I saw some of the coverage on the justice dept story but I’m not sure how serious it is, it’s just a posting for lawyers. And it will start for white applicants facing discrimination and I do think it will also include Asians if it goes forward.
Harvard’s incoming class is majority non-white.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/08/02/harvard-incoming-class-majority-nonwhite/5yOoqrsQ4SePRRNFemuQ2M/story.html
Apparently this case is a holdover from the Obama justice dept that was filed in 2014 by Asian American students against Harvard. So this is not something new initiated by the Trump justice dept.
Ironically I remember Alan Deshowitz’s speech where he boldly proclaimed 50% of Harvard’s professor’s are Jewish. Would liberals or conservatives on either side of the aisle dare call for a ban on over-represented Jews without being slammed as racist or anti Semitic?
I’ve been on CC for 7 years off and on, we have had many Muslim students of color, particularly Middle Easteners, and Pakistanis come and say ‘hey I need to check the Asian box, this isn’t fair, I don’t have the same background or so and so African migrant has a background of an African prince and migrated here only 7 years ago and they are in a more advantaged position than me and getting anotheer crutch up’ And now just imagine for those Muslim Middle Eastern students how bad things have gotten since then! The truth is if affirmative action were made to help groups, here is a prime case, like with Jews during WW2, that it doesn’t- it is about privilege. Just look at my two alma maters UChicago and Harvard and you can see how provosts had to challenge ingrained institutions to even get non-white or non-Jewish students into the student body.
I doubt whatever Trump’s policy are will affect the rich and privileged, where they be WASP legacy admits or Jewish Americans. Keep in mind family wealth almost directly correlates with things like SAT scores. Merit will not be a replacement but a facade.
Affirmative Action’s time is up. At least in the form it’s currently in. I would go as far as to say it’s an injustice. I hold no love for Trump, but if he successfully and justly succeeds in this endeavor, I think you will see a huge swing in the Asian American vote for generations to come.
Straw-man argument, there is NO ban on over-represented Asians. Harvard is trying its best to achieve black parity.percentage-wise with the general population and they are more or less matched at 1:1. Asians represent 4.7% of the US population but compose 22.2% of Harvard’s admitted class or 5:1. Over-represented is the opposite of ban isn’t it?
So they are better qualified you will add I guess?. Who decides that?, you? Please tell me on which factors?
There are many, many other hooks. Geographical location (they don’t want to be regional or even national…), developmental cases, legacy, SPORTS, sex, etc… Why shouldn’t race be one? It is not like the US was built on race blind policies or like black oppression was/is not real. Please explain to me why it has to be blind but only one way?
There is no straw man. In fact you are using a straw man, to impose an argument which no one here really argued for. This has been discussed, and statistics sourced here, most of the ‘blacks’ at top schools are no longer even African Americans for whom Affirmative Action was made and tailored to 1, but extremely well off and educated African and Caribbean migrants and their children. More well off than even white groups.
- The point isn't so much that Asians or whites are over represented (according to their population in the US, which is irrelevant)but definitely not their population as far as application. The point is there are FAR more stringent requirements for them, and not other over represented groups like Ashkenazis aka white Jews. According to many statistics an Asian American must get 150 pts higher on the SAT, and has about 3 times less (1/4) the admission rate of the equivalent white applicant. Correct me if I'm wrong Lopez. Relativity is important here.
Lastly I dare say there are far more deserving groups for affirmative action today. I think it would be illegal to give a religious preference, but many Muslim groups, almost all of whom seem colored, ethnicities should be considered, as well as many Central American groups (Cubans Venezuelans and other white Hispanic groups dominate top schools just like African migrants) in a Trump era. Giving affirmative action to minorities like Nigerians who never deserved it in the first place or Cubans, resulted in many communities which, ironically, as other posters pointed out, voted against those same Liberal values and actually are helping to get rid of the policy altogether.
If you coddle demographics that are undeserving of a policy, it seems intuitive to me that such a policy would collapse eventually.
“colored”? Wow.
For all you know the minorities from more comfortable situations may not get much of a tip in applications. Hmong and Laotians might because of their relative economic status.
Last I have seen, racists don’t stop and ask for your nation of origin before treating a person badly.
You started your original post by writing: “Would liberals or conservatives on either side of the aisle dare call for a ban on over-represented Jews without being slammed as racist or anti Semitic?”
Harvard has a ban on Asians? The answer is a resounding NO (they are far and away the most over-represented group) so I am sorry but you have started this discussion by building a straw man as the opposite is clearly true.
Then:
“1, but extremely well off and educated African Caribbean migrants and their children. More well off than even white groups.”
Do you have data to back this up?
“2. The point isn’t so much that Asians or whites are over represented (according to their population in the US, which is irrelevant)but definitely not their population as far as application. The point is there are FAR more stringent requirements for them, and not other over represented groups like Ashkenazis aka white Jews.”
Population in the US is not irrelevant. If Harvard was to get a rush of applications from fill blank _____ state, or 100+ great querterbacks with great stats, or zillionaire brats with good enough stats or slave descendants with great stats or I think you get the picture… But in case you don’t: a group that sees Harvard as the end all be all school, you can be sure that Harvard will cut back on that group. Someone wrote this elsewhere:
"For supposedly educated people, a lot of the folks involved with this lawsuit can’t parse basic statistics.
