5 ms·

Anyone going to address the Asian elephant in the room? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/led-aapi-scholars-thousands-academics-tell-supreme-court-sup

Anyone going to address the Asian elephant in the room? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/led-aapi-scholars-thousands-academics-tell-supreme-court-support-affir-rcna41412 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/led-aapi-scholars...

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I am not sure why this is an elephant at all? Right now schools can use just about any criteria they want. Why would they cede the control of the process at all?
- throw_m239339 4y ago
  > I am not sure why this is an elephant at all? Right now schools can use just about any criteria they wants. Why would it cede the control of the process at all? Cause it's racist thus immoral. Some american universities used to do that for jews. It's was bad back then it's still bad now. "race-conscious admission", what a sweet euphemism for racial discrimination in academia. Just call it something that sounds positive, the hell with our principles.
  - HideousKojima 4y ago
    It's also blatantly in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and in violation of the 14th Amendment for any state schools. But that hasn't stopped the courts and educational institutions from being explicitly and overtly racist via affirmative action.
    - cma 4y ago
      Alumni preference is racist at lots of schools, since they were segregated in living memory and the chain of alumni admitted with special preference can't go back to a person of excluded race before the desegregation of the school.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
    I am not arguing race. I am asking why from sheer 'ability to steer process in direction I want' would an institution not fight against any changes to the status quo just when they figured out a sweet spot for themselves? I guess what I am saying that it explains a lot behind the link provided.
    - throw_m239339 4y ago
      > I am not arguing race. Well this thread is about about "racism in academia". This is the elephant in the room. Racist policies in college admissions. You're trying to argue that it's somehow off topic when it's blatant and the so called anti-racist activists defend racism when it's targeted at groups they don't care about.
      - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
        Hmm. Interesting point. Can you define racism for me as it relates to "Racist policies in college admissions."? I am trying to determine if you are looking at disparate impact or something else ( and if so, what that something else is ). I don't really disagree with you, but I am trying to understand your perspective. << You're trying to argue that it's somehow off topic Not at all. I am sure racism part will be covered in detail, while I go after less obvious, but likely more accurate 'people maintaining status quo, because it benefits them'.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mikece 4y ago
If I recall correctly, the "California Civil Rights Amendment" (aka: Prop 16) from 2000 would have ended affirmative action in the State of California. I seem to recall that much of the support for this amendment was from the Asian community who were upset that they maxed out their quotas in the UC system every year and those being denied acceptance would have been statistically in the top 5% of applicants in any other quota category. I'm not sure if it's an elephant or a duck.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  Even in states that have forbidden race-based affirmative action, schools have found simple proxies such as zip codes and various outreach programs to circumvent such bans.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
boplicity 4y ago
I'm not really sure what you mean, by the "Asian elephant in the room" -- but the article you linked to has some useful links. You could, for example, read the brief submitted to the supreme court. Here's what the article quoted: > In the Harvard brief, the academics argued that SFFA’s case is grounded in racist stereotypes, citing the petitioner’s own assertion that Asian Americans are academically “substantially stronger” than other demographic groups and therefore “should be admitted at a higher rate.” > “That assertion fundamentally rests on a racial stereotype about Asian Americans as a so-called ‘model minority,’” the brief reads. “That stereotype advances the views that (1) Asian Americans are smarter and value education more than other groups and (2) other racial minorities do not value hard work and education.” > The Harvard brief also states that the dissolution of race-conscious admissions would harm Asian Americans and ignore the diversity of experiences and degrees of power and privilege within the group. > “Research shows that advocating such views creates groundless fears of racial discrimination in college admissions that … inhibits identity development among Asian American students,” the brief reads.
- CWuestefeld 4y ago
  > “Research shows that advocating such views creates groundless fears of racial discrimination in college admissions [...] Is this just saying that observing that colleges are discriminating against Asians (by rejecting their applications at a higher rate, such that less-objectively-qualified applicants of other races are accepted in their stead) makes people feel that Asians are being discriminated against? Because of course discriminating against someone makes it seem like there is discrimination afoot.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

