All it takes for discrimination against asians to stop is for liberals to stop discriminating against asians and your response is that liberals have to stop discrimination by others against blacks before they can stop discriminating against asians?
So tell me how are hispanics suffering from a heart attack? Why is there a preference for hispanics over asians?
How are caribbean and african immigrants suffering from heart attacks?
You act like asians are relatively successful in america because we had it easy. Which ethnicity were put in American internment camps? Which ethnicity had a law specifically excluding their immigration?
Well, Thank you for the admission. It’s not common for people to admit that they learned something new on this site anymore (it used to be a very common occurrence 10+ years ago).
I know a little something about the Hecht-Calandra Act and the VOX article is mischaracterizing the facts. The “predominantly white” kids at the time were predominantly Jews.
“Mathew’s board demanded that the schools chancellor abolish the admissions test and admit students solely on the basis of recommendations; it threatened a lawsuit if he didn’t.”
“Chancellor Scribner announced that “any test of academic achievement tends to be culturally biased.””
In the face of these attacks on objective measures of merit, they fought back.
Now it’s the asians that must fight back.
“Brooklyn Tech, for example, was 25% black, Latino and Asian when the law passed. By 1976, black and Latino students became a large majority for nearly 20 years.”
If the perceived racist origin of the SHSAT makes the test somewhat suspect then why doesn’t the racist origin of holistic admission make Harvards admissions process suspect?
As for whether there is deliberate discrimination, I think it is the most plausible reason for why the asian population has remained relatively steady over the last few decades despite the asian population exploding in the same period (although the asian contingent in each entering class has increased since the lawsuit started). I can be convinced that it was subconscious after all when Berkeley stopped considering race, not only did asian admissions increase, white admissions fell. And I feel pretty confidant that the berkeley admissions committee was not trying to admit more white kids at the expense of asian kids, it just sorta happened.
When you subjectively introduce race into the calculus, you poison the whole process. I think it would be better to do away with racial preferences altogether but if you must have it, then make it objective. A quota or a defined preference (e.g. +200 points on the SATs) would be more fair even if SCOTUS declared it unconstitutional.
So some prominent liberals had some false instincts on an issue, and after “long and tedious work” most of them (or enough of them) changed their mind on the issue?
While I’d hope liberals wouldn’t have any negative or racist instincts, I understand that anyone can have such feelings. But this reflects well on liberals, in general – we’re a group who, with time and good arguments and data, actually have a great chance at changing our views.
It sounds like Asian advocates are doing the right thing and making good arguments. Good for them. I don’t know if everything you’re saying is factually accurate (sometimes you characterize your cites in ways that don’t strike me as accurate), and given our past history of discussions and disagreements, I’m probably not going to take your characterizations at face value. I still think your personal feelings about black people, liberals, and “woke SJWs” are pointing you at the wrong enemies – the “right” enemies are the same as they almost always are… wealthy and powerful institutions, generally run by and benefiting wealthy white people. “Woke SJWs” are just a silly fantasy boogieman.
The relevant aspect of this is to recognize the scale (the net effect is STILL that Black and Latino students are underrepresented in a variety of ways) what you can do about it. Actually having racial quotas would be illegal as you say. Having a single test to get in would probably not work in any case in undergrad, and would have to be something very different from the SAT.
The SAT is run by a private organization, you have to pay to take the test and you can pay to take the test multiple times and use your best scores from each section - it nakedly benefits people who can pay more. It’s also very unlikely to actually test what students will be studying in a particular field of study. You would at the very best have to do something more like creating a test like the LSAT tailored for the particular field of study a student would be going into, which also would have complications because a lot of people apply to undergrad with no major, or switch majors.
I think the conclusion to your argument is that the only thing remaining is the binary choice to allow or disallow affirmative action. I don’t think it’s fair to view someone who doesn’t want to scrap AA over the Harvard (or similar) admissions controverseys to be doing it out of racism or unfairness to Asians.
I’m sure it is just me, but I am highly doubtful that concern over allegations of discrimination against Asian students at the nation’s most elite institutions is the issue that is most critical to Democratic performance with the non-college educated, especially rural, whites. I did click the right thread?
