Current Events > Lawsuit against Harvard for discrimination against Asian-Americans...

(+) Yeah! (+)

foreveraIone posted...

Veggeta X posted...

Who is SMAL again?

sir mix a lot. Korean American lawyer who hates blacks and hispanics

"lawyer"
---

darkjedilink posted...

Statistically speaking, white students are better academically than black students.

But not smarter.

Colleges aren't just looking for people who know how to get A's in their high school classes or have a school system which teaches to the SAT and prepares their students to do well on them. Those aren't the students who are going to innovate, invent, etc. to bring their college a good name.
---

Anteaterking posted...

Colleges aren't just looking for people who know how to get A's in their high school classes or have a school system which teaches to the SAT and prepares their students to do well on them. Those aren't the students who are going to innovate, invent, etc. to bring their college a good name.

Right, we should follow Evergreen State's model and accept anyone with a "passion"
---

Bloodychess posted...

Right, we should follow Evergreen State's model and accept anyone with a "passion"

Where did I say anything about passion? I'm saying the person whose school averages 1000/1600 on the SAT who gets a 1400 is more likely to have meaningful success to the university than someone from a school who averages 1450 who gets a 1400.
---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Again, so fucking what? Statistically speaking, white students are better academically than black students. This logically carries over to legacies, and your SAT bump proves me right.

I stand uncorrected as you continue sticking your hand up your ass in attempt to make a point

It took me 10 seconds on mobile to pull up something that even remotely backs up what I said, why is it so hard for you

Even had this delicious tidbit included wow wiki what a great site for lazy researching

As a body of entering freshmen, legacies almost invariably have substantially lower GPAs and SAT scores than the larger body of entering freshmen, and, during their undergraduate careers, legacies as a body of students typically perform worse than the overall student body.

Unfortunately no direct citation for that statement, but I'm gonna take it at face value right now because compared to what you've brought to the table (nothing), this looks slightly more convincing. I'll check back in on you in an hour

I notice that it doesn't compare them SPECIFICALLY to black students, either.
---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

https://twitter.com/samswey/status/981753899253198848?s=19

Glad you posted a link because I was about to say while people are whining about affirmative action, the actual thing fucking over people is legacy admissions. But I wasn't gonna search for a link because this shitty argument has been made 100+ times on this board. The same topic will be made next month starting back at square one

Legacy admissions being the main culprit is common knowledge to anyone who has gone through the process of applying to a college, assuming it's not a community college, since one of the first things they ask you is if you had relatives who attended the school

A link to twitter is credible now?
---

darkjedilink posted...

I notice that it doesn't compare them SPECIFICALLY to black students, either.

You probably don't notice a lot of things

Like how this topic is about Asian admission discrimination due to affirmative action at Harvard, then Frisbee provides a link comparing admissions of black students and white legacy students at Harvard with hard numbers just so we're all not frothing at the mouth with absolutely nothing backing up any point made.

I, MacadamianNut3, extend this with softer stats that go beyond comparing white legacy students to black students, to legacy vs minorities (once again topic is about AA), which includes highlighting a part (again, following the arguments at hand) suggesting that even with non-Asian minorities getting bumps in standardized testing scores in the eyes of admission offices, legacy preferences still supersede that bump. Unless you're naive enough to think Harvard would be the only one affected by whatever outcome happens (TC doesn't think so either going by the opening post), the discussion about legacy admissions vs affirmative action as a whole is relevant.

Meanwhile your grand takeaway from this exchange with I, MacadamianNut3, filled with words longer than 6 characters each is "what about the blacks, you can't prove me wrong about the blacks", suggesting that when it comes to AA that's all that pops up in your head like a simpleton even when the person you're addressing is clearly laying out their argument. And as a cherry on top you've still yet to back up anything you've said that is related to this

Clearly it's not worth my time discussing this topic with you. I'm not in the mood to put on kiddie gloves and dumb down everything I said so you can follow along. But I did highlight usernames to help end the confusion since you seem to have a lot of grievances towards what I've said while arguing against a point I didn't make (because I'm not gonna take the time to break down those specific stats looking beyond wiki for reasons mentioned in my first post, unless someone actually points out a false claim. Because posting lies is muy mal)

I see TC posted in response about the credibility of the tweet even though in the link given it also flat out gives another link to stats provided by Harvard themselves. I'll let him figure out that conundrum and report what he finds. I didn't click it myself but why do the work when someone motivated to prove you wrong can do it for you
---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

darkjedilink posted...

