8th Grade White Boy Privilege (or A little child can lead them)

[laughing dog]

So you're saying one can be critical of Obama and it not be racist? sonovabitch

I accept your apology.

 

[Tristan Scott]

Yeah. Criticism of Obama = racist.

Speaking for yourself?

 

[Trausti]

Yeah. Criticism of Obama = racist.

Speaking for yourself?

New to the board? Welcome. Stay awhile.

 

[Metaphor]

Of course it has de facto quotas. Ask any Asian applicant.

For someone who insists on reliable data, that response is truly silly. On what basis would any Asian applicant have reliable knowledge (not belief) about a quota? If we ask Harvard, they say they don't have any quotas. Using your implicit rationale, you would have accept that as the truth.

You have misunderstood my implicit rationale, and misjudged my rhetoric for a detailed case.

Quotas are a dirty word. This is realised even by those who support affirmative action and would like to see quotas or de facto quotas. So the word gets exercised on the euphemism treadmill and becomes targets and then gets more exercise and becomes race-conscious and diversity. Harvard admits and celebrates that racial and ethnic background are part of its (still shrouded in secrecy) selection criteria.

The author of this article says that Asians qua Asians don't have a special interest category to compete in (like Blacks and Hispanics). Since 50% of Harvard's admissions are "special interest" (legacy admissions, athletes, and 'diversity' groups like Blacks and Hispanics), it is a de facto quota.

 

[laughing dog]

You have misunderstood my implicit rationale, and misjudged my rhetoric for a detailed case.

No, I haven't.

Quotas are a dirty word. This is realised even by those who support affirmative action and would like to see quotas or de facto quotas. So the word gets exercised on the euphemism treadmill and becomes targets and then gets more exercise and becomes race-conscious and diversity. Harvard admits and celebrates that racial and ethnic background are part of its (still shrouded in secrecy) selection criteria.

The author of this article says that Asians qua Asians don't have a special interest category to compete in (like Blacks and Hispanics). Since 50% of Harvard's admissions are "special interest" (legacy admissions, athletes, and 'diversity' groups like Blacks and Hispanics), it is a de facto quota.

I see. According to you, AA means "quotas" or "de facto quotas" by definition. I prefer to have discussions in the real world with real people, not with the Cheshire Cat in Wonderland. Your obsession about "quotas" (de facto or otherwise) is irrelevant to the discussion about Malia Obama's admission to Harvard unless you can show it was based on a "quota".

 

[Keith&Co.]

Do white students actually get turned down so that schools can meet quotas? I mean, assuming there is a stated or unstated quota, a goal of X many black students, does the number X have anything to do with the number of white students accepted?


My son just graduated from Salem university, and every year they accepted more students than they had room for in the dorms. You'd think that would be a limit to the number of students they could accept, but every year they exceed a real, physical limitation. But if physical limitations won't stop their accepting, why would mere numbers?

 

[Trausti]

Do white students actually get turned down so that schools can meet quotas? I mean, assuming there is a stated or unstated quota, a goal of X many black students, does the number X have anything to do with the number of white students accepted?


My son just graduated from Salem university, and every year they accepted more students than they had room for in the dorms. You'd think that would be a limit to the number of students they could accept, but every year they exceed a real, physical limitation. But if physical limitations won't stop their accepting, why would mere numbers?

I imagine the over acceptance is due to the likelihood that Salem University is not the prospective student's first choice. But anyway, I'm sure Malia Obama is bright but when your daddy is President you can go wherever you want.

 

[Metaphor]

No, I haven't.

Yes, you have. My 'rationale' is not that de facto quotas exist only on someone's say-so. Harvard has much to lose from characterising its 'race conscious' admissions process as a de facto quota system, but that's what it is.

I see. According to you, AA means "quotas" or "de facto quotas" by definition.

No, you don't see. I did not even use the words affirmative action; I specifically spoke about Harvard's not-hidden goals of 'diversity' in its admissions.

I prefer to have discussions in the real world with real people, not with the Cheshire Cat in Wonderland. Your obsession about "quotas" (de facto or otherwise) is irrelevant to the discussion about Malia Obama's admission to Harvard unless you can show it was based on a "quota".

I do not know Malia Obama's grades, or SAT scores, or extra-curriculars, and other information pertinent to her admission.

What I do know is that Harvard has a de facto race quota system that must arise if there is a racial and ethnic diversity in admissions policy (there is), and racial and ethnic groups differ in their average academic credentials (they do).

However, Malia Obama's race was probably the least influential aspect in her admission, since 'offspring of a President in office' has its own quota where the admission rate is 100%.

 

[Rhea]

For someone who insists on reliable data, that response is truly silly. On what basis would any Asian applicant have reliable knowledge (not belief) about a quota? If we ask Harvard, they say they don't have any quotas. Using your implicit rationale, you would have accept that as the truth.

You have misunderstood my implicit rationale, and misjudged my rhetoric for a detailed case.

