12 ms·

It's the logical conclusion of your stated thesis and affirmative action as it exists today. >Folks are acutely aware that Asian immigration in the US only all

by hnaccy 8y ago

It's the logical conclusion of your stated thesis and affirmative action as it exists today. >Folks are acutely aware that Asian immigration in the US only allowed extremely rich and overqualified immigrants until relatively recently 18th century Chinese laborers are rich and overqualified? Why say "no", whites don't have it harder than asians, then 180 and state that asian americans are all drawn from some privileged group. I'm not a eugenicist I'm just surprised by how easily affirmative actions proponents cast aside asian american concerns and commonly stereotype them as soulless grade grinders with "Tiger Moms" etc.

KirinDave 8y ago
Your argument is wrong and ignores reality. You should feel ashamed of yourself for presenting such a disingenuous and widely debunked argument. This venue demands better. For folks who don't know (hnaccy almost certainly does because this is the standard rebuttal to this lousy argument): Because the Chinese Exclusion Act was a real thing, the total combined Asian American population between the 8th census and the 1965 Immigration & Naturalization Act never exceeded 500,000 nationally, and that's adding a healthy margin of error. The recruited labor force was minuscule and not a significant contributor to today's booming population of over 20m. It wasn't until after substantial immigration changes (oh, and federally guaranteeing non-whites could own property) that more folks were allowed in, and so we've had a relatively tiny fraction of US history where immigration was possible and desirable (who's gonna immigrate if you're legally forbidden to own a business or a home because of your skin color?). Folks moving in initially were folks who were rich and capable of going to a country with only minimal resources and support structures. The first year after the I&NA came about, the Asian population in America surged by over 200% and has grown at a healthy clip since then, dramatically skewing the characteristics of the population's wealth distribution. So yeah, there's a substantial bias in Asian immigration, which has had a lot less time to give people with less means (a reliable predictor of maximum academic performance). We'd expect to see this in the data if economic resources enable academic performance, which we can point to multiple obvious mechanisms of. hnaccy's argument only makes sense if you believe there is some essential quality to Asian and White genetics that, in isolation of every other factor, reliably makes them "smarter" than black or brown people. Even a casual knowledge of genetics and epigenetics suggests that this is at best radically implausible at worst an outright lie dating back to 1930s propaganda trying to co-opt science for political gain.
- hnaccy 8y ago
  Someone can disagree with the concept and/or implementation of race based admission policies without being a racist eugenicist. I believe my confusion stems from you answering no to my question >So you believe that white americans start from a harder place than asian americans? When it sounds like you do believe asian Americans start in a better place due to historical immigration policies and trends.
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    > Someone can disagree with the concept and/or implementation of race based admission policies without being a racist eugenicist. I agree. However, you went a step further and started suggesting a biological essentialism and history erasure. If you simply didn't know you were doing that then admit your opinion is ahistorical and go research the subject. I think you're are now walking this statement back because it was such a weak point. I'm going to take screenshots in case you attempt to abuse editing. > When it sounds like you do believe asian Americans start in a better place due to historical immigration policies and trends. Please see Dr. Eugenia Cheng's 2017 talk "Category Theory in the Real World" for a primer in how to interpret this. There are multiple axis of privilege. Interestingly enough, admissions standards often address these axis by also considering family income and other historical details like presence or loss of family members. The existence of affirmative action for specific groups does not create a zero sum exercise for white Americans, who also have access to a larger number of economic and social criterion for admissions and financial aid.
    - hnaccy 8y ago
      >started suggesting a biological essentialism Where? The existence of affirmative action for specific groups necessarily disadvantages other groups based on their race.
      - KirinDave 8y ago
        > The existence of affirmative action for specific groups necessarily disadvantages other groups based on their race. Why?

by hnaccy 8y ago

KirinDave 8y ago

Your argument is wrong and ignores reality. You should feel ashamed of yourself for presenting such a disingenuous and widely debunked argument. This venue demands better. For folks who don't know (hnaccy almost certainly does because this is the standard rebuttal to this lousy argument): Because the Chinese Exclusion Act was a real thing, the total combined Asian American population between the 8th census and the 1965 Immigration & Naturalization Act never exceeded 500,000 nationally, and that's adding a healthy margin of error. The recruited labor force was minuscule and not a significant contributor to today's booming population of over 20m. It wasn't until after substantial immigration changes (oh, and federally guaranteeing non-whites could own property) that more folks were allowed in, and so we've had a relatively tiny fraction of US history where immigration was possible and desirable (who's gonna immigrate if you're legally forbidden to own a business or a home because of your skin color?). Folks moving in initially were folks who were rich and capable of going to a country with only minimal resources and support structures. The first year after the I&NA came about, the Asian population in America surged by over 200% and has grown at a healthy clip since then, dramatically skewing the characteristics of the population's wealth distribution. So yeah, there's a substantial bias in Asian immigration, which has had a lot less time to give people with less means (a reliable predictor of maximum academic performance). We'd expect to see this in the data if economic resources enable academic performance, which we can point to multiple obvious mechanisms of. hnaccy's argument only makes sense if you believe there is some essential quality to Asian and White genetics that, in isolation of every other factor, reliably makes them "smarter" than black or brown people. Even a casual knowledge of genetics and epigenetics suggests that this is at best radically implausible at worst an outright lie dating back to 1930s propaganda trying to co-opt science for political gain.

hnaccy 8y ago
Someone can disagree with the concept and/or implementation of race based admission policies without being a racist eugenicist. I believe my confusion stems from you answering no to my question >So you believe that white americans start from a harder place than asian americans? When it sounds like you do believe asian Americans start in a better place due to historical immigration policies and trends.
- KirinDave 8y ago
  > Someone can disagree with the concept and/or implementation of race based admission policies without being a racist eugenicist. I agree. However, you went a step further and started suggesting a biological essentialism and history erasure. If you simply didn't know you were doing that then admit your opinion is ahistorical and go research the subject. I think you're are now walking this statement back because it was such a weak point. I'm going to take screenshots in case you attempt to abuse editing. > When it sounds like you do believe asian Americans start in a better place due to historical immigration policies and trends. Please see Dr. Eugenia Cheng's 2017 talk "Category Theory in the Real World" for a primer in how to interpret this. There are multiple axis of privilege. Interestingly enough, admissions standards often address these axis by also considering family income and other historical details like presence or loss of family members. The existence of affirmative action for specific groups does not create a zero sum exercise for white Americans, who also have access to a larger number of economic and social criterion for admissions and financial aid.
  - hnaccy 8y ago
    >started suggesting a biological essentialism Where? The existence of affirmative action for specific groups necessarily disadvantages other groups based on their race.
    - KirinDave 8y ago
      > The existence of affirmative action for specific groups necessarily disadvantages other groups based on their race. Why?