5 ms·

> You've cherrypicked examples. Look at UNC Chapel Hill or Georgia Tech or Duke (acceptance rates of 25% or less, small Asian populations. I see higher white p

> You've cherrypicked examples. Look at UNC Chapel Hill or Georgia Tech or Duke (acceptance rates of 25% or less, small Asian populations. I see higher white populations at those schools than the ones I cited, which would support my point that affirmative action does not disadvantage whites, since all 3 schools you mentioned use affirmative action yet they have higher white populations than schools which do not use affirmative action. > You're claiming that none of them engage in race-aware, holistic admissions processes, despite contrary statements on all of their undergraduate admissions websites? I made no such claim. In fact, the stats you've shown would further prove my point that whites are not disadvantaged by affirmative action, and that Asians are. > Are you claiming that being overrepresented compared to the baseline population is evidence that a group is unaffected by affirmative action When did I say overrepresented? I merely said the percentage of whites is the same between schools which do and do not use affirmative action, in both schools which are prestigious and those which are not. You cannot say the same is true for Asians. > are unaffected by affirmative action Except the evidence is overwhelming that Asians have to have higher SAT scores, stronger extracurriculars, and stronger profiles to be admitted compared to both whites and other minorities. Not only that, but Asians who received identical personality scores as whites/blacks from alumni interviewers were rated lower by Harvard admissions staff, in order to disadvantage Asians. See: SFFA vs. Harvard. Try to read from a source that isn't liberal this time around. Your claim that all races must have equal representation to their proportion of the population ignores the impact of culture on outcomes. Why do black people dominate athletics? Maybe ask yourself if the NBA should have affirmative action. > You literally just claimed to know what's good for society No, I claimed affirmative action was illegal under the Civil Rights Act and racist. The difference here is that you are a white person, who is not affected by affirmative action, mandating that minorities, who are negatively affected by affirmative action, adhere to it. And you dismiss minorities' opinions as invalid and dismiss the fact that a majority of minorities say they don't want race to be taken into account in the workplace (see the Vox link in my previous comment). THAT is white supremacy: believing your own opinions about minorities, as a white person, while ignoring those same minorities telling you they don't want what you're preaching.

joshuamorton 4y ago
> I merely said the percentage of whites is the same between schools which do and do not use affirmative action, in both schools which are prestigious and those which are not. But this isn't true. Berkley is 25% white, Harvard is ~40% white, Tulane is 61% white. If what you said were true, all three would have similar white populations. Let me try and clarify this for you one last time. Not all schools get them same population of applicants, so you would not expect all schools to get the same population of attendees. National target schools, and schools in areas with large Asian populations, may have relatively large Asian populations. But other schools, including relatively selective ones, in areas with smaller Asian populations, will not have many Asian applicants. If such a school wants to engage in Affirmative action programs, it cannot do so by discriminating against Asian applicants, because it does not have an excess number of Asian applicants to discriminate against. You have claimed previously that such a thing cannot happen, and that even if it did that it "doesn't matter at all". What I have shown are highly selective schools with applicant pools that have a relatively small number of Asians, and I previously demonstrated that such schools engage in affirmative action programs. This demonstrates that such schools disfavor white students when favoring minority applicants. > Except the evidence is overwhelming that Asians have to have higher SAT scores, stronger extracurriculars, and stronger profiles to be admitted compared to both whites and other minorities. Right, now apply the exact same argument to white applicants in comparison to other minorities in regard to the schools I mentioned like Tulane, Emory, Chapel Hill, etc. You would expect white students to be overrepresented compared to the baseline population (much as Asian students are in schools that they target), but they aren't, while Hispanic and Black students often are overrepresented. So can you explain to me how precisely the same behavior is harmful racism against Asians when done by Berkeley or Harvard, but somehow doesn't happen, or if it does it "doesn't matter" when it's at Tulane or Emory and impacts white students? I'll also mention that twice now you've accused me of white supremacy based solely on your assumption that I am white, and your further belief that a white person, I cannot be harmed by affirmative action policies. In reality, it appears that your actual belief is that affirmative action that harms white people "doesn't matter", and that because it "doesn't matter" a White person cannot be harmed by it. > Your claim that all races must have equal representation to their proportion of the population ignores the impact of culture on outcomes. I, uhh, I didn't make this claim. > No, I claimed affirmative action was illegal under the Civil Rights Act and racist. So when you said "Affirmative action is bad for society.", you didn't mean that ending affirmative action would be good for society? What's the option I'm missing? > And you dismiss minorities' opinions as invalid and dismiss the fact that a majority of minorities say they don't want race to be taken into account in the workplace (see the Vox link in my previous comment). I remain confused, I side with the majority on responses to the vox link. While I didn't explicitly state it here[0], my response there should make it clear that I also don't believe that companies should consider race when making hiring or promotion decisions. Like, I'm already on record saying the opposite of wat you think I'm saying. I've never said anything that implies otherwise, so I don't know why you're claiming that I disagree with minorities about this thing when I don't. Like, it's also not a good idea to treat minorities as a monolith. While you clearly oppose Affirmative Action, 80% of Hispanic adults and 70% of Black adults do support them[1], so claiming that I am ignoring minorities simply because I disagree with you is to disregard, well, quite literally the majority of nonwhite Americans, who also disagree with you. And that's fine! Minorities aren't monolithic and you're perfectly free to disagree with anyone you like, but please refrain from accusing me of white supremacy simply because I disagree with you, it's rude. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32186694 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32186694 [1]: https://news.gallup.com/poll/352832/americans-confidence-racial-fairness-waning.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/352832/americans-confidence-rac...

