3 ms·

Hi, I'm Asian and never got into an elite institution like Harvard, but did get into UNC Chapel Hill. I'm thoroughly mediocre overall and was when I applied. I

Hi, I'm Asian and never got into an elite institution like Harvard, but did get into UNC Chapel Hill. I'm thoroughly mediocre overall and was when I applied. I oppose this lawsuit because I see no evidence that this is anything but sour grapes on the part of the aggrieved parties, all of whom seem to have gone to other elite institutions that I could have never gotten into (like Duke). I am fundamentally opposed to the implication of this suit - the acknowledgement that literally any outcome outside of getting into Harvard is a net detriment to life outcomes significant enough to warrant a lawsuit. I believe this to be un-American and incredibly elitist. In addition, the DOJ's tacit support for it appears to be nothing more than a cynical ploy to drive a wedge between Asian-Americans and other people of color. I've seen some analysts claim that this could convince Asian-Americans to start voting Republican again - something I find amusing, because this country and community have significantly larger problems than pearl-clutching about whether one gets into elite school A or elite school B.

asianthrowaway 8y ago
> I am fundamentally opposed to the implication of this suit - the acknowledgement that literally any outcome outside of getting into Harvard is a net detriment to life outcomes significant enough to warrant a lawsuit. I don't think that's the implication. I think the point of the plaintiffs is that the admissions process is racist against asians of equal capability to other races. Now no doubt some of them might be motivated by a personal vendetta against Harvard for being rejected, but I don't think they're asking to be personally admitted to Harvard if their case succeeds. I'm not american but this is literally institutional racism, and it's bizarre to me how people, and especially asians, seem okay with it.
gnulinux 8y ago
I hate saying things like this because it's very meaningless, but this time it's a bit too much. UNC Chapel Hill is absolutely an elite institution. It's one of the most prestigious public schools in the world (recall recent Nobels) and has a very low acceptance rate. Beliefs like this mostly come from the absurd favoritism of the society to private schools. Most people I met would consider a private school roughly as prestigious as UNC "elite" and not consider UNC "elite".
- akhilcacharya 8y ago
  I didn't actually end up going there, I went to a school even less prestigious and less notable (our only Nobel is Rajendra Pauchauri) because I initially intended on majoring in something not available there (I later changed my mind). That was probably a mistake, but whatever. In addition, I'm in-state. For the year before me I believe in-state acceptance was in the 40-50% range, which isn't very competitive IMO.
  - gnulinux 8y ago
    Again this conversation is absurd but for what it's worth, acceptance rates are very bad way to compare selectivity (which is essentially what I meant but phrased wrong). Berkeley and UCLA have around ~8% - ~13% acceptance rate but Berkeley receives almost half what UCLA receives because Berkeley is much more selective than UCLA so some people don't even apply to Berkeley and apply to other UCs (we can see this if we compare student profile). If you look at sheer numbers Berkeley's 10% acceptance rate seems noob compared to a tiny liberal arts college with 5% acceptance rate but Berkeley is absolutely one of the most prestigious universities in the world, it just accepts hoards of students all over the world. So, it's not that easy.
sidr 8y ago
So because these candidates were more competitive college applicants than you, there's no clear and blatant systematic bias? Harvard and Duke are both more selective/prestigious than UNC, therefore they are equally selective/prestigious? The reason Harvard is at the center of this is, any discrimination at the most selective institution will filter down because the overqualified rejects from the top tier will fill up the second tier, and the overqualified rejects from the second tier will start filling up the third tier, and so on...Also, as lawsuits go, if they get a decision against Harvard, you can be sure Yale and Princeton and Stanford will take a long hard look at their admission policies. Or more suits will be filed until there is a systemic change.
- akhilcacharya 8y ago
  > there's no clear and blatant systematic bias? I haven't been convinced of it, no. > Harvard and Duke are both more selective/prestigious than UNC, therefore they are equally selective/prestigious? No, but some 86% of applicants can't get into Duke and 95% can't get into Harvard so I'm not sure if that extra 9% is really worth complaining over. It reeks of incredible elitism. For the record, Yale and Stanford are in the same tier. Most of the ordinary folks in this country don't go to competitive schools at all, if they go.

asianthrowaway 8y ago

> I am fundamentally opposed to the implication of this suit - the acknowledgement that literally any outcome outside of getting into Harvard is a net detriment to life outcomes significant enough to warrant a lawsuit. I don't think that's the implication. I think the point of the plaintiffs is that the admissions process is racist against asians of equal capability to other races. Now no doubt some of them might be motivated by a personal vendetta against Harvard for being rejected, but I don't think they're asking to be personally admitted to Harvard if their case succeeds. I'm not american but this is literally institutional racism, and it's bizarre to me how people, and especially asians, seem okay with it.

gnulinux 8y ago

I hate saying things like this because it's very meaningless, but this time it's a bit too much. UNC Chapel Hill is absolutely an elite institution. It's one of the most prestigious public schools in the world (recall recent Nobels) and has a very low acceptance rate. Beliefs like this mostly come from the absurd favoritism of the society to private schools. Most people I met would consider a private school roughly as prestigious as UNC "elite" and not consider UNC "elite".

akhilcacharya 8y ago
I didn't actually end up going there, I went to a school even less prestigious and less notable (our only Nobel is Rajendra Pauchauri) because I initially intended on majoring in something not available there (I later changed my mind). That was probably a mistake, but whatever. In addition, I'm in-state. For the year before me I believe in-state acceptance was in the 40-50% range, which isn't very competitive IMO.
- gnulinux 8y ago
  Again this conversation is absurd but for what it's worth, acceptance rates are very bad way to compare selectivity (which is essentially what I meant but phrased wrong). Berkeley and UCLA have around ~8% - ~13% acceptance rate but Berkeley receives almost half what UCLA receives because Berkeley is much more selective than UCLA so some people don't even apply to Berkeley and apply to other UCs (we can see this if we compare student profile). If you look at sheer numbers Berkeley's 10% acceptance rate seems noob compared to a tiny liberal arts college with 5% acceptance rate but Berkeley is absolutely one of the most prestigious universities in the world, it just accepts hoards of students all over the world. So, it's not that easy.

sidr 8y ago

So because these candidates were more competitive college applicants than you, there's no clear and blatant systematic bias? Harvard and Duke are both more selective/prestigious than UNC, therefore they are equally selective/prestigious? The reason Harvard is at the center of this is, any discrimination at the most selective institution will filter down because the overqualified rejects from the top tier will fill up the second tier, and the overqualified rejects from the second tier will start filling up the third tier, and so on...Also, as lawsuits go, if they get a decision against Harvard, you can be sure Yale and Princeton and Stanford will take a long hard look at their admission policies. Or more suits will be filed until there is a systemic change.

akhilcacharya 8y ago
> there's no clear and blatant systematic bias? I haven't been convinced of it, no. > Harvard and Duke are both more selective/prestigious than UNC, therefore they are equally selective/prestigious? No, but some 86% of applicants can't get into Duke and 95% can't get into Harvard so I'm not sure if that extra 9% is really worth complaining over. It reeks of incredible elitism. For the record, Yale and Stanford are in the same tier. Most of the ordinary folks in this country don't go to competitive schools at all, if they go.