Oh I forgot, That was BTW an Asian lawyer that graduated from Yale and Columbia Law University.
Wow, that is pathetic.
Did you even read the article? For the benefit of those who can’t be bothered to read the reasonably short article:
The author (whose academic credentials matter less than his arguments) is absolutely agreeing that the harvard admissions process is problematic.
He points out legacy preferences are out of control but admits they are not subject to jducicial review the way racial discrimination is.
So what would he have us do? Accept the things we cannot change AND the things we can change?
The injustice of legacy admissions does not make racial discrimination any more acceptable.
It’s not that we are only trying to fight the fights we can win, we are fighting the fights that are possible to fight.
How exactly are we supposed to fight legacy admissions.
He mostly seems to be saying that we should not welcome aid from the enemy
What he gets wrong is that he assumes that asian success is detrimental to other minorities.
How is our success harming others? We are not sabotaging others, we are not asking for preferences over others. We are only asking our brethren to get their foot off our necks.
If the concern is that white supremacists are using asian success to criticize blacks and hispanics, then how is any of that laid at our feet? Explain the model minority myth to the racists not to us. We are well aware of how the model minority myth is used by the right to hurt blacks and by the left to hurt asians.
So yeah, I did read it, what is silly is to spin it like you did. Like he said you get it wrong when you claim to talk for all Asians when you say that “we are not asking for preferences over others” you actually are. The result of dismissing what Yale and others are doing will lead to less Hispanics or Blacks in those institutions. While in reality what Yale and others are doing is not to stop all Asians from coming.
Wanting applicants to be treated as individuals rather than rejected because of their race is not asking for a preference over others. It’s asking for equal treatment.
How in the world are we asking for preferences over others?
What do these words mean?
Yes and the result of allowing yale to continue what they are doing will lead to less asians in those institutions. So should we be more focused on the race of people getting in or the fairness of the process by which people get in. Not that popular opinion justifies any position but the majority of americans do not think that that race should not be a factor in college admissions and only a very tiny minority (the far left) thinks it should be a major factor. This is all in spite of the fact that there is broad support for affirmative action generally.
That sounds like it should be OK for a store to sell limited cleanser items mostly to whites and Asians. What stores do is to put limits regarding how much cleanser can be purchased from a store, one result is that poor people, that usually include Hispanics and blacks, can get them still.
This may be the dumbest attempt at an analogy in the history of human communication.
Lol, I was trying to think of a kinder way to phrase it. 
That Yale discriminates against Asians is a matter of objective fact. Simply marking “Asian” instead of “white” on an application to Yale immediately and directly lowers your score on their admissions rubric. What you are arguing is that this sort of discrimination is a good thing because it advances some other interest. “Anyone alleging that this thing which I celebrate the existence of is a thing that exists has ulterior motive X and Y” is a nonstarter as a debating tactic.
That even with AA Asians are not stopped from going to elite schools. Just that there are a bit less and again that is an issue that need to be solved by helping educational institutions to increase size or set others.
That is why the courts early decided that the harm some claimed was not as they claimed, at the same time the court did not ignore the harm to others if they had decided the other way.
Speaking of tactics that line only leads to a logical counter: You then do think that discrimination against Hispanics or Blacks is OK then. Since I do think you are not proposing that, I suggest you do drop your personal digs.
That’s a nutty way of looking at it. If your application is rejected for being the wrong race then why the heck would you care that some other people of the same race do get in? You’ve still suffered racial discrimination. Note your cleanser analogy was limiting the amount each individual could buy, not ‘sorry, we already sold 20 to Asians today, the rest are reserved for Hispanic customers’.
Maybe the board software should just auto-reply to your posts with this so as to save us all time, but, once again: What the fuck are you talking about?
Precisely, it was about pointing out the limited resources available. Since Hispanics and blacks also have shot, it is actually more fair. And no, there is no warranty that more Hispanics or Blacks would get them, in places with more Asians in a community they would get more.
Remember: the original issue was that where the high school was, the Hispanics and blacks are almost not getting any.
[count] : a criticism or insult that is directed toward a particular person or group
a personal dig
Like several Asian scholars, I do not think this is a racist move against Asians. Drop that.
First of all, that’s not what you said. You said that I must somehow believe in racism against Hispanics without explaining any connection between that allegation and my remark about Yale’s discrimination against Asians.
Second, there’s no room for “what you think” here. Elite colleges including Yale use a system for scoring applications in which various components are assigned numerical scores; some parts of the process are objective (SAT scores are translated into one component of the formula) and others are subjective (essays are graded and “well-roundedness” is evaluated by humans, and assigned a number). As part of this process, a certain number of points are added or subtracted for race alone apart from and in addition to characteristics of economic status etc. Two otherwise identical Yale applications, one from a white applicant and one from an Asian applicant, will - always and invariably, and by explicit and intentional codification in the process - result in the white applicant receiving a higher score, because “being Asian” in and of itself earns a numerical penalty in the process.
It’s the most straightforward, cut-and-dried, naked example of racial discrimination imaginable. You can’t say you “don’t think this is a racist move” and maintain any tenable claim on understanding what the word “racist” means. You can only purport to argue that this instance of racism is justified somehow, and you are not doing a very good job of it.
That is why I said you are not. You are the one not dropping the insulting point that I do agree with racism against Asians, as other Asian scholars explained, this issue is not as you insist.
And clearly you are still ignoring the location where the main OP issue is taking place, following your solutions just leads to less Hispanics and blacks to have access.
Wait, do you think it would be fine for a shopkeeper to set a quota of how many items to sell to each race, and turn away customers based on race once that quota was gone? WTF?
I thought we were talking about Yale now? You know, with the racial quotas?
As for the lottery, although a bad idea it’s not inherently unfair, but it is racist in effect. Did you ever answer whether eliminating family reunification visas is racist?
No, again I said that there is no warranty for that to happen.
For clarity, are you claiming that Yale doesn’t in fact add or subtract points for race, or that this is somehow not racist, or that you don’t agree with it?