together. Racism is part of our national history, part of what's kept the system stable, why the working class never overthrew the capitalist class.<br>
That's why it has to be tackled head on, why we can't simply, "ignore it." We have to address it, have to see it for what it is. But to simply ignore it and simply say that high wages and benefits are meant for "the best" is just naive.
Yes, hard work can save you. But its NOT RIGHT that someone should work harder to make it from Watts than from Bel Air. The playing field ain't level buddy, sorry, it's horribly horribly skewed.
Of course AA is treating a sympton and not a cause, but maybe people wouldn't be forced to resort to racial quotas if rich, dipraportionally white, neighbor hoods were willing to share their wealth to benefit poor communities. Work's gotta be done on both ends, diversity isn't just paternalism, its a legitimate tool to build a better society, and more diversity, means a better education.</p>

<p>
[quote]
more diversity, means a better education.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hear hear, the more "diversity" you have, the smarter you will become. For example, some great grad programs are extremely diverse - they have more than than 50% URMs. But not only that, they also has 100% women students. These programs have great placements and Berkeley undergrad should follow their lead. Anything that fosters diversity and destroys the Judeo-Christian white heterosexual male power structure is a good thing.</p>

<p>1) students of different racial/ethnic backgrounds do not usually interact at a close level; self-segregation is present. 2) social psychology research shows that non-intimate outgroup contact increases prejudice to higher levels than if no contact occurred. So what is the benefit of this so-called "diversity"? It's a cosmetic thing.</p>

<p>i feel hated on. but regardless, you guys are all very shortsighted. in the long run, whether you attend berkeley, or ucla, or uci doesn't make much of a difference. if you're talented, then the university you attend can't make you untalented, and the same goes for the opposite. i'm a white male and i say bring on AA. sure, i might get rejected from a school because joe latino had the same stats as me but he's an URM, so he got in, but in the end, i can be just as successful at another university. stop complaining. so what if you didn't get into your first choice university. you've been accepted to three other top universities. congratulations, you've got a good life. if you're excuse for not being successful in life is that a minority took your spot at one college, then that's all you've got--excuses.</p>

<p>Gee, nice use of numbers; lets pull some other numbers out of another dry smelly crevace, maybe a history book. </p>

<p>500,000+ Africans forced on boats as slaves to North America; </p>

<p>63,000: the number of Chinese who immigrated in the 19th century, barred from citizenship and taxed as "foreign" miners: generating almost all tax revenue from the mining industry at that time. Not to mention, the number of those immigrants forces to work as virtual slaves in the rail roads. </p>

<p>Or maybe some fractions? 1/5-> children in California born in poverty
A few percentages maybe dobby? as percentages seem to be you're favorite:</p>

<p>19.1%, foreign born residents in poverty;
American Indians, African Americans, and Latinos in poverty ranges from 21.9-24%, that's almost 1/4 if you have trouble counting that, math wiz.</p>

<p>All this, formed from an enlightened, yet oh so often attacked "Judeo-Christian white heterosexual male power structure." So yah, I guess it is a little good if we chip away at it, maybe do something to pay back these little bits of injustice.</p>

<p>
[quote]
500,000+ Africans forced on boats as slaves to North America;</p>

<p>63,000: the number of Chinese who immigrated in the 19th century, barred from citizenship and taxed as "foreign" miners: generating almost all tax revenue from the mining industry at that time. Not to mention, the number of those immigrants forces to work as virtual slaves in the rail roads. </p>

<p>Or maybe some fractions? 1/5-> children in California born in poverty
A few percentages maybe dobby? as percentages seem to be you're favorite:</p>

<p>19.1%, foreign born residents in poverty;
American Indians, African Americans, and Latinos in poverty ranges from 21.9-24%, that's almost 1/4 if you have trouble counting that, math wiz.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So it's about history now? Alright, let's talk history. There's at least one case of atrocities perpetrated by the White Man missing from your list. </p>