When a large batch of applicants with a particular ethnic identity apply exclusively to a very small subset of majors, then they are naturally going to face greater competition between themselves.
The desire to blame some mythical group of underperforming African-Americans who are “stealing” the slots which rightfully “belong” to a bunch of prestige-obsessed cookie-cutter drones is so whiny it makes me cringe.
Hey! Tiger parents! Grow up! You are not helping your kids or yourselves."
- Statistics on nigerian americans and other groups can be found simply by Google search, made famous by Tiger Mom's book tho.... You can do some work too
- https://www.google.com/search?q=jews+over+represented+ivy+league&rlz=1C1CHMO_enUS540US540&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi775mhvMbVAhWEVhQKHQpdCYwQ_AUICygC&biw=954&bih=487 or specifically Jews in the ivy league dartblog for a nice bar graph . Your point again, doesn't stand against statistics. They are 1.5% of the population or 2% depending on which census and 25% of some ivys. Grossly overrepresented compared to any other group, there is no cap on them, and I would argue nor should there be in an ideal environment. In fact a lot of people refer to the Jewish quotas at Big 3 as being analagous to what Asians face today
- You seem upset and accusatory, not only are many of the statistics you want posted here in multiple threadsd and cited and recited a lot, but if you look closely at the link for black higher education, you will see that many do not even argue against any racial group or for a meritocracy, but to include economics in the formula, instead of simply race. There's actually a strong consensus here, not only racially but economically that people do not start on equal footing. It's ONLY race being a factor that most don't like
Well, I am glad we are avoiding stereotyping large groups of people. /s
You are new here. Would you like to try again?
Sure, I will try again. To clarify I copied that from elsewhere in response to @Doct0r comments on specific “colored” groups that he thinks “deserve” (or not) admission. I apologize for going tit a tat as I can see how it can be taken the wrong way.
To clarify further, that comment was not meant to represent [Asian Americans] as a stereotypical group but those that are now suing Harvard after not being accepted. I see it (the lawsuit) as an extreme consequence of what William Deresiewicz terms “excellent sheep” and their behavior. If someone is not familiar with the term here it goes:
https://newrepublic.com/article/118747/ivy-league-schools-are-overrated-send-your-kids-elsewhere
^^^ NO, it is not about Asian Americans and I personally know plenty of parents and kids of every race and ethnicity deeply invested in the Ivy-admissions rat race.
PS Since Doct0r brought up “Tiger mom” and her stats I would like to add that Deresiewicz goes hard on Amy Chua in his book, his strong opinion is that she has a “shallow, entitled, and abusive view of the world”.
Deresiewicz’s book was a complete waste of time, as are most of his self-promoting missives.
I am not in agreement with everything Deresiewicz writes but I can probably say the same about every author and book I have ever read. However, on the specifics points that I mentioned I am in agreement with him.
You say it was a waste of time for you, you don’t agree with his “excellent sheep” thesis? you agree with Amy Chua’s methods and style? both? other?
The lawsuit was filed by Edward Blum (same guy who filed for Abigail Fisher in Texas and lost, and many other anti-AA cases) during Obama’s term but the Justice Dept was not involved.
What is new is that THIS Justice Dept wants to participate in it.
http://time.com/4885174/justice-department-affirmative-action-colleges-universities/
@notigering - Part of the problem with “Excellent Sheep” is that it was written by a former Yale professor who has been steeped in academia his whole life. While he successfully highlights some problems with higher education at elite institutions, his suggested solutions would only sound reasonable to those who live or pretend to live in an ivory tower. After the first couple of chapters, the book turns into a long screed which has minimal value to a parent of a college age kid. Frank Bruni’s “Where You Go Is Not Who You’ll Want to Be” was more useful.
I have not read Amy Chau’s book.
@Zinhead I read Bruni’s book as well and I agree more with him overall. You summarized the issues with “perfect sheep” well so no need to add more. That said they both describe what they consider to be a very similar and unhealthy problem and that was what I was referring to above. I would say the article (^ “Parents, don’t send your kids to Ivy”) is enough except that I don’t think he even mentions Amy Chau and I enjoyed his take on her methods…
“The desire to blame some mythical group of underperforming African-Americans who are “stealing” the slots which rightfully “belong” to a bunch of prestige-obsessed cookie-cutter drones is so whiny it makes me cringe.”
A lot of stereotyping there, bordering on racism. I work with a lot of these cookie cutters, in silicion valley, and they’re not really all the same. You remind me of that Google employee who said women and minorities are not smart enough to code, just whites and Asians.
That is not remotely what he said. If you want to read the actual document instead of what a biased media reports, see the following:
https://www.scribd.com/document/355823379/Google-s-Ideological-Echo-Chamber#from_embed
You have it backwards. The group on the lawsuit (do I have to keep repeating I am referring to them?) are the ones arguing - in court nonetheless! - that blacks and latinos don’t deserve to be there but they do because they did better in a standardized test or piano playing or whatever endless list of things… If anything that is analogous to the behaviour of the booted Google misogynistic jerk. Keep them out because me/we are better than them is their loud and clear message, and who exactly told them that?: Well, they decided them for themselves with the help of someone with an agenda and I cringe at that whole spectacle…
Would like to add that my position would be exactly the same if it was the other way around in any possible permutation of races or colors that you can think of.
“That is not remotely what he said.”
That’s how it was interpreted, if he didn’t imply what I wrote, he would still have his job.