I think percentages make far more sense to compare. In California, you are going obviously going to have a lot more Hispanic students than in many other states. That’s not the case in, say, the Southeast.
So do you think the Asian American Voters Survey does not know how to conduct polls? Because that’s where I got the 70% support for Affirmative Action… and where you got the support that Asian groups are trending right. Obviously you think the Asian American Voters Survey matters (at least in one measure). How do you account for the difference since you believe both AAVS and Pew polls should be considered in equal measure.
A quick and easy way to compare who has it more difficult is to compare average annual incomes among both groups.
The way Affirmative Action works currently is that the major disadvantaged groups - African Americans, Hispanics get a ‘bump’ in their overall profile. Colleges have a ‘holistic view’ after Supreme Court decisions in the 1970s. So therefore their total points are bumped up so that those who are the on the bottom of the other groups are vaulted over. However, there are far more than race that results in elevating a profile - extra curriculars for one (why do you think so may Ivy League strivers join extra curricular clubs - and one where Asian Americans score high on), whether athletic or not. Interviews also have an effect on the total point score. Universities have a plethora of criteria - race is not only one.
Even the big lawsuit against Harvard, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard is making most of its major arguments (and providing many studies) against the legacy system. And is asking that Asian personality scores (which are ridiculously low as a whole - either deliberately or through unconscious bias, appear to be racially motivated) be relative to white scores. So it does appear that a lawsuit against Asian discrimination is taking the legacy system to task.
Oh, and before you ask, it does not bother me at all that those who have extra curriculars, music proficiency, or great interviews get a bump, as it is does not that historically discriminated and oppressed groups do. Now, I would definitely get behind a more granular breakdown of Asian Americans (and Latin Americans honestly) - so Asian groups that have far less success also get those bumps.
Well if this isn’t the pot calling the kettle black. Please find more polls that say contradictory things and use them both to advance your agenda. Start with why we should discount the 70% positive view of affirmative action in the initial poll you submitted, but accept that Asian groups are trending right in the same poll.
Mate, mate, mate - if I’m not going to be baited into calling you racist, I’m not going to be baited into calling you anything else insulting, either.
I’d say it did give more weight to their experiences of being Asian, actually.
What is this “other Asians” crap? Both cites were people talking about themselves as well.
I said “Functionally”.
And it’s also a giant myth you’re perpetuating - other cultures do value education, and do work hard - Africans certainly do, which is why it’s an African ethnic group, not an Asian one, that is the most successful US immigrant group.
I disagree. I think gross numbers is far more important. You are increasing the injustice with every extra seat.
Are you talking about these polls?
Perhaps you can provide a link?
Still not seeing the “hispanic disadvantage”
2 standard deviations worth of difference in scores. race is not the only criteria, obviously but it is a major criteria.
At this point, it appears you are merely trying to equalize results.
I don’t think you ever linked to that poll. You sure you saw it correctly. Because the poll I saw got to 70% by excluding one of the largest groups of asians (chinese americans) to get to 70%
At this point you are admitting you were being insulting with that comment aren’t you?
I think the rest of your posts can safely be ignored.
Let me repost because I missed a poll here (I did not see that there was a national and California AAVS poll):
Is their a head-to-wall emoji? Blacks only make 6% of California’s population. Hispanics make up ~40% of California’s population. Of course more Hispanics in total numbers are going to be affected in California, which has (far) more Hispanics and less Blacks than the rest of the country as a whole. The percentages indicate which groups have benefited more.
The 2020 one, which you linked to in you OP, and I quoted 538’s analysis on it (from the SAME ARTICLE you posted in the OP).
Q16A - so support for Affirmative Action has gone up since 2018!
Though it seems in California, Affirmative Action support is at 62%
The crosstabs also seem to include similar numbers to the California Prop 16 as you stated earlier, but it was not mentioned that Prop 16 also includes removing affirmative action “in the operation of public employment, public education, and public contracting” While the other question (62%) only seemed to deal with access to higher education.
When the results are so out of wack with percentages, it strikes me that there is no equality of opportunity. Affirmative Action is trying to help with those percentages for some groups which require help.
Yes, I have noted that as well. Are you angry that Asians get included with blacks and have been in CRT analysis? Is that the core of this?
Irrelevant. Who gives a shit if more hispanics are beneficiaries of aa because there are more hispanics. Those are still seats being given to people based on race.
If you are saying that this means that the gross numbers might be different at east coast competitive colleges, well duh. But the beneficiaries of race based affirmative action that are the descendants of slaves is a small portion of the overall number of beneficiaries of race based affirmative action.
Do you have those cites for how hispanics have been so oppressed compared to asians that it justifies asian atonement to hispanics?
Yeah, that’s wierd. I see a difference between the sample sizes pew 6600+ aapi1500+. It also shows that asians in safe republican states support aa at a higher rate than asians in safe democratic states. I wonder what’s up with that. They also report being contacted by the democratic party more frequently that asians in safe democrat or battleground states.
So disparity in results is proof of disparity in opportunity?
Do asians have more opportunity than whites?
The results between asians and whites are pretty out of whack with percentages.
I think it would be advantageous to asians to have asians lumped in with blacks the way hispanics have been. I don’t think it would be fair, just as I don’t think it is fair to have hispanics ride on the coattails of black slavery and segregation to get race based preferences.