<p>The America government knew about Hitler's concentration camps and failed to intervene or even speak out before the "official finding" at the end of the war, opting instead to erect a bureaucratic "paper wall" to keep Jews out. Heck, FDR himself refused to let a ship full of Jews, the SS St. Louis, from unloading in Florida. He did that in spite of mounting evidence that Jews were being treated like cows in Germany, where the ship was forced to return. Many the people on that ship became "slaves" at Auschwitz and ended up in the gas chambers/crematoria. So in a way, America, and arguably the Democratic Party itself, is directly responsible for the enslavement and eventual deaths of those Jews. Yet, it's not like America or the Democrats have even attempted to repay their "debt" to the American descendents/relatives of those and other Jews they "killed" by granting them URM status when applying to American colleges which use affirmative action. Something quite different seems to be happening. Jews have a harder time getting into top colleges than just about everyone. Why is that? </p>

<p>I'm not really against affirmative action. All I'm trying to say is that if you're going to use race-based affirmative action, you should not have a double standard. If what's needed to benefit from AA is being the descendant/member of a dehumanized group in recent American history, you better grant the same privilege for all members of groups that fit the bill. You should also determine what constitutes "recent history" and narrow the definition of who exactly may qualify for status as a member of a dehumanized group in said history.</p>

<p>
[quote]
All this, formed from an enlightened, yet oh so often attacked "Judeo-Christian white heterosexual male power structure." So yah, I guess it is a little good if we chip away at it, maybe do something to pay back these little bits of injustice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think you fail to realize that doing such a thing would probably create more injustice. For example, when Hispanics become the majority of California and by extension the legislature, they will probably implement affirmative action on a massive level, citing past discrimination. You think whites and Asians are going to have an easy time getting into UC, even if they really deserve it? Probably not. The Hispanic leaders who will then be in power will be pretty convinced that in spite of their wealth and power they are still the victim and will continue to tear down the by then imagined "Judeo-Christian white heterosexual male power structure." It's an established socio-psychological fact that if a group reaches a position of power by gradually vanquishing another group, the group that has gained is not likely to suddenly turn around and play nice to the descendants of the other group. I'm not saying the new majority group will exterminate the new minority group, there'll simply be a turn-over in the racial-capitalist hierarchy. Is that the kind of California you want? I get the impression you're a some kind of socialist and affirmative action helps build hierarchy, and that's not very socialistic IMO. If you want to "chip away" at privilege, you should favor the nationalization of all colleges and open enrollment for everyone and their mother.</p>

<p>I do favor that, college education should be a right for high school graduates, not a priviledge for those who can afford it, or benefited the circumstances of quality education. Education in a society based on progress is a RIGHT, just as healtcare is a RIGHT, and currently many are not given that right (look it up, promote the general Welfare, in the very first sentence in our Constitution)</p>

<p>The supreme court's ruled (by conservative elitists appointees) that de facto racial and class segregation is perfectly accepted legal doctrine, so it's up to government to legislate for it due to the court's reinterpretation of precedent in 1974 (from Brown v. BOE, which mandated to Milliken v. Bradley[making busing non-mandatory] and san antonio independent school district v. rodriguez, making funding legally unequal) and to fix the funding structure (which must be mandated in order to actually enforce racial and class desegregation) or you need to use AA programs. </p>

<p>The argumentt about "the best students" doesn't hold water, college admissions is about future potential, not just past performance. There's alot of potential in sending more minorities to college, and as a public institution, Cal, and the rest of the UC should be prioritizing THE GENERAL WELFARE, not just of that 1% but of the entire 100%
There's a reason we need to be around other cultures in an educational environment, and that's because the only way to learn of other cultures. How are we to understand if we aren't able to stand under. </p>

<p>For four centuries the 1 percent have controlled the 99% through a system aimed soley at profit and stressing inferiority. Part of that is creating a false competitiveness between races and outright oppression of some in order create a feeling of inferiority. All of that done in the name of progress.</p>

<p>No i'm not a socialist, i'm more conservative than george bush jr. he wants to turn the clock back 150 years, I wanna turn the clock back to a time when when people shared things and cared for one another cooperatively. But to do that now, government needs to act.</p>

<p>Too long in America there's been a lie fed to us that government is something that shouldn't regulate and change our system to help everyone, but leave us out to fend for ourselves. government should work to educate, should work to feed us. Government intervention can be a place for good, a place where people....like different races and classes...are brought together. That's what AA is intended for, especially since de facto segregation continues despite Brown v. BOE.</p>

<p>Here is Thomas Sowell's response to the NYT article, "Little Asia on the Hill."
<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/01/the_new_yellow_peril.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/01/the_new_yellow_peril.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>