[FEDERALIST] If We’re Going To Have A Racial Double Standard It Should Be About Black Americans Only

This is the top 5-10% of all students though. They are ALL capable. Although yes, the black students will score the lowest on tests so universities should have quotas to meet at this level. How many asians only do things to put on their college apps instead of anything else? You do need accurate representation to adjust to global economies.

The question is how they do in the real world with these credentials , while other races have thrived I still haven't seen what I'd like from African American graduates. The nuance just hasn't been displayed to create innovative companies and expand instead of just bragging about their 6 figure salary. This is what I'd like to see jaygoogle focus on improving because all of these students are smart enough to succeed. It's not helping the other 90% to not go above and beyond the others.

 

Umm... your example has nothing to do with why quotas are used and you've used it to promote a white pride narrative. You seem naive to the bottomline numbers of elite college because there are quotas used, they dont deny it. Each race will have wildcards and the academic credentials are only a small part of the overall process, but the quota must be met. That's something I agree with , but dont kid yourself into thinking hes getting that spot over a kid in another "quota".

 

To be clear, I'm not arguing that those let in aren't capable, that's entirely besides the point. I'm against racial discrimination when it comes to student admission policy just like I'm against it when companies look to hire people. The decisions should be made on merit alone without race, religion, sex, gender, or SES being factored in. The ONLY representation that matters is representation by those who are the best, no matter who they are.


I still find it ridiculous that I'd have to argue against racial discrimination in 2018, but apparently according to this thread anyway, there are a ton of people that support it so long as certain "tribes" benefit from it.

 

Incorrect, they deny that they have quotas.

https://college.harvard.edu/are-there-quotas-international-applicants

EDIT: I'll also add, that having quotas is illegal, so Harvard would not admit it and they would deny it, as they have.

And there has been no evidence of quotas which is what this entire conversation was/is about. Stanford is in a state that doesn't allow Affirmative Action and has the same % of Asians in its incoming class. I was led to believe that Caltech was proof that quotas existed, Stanford says otherwise.

Are you comparing Harvard graduates to....what? The general black population?

I'm pretty sure Harvard grads do well no matter what their race, you need to set your measure of success... if your measure of success is starting new innovative companies like Apple or something...I mean, I think that's pretty unrealistic, having a 6 figure salary is pretty dang successful. I bet if you asked any 23 year old college student that they'd have a 6 figure salary they'd say thank you and goodbye.

 

That's like your opinion, dude. Nothing more.

 

Wow. Did you really just try to pass off a page about international students as something to do with race based affirmative action?

"A student’s chances for admission and financial aid are not affected by citizenship or by the location of the school that the student attends."

All of the East Coast Ivy league's have affirmative action and quotas, and some of them are even being sued for the quotas used to help African Americans. These are quotas I agree with as I think institutions should have diversity and not just bottomline admissions, but ones I don't pretend aren't used when the exact same percentage is let in each year.

Read up on it, I have a feeling you know all this but are playing it stupid for the sake of your narrative.

The Secret Quotas in College Admissions

UPenn affirmative action

How Harvard employs affirmative action

 

Read the post above instead of apologizing. Didn't mean to use facts to hurt your imaginary narrative.

 

The facts show only Blacks and Hispanics benefit from it, post 166 has all the links. Even though their aptitude is lower, I feel organizations can benefit from these quotas in the long run because of the global market you naturally deal with. It's not all raw number crunching, and hispanics for example are privy to the trends of a huge market. That is the long term point of diversity beyond the inclusiveness tag line.

In this thread you have liberal cheerleaders rooting for their team and ignoring the facts. It's hard to take those types seriously but I stand by diversity being good for the economy, although not on false narratives they use to stir up emotion.

 

@Senator your post is all over the place my dude.

You said that Harvard ADMITS to having quotas, which is, as I mentioned. Illegal. Harvard is openly admitting a crime? A school that produces the best of lawyers? Yeah.

No, Harvard is being sued...so it would be odd for Harvard to be openly admitting that they have quotas when they are being sued for it. Evidence have not been shown that they do.

Not only my conclusion but the conclusion of the Department of Education of the USA...which Harvard sent data too so that the government can investigate.

You are making the same mistake as the last two guys. That doesn't prove ____. Correlation is not evidence.