I notice that it doesn't compare them SPECIFICALLY to black students, either.

You probably don't notice a lot of things

Like how this topic is about Asian admission discrimination due to affirmative action at Harvard, then Frisbee provides a link comparing admissions of black students and white legacy students at Harvard with hard numbers just so we're all not frothing at the mouth with absolutely nothing backing up any point made.

I, MacadamianNut3, extend this with softer stats that go beyond comparing white legacy students to black students, to legacy vs minorities (once again topic is about AA), which includes highlighting a part (again, following the arguments at hand) suggesting that even with non-Asian minorities getting bumps in standardized testing scores in the eyes of admission offices, legacy preferences still supersede that bump. Unless you're naive enough to think Harvard would be the only one affected by whatever outcome happens (TC doesn't think so either going by the opening post), the discussion about legacy admissions vs affirmative action as a whole is relevant.

Meanwhile your grand takeaway from this exchange with I, MacadamianNut3, filled with words longer than 6 characters each is "what about the blacks, you can't prove me wrong about the blacks", suggesting that when it comes to AA that's all that pops up in your head like a simpleton even when the person you're addressing is clearly laying out their argument. And as a cherry on top you've still yet to back up anything you've said that is related to this

Clearly it's not worth my time discussing this topic with you. I'm not in the mood to put on kiddie gloves and dumb down everything I said so you can follow along. But I did highlight usernames to help end the confusion since you seem to have a lot of grievances towards what I've said while arguing against a point I didn't make (because I'm not gonna take the time to break down those specific stats looking beyond wiki for reasons mentioned in my first post, unless someone actually points out a false claim. Because posting lies is muy mal)

I see TC posted in response about the credibility of the tweet even though in the link given it also flat out gives another link to stats provided by Harvard themselves. I'll let him figure out that conundrum and report what he finds.

There were ZERO 'hard numbers' in Frisbee's link...
---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

damn that post is a thing of beauty
---

Oh wait now I see the confusion. Maybe.

The wiki link wasn't a response to your white vs. black point. The part about the source being from your ass, reiterated multiple times later, was

The link was an extension to actual numbers related to legacy students and minorities to demonstrate an act where someone doesn't make claims without backing it up with anything, given how I previously made the claim "legacy preferences are the real culprit"

We've all learned something today
---

For people who have the attention span to read more than a tweet:

https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webOpportunity%20Cost%20of%20Admission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20June%202005.pdf
---

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.
---

this explains why SMAL isn't a lawyer
---

So based on what was just linked, using a race-blind system would dramatically affect blacks (33.7% acceptance rate -> 12.2%) and Hispanics (26.8 -> 12.9), do pretty much nothing for whites (23.8 -> 24.3), and help Asians (17.6 -> 23.4)

Legacy and athletes would bump bump up admitted whites slightly by almost 2 percent, drop Asians <2 percent, and do little to blacks and Hispanics

Great link. Shuts down the claim I made earlier

Though I'm wondering about how this 2005 (1997 data) study mentions the growing benefits of legacies (mainly white stared by them) and athletes (mainly white stated by them) also noted in their 2004 study (1983 - 1997 data) and states that if trends continue that they might "fully offset the weakening preferences for underrepresented minority applications"

Wonder how that applies nowadays
---

I didn't know CE has this many Asians, wtf.
---

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.
---

Howl posted...

LIBERALS

---

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid.

Which shows how much Democrats really care about minorities.
---

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.

jfc that's not how it works. The world demographic of Asians dwarfs that of Africans so there will be a disproportionately larger amount of successful Asians that excel in school. It does not mean in general Asians are so successful if out of 1,000,000 immigrants 600,000 are Asian, and only 100,000 are Africans. And that's not even including the fact that many Asian countries are more developed than African countries so more Asians have the opportunity to immigrate than Africans making the ratio even more skewed.

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.

jfc that's not how it works. The world demographic of Asians dwarfs that of Africans so there will be a disproportionately larger amount of successful Asians that excel in school. It does not mean in general Asians are so successful if out of 1,000,000 immigrants 600,000 are Asian, and only 100,000 are Africans. And that's not even including the fact that many Asian countries are more developed than African countries so more Asians have the opportunity to immigrate than Africans making the ratio even more skewed.