Quotas are a dirty word. This is realised even by those who support affirmative action and would like to see quotas or de facto quotas. So the word gets exercised on the euphemism treadmill and becomes targets and then gets more exercise and becomes race-conscious and diversity. Harvard admits and celebrates that racial and ethnic background are part of its (still shrouded in secrecy) selection criteria.

The author of this article says that Asians qua Asians don't have a special interest category to compete in (like Blacks and Hispanics). Since 50% of Harvard's admissions are "special interest" (legacy admissions, athletes, and 'diversity' groups like Blacks and Hispanics), it is a de facto quota.

Wait, what? There are no Asian Legacy students? No Asian athletes?
I did not see that coming.

 

[J842P]

You have misunderstood my implicit rationale, and misjudged my rhetoric for a detailed case.

Quotas are a dirty word. This is realised even by those who support affirmative action and would like to see quotas or de facto quotas. So the word gets exercised on the euphemism treadmill and becomes targets and then gets more exercise and becomes race-conscious and diversity. Harvard admits and celebrates that racial and ethnic background are part of its (still shrouded in secrecy) selection criteria.

The author of this article says that Asians qua Asians don't have a special interest category to compete in (like Blacks and Hispanics). Since 50% of Harvard's admissions are "special interest" (legacy admissions, athletes, and 'diversity' groups like Blacks and Hispanics), it is a de facto quota.

Wait, what? There are no Asian Legacy students? No Asian athletes?
I did not see that coming.

I'm sure there are, but how could that possibly be a response to his claim?

 

[Metaphor]

You have misunderstood my implicit rationale, and misjudged my rhetoric for a detailed case.

Quotas are a dirty word. This is realised even by those who support affirmative action and would like to see quotas or de facto quotas. So the word gets exercised on the euphemism treadmill and becomes targets and then gets more exercise and becomes race-conscious and diversity. Harvard admits and celebrates that racial and ethnic background are part of its (still shrouded in secrecy) selection criteria.

The author of this article says that Asians qua Asians don't have a special interest category to compete in (like Blacks and Hispanics). Since 50% of Harvard's admissions are "special interest" (legacy admissions, athletes, and 'diversity' groups like Blacks and Hispanics), it is a de facto quota.

Wait, what? There are no Asian Legacy students? No Asian athletes?
I did not see that coming.

Oy vey.

There is no special interest category of Asians qua Asians.

There is a special interest category of Blacks qua Blacks and Hispanics qua Hispanics.

 

[Metaphor]

Do white students actually get turned down so that schools can meet quotas? I mean, assuming there is a stated or unstated quota, a goal of X many black students, does the number X have anything to do with the number of white students accepted?

White, and especially Asian, students must get turned down so that schools can meet de facto quotas that arise because of racial diversity goals.

Harvard and other elite schools could certainly take on more students than they currently do; the demand is there. But part of the prestige of Harvard is its exclusivity, so it cannot trade on the demand the way the manufacturers of other product could.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

No, it doesn't and no, it wasn't surprising. The outrage expressed by racists about anything associated with Obama or his family has been pervasive and persistent. So has the outrage that any black person was admitted to or graduated from any competitive program, although that outrage has been going on since I was a kid or longer.

Of course it has de facto quotas. Ask any Asian applicant.

Would that include Asian students currently enrolled?

Ethnic breakdowns


African American
13.7%

Asian American
22.1%

Hispanic or Latino
12.6%

Native American or Pacific Islander
2.6%

I don't know why accusations of quotas bothers you. You approve of them when they favour your favoured groups.

Do you have proof of these quotas?

 

[Metaphor]

Would that include Asian students currently enrolled?

Of course it would. The Asian students currently enrolled have academic credentials that are a standard deviation or more higher than the Black students enrolled. Those students were as subject to the de facto quota as all the Asian students who weren't accepted but would have been if Black and Hispanic/Latinx race were not a diversity selection special interest group.

Ethnic breakdowns
African American
13.7%

Asian American
22.1%

Hispanic or Latino
12.6%

Native American or Pacific Islander
2.6%

If Harvard did not have a de facto racial quota that arises from its diversity goals, there would be more Asians and fewer Black/Latinx students.

Do you have proof of these quotas?

Actual quotas by race would be illegal. The de facto quotas that arise when Harvard has a stated (race/ethnicity) diversity goal and admits it uses 'race conscious' admission policies to achieve them are not illegal as long as the admissions scheme is 'narrowly tailored' to achieve its diversity goal.

 

[Toni]

I wonder, are Sasha's and Malia's 'success stories' already written, like this white boy claims his is?

He has forgotten that he may be denied college admissions for less qualified black and hispanic applicants. Given the left-wing bent of SCOTUS we are virtually guaranteed racism in college admissions for another generation at least.

Or he may be denied admission in favor of more qualified black, Hispanic, or Native American or Asian students. Or maybe he will prefer not Harvard. A state school. Trade school.

Won't erase the advantages that come from being white, male, middle or upper middle class.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Of course it would. The Asian students currently enrolled have academic credentials that are a standard deviation or more higher than the Black students enrolled.

You know this HOW and are academic credentials the only things considered in the admissions process, AND what are those credentials AND are those credentials equally weighed in all cases?

