are colleges racist?

[xiggi]

<p>

Xiggi, One observation. You often just state an opinion and claim it to be true without providing supporting rationale or evidence. Have you noticed that in yourself?

</p>

<p>I applaud your sense of humor. You must confuse with me with somebody else.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>/ s i g h …</p>

[IndianParent]

<p>

I applaud your sense of humor. You must confuse with me with somebody else.

</p>

<p>If you insist, I will do my best to confuse with you with someone else. But my observation remains.</p>

<p>So, you are not going to answer the question that gives away your social compass, right?</p>

[xSlacker]

<p>

So you are not really OK with another definition AA, contrary to what you said.

</p>

<p>I said updating it and maybe redefining it not giving URMs the shaft while giving Asians a free pass to dominate America…</p>

<p>

Then you must believe that Asian kids are born with talent. I simply don’t.

</p>

<p>Being able to play a violin well is not talent. Talent is YoYo Ma or whatever his name is. It seems your definition of talent is flawed.</p>

<p>I could learn to play golf and probably get pretty good. I can’t, however, be Jack Nicklaus…</p>

<p>I CAN play basketball very well. Give me 50000 hours of practice and I’ll still never be Michael Jordan.</p>

<p>THAT is talent…</p>

<p>And assuming all Asians are good at whatever you are stating they are good at is like saying all blacks are great at sports. That is patently false, even IF blacks seem to dominate sports in America. ;)</p>

[IndianParent]

<p>

It seems your definition of talent is flawed. …THAT is talent…

</p>

<p>Then I guess 99.9999%+ of college applicants are not talented and we should do away with the ECs.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

Then you must believe that Asian kids are born with talent.

</p>

<p>Achievement in most things does not require talent, if one is willing to work long and hard enough. Certainly you know of Gladwell’s 10,000 hours theory, for example. The problem with having to rely purely on hard work for achievement is that it can make you one-dimensional, or limited in interests. Those with talent are more likely able to excel in several areas, because they do not have to work so hard. Like my friend’s son who was val and both scored 2400 and was a recruited athlete. He was very talented both academically and athletically, so it was not that hard for him.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Who do you think deserve more help? Rich and upper middle class African Americans who are not descendants of slaves, or poor Asian Americans? This is not about AA. I am just trying to gauge your social compass here.

</p>

<p>You added this after I replied. The answer is very simple:</p>

<p>Since the question is not about AA, poor Asian Americans deserve (and need) more help than rich and upper middle class African Americans who are not descendants of slaves.</p>

<p>Please note that every word in my answer is relevant, especially the first ones.</p>

[IndianParent]

<p>

I said updating it and maybe redefining it not giving URMs the shaft while giving Asians a free pass to dominate America…

</p>

<p>Equal treatment under the law is free pass? Do you believe in an Asian quota?</p>

[IndianParent]

<p>

Since the question is not about AA, poor Asian Americans deserve (and need) more help than rich and upper middle class African Americans who are not descendants of slaves.

</p>

<p>Excellent. Now, do you think AA comes in the way of getting the needed and deserved help to poor Asian Americans? Now this is about AA.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

Then I guess 99.9999%+ of college applicants are not talented and we should do away with the ECs.

</p>

<p>That is probably true for <em>most</em> college applicants, and not surprisingly, most colleges do not care about ECs. The elites do care about ECs and probably do get the students who are both talented and work hard to develop that talent, because the vast majority of them are outstanding students academically <em>and</em> have extremely high achievements in other areas, too.</p>

[IndianParent]

<p>OK, this thread is addictive. No more posts by me on this thread till the weekend.</p>

[Bay]

<p>

do you think AA comes in the way of getting the needed and deserved help to poor Asian Americans? Now this is about AA.

</p>

<p>As much as you would like to wish it so, AA does not exist to “help” poor people, and the US Supreme Ct has specifically held that this rationale for AA is prohibited. (You would know this if you had read Grutter). The only lawful purpose for using race in admissions is to create a racially diverse learning environment. The Ct did not care, nor must the elites care, whether the Black student is rich or poor.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Excellent. Now, do you think AA comes in the way of getting the needed and deserved help to poor Asian Americans? Now this is about AA.