The systematic oppression thing he was talking about only applies to the US though.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/four-former-clarence-thomas-clerks-082416016.html

The legal team challenging Harvards admissions policy as racially discriminatory will be comprised of four former law clerks to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, the courts only African-American member. Adam Mortara and John Hughes, both partners at Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott, are joining William Consovoy and Patrick Strawbridge, partners at Consovoy McCarthy Park, in the case Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College.

The lawyers declined to comment. Strawbridge filed a motion on Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts seeking pro hac vice admission for Mortara and Hughes to appear in the trial set to begin Oct. 15. A team from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr represents Harvard, which has denied it discriminates against any group in the admissions process.

The plaintiffs claim Harvards policy discriminates against Asian-American students in favor of African-American and other applicants, in violation of civil rights laws. Mortara clerked for Thomas in 2002 and 2003, and Hughes did so from 2005 to 2006. Consovoy and Strawbridge clerked for Thomas in 2008 and 2009. Mortara clerked for Thomas during the term in which the court issued the landmark affirmative action case Grutter v. Bollinger. The majority ruled that narrowly tailored use of race in university admissions was constitutional. In a partial dissent, Thomas expressed his long-standing opposition to affirmative action. I believe blacks can achieve in every avenue of American life without the meddling of university administrators, he wrote.

A university may not maintain a high admission standard and grant exemptions to favored races. Racial discrimination is not a permissible solution to the self-inflicted wounds of this elitist admissions policy. Thomas voiced similar views in Fisher v. University of Texas, litigation that was backed by the Project on Fair Representation, the same organization that is behind the challenge to Harvard and, in a separate suit, the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. In the University of Texas case, the justices in 2016 upheld policies that permitted the consideration of race in admission decisions. Thomas has drawn from his own experience at Yale Law School in asserting that affirmative action programs stigmatize black students...
---

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.

jfc that's not how it works. The world demographic of Asians dwarfs that of Africans so there will be a disproportionately larger amount of successful Asians that excel in school. It does not mean in general Asians are so successful if out of 1,000,000 immigrants 600,000 are Asian, and only 100,000 are Africans. And that's not even including the fact that many Asian countries are more developed than African countries so more Asians have the opportunity to immigrate than Africans making the ratio even more skewed.

The systematic oppression thing he was talking about only applies to the US though.

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

Asia (including the Middle East) remains, however, the top source continent of recent immigrants. In 2016, the majority (61.8%) of newcomers were born in Asia.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025b-eng.htm

I couldn't find the American version.

If most of your immigrants are Asian, and considering the fact that immigration from around the world is a major life decision so many of those families will have more pressure to do well then It's easy to get the false impression that Asians are generally more successful when ignoring the massive population they came from and that you may be looking at a biased sample size.

As for the systematic oppression, yeah it makes sense. If 60% Asians immigrate every year its fair to favor demographics that are underrepresented because they are less competitive just by numbers alone. And if that is left unchecked, education by ethnicity will be skewed for Asians because there are only X universities, but more and more Asians are coming over.

Hexagon posted...

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

I mean, most of his post was about discrimination and systematic oppression double standards so you zeroing in on four words is pretty sketchy.

Applications should not include race.
---

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

I mean, most of his post was about discrimination and systematic oppression double standards so you zeroing in on four words is pretty sketchy.

What's more sketchy is that you expected people to stay focused on a serious topic on CE and not talk about whatever they feel like.

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

It's funny how Asians are so successful that colleges are actively purposefully discriminating against them in favor of black students, but the left still says systemic oppression primarily affects black people.

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.

jfc that's not how it works. The world demographic of Asians dwarfs that of Africans so there will be a disproportionately larger amount of successful Asians that excel in school. It does not mean in general Asians are so successful if out of 1,000,000 immigrants 600,000 are Asian, and only 100,000 are Africans. And that's not even including the fact that many Asian countries are more developed than African countries so more Asians have the opportunity to immigrate than Africans making the ratio even more skewed.

The systematic oppression thing he was talking about only applies to the US though.

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

Asia (including the Middle East) remains, however, the top source continent of recent immigrants. In 2016, the majority (61.8%) of newcomers were born in Asia.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025b-eng.htm

I couldn't find the American version.

If most of your immigrants are Asian, and considering the fact that immigration from around the world is a major life decision so many of those families will have more pressure to do well then It's easy to get the false impression that Asians are generally more successful when ignoring the massive population they came from and that you may be looking at a biased sample size.