Your links, not a single one of them make the huge claim that you did, that Harvard ADMITS to having quotas.

You show that AA went from 11 to 14% (in 2017 they were 9%) but Hispanics remained the same...

Your link about Hispanics doesn't even say that. (In fact, it doesn't even mention Hispanics AT ALL, did you even read it for 5 seconds?) It says it was 11.6 one year...in 2019 it was 12% in 2010 in was 10% So no, you are actually factually wrong here. It has not been 11% every year. It was 11% one year.
https://features.thecrimson.com/2015/freshman-survey/makeup/

White women and legacies...who are overwhelmingly white, benefit from it too. This is something even super conservative judge Clarence Thomas mentioned, that if you get rid of AA, that people will turn their eyes to legacies, and no college wants that. Oh, do they love their legacies.

I've done nothing but stick to facts, your last post makes me wonder if you understand what they are.

You say Harvard admitted to using quotas. They did not.
That Harvard admits the same % of Hispanics every year. They do not.

You then posted a Penn statement that said nothing about quotas. Do you know what a quota is? Its a limit, a set number, a cap. Nowhere on that page did they admit to having a quota. Saying "We like to have a diverse campus" is not saying "We have a set number of blacks, hispanics, asians we accept each year no matter what."

So right now I'm not sure if you know what quotas are. You claim that Harvard admits to it, admitting that they are committing a crime, mind you, the same crime they were proved to have committed before against Jews which then made it a crime.

So tell me nothing about false narratives until you prove that Harvard ADMITTED to having quotas. When you find it, tell that Blum guy you've found the smoking gun, because he's going to need it in court. Not sure he can handle another loss here...

 

Meanwhile...

Ran from this thread after his failed caltech point, he relied so heavily on that graph...I must really be dominating his thoughts for him to randomly think of me in another thread.

 

LOL what failed point? Guy, if you had ANY self awareness whatsoever, you'd be ashamed of yourself for arguing FOR racial discrimination, but I know that's not the case with you. All you see is what benefits certain tribes and you clearly have no real principles whatsoever.

I was embarrassed for you, and that's why I didn't respond to the BS where you attempted to say "hey Stanford does it too" as a defense of the policy of racial discrimination against Asians at top PRIVATE universities. You do understand that the Cal Tech example was based on California law that applies to state schools and not private universities right? Yeah, I know you didn't understand that, hence why I was embarrassed for you. Now that I've spelled it out for you Barney style, hopefully you'll understand why pointing to the fact that another private elite university uses similar racist policies doesn't excuse Harvard for their racist policies. The reason so many Asians go to Cal Tech is because they are rejected from schools like Harvard and Stanford on the basis of their race and Cal Tech CAN'T do that due to being a state school in California due to the laws against it.

The reason the person making racist comments about Asian people reminded me of you is that you were here in this thread supporting racism against Asians because of some small benefit that racism provides to a tribe you care about. Bettie Cook Scott would absolutely approve.

 

After 2-3 pages, have we concluded that Harvard is one college out of a thousand others with a unique, possibly arbitrary, set of admissions requirements?

 

1. Caltech is a private school.
2. Caltech does certain fields better than Harvard such as STEM, especially Engineering, and many Asians chose engineering.

 

More complete nonsense and hogwash from you and a strawman you've beaten to death by now. Stop. It's already dead.

blah blah blah "YOU'RE RACIST" blah blah blah. What happened to sticking to the facts?

Lol you know Caltech is a private school too right? I see @fchowd0311 just mentioned it.

Talk about embarrassing yourself.

You've still yet to tell me what is the benefit I see?

African Americans are not even the main beneficiaries of Affirmative Action, as you, yourself, claimed lol.

So according to you...I'm defending my tribe, i'm black for those that don't know...but I'm supporting a policy that benefits white people more???

You could just ASK why I support AA instead of inventing strawen about it. Pro-tip here, when you are arguing people about a subject or topic it's better to ask and clarify their stance, that way they don't go "That's not what I said," or accuse you of attacking them falsely. I try to do this sometimes but I think many of you guys think I'm trying to ask some gotcha question when I really want to make sure I'm going at your point.

So, since you won't ask, I support AA the same reason MLK Jr did, to protect all people, including white people (who may be a majority-minority one day) against possible discrimination...because I know people are not honest, can be malicious, and we could get high officials (like a SCOTUS judge) that for some reasons believes that their ought to be less of one group of people at elite universities.