</p>

<p>I knew this one was coming … from a mile away. </p>

<p>This how we will play this one out. Please provide me your definition of what AA is in the context of college admissions and I will respond. There is, however, one caveat: please also provide me the link to the source of your definition. For reference, it is NOT what Fabrizio has presented so far.</p>

<p>Fwiw, this is not totally honest on my part because forcing you to search and find the true purpose of the AA in the context of college applications should also show the relative irrelevance of the question.</p>

[poetsheart]

<p>

Are you saying that because Asians work hard to get to a level playing field with Whites they should be punished and seats taken away from them to give to URMs?

</p>

<p>Hmmmm…The OPs of these anti-AA threads are usually whites, not Asians (claiming their seats at elite schools were “stolen” by URMs). But is it any more true than the claims being made in this thread? Notice neither group ever blames applicants who received tip-ins from other categories (legacies, athletes, geographic diversity admits, low SES admits, wealthy donor’s kids, etc.) for grabbing a spot that should have been theirs. Oh, whatever will these hand-wringers do when they don’t have black people to blame anymore, and they still find themselves up against formidable statistical odds, and fail to be admitted? Who will have taken their seat this time? Whoever will they blame?</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

My friend, you are now grasping at straws in the most pathetic way. </p>

<p>If President Casper wanted to talk about poor(er) students, he would have. Directly and clearly.

</p>

<p>Direct quote: Affirmative action is based on the judgment that a policy of true equal opportunity needs to create opportunities for members of historically underrepresented groups to be drawn into various walks of life from which they might otherwise be shut out.</p>

<p>If Casper is NOT talking about a subset of “underrepresented” minorities but rather all of them, then in context “might otherwise be shut out” can only mean one thing: Casper believes that without affirmative action, Stanford wouldn’t have any “underrepresented” minorities.</p>

<p>If he and you believe that, then it’s immensely ironic that you paint yourselves the defenders of "URM"s’ “interests.”</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

While that disparity is growing smaller you are most definitely on the white side so to speak.

</p>

<p>Do you know any Asians in your personal life? If you did, I don’t think you’d be making such a remark.</p>

<p>

Out of all the minorities there are only two that have TRULY been oppressed systematically, for hundreds of years, resulting in destroyed cultures and a near failing population… These two DON’T include Asians unless you get technical and point out that NA’s came from Asia…

</p>

<p>So, uh, why do Hispanics get preferences then?</p>

[fabrizio]

<p>

while giving Asians a free pass to dominate America…

</p>

<p>Have you learned what the “yellow peril” in U.S. history was?</p>

[johnwesley]

<p>

So, uh, why do Hispanics get preferences then?

</p>

<p>Simple. If you were a Harvard adcom looking at a future America made up of 50% Hispanic Americans would you want to be the one to explain why they make up only 5% of the freshman class?</p>

[Bay]

<p>

If you were a Harvard adcom looking at a future America made up of 50% Hispanic Americans would you want to be the one to explain why they make up only 5% of the freshman class?

</p>

<p>Good point, and could explain Harvard’s business decision to use race as a factor in admissions.</p>

[Hunt]

<p>

Don’t blame me, blame the race politics in the USA. I am just recommending that Asians play it like American politicians do. When in Rome …

This is actually an interesting point, and I think part of the source of the difficulties in this discussion. Recent immigrants to the US do not understand why they have to be penalized for the sins of the past in the US–why don’t the whites just pay for it? Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. When you immigrate to a country, you are buying into both the benefits and the problems of living in that country. Oppression of racial minorities, especially blacks and Native Americans, is a huge part of the history of this country, and affirmative action is one of the tools that is being used to try to undo the damage of that history (I don’t feel the need to buy into the polite fiction that AA can only be about “diversity,” by the way). If you want to come here and share in the goodies, you have to pay the taxes, too–and AA is part of the tax. If you want to argue about how it’s ineffective, OK. If you want to argue that it’s unfair to Asians, well, then I have little sympathy. You can’t move next to the slaughterhouse and complain about the smell.</p>