As for the systematic oppression, yeah it makes sense. If 60% Asians immigrate every year its fair to favor demographics that are underrepresented because they are less competitive just by numbers alone. And if that is left unchecked, education by ethnicity will be skewed for Asians because there are only X universities, but more and more Asians are coming over.

It's not a stereotype that Asians are more successful in school, it's an objective fact.
---

Rika_Furude posted...

Equality doesnt mean that black students are guarenteed 20% or 50% of the available seats. It means they should be considered equally, based on academic merit alone, compared to other students. Same applies to every race. If there are 100 seats available, and the top 100 condidates are asian, that class should be 100% asian. Or black, or white if those nationalities happened to be the top candidates at that time.

Race shouldnt even be a factor, other than to ensure they arent discriminated against. Discrimination in favor of should be outlawed.

---

My favorite 'argument' against not including race as a factor is that all of these people think that after 1965 every black person to ever walk this earth suddenly became a middle class citizen and moved to a neighborhood with a good school.

Ignoring the fact that many of those kids and adults who grew up during the Civil Rights Era (Both of who are still alive today!!!!) didn't magically get better lives aft(er the acts. Nothing changed for them on an individual basis, so many of those families are only just starting to get out of poverty (if at all!) that the economic opportunities aren't the same. And then people have the gall to say "but they don't perform as well as others!" as if these issues are magically fixed and don't have long term impact even though the generation that faced economic, educational, systemic oppression its still alive and that those policies affected their ability to provide their own kids economic and educational opportunities.

People like to quote MLK saying it's cruel to tell a man without boots to pull himself up with bootstraps, but entirely miss the point where the civil rights act gave people the right to buy boots, but not the means to do so, nor any boots themselves.

As far as the Asian American lawsuit goes, I won't comment on the specifics, but I do find it fascinating that Asians being a "model minority" is used to both dismiss any legitimate racism against them and also to justify mistreatment of other minorities who aren't Asian. The Korematsu generation Asians who spent time in the camps as kids are statistically more predisposed to violence and crime. You don't think that affects how future generations are raised?
---

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-harvard-discrimination/harvard-admissions-data-can-be-filed-under-seal-in-bias-case-judge-idUSKBN1HH2QZ

BOSTON (Reuters) - Documents related to Harvard Universitys admissions process may be filed initially under seal in a lawsuit accusing the Ivy League school of discriminating against Asian-American applicants, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday.

However, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston warned lawyers for Harvard and a non-profit suing the college that they should limit how much court filings are redacted and said she would review them to see if more should be made public.

Students for Fair Admissions Inc (SFFA), which filed the lawsuit in 2014, had said records related to Harvards admissions rates and processes would be used for a motion seeking to have Burroughs rule in its favor without a trial.

It opposed a request by Harvard to file an unredacted motion initially under seal, saying court papers in the case should be publicly accessible.

Burroughs, though, said almost certainly some of the confidential Harvard documents should be kept under seal. She said she hoped the parties could avoid the need for redactions that would lead to pages and pages of blackness on the record.

The presumption is the information is openly available, Borroughs said. You dont need to put the recipe Coke into a motion, but you can allude to the fact that there is a recipe for Coke.

Borroughs directed SFFA to file two versions of its motion, one redacting information the parties could not agree should be made public and a sealed version for her to review. She also scheduled a trial tentatively for October.

Were very happy theres going to be a prompt trial, William Lee, Harvards lawyer, said outside of court.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled universities may use affirmative action to help minority applicants get into college. Conservatives have said such programs can hurt white people and Asian-Americans.

In 2016 the court rejected a high-profile challenge to a University of Texas program designed to boost the enrollment of minority students that was brought by a white woman.

SFFAs president, Edward Blum, is a prominent anti-affirmative action activist who identified the plaintiff in the University of Texas case.

Following the election of Republican President Donald Trump, the Justice Department began investigating whether Harvards policies are discriminatory because they limit the acceptance of Asian-Americans...
---

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

Hexagon posted...

Howl posted...

Yup. This is totally because Asians are superior and not at all that "Asia" has a population of at least half of the entire human population and is bound to over represent in the western world due to immigration.