 

Fair enough, I checked and I was mistaken. This is the first legitimate point you've made in this thread. Congratulations. That said, it still doesn't excuse racist policies at Harvard or any other institution it just shows that some private universities can have principles and oppose racial discrimination.

You essentially answer your own question. It's pretty clear that the reason you support racist policies is for the small advantage it gives black applicants. Despite the fact that others benefit from the racism more, you've shown that you will outright support racism if it benefits black people in any small way. That's apparently the most important thing to you.

Well this is first and foremost a lie, you don't wish to "protect all people", if you did, you wouldn't be supporting racist policy.....and in fact you are supporting people who believe that there ought to be less of one group of people at elite universities.....hence why they are artificially decreasing the Asian population.

You don't get to pretend like you are supporting equality when you are actively supporting racial discrimination.....which is what you are doing.

For the record though, I'm not calling you a racist, you might not be.....but what is clear is that you would support racist policies if you thought it gave black people any kind of advantage. Clearly you have your priorities and the best interest of black people is at the top ahead of literally anything else.

 

Well if you are trying to make that point with CalTech vs Harvard, it still doesn't make sense as Asians that are academically qualified for either school wouldore often prefer Caltech over Harvard due to Asians having preference for STEM which Caltech is better at.

 

How is this the one of the most racist posts you have seen?

I thought one of the reasons for Affirmative Action is that certain groups have been historically disadvantaged and that as a result there are barriers (that may include others in a particular community not valuing education as highly etc.) that need to be addressed to try and give everyone actual equal opportunity.

Is it wrong to acknowledge that there may be some negative pressure in some neighborhoods against performing well scholastically? I don't think that is an indictment of a race or socioeconomic level but perhaps an example of the disadvantages caused by historical treatment.

 

You are correct. It doesn't excuse racist policies, and good that you admitted your mistake. I won't harp on that mistake any longer.

Unfortunately for you though, there has as of yet been no proof of racist policies at Harvard or any other institution. When the Department of Education looked into it, they came to the conclusion that it wasn't there.

Man, so many of you guys say "You will wait for the facts..." when a black person is shot by an officer, and if you realize, I never comment on those threads until the facts are out there...yet now you sit here and condemn Harvard of being racist against Asians and your only proof being "Well, they have 22% and need to be at 40% according to Caltech..." based on...what? Your opinion?

Well AA is not quota. Harvard could be using AA and have 3% African Americans at their school...or 5%...or 14% what number of blacks going to Harvard proves that they are getting in on race alone or that anyone actually benefits being black when it comes to going to Harvard?

You need to actually prove that...and yes, to do that, you basically have to say that the student(s) in question isn't Harvard material and thus is there because of their race.

Ed Blum isn't even making this argument because he knows it won't win in court, it's a silly argument that would be very difficult to prove.

What are you talking about? Harvard has been admitting more Asians over the years, not less.

Like MLK Jr did, I support Affirmative Action exactly for equality. It's a protective regulation that prevents the worse from happening. I think we can all agree that MLK wanted what was best for all people.

Without Affirmative Action, actual racial discrimination can go unchecked, as it did in the past.

AA is far from perfect, but the worst it does is send elite students to a different elite school that they may not have preferred going to. Without it, you risk once again, as studies show, blocking black and brown children out of elites schools and thus close the pipeline for them to hold important positions in society.

Now, I could accuse you of secretly wanting this to happen, but it's pointless to argue honestly, although it's fun trolling sometimes so shrug...maybe you secretly want this to happen? Why not.

 

This is pretty much it.

It exists to see the full potential of all people knowing that certain environments hinder the potential. That's why coming from a hard background may appeal to admissions. It shows that maybe the student didn't test as well as they should have, did the student have tutoring? Did the student had to work just to help provide for a family thus taking the focus away from studying?

According to others like Bobby, all of that should be ignored. Maybe it should if you are looking for a STEM student, but schools like Harvard don't focus on that and are not only looking for STEM students.

 

If you don't know how a racist post is racist, then there is not one that I can say to explain pretty much anything to you that you would understand. SO either you're being willfully ignorant or you're just plain ignorant. Either way I won't be wasting my time.