Those students were as subject to the de facto quota as all the Asian students who weren't accepted but would have been if Black and Hispanic/Latinx race were not a diversity selection special interest group.

A de facto quota which you have yet to prove.

Ethnic breakdowns
African American
13.7%

Asian American
22.1%

Hispanic or Latino
12.6%

Native American or Pacific Islander
2.6%

If Harvard did not have a de facto racial quota that arises from its diversity goals, there would be more Asians and fewer Black/Latinx students.

Why? Is it you contention that in all categories used in the admissions office at Harvard, students of Asian descent across the board consistently score above black students? And exactly how many more students of Asian ancestry would be admitted if Harvard valued in its student population only those credentials and accomplishments that you do?

Do you have proof of these quotas?

Actual quotas by race would be illegal. The de facto quotas that arise when Harvard has a stated (race/ethnicity) diversity goal and admits it uses 'race conscious' admission policies to achieve them are not illegal as long as the admissions scheme is 'narrowly tailored' to achieve its diversity goal.

SO you have no proof of exactly what is the quota or what is the magnitude of the harm if any is done by the quota?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Does having "race conscious admissions" mean that white people get preferential admission based on race over asian people, but just not to the level that black people do? Just how much does Harvard screw asians over? And will Athena's stats showing our superior performance lead to even harder admissions for us based on race?

 

[Metaphor]

You know this HOW

Harvard uses SAT scores and GPA to evaluate academic credentials. The SAT scores of Asian students are a standard deviation higher than Black students in the high-school population. There's no good reason to think this isn't reflected in the populations of students that apply to Harvard. Graduate medical schools also see this large difference in academic credentials (specifically, the GAMSAT and GPA scores) between Asian and Black applicants.

But, like the author of the article posted by me earlier, I too would love to see full transparency on Harvard's admission process. I would love to see the GPA and SAT scores of admitted students by race, gender, legacy status, athlete status, and degree/intended major.

and are academic credentials the only things considered in the admissions process,

Of course they are not. Harvard proudly admits it uses 'holistic' criteria, including the race and ethnic background of the applicant.

Asian students are coached to not reveal their Asianness in their essays and CVs. Do you understand the implication of that?

AND what are those credentials AND are those credentials equally weighed in all cases?

One of the credentials is ability to contribute to Harvard's diversity policy. Asian and White students get zero points in this category.

A de facto quota which you have yet to prove.

It is a mathematical certainty given the preconditions.

Why? Is it you contention that in all categories used in the admissions office at Harvard, students of Asian descent across the board consistently score above black students?

One of the 'categories of admission' is ability to contribute to Harvard's stated and open racial/ethnic diversity preference. This isn't something I've made up; it's Harvard's open and stated goal. Asian and White students get zero points on this credential because the total number of Asian and White students obtained through academic, legacy, and athletic admissions mean admitting more of them cannot contribute to Harvard's 'diversity' goal.

And exactly how many more students of Asian ancestry would be admitted if Harvard valued in its student population only those credentials and accomplishments that you do?

If Harvard valued only academic credentials and did not have special interest categories like legacy, athletic, and racial/ethnic diversity admissions, the number of Asian admissions would rise in proportion to their significantly higher academic credentials.

I can't tell you by how much, because Harvard doesn't publish the kinds of statistics necessary to work it out. But when California banned 'race conscious' admissions, the number of Asian students admitted into California institutions rose.

SO you have no proof of exactly what is the quota or what is the magnitude of the harm if any is done by the quota?

The harm is whatever harm you think discrimination by race or ethnicity does.

I think it's a terrible thing to discriminate by race/ethnicity for no good reason, and 'diversity' is no good reason.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

You can't even push the collective white guilt for slavery angle here. How many asians in US history enslaved or owned black people? How many asian senators voted for racist laws against black people?

Why are we punished for what you white people did, and moreso than you are? There is no excuse for this.

"we have too many if your kind".... Now that cant be racist... Lol

Curious... How would folks react if we did this for religion instead of race? There sure were a lot of Jews in my law school, and so very few atheists, muslims, and Hindus. Should we have had special treatment for the sake of "diversity"? Harder entrance tests for Jews? Special outreach program to bring in more non-jews? Or would that not have gone over too well?

 

[Metaphor]

You can't even push the collective white guilt for slavery angle here. How many asians in US history enslaved or owned black people? How many asian senators voted for racist laws against black people?

Why are we punished for what you white people did, and moreso than you are? There is no excuse for this.

"we have too many if your kind".... Now that cant be racist... Lol

It's even more perverse than that, if it can be imagined.

If Asians (collectively) performed more poorly academically, they'd be included in Harvard's special interest category of 'racial diversity', because there would not be "enough" of them based on academic credentials alone to fulfill Harvard's 'diversity' goal.

In other words, individual Asians are punished for the collective high academic performance of their racial group. Asians need to do better, academically, than Black/Latinx students to obtain the same chance of admission.

You'll have to ask the people who advocate 'race conscious' admissions criteria for why they want to treat you the way they do.