There's far less asians in the US than black people. This argument is utterly stupid. Also I never said anything about them being superior.

jfc that's not how it works. The world demographic of Asians dwarfs that of Africans so there will be a disproportionately larger amount of successful Asians that excel in school. It does not mean in general Asians are so successful if out of 1,000,000 immigrants 600,000 are Asian, and only 100,000 are Africans. And that's not even including the fact that many Asian countries are more developed than African countries so more Asians have the opportunity to immigrate than Africans making the ratio even more skewed.

The systematic oppression thing he was talking about only applies to the US though.

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

Asia (including the Middle East) remains, however, the top source continent of recent immigrants. In 2016, the majority (61.8%) of newcomers were born in Asia.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025b-eng.htm

I couldn't find the American version.

If most of your immigrants are Asian, and considering the fact that immigration from around the world is a major life decision so many of those families will have more pressure to do well then It's easy to get the false impression that Asians are generally more successful when ignoring the massive population they came from and that you may be looking at a biased sample size.

As for the systematic oppression, yeah it makes sense. If 60% Asians immigrate every year its fair to favor demographics that are underrepresented because they are less competitive just by numbers alone. And if that is left unchecked, education by ethnicity will be skewed for Asians because there are only X universities, but more and more Asians are coming over.

It's not a stereotype that Asians are more successful in school, it's an objective fact.

Funny enough that's not true everywhere (in the world), and there's large differences among the different "Asian" groups.

A lot of it has to do with US Immigration policy.
---

EmeralDragon23 posted...

My favorite 'argument' against not including race as a factor is that all of these people think that after 1965 every black person to ever walk this earth suddenly became a middle class citizen and moved to a neighborhood with a good school.

Ignoring the fact that many of those kids and adults who grew up during the Civil Rights Era (Both of who are still alive today!!!!) didn't magically get better lives aft(er the acts. Nothing changed for them on an individual basis, so many of those families are only just starting to get out of poverty (if at all!) that the economic opportunities aren't the same. And then people have the gall to say "but they don't perform as well as others!" as if these issues are magically fixed and don't have long term impact even though the generation that faced economic, educational, systemic oppression its still alive and that those policies affected their ability to provide their own kids economic and educational opportunities.

People like to quote MLK saying it's cruel to tell a man without boots to pull himself up with bootstraps, but entirely miss the point where the civil rights act gave people the right to buy boots, but not the means to do so, nor any boots themselves.

As far as the Asian American lawsuit goes, I won't comment on the specifics, but I do find it fascinating that Asians being a "model minority" is used to both dismiss any legitimate racism against them and also to justify mistreatment of other minorities who aren't Asian. The Korematsu generation Asians who spent time in the camps as kids are statistically more predisposed to violence and crime. You don't think that affects how future generations are raised?

So, preferential treatment based on race is good? Or is it only good when certain races benefit?
---

darkjedilink posted...

EmeralDragon23 posted...

My favorite 'argument' against not including race as a factor is that all of these people think that after 1965 every black person to ever walk this earth suddenly became a middle class citizen and moved to a neighborhood with a good school.

Ignoring the fact that many of those kids and adults who grew up during the Civil Rights Era (Both of who are still alive today!!!!) didn't magically get better lives aft(er the acts. Nothing changed for them on an individual basis, so many of those families are only just starting to get out of poverty (if at all!) that the economic opportunities aren't the same. And then people have the gall to say "but they don't perform as well as others!" as if these issues are magically fixed and don't have long term impact even though the generation that faced economic, educational, systemic oppression its still alive and that those policies affected their ability to provide their own kids economic and educational opportunities.

People like to quote MLK saying it's cruel to tell a man without boots to pull himself up with bootstraps, but entirely miss the point where the civil rights act gave people the right to buy boots, but not the means to do so, nor any boots themselves.

As far as the Asian American lawsuit goes, I won't comment on the specifics, but I do find it fascinating that Asians being a "model minority" is used to both dismiss any legitimate racism against them and also to justify mistreatment of other minorities who aren't Asian. The Korematsu generation Asians who spent time in the camps as kids are statistically more predisposed to violence and crime. You don't think that affects how future generations are raised?

So, preferential treatment based on race is good? Or is it only good when certain races benefit?

No, instead we should leave higher education as a contest of which ethnicity can procreate the fastest because of muh ill-conceived notion of objectivity. Then, when China sends over half of its population to the west for education and other races are displaced out of school through sheer numbers even if they are exceptionally talented and other future generations of other ethnicities are screwed over in life. Then everything will be fair.