I am not sure why this is an elephant at all? Right now schools can use just about any criteria they want. Why would they cede the control of the process at all?

throw_m239339 4y ago
> I am not sure why this is an elephant at all? Right now schools can use just about any criteria they wants. Why would it cede the control of the process at all? Cause it's racist thus immoral. Some american universities used to do that for jews. It's was bad back then it's still bad now. "race-conscious admission", what a sweet euphemism for racial discrimination in academia. Just call it something that sounds positive, the hell with our principles.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  It's also blatantly in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and in violation of the 14th Amendment for any state schools. But that hasn't stopped the courts and educational institutions from being explicitly and overtly racist via affirmative action.
  - cma 4y ago
    Alumni preference is racist at lots of schools, since they were segregated in living memory and the chain of alumni admitted with special preference can't go back to a person of excluded race before the desegregation of the school.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
  I am not arguing race. I am asking why from sheer 'ability to steer process in direction I want' would an institution not fight against any changes to the status quo just when they figured out a sweet spot for themselves? I guess what I am saying that it explains a lot behind the link provided.
  - throw_m239339 4y ago
    > I am not arguing race. Well this thread is about about "racism in academia". This is the elephant in the room. Racist policies in college admissions. You're trying to argue that it's somehow off topic when it's blatant and the so called anti-racist activists defend racism when it's targeted at groups they don't care about.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
      Hmm. Interesting point. Can you define racism for me as it relates to "Racist policies in college admissions."? I am trying to determine if you are looking at disparate impact or something else ( and if so, what that something else is ). I don't really disagree with you, but I am trying to understand your perspective. << You're trying to argue that it's somehow off topic Not at all. I am sure racism part will be covered in detail, while I go after less obvious, but likely more accurate 'people maintaining status quo, because it benefits them'.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mikece 4y ago

If I recall correctly, the "California Civil Rights Amendment" (aka: Prop 16) from 2000 would have ended affirmative action in the State of California. I seem to recall that much of the support for this amendment was from the Asian community who were upset that they maxed out their quotas in the UC system every year and those being denied acceptance would have been statistically in the top 5% of applicants in any other quota category. I'm not sure if it's an elephant or a duck.

HideousKojima 4y ago
Even in states that have forbidden race-based affirmative action, schools have found simple proxies such as zip codes and various outreach programs to circumvent such bans.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

boplicity 4y ago

I'm not really sure what you mean, by the "Asian elephant in the room" -- but the article you linked to has some useful links. You could, for example, read the brief submitted to the supreme court. Here's what the article quoted: > In the Harvard brief, the academics argued that SFFA’s case is grounded in racist stereotypes, citing the petitioner’s own assertion that Asian Americans are academically “substantially stronger” than other demographic groups and therefore “should be admitted at a higher rate.” > “That assertion fundamentally rests on a racial stereotype about Asian Americans as a so-called ‘model minority,’” the brief reads. “That stereotype advances the views that (1) Asian Americans are smarter and value education more than other groups and (2) other racial minorities do not value hard work and education.” > The Harvard brief also states that the dissolution of race-conscious admissions would harm Asian Americans and ignore the diversity of experiences and degrees of power and privilege within the group. > “Research shows that advocating such views creates groundless fears of racial discrimination in college admissions that … inhibits identity development among Asian American students,” the brief reads.

CWuestefeld 4y ago
> “Research shows that advocating such views creates groundless fears of racial discrimination in college admissions [...] Is this just saying that observing that colleges are discriminating against Asians (by rejecting their applications at a higher rate, such that less-objectively-qualified applicants of other races are accepted in their stead) makes people feel that Asians are being discriminated against? Because of course discriminating against someone makes it seem like there is discrimination afoot.