6 ms·

>To the asian issue I wonder if it isn't even a negative treatment, just that other racial minorities get a tip and many whites make it through legacy and donor

by Veelox 8y ago

>To the asian issue I wonder if it isn't even a negative treatment, just that other racial minorities get a tip and many whites make it through legacy and donoring. I am going to make some assumptions and I apologise if they are wrong. I am going to assume that you think racism is wrong. I think that includes structural rasism. That is, policies, procedures, and practices by institutions that systematically disadvantage on race over another. From you above comment, it seems like you believe other racial minorities get an excplicit tip as a matter of policy. It also seems like you believe whites get an implicit tip due to the due to the process of how legacies work. Yet, you seemed to stop a step short of calling this structural rasism against Asian Americans. Is there something I am missing for why you didn't take that last step?

kjeetgill 8y ago
This is a delicate issue so I'm afraid your fantastic post won't receive a response from anyone who didn't agree with you 100%. I felt I should chime in. Why that last step is a little different for some of us. Truthfully, I don't know. 'Structural Racism' feels different that regular direct explicit racism. I don't feel as confident making blanket statements about it at least. I can certainly think of structurally racist scenarios that feel totally and completely wrong. Casting in movies and entertainment for instance. But other times it's less clear. At the very least there's a point where a desire to be charitable and give someone the benefit of the doubt starts to fade into the picture. I don't wish to speak to the exact matter at hand. I'm catching up on the story still.
sadamznintern 8y ago
Structural racism for African Americans is longstanding issues of disproportionate policing, a massive wealth gap as a result of block busting and red lining, and the educational disadvantages that come with it. If the only thing Asians have against them is having to go to Cornell or a state school instead of Harvard I think those complaining should rethink their priorities.
- Eridrus 8y ago
  Asian people have been discriminated against and oppressed plenty throughout (recent) history, just because the Asians in the US are doing well doesn't mean there is no discrimination - we're just seeing that minorities who come here through skilled immigration pathways tend to be more successful, but don't worry, we're cracking down on that now and you'll see the reversion to the mean occuring in Asian kids soon enough.
frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
>Yet, you seemed to stop a step short of calling this structural racism against Asian Americans. Is there something I am missing for why you didn't take that last step? If we remove legacy admissions, does the Harvard admission system become racist against white people? I don't think so. Harvard is trying to counter-balance a (semi) racially stratified society. Imagine a caste society. Higher caste children are provided with much more material support and are going to be more equipped to get high scores on standardized tests and participate in extracurricular activities (and the right ones). Would a school that looked only at test scores and extracurriculars be race-blind? No, it would just be an indirect observer of race, in this way we have 'laundered' race. In a racist structure there is no way to be blind to race, you either perpetuate it or you work against it.
- Veelox 8y ago
  >In a racist structure there is no way to be blind to race, you either perpetuate it or you work against it. You could be trying to say one thing while I hear something different. Do you think it is okay to elevate underrepresented minorities despite a lack of objectively measurable merit?
  - frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
    >Do you think it is okay to elevate underrepresented minorities despite a lack of objectively measurable merit? In the sense that you mean it - yes. But I would say that there is no such thing as 'objectively measurable merit' and that frequently the type of merit we measure when admitting applicants to the Ivy League isn't really merit at all but instead laundered privilege (whether on race or class or anything else). Some intelligent black girl who goes to a school that performs in the bottom third and takes the hardest classes available to her and has to work a job after school has basically no chance to make it to Harvard or Stanford or Cornell. Some intelligent Asian girl who goes to a private school and takes the hardest classes available and plays tennis and is on the debate team still has a decent chance. Who is more meritorious? We aren't really measuring merit at all, we're measuring likelihood to pass into the upper echelons of society. And then to the extent that there are lots of white and Asian kids who have grown up in circumstances which allow them to signal in a way that the black girl above can't, I really don't have a problem with Harvard stepping in and fixing that.

by Veelox 8y ago

kjeetgill 8y ago

This is a delicate issue so I'm afraid your fantastic post won't receive a response from anyone who didn't agree with you 100%. I felt I should chime in. Why that last step is a little different for some of us. Truthfully, I don't know. 'Structural Racism' feels different that regular direct explicit racism. I don't feel as confident making blanket statements about it at least. I can certainly think of structurally racist scenarios that feel totally and completely wrong. Casting in movies and entertainment for instance. But other times it's less clear. At the very least there's a point where a desire to be charitable and give someone the benefit of the doubt starts to fade into the picture. I don't wish to speak to the exact matter at hand. I'm catching up on the story still.

sadamznintern 8y ago

Structural racism for African Americans is longstanding issues of disproportionate policing, a massive wealth gap as a result of block busting and red lining, and the educational disadvantages that come with it. If the only thing Asians have against them is having to go to Cornell or a state school instead of Harvard I think those complaining should rethink their priorities.

Eridrus 8y ago
Asian people have been discriminated against and oppressed plenty throughout (recent) history, just because the Asians in the US are doing well doesn't mean there is no discrimination - we're just seeing that minorities who come here through skilled immigration pathways tend to be more successful, but don't worry, we're cracking down on that now and you'll see the reversion to the mean occuring in Asian kids soon enough.

frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago

>Yet, you seemed to stop a step short of calling this structural racism against Asian Americans. Is there something I am missing for why you didn't take that last step? If we remove legacy admissions, does the Harvard admission system become racist against white people? I don't think so. Harvard is trying to counter-balance a (semi) racially stratified society. Imagine a caste society. Higher caste children are provided with much more material support and are going to be more equipped to get high scores on standardized tests and participate in extracurricular activities (and the right ones). Would a school that looked only at test scores and extracurriculars be race-blind? No, it would just be an indirect observer of race, in this way we have 'laundered' race. In a racist structure there is no way to be blind to race, you either perpetuate it or you work against it.

Veelox 8y ago
>In a racist structure there is no way to be blind to race, you either perpetuate it or you work against it. You could be trying to say one thing while I hear something different. Do you think it is okay to elevate underrepresented minorities despite a lack of objectively measurable merit?
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
  >Do you think it is okay to elevate underrepresented minorities despite a lack of objectively measurable merit? In the sense that you mean it - yes. But I would say that there is no such thing as 'objectively measurable merit' and that frequently the type of merit we measure when admitting applicants to the Ivy League isn't really merit at all but instead laundered privilege (whether on race or class or anything else). Some intelligent black girl who goes to a school that performs in the bottom third and takes the hardest classes available to her and has to work a job after school has basically no chance to make it to Harvard or Stanford or Cornell. Some intelligent Asian girl who goes to a private school and takes the hardest classes available and plays tennis and is on the debate team still has a decent chance. Who is more meritorious? We aren't really measuring merit at all, we're measuring likelihood to pass into the upper echelons of society. And then to the extent that there are lots of white and Asian kids who have grown up in circumstances which allow them to signal in a way that the black girl above can't, I really don't have a problem with Harvard stepping in and fixing that.