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

I don't care about the "systematic oppression". I was just addressing the stereotype that Asians are more successful in school.

I mean, most of his post was about discrimination and systematic oppression double standards so you zeroing in on four words is pretty sketchy.

What's more sketchy is that you expected people to stay focused on a serious topic on CE and not talk about whatever they feel like.

Why don't we talk about how your posts sound very stormfront-esque? And for the record I'm pretty sure most East Asians (the ones that are normally talked about in regards to AA) "procreate" a lot slower than other ethnicities.

Good.
---

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Why don't we talk about how your posts sound very stormfront-esque?

Nice ad hominem, but is stormfront a group that supports universities giving an advantage to minority applicants? Because it sounds a lot like you're just saying bs.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And for the record I'm pretty sure most East Asians

Thanks for being "pretty sure". That was quite the valuable information you shared with us.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

"procreate" a lot slower

You don't have to put procreate in quotations. It's the right word.

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Why don't we talk about how your posts sound very stormfront-esque?

Nice ad hominem, but is stormfront a group that supports universities giving an advantage to minority applicants? Because it sounds a lot like you're just saying bs.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And for the record I'm pretty sure most East Asians

Thanks for being "pretty sure". That was quite the valuable information you shared with us.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

"procreate" a lot slower

You don't have to put procreate in quotations. It's the right word.

Hey, you're the one that says we could talk about whatever we like after you went on an irrelevant tangent. And stormfront is one of the only groups that cries about the procreation of ethnicities. It's not an ad hominem if it's true. If someone says "blacks deserve to be racially profiled by police because statistically they commit more crimes" it's completely appropriate to call them racist like you are.

And me being pretty sure is better than you just stating something you pulled out of your ass as fact.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And me being pretty sure is better than you just stating something you pulled out of your ass as fact.

The Canadian census that I linked to and common knowledge of world demographics that Asia has the largest population of all the continents/ethnicity came out of my ass?

FreedomEtrtment posted...

If someone says "blacks deserve to be racially profiled by police because statistically they commit more crimes" it's completely appropriate to call them racist like you are.

Except discussing population size and how that translates to under-representation of ethnicities in school applications isn't racism you fool.

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And me being pretty sure is better than you just stating something you pulled out of your ass as fact.

The Canadian census that I linked to and common knowledge of world demographics that Asia has the largest population of all the continents/ethnicity came out of my ass?

FreedomEtrtment posted...

If someone says "blacks deserve to be racially profiled by police because statistically they commit more crimes" it's completely appropriate to call them racist like you are.

Except discussing population size and how that translates to under-representation of ethnicities in school applications isn't racism you fool.

Having the largest population doesn't mean they're procreating the fastest. That should be common sense.

No, but zeroing in it and focusing entirely on "ackchyually, asian's aren't successful" with a massive chip on your shoulder and using it to justify discrimination is. And lol speaking of ad hominems. You got so upset your flimsy argument was described as it is you just go for a childish flame. Grow up.

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And me being pretty sure is better than you just stating something you pulled out of your ass as fact.

The Canadian census that I linked to and common knowledge of world demographics that Asia has the largest population of all the continents/ethnicity came out of my ass?

FreedomEtrtment posted...

If someone says "blacks deserve to be racially profiled by police because statistically they commit more crimes" it's completely appropriate to call them racist like you are.

Except discussing population size and how that translates to under-representation of ethnicities in school applications isn't racism you fool.

Having the largest population doesn't mean they're procreating the fastest. That should be common sense.

No, but zeroing in it and focusing entirely on "ackchyually, asian's aren't successful" with a massive chip on your shoulder and using it to justify discrimination is. And lol speaking of ad hominems. You got so upset your flimsy argument was described as it is you just go for a childish flame. Grow up.

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype. Good job with that strawman argument since I never said that they aren't successful. But you know, I've already learned about shitty argumentation in school you don't have to give me examples of logical fallacies every time you post.

Thanks for your "facts", now I've completely forgotten about China's birth policies. Oh wait.

Thanks for saying "grow up" now I know that you're not worth my time.

Hexagon posted...

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype.

It is a sterotype. It's also statistically correct - it's the reason why most colleges give Asians a 50-point deduction on their SAT scores.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Hexagon posted...

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype.