So, meanwhile two conflicting narratives regarding how Ds are positioned to do with the non-college educated, especially rural, white voters moving forward are being fed by different takes on recent data:
We have 538’s take on the recent election cycle: Ds are killing it in suburbia but doing even poorer in rural areas.
We have a NYT opposing take that yes suburbia is delivering for the Ds but that Trump’s rural white support is softening significantly.
Massive turnout and D-ward margins among urban to suburban voters will of course be key in 2020. But there are important states that cannot be won without undercutting Trump’s GOP huge margins with non-college educated rural white voters. The nature of our system is that all voters are equal but that some voters (rural voters) are more equal than others. Ceding them to Trumpism without contest would be foolish and I hope that the NYT analysis is more on target this time …
I will make a thread to discuss Asian-Black relations and affirmative action.
Yes, some black people despise Asians and vice versa.
**The Democratic Party is a coalition of tribes. **
But meanwhile, yes, Democrats should appeal more to white voters.
The Kaepernick thing did not help; since politics and sports is intertwined, why doesn’t some of the white athletes, who can sympathize with their black colleagues, who face racial discrimination with policing, etc. discuss these things with voters to further their platform.
Democrats should probably campaign more in rural places and talk about jobs, healthcare, etc.
The recent NYT polling also showed underwhelming results for democratic candidates in the six polled swing states, with Warren definitively losing against Trump and Biden mostly winning but by relatively low margins. Notably, Warren does worst in North Carolina and Michigan; Biden loses North Carolina and only wins Michigan by a point.* I don’t know how to square that with the story that Trump sees worsening performance in white rural areas – and even if he does worse in Kentucky as indicated by that Mason-Dixon poll, well, you could have Trump on tape laughing uproariously while aborting babies and peeing on a bible and I’m still not sure he’d lose Kentucky.
All the time! Arguably to their detriment! I don’t know where Yankees 1996 Champs’s headspace is currently at, but I urge them to pay a little more attention.
I don’t quite follow you here. Are you saying that it would help democrats appeal to white voters if white athletes addressed voters about the challenges their black teammates face? Regardless, I don’t see how Kaepernick presents a problem that was caused by or could be addressed by democratic politicians seeking election. If Biden were to come out and say I think literally anything at all about Colin Kaepernick, he’d alienate somebody or other whose vote he needs.
Appealing to NCEW voters does not require turning away from real issues of social justice. Appealing to them in that way would be a mistake and fruit not worth eating or even picking up off the ground.
The main thing is to resist the temptation to “other” them in manners similar to how Trumpism “others”, well, others.
While I believe identifying and trying to help with the real problems that face the demographic is good politics, it would be the right thing to do for the country even if it was not.
But not at the expense of not addressing the real problems of other groups.
No the actions of a very few do not reflect all that get labelled as SJW by the Right and is certainly not the position that the Democratic party has ever run on.
Be a national party. Don’t just focus on urban areas.
Show up in Carroll County, MD, or Sussex County, NJ, and talk about jobs, healthcare, crime, prescription pills.
This is not confusing.
Focus on everyone.
Jobs, economy should be the Democrats number one priority, but it isn’t.
The false instinct seems to be the dominant instinct. I cannot identify nearly as many non-asian liberals whose first instinct was to condemn the anti-asian discrimination. What do you call it when conservatives have an instinct to support a policy that discriminates against a racial group? What do you call it when liberals have that sort of instinct?
For every cite you can provide of a liberal whose first instinct was to speak out against these discriminatory policies, I can provide at least 2 examples of liberals speaking out in support of them.
What is an acceptable percentage of liberals that continue to push anti-asian discrimination. How much of that discrimination should asians tolerate?
I have characterized black CULTURE as toxic but I have no negative feelings towards blacks.
I have negative feelings towards woke SJWs and for good reason IMO. I think they are a bad for liberalism. They shrink the tent with their ideological purity.
In what way is the SHSAT benefitting wealthy white people? Whites are underrepresented and wealthy whites don’t go to public schools in NYC. How is the NYC Dept. of Ed. run by wealthy white people?