There was plenty of support. About 43.4% supported it and 56.6% opposed it.
This is the THIRD TIME that California has rejected affirmative action. When are the progressives going to be able to phrase the questions clearly enough to get Californians to vote in favor of race based preferences. Isn’t it possible that most people, even most liberals don’t actually like race based preferences.
“Prominent Asians” what the fuck are those? Are they the spokesmen for all asians or something? The movement has had 25 years to 'educate" the ignorant masses about why race based discrimination is good for them. They’re not buying it. You might as well say that Californians were too ignorant to vote for trump. The ballot measure lost by a 10% margin. The margin among asians was even larger. Isn’t it possible that these academics have it wrong and race based preferences are a bad idea.
So the asian academics that are in favor of increased diversity for diversity’s sake think that the asians that are not in favor of increased diversity for diversity’s sake are getting it wrong? Pfft. So?
The majority of a state like California failed to vote for race based preferences despite a 25 year campaign to reinstate race based preferences and their best argument is that the voters didn’t understand what they were voting for? Isn’t it possible that California doesn’t want race based preferences?
Anyhow… Created different thread if you want to discuss this further without derailing this thread too much.
There’s some Asians cheering on the racist, quotamongering hatred of excellence that the VA education secretary is fanatically devoted to, and there’s some other Asians opposing it. Given that we can all point to “the Asians who agree with us” regardless of which side of this question we are on, it’s anyone’s guess why one would pick the racist, quotamongering hatred of excellence.
And this is about the fourth time that you ignore I’m not making that argument, again race is only a factor in several items we are talking about, that is why the argument your side makes falls short because it is not much about AA, but more about diversity.
Turns out that your argument there does not know that a lawsuit does not equal objective testing, that will depend on what it is decided after a trial, if there is one. Because as it is I could also say that there is also the chance that this could be dismissed before a trial takes place.
What judges? What are you talking about? How is “we need to replace the admissions test with a lottery because there are too many Asians” not making decisions based solely on race?
As usual, even if one can decode the attempted grammar and word usage in your posts to determine what the hell you are saying, it’s still impossible to figure out what the hell you are talking about.
We are talking also about the university cases like Yale, you need to remember what was discussed already.
I will have to let you know also that reaching for the grammar Nazi maneuver does not lead to happy results for the ones that attempted that before.
In any case, the reply was to also deal with your mistaken belief that this is about quotas (“quota mongering” as you said) educational institutions had to deal with the reality that Affirmative Action has to be followed with no quotas in place (something that was already conceded in many other cases, it should be noted that now the effort is to even get rid of what is left of AA).
Many educational institutions (and the Asians in those too) do realize that diversity is still a thing to work for and that there are many myths still being pushed by the opponents of diversity.
My post about the Virginia secretary of education is about the topic of this thread, a “selective magnet school in Virginia moving towards a lottery system,” due to the repeated, open statements of the Virginia secretary of education and others that they find it unacceptable that the raceblind merit-based admissions system produces too many Asians at a particular school. You have made it clear that you think destroying the merit-based system, the achievement level that the TJ program has reached, and racial equality of opportunity are worthwhile costs to incur in order to achieve “diversity” (taking spots away from Asians who have earned them and giving them to undeserving whites). I disagree with this notion. I do not think it is a useful goal in and of itself and I certainly don’t think it is so great that it outweighs the negatives of the government implementing racial quotas and going to war on a minority group. You continuing to restate your position that “diversity” (undeserving white people taking things Asians have earned) is so great that it justifies literally any means of achieving that end is not an argument for the morality or efficacy of said position.
The cancers are really the arguments that attempt to forget history and context, particularly ignoring that Asians were helped with AA before.
In numerous surveys, large majorities of Asian Americans have supported race-conscious college admissions and rejected efforts to use Asian Americans as a wedge group against other communities of color who support affirmative action.
Most recently, a 2016 national poll conducted by Advancing Justice, APIAVote and AAPIData.com found 64 percent of Asian-American voters favoring programs designed to help blacks, women and other minorities access higher education. These results should not surprise, as many Asian American groups, second perhaps only to white women, have been among the greatest direct beneficiaries of a variety of affirmative action programs. Indeed, over the past 50 years, the dramatic increase in Asian American representation at elite schools such as Yale was made possible because such schools included Asian Americans in their race-conscious admissions.
However, in recent years, the anti-affirmative action movement has attempted to co-opt Asian Americans, ignoring the historical gains our community has made as a result of affirmative action. Anti-civil rights activists like Edward Blum, the lawyer behind the Fisher litigation and several lawsuits seeking to dismantle voting rights for people of color, have openly fished for Asian-American clients to further their attacks against holistic, race-conscious admissions programs at prominent universities.
If “we should stop destroying schools in order to give spots that Asians have earned to dumber white people” is “anti-affirmative action” then sign me up for being “anti-affirmative action.” The only people playing racial wedge games here are the CRT-obsessed liberal scam artists who are pretending to care about black underrepresentation yet doing nothing about it and using it as an excuse to redistribute benefits to whites who failed tests.
In addition to violating core constitutional principles of race-blindness, eliminating merit at our best STEM schools is going to have big impacts on the country in general. Our success as a world leader in science, research, education, and even national security depends on identifying and nurturing the elite minds that these programs are targeted at. Keep pretending that everyone is of equal intellectual capacity and we’ll all end up speaking Russian equally.
Since AA is not about pretend, but that in actuality minorities are allowed in not only by taking their intellect into account but other factors, that rant is just a very ignorant opinion.
Everyone IS of equal opportunity. The problem is not everyone receives equal educational opportunity. Actually, the problem is much bigger: far too many do not receive all kinds of equal opportunity. Economic, healthcare, housing and food security, employment, safety and survival of their person.
