4 ms·

Yeah, but it leads to absurd results, where the black daughter of two doctors, with 500K+ in annual family income is given preferential treatment, while the Chi

Yeah, but it leads to absurd results, where the black daughter of two doctors, with 500K+ in annual family income is given preferential treatment, while the Chinese-American son of a janitor is discriminated against.

mbg721 4y ago
But he has privilege, and she doesn't.
- TheMagicHorsey 4y ago
  Yeah, but why are Chinese considered privileged now, when before they were not?
  - mbg721 4y ago
    Because when they were mostly poor railroad workers, they were easily manipulated, and now that they're middle-class professionals, they aren't?
    - TheMagicHorsey 4y ago
      How did that happen if America is so systematically racist that races can't get ahead on their own without positive discrimination?
      - mbg721 4y ago
        We're only racist with an eye toward particular races. Allegedly.
- tomrod 4y ago
  My understanding of people claiming privilege is that, under ceterus paribus ("all else equal") assumptions, certain groups have worse socioeconomic outcomes than others. The hypothetical here doesn't match that.
xiande04 4y ago
Do you have any proof of that being the case? If the Chinese son makes it clear to the admission team about the hardships he overcame, surely that would be to his advantage. Completely anecdotally, but I had two Asian colleagues from poor households. One got a full ride to Harvard and the other to MIT. Whereas, the smartest person I've ever personally known was accepted to Harvard but not given any financial aid. He was a white male with a drug-addicted mom raised by his grandma in the slums.
- ekam 4y ago
  https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29964/w29964.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29964/w299...
- slowmovintarget 4y ago
  You're advocating an arbitrary system over a rules system. Who decides whether the sob story the janitor's son tells is sufficient? Is having two drug-addled parents better than one? In a rules based system, you get in or don't based on your qualifications and prerequisites. You can predict how the system will act in restricting you. It is fairer. In a system where everyone must be judged, it leads to exercises in capriciousness, which is what we're seeing now. "We have too many that look like you, we need a different assortment of appearances." That's arbitrary. "Your story made me sadder than his story, you get in." That's an awful way to run a system. That's how you get aristocracy with arbitrary power. It's what every monarch of the old systems lorded over the peasants. We're just recreating it in technicolor in all of our non-governmental systems, and it just seems so utterly foolish. The claims for why we're doing it seem noble, but they always seem that way. What this arbitrary mechanism always achieves is the opposite of its stated intent.
  - SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
    I think this was excellently reasoned. Wish there was something I could add, but it’s all there. This has been my argument against “post modernism” and “my truth” nonsense. You can’t have a legal or social system that is selectively applied because of a story or your feelings.

mbg721 4y ago

But he has privilege, and she doesn't.

TheMagicHorsey 4y ago
Yeah, but why are Chinese considered privileged now, when before they were not?
- mbg721 4y ago
  Because when they were mostly poor railroad workers, they were easily manipulated, and now that they're middle-class professionals, they aren't?
  - TheMagicHorsey 4y ago
    How did that happen if America is so systematically racist that races can't get ahead on their own without positive discrimination?
    - mbg721 4y ago
      We're only racist with an eye toward particular races. Allegedly.
tomrod 4y ago
My understanding of people claiming privilege is that, under ceterus paribus ("all else equal") assumptions, certain groups have worse socioeconomic outcomes than others. The hypothetical here doesn't match that.

xiande04 4y ago

Do you have any proof of that being the case? If the Chinese son makes it clear to the admission team about the hardships he overcame, surely that would be to his advantage. Completely anecdotally, but I had two Asian colleagues from poor households. One got a full ride to Harvard and the other to MIT. Whereas, the smartest person I've ever personally known was accepted to Harvard but not given any financial aid. He was a white male with a drug-addicted mom raised by his grandma in the slums.

ekam 4y ago
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29964/w29964.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29964/w299...
slowmovintarget 4y ago
You're advocating an arbitrary system over a rules system. Who decides whether the sob story the janitor's son tells is sufficient? Is having two drug-addled parents better than one? In a rules based system, you get in or don't based on your qualifications and prerequisites. You can predict how the system will act in restricting you. It is fairer. In a system where everyone must be judged, it leads to exercises in capriciousness, which is what we're seeing now. "We have too many that look like you, we need a different assortment of appearances." That's arbitrary. "Your story made me sadder than his story, you get in." That's an awful way to run a system. That's how you get aristocracy with arbitrary power. It's what every monarch of the old systems lorded over the peasants. We're just recreating it in technicolor in all of our non-governmental systems, and it just seems so utterly foolish. The claims for why we're doing it seem noble, but they always seem that way. What this arbitrary mechanism always achieves is the opposite of its stated intent.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y ago
  I think this was excellently reasoned. Wish there was something I could add, but it’s all there. This has been my argument against “post modernism” and “my truth” nonsense. You can’t have a legal or social system that is selectively applied because of a story or your feelings.