joshuamorton 4y ago

> I merely said the percentage of whites is the same between schools which do and do not use affirmative action, in both schools which are prestigious and those which are not. But this isn't true. Berkley is 25% white, Harvard is ~40% white, Tulane is 61% white. If what you said were true, all three would have similar white populations. Let me try and clarify this for you one last time. Not all schools get them same population of applicants, so you would not expect all schools to get the same population of attendees. National target schools, and schools in areas with large Asian populations, may have relatively large Asian populations. But other schools, including relatively selective ones, in areas with smaller Asian populations, will not have many Asian applicants. If such a school wants to engage in Affirmative action programs, it cannot do so by discriminating against Asian applicants, because it does not have an excess number of Asian applicants to discriminate against. You have claimed previously that such a thing cannot happen, and that even if it did that it "doesn't matter at all". What I have shown are highly selective schools with applicant pools that have a relatively small number of Asians, and I previously demonstrated that such schools engage in affirmative action programs. This demonstrates that such schools disfavor white students when favoring minority applicants. > Except the evidence is overwhelming that Asians have to have higher SAT scores, stronger extracurriculars, and stronger profiles to be admitted compared to both whites and other minorities. Right, now apply the exact same argument to white applicants in comparison to other minorities in regard to the schools I mentioned like Tulane, Emory, Chapel Hill, etc. You would expect white students to be overrepresented compared to the baseline population (much as Asian students are in schools that they target), but they aren't, while Hispanic and Black students often are overrepresented. So can you explain to me how precisely the same behavior is harmful racism against Asians when done by Berkeley or Harvard, but somehow doesn't happen, or if it does it "doesn't matter" when it's at Tulane or Emory and impacts white students? I'll also mention that twice now you've accused me of white supremacy based solely on your assumption that I am white, and your further belief that a white person, I cannot be harmed by affirmative action policies. In reality, it appears that your actual belief is that affirmative action that harms white people "doesn't matter", and that because it "doesn't matter" a White person cannot be harmed by it. > Your claim that all races must have equal representation to their proportion of the population ignores the impact of culture on outcomes. I, uhh, I didn't make this claim. > No, I claimed affirmative action was illegal under the Civil Rights Act and racist. So when you said "Affirmative action is bad for society.", you didn't mean that ending affirmative action would be good for society? What's the option I'm missing? > And you dismiss minorities' opinions as invalid and dismiss the fact that a majority of minorities say they don't want race to be taken into account in the workplace (see the Vox link in my previous comment). I remain confused, I side with the majority on responses to the vox link. While I didn't explicitly state it here[0], my response there should make it clear that I also don't believe that companies should consider race when making hiring or promotion decisions. Like, I'm already on record saying the opposite of wat you think I'm saying. I've never said anything that implies otherwise, so I don't know why you're claiming that I disagree with minorities about this thing when I don't. Like, it's also not a good idea to treat minorities as a monolith. While you clearly oppose Affirmative Action, 80% of Hispanic adults and 70% of Black adults do support them[1], so claiming that I am ignoring minorities simply because I disagree with you is to disregard, well, quite literally the majority of nonwhite Americans, who also disagree with you. And that's fine! Minorities aren't monolithic and you're perfectly free to disagree with anyone you like, but please refrain from accusing me of white supremacy simply because I disagree with you, it's rude. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32186694 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32186694 [1]: https://news.gallup.com/poll/352832/americans-confidence-racial-fairness-waning.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/352832/americans-confidence-rac...