My issues with crt are based on it’s rejection of rights based rational analysis in favor of anecdote and storytelling. Policymaking based on anecdotes and parables makes for bad policy.
My issues with aa (as it is practiced today, - disclaimer - I have an equal if not greater problem with legacy and athletic preferences) is that it is overly inclusive in the preferences it bestows and the dehumanizing way it justifies discriminating against asians. These preferences are passed out like there is little to no cost to granting these preferences and i think the reason that this is seen as almost cost free to some is because the cost is primarily borne by asians. I think the narrative that grow up around this to justify this preference at the expense of asians diminish the hard work of asian kids, the painful sacrifices of asian families and creates dehumanizing stereotypes of asians to justify discriminating against them.
I am not against all aa. I am in favor of aa (and even reparations) for the descendants of slaves and american indians but when you put poor hispanic immigrants ahead of poor asian immigrants based solely on race, I have a problem with that.
I am not sure how your links are responsive to my posts.
I am particularly not clear how your link shows that hispanics have been so much more oppressed than asians that it justifies asian atonement to hispanics.
I will have to spell it then, just saying here that by past experience people that are racists usually do have a problem understanding that being “Hispanic” is not a race. I hope that was just plain ignorance there.
This is something you have said without any facts. I’ve shown in California the % drops of African-Americans and Latin Americans. How do you know the breakup of those people? There are far more African-American than recent African immigrants in the US, so my opinion of the data is that most of that number are African-Americans.
I’ve already told you that you can look at average and median incomes as a quick and dirty measure.
Latinos and African-Americans get boosts due to decades and centuries of disparate treatment which I believe manifests this in this income disparity (Latino/Hispanic, btw, have a lower average and medium income than any other group). It may affect indeed Asians if they are the lowest group among the others in the entering class and so get passed. However, Asian Americans haven’t the highest racial average and median income allowing them higher privileges in terms of schools and support doesn’t seem to be factored in your calculus either. Pacific Islanders I think should be considered separately, as well as other Asian groups which are not as successful.
Disparity in results does indeed indicate there is something out of wack with opportunity. This manifests mostly in the workplace So Asians should have help regarding opportunities in the workplace than their white counterparts. However, in the education sphere, Asian Americans are generally in a much higher percentage among the most selective schools than their population numbers. So it seems any disparity in results in the education sphere appears to be in favor of Asians.
And I do not. The only caveat is that some Asian Americans groups don’t have the financial benefits that other Asian American groups do (Pacific Islanders on the chart I’ve shared). They should be separately considered because of that.
That is about as relevant as stating that jews are not a race. So if i understand you correctly, you don’t actually have any response to my posts but you think that I’m racist because I refer to hispanics as a race? WTF?
“Lani Guinier, a Harvard law professor, and Henry Louis Gates Jr., the chairman of Harvard’s African and African-American studies department, pointed out that the majority of them – perhaps as many as two-thirds – were West Indian and African immigrants or their children, or to a lesser extent, children of biracial couples.” https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/24/us/top-colleges-take-more-blacks-but-which-ones.html
This is less dramatic at other schools but still a significant portion of the black students are immigrants or the children of immigrants.
This proves that hispanics have lower incomes. it doesn’t prove some disproportionate amount of oppression compared to asians. You’re basically saying that we should give hispanics a preference because they are poorer than asians, on average. Then why not just have means tested admissions preferences?
What is the oppression that hispanics have suffered that asians have not that would justify giving them a preference at the expense of asians. It is no answer to simply say that hispanics have lower incomes ergo they have suffered more oppression. That’s ridiculous.
So asians suffer a form of oppression that hurts them in the workplace but actually helps them exceed whites in academics? This showcases my problem with crt. You lose your connection to logic and rational thought. You adopt a near religious faith in a position and you expect everyone to accept your faith as fact.
And we’re done. There is simply no way that we are going to bridge this gap.
This is about Harvard (at least that’s all I can read of the article). Harvard is not the only school with affirmative action. Many state schools engage in it as well.
So you think most of the college freshman who are not in the UC system due to Prop 209 were African immigrants?
Listen you can provide all the counter-narratives you want, but I’ve provided you data. Are you attempting to say that the race with the lowest average and median income haven’t been discriminated against? Or even more ridiculous, that they have suffered the same discrimination as the racial group with the highest average and median income? Is that your position?
What do you feel is deficient in Latin culture then that accounts for this?
If you feel that Asians have suffered as much if not more systemic discrimination that Latin Americans (and you do agree they’ve suffered discrimination, right?) then where is your data? I provided data and you provided counter narrative.
Do you think Affirmative Action would have occurred if black Americans were making the same as white Americans?
Are Asians not exceeding whites in academics? Look at the numbers. Compare them to Asian populations. Your counter narratives are not compelling.
In addition, I will concede that at top tier universities you may find more black immigrant among the black population, but that’s not where most black people go to school (see link). And state universities have affirmative action programs (those are the ones which are subject to court challenges). And those are the ones with growing black enrollment unlike the top tier schools.
It could be cultural. Why would members of a variety of cultures that value entrepreneurship, education, hard work, etc. align with a political party that promotes victimhood mentality and rewards poor performance, criminality, and failure? If the Republicans would work on their messaging a bit they would have a large percentage of Hispanic and Asian voters secured. Especially those who have fled socialist or communist nations.