It is a sterotype. It's also statistically correct - it's the reason why most colleges give Asians a 50-point deduction on their SAT scores.

Are you sure about that? Are you sure its not a post test modifier? Are you sure that it's "Asians" are more successful? Or that their ethnicity is over-represented by the best of the best immigrants and the schools correct for this by reducing application points so that ethnicity with lower demographics can compete?

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

Hexagon posted...

FreedomEtrtment posted...

And me being pretty sure is better than you just stating something you pulled out of your ass as fact.

The Canadian census that I linked to and common knowledge of world demographics that Asia has the largest population of all the continents/ethnicity came out of my ass?

FreedomEtrtment posted...

If someone says "blacks deserve to be racially profiled by police because statistically they commit more crimes" it's completely appropriate to call them racist like you are.

Except discussing population size and how that translates to under-representation of ethnicities in school applications isn't racism you fool.

Having the largest population doesn't mean they're procreating the fastest. That should be common sense.

No, but zeroing in it and focusing entirely on "ackchyually, asian's aren't successful" with a massive chip on your shoulder and using it to justify discrimination is. And lol speaking of ad hominems. You got so upset your flimsy argument was described as it is you just go for a childish flame. Grow up.

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype. Good job with that strawman argument since I never said that they aren't successful. But you know, I've already learned about shitty argumentation in school you don't have to give me examples of logical fallacies every time you post.

Thanks for your "facts", now I've completely forgotten about China's birth policies. Oh wait.

Thanks for saying "grow up" now I know that you're not worth my time.

His post along with this entire topic was in the context of the US system and schools. You trying to draw that out to what it means worldwide and focusing on that trivial statement was completely irrelevant and just showed that you have a massive chip on your shoulder to put it nicely. I wouldn't be talking about logical fallacies when everyone of your posts was filled with them, especially the fact that your first and subsequent discussion was a red herring and an irrelevant tangent to begin with.

China's birth rates are on the lower end of the world's population. And China isn't all of Asia.
Why wouldn't I tell you to grow up when you've resorted to petty flames and behaving like a child.

Hexagon posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Hexagon posted...

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype.

It is a sterotype. It's also statistically correct - it's the reason why most colleges give Asians a 50-point deduction on their SAT scores.

Are you sure about that? Are you sure its not a post test modifier? Are you sure that it's "Asians" are more successful? Or that their ethnicity is over-represented by the best of the best immigrants and the schools correct for this by reducing application points so that ethnicity with lower demographics can compete?

On average, black people make up about 25 percent of college student bodies, and at Harvard, it's 30. That's with them being only about 13 percent of the US population. Latinos are even MORE overrepresented.

So it can't be that.
---

ITT People think Asian-Americans and Asians are the same thing.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Hexagon posted...

darkjedilink posted...

Hexagon posted...

Lmfao I said calling Asians the most successful in school is a stereotype.

It is a sterotype. It's also statistically correct - it's the reason why most colleges give Asians a 50-point deduction on their SAT scores.

Are you sure about that? Are you sure its not a post test modifier? Are you sure that it's "Asians" are more successful? Or that their ethnicity is over-represented by the best of the best immigrants and the schools correct for this by reducing application points so that ethnicity with lower demographics can compete?

On average, black people make up about 25 percent of college student bodies, and at Harvard, it's 30. That's with them being only about 13 percent of the US population. Latinos are even MORE overrepresented.

So it can't be that.

https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics

Ethnicity

African American

14.6%

Asian American

22.2%

Hispanic or Latino

11.6%

Native American or Pacific Islander

2.5%

The real question is, are these statistics from blind admissions or not. And if not, how much higher would Asians be at.

GiftedACIII posted...

ITT People think Asian-Americans and Asians are the same thing.

What's the difference? One generation?

Hexagon posted...

What's the difference? One generation?

Uh, the difference is one grew up in the US and has been immersed in US culture while the other didn't. It doesn't really matter how many generations has been gone through.
Though you think all Asian-Americans are all of the same generations too? Yikes. Tagged accordingly.
---

GiftedACIII posted...

Hexagon posted...

What's the difference? One generation?

Uh, the difference is one grew up in the US and has been immersed in US culture while the other didn't. It doesn't really matter how many generations has been gone through.
Though you think all Asian-Americans are all of the same generations too? Yikes. Tagged accordingly.

I wish I could back the time I wasted reading your post.

based
---