I think that then one should consider that CRT were more based on evidence than what some assume. Remember, CRT uses a framework to look at the issue, Attorney Generals use other ways. That the conclusions are similar does point to CRT to be more valid than some assume. If it is not an assumption one has to insist: where is the evidence that the Attorney General used CRT?
BTW I will have to point out that I started this discussion knowing almost nothing about CRT, you should know that looking at academic sources, history and other items to see if your opinions are proper, lead me to then conclude that CRT proponents are more on the money and that there is really no evidence shown that the ones reporting discrimination or in favor of changes are just relying on CRT, when even AA was a thing before CRT came into the picture.
Premise 1: “Affirmative action has been good for Asians at some point, though I won’t tell you which Asians or at what point”
Premise 2: “I have decided that anything at all done by the Fairfax County school board regarding the TJ admissions policy constitutes ‘affirmative action’ even if this requires using the phrase ‘affirmative action’ to refer to things that no other person in the English-speaking world has ever used it to mean”
Conclusion: “What the Fairfax County school board is doing is good for Asians.”
Seems to be more an argument that since something was found to be a bogeyman (an opinion really about CRT) that it is then very good to call the same to any other AA or similar efforts, it is wrong to declare that Asians that are involved support the changes or attorney generals point at discrimination by using CRT too.
You still need a cite to make a good argument that they are using CRT in this case, as it is, they are relying in just old fashion anti-discrimination efforts or past case law. No CRT required.
No, she was talking about past history that should not be ignored. It was not just the Hmong, in fact there is no mention of them.
Today, you don’t hear about how affirmative action programs kickstarted the careers of Asian Americans forty years ago, when they were the underrepresented minority. You also don’t hear of the studies that attest to affirmative action’s abilities to lessen the harsh income gap between Asian-American ethnic communities. At the end of the day, contrary to my initial instincts, eliminating affirmative action won’t give a leg-up to Asian-American applicants. We stand to lose more from Edward Blum’s win.
The concept of “lying” doesn’t even apply to an opinion piece. She made the same generic pro-AA points that anyone else could, mostly focusing on an ethical argument that Asians should support AA for black people. There isn’t any factual information in the piece about how “Asians have benefitted from affirmative action” which is not surprising given that the piece focuses largely on the debate about re-instituting racial quotas in California’s public universities, which always were used to cap total Asian enrollment and never benefitted any group of Asians.
You’re just dressing up the same “it can’t be racist against Asians if I can find 1 Asian who supports it” thing that you’ve dredged up again and again. There’s no logic to that statement whatsoever.
You also hear surprisingly little about flying unicorns and pots of gold at the end of the rainbow.
And yet, racial quotas WERE eliminated in California university admissions 24 years ago and more qualified Asians DID benefit by assuming more spots that were previously reserved as racial handouts for applicants who failed to meet the academic criteria. This isn’t a hypothetical. And it still requires a better connection to the notion that virulent anti-Asian racists openly stating “we’re going to overhaul the TJ admissions system to keep Asians out” is somehow “beneficial to Asians” than your insistence that this is “affirmative action” and therefore good because anything that anybody labels “affirmative action” must be good.
Nope, the reality is that I can find more than just one.
Contrary to mainstream coverage of Asian American (mostly Chinese American) opposition to affirmative action, public opinion polling consistently shows that a majority of Asian Americans support affirmative action. When Abigail Fisher unsuccessfully sued the University of Texas in an attempt to dismantle its affirmative action programs, more than 160 diverse Asian American and Pacific Islander groups signed on to amicus briefs to support race-conscious admissions.
As an Asian American civil rights group borne from the tragedy of Vincent Chin, we fight every day to end racism against Asian Americans and other people of color. We understand the fear that anti-affirmative action groups feel because of the enduring history and current reality of racism in our country, but we believe that they are focusing their energies on the wrong fight. Instead of fighting against other victims of systemic discrimination, we should be fighting together to end residential segregation, inadequate school funding, and the school-to-prison pipeline to create better access to education for everyone.
I see a vague references to how asians have benefited from AA to “kick start their careers” but that seems pretty content free.
I think this is an undergrad.
The article by a grad student from vermont was even less specific.
And yet asians in california voted overwhelmingly against prop 16.
The deployment of Asian Americans as an exemplary group inrace relations is nothing new. The model minority myth of Asian Americans has been used since the Sixties to denigrate other non-whites. According to the model minority myth, Asian Americans have suffered discrimination and overcome its effects by being conservative,hard-working, and well-educated, rather than through any government benefits or racial preferences.If they are hurt at all by affirmative action, Asian Americans are harmed no differently from whites.
The real risk to Asian Americans is that they will be squeezed out to provide proportionate representation to whites, not due to the marginal impact of setting aside a few spaces for African Americans.The linkage of Asian Americans and affirmative action, however,is an intentional maneuver by conservative politicians to provide a response to charges of racism. The advocates against affirmative action can claim that they are racially sensitive, because, after all, they are agitating on behalf of a non-white minority group. These opponents of affirmative action also claim that if racial “quotas” are to be used,they should be used to benefit whites as well
Faculty Publications UC Hastings College of the Law Library
Does not change anything that I said, remember that ignorance can also happens among people that are being misled by conservative media. As experts and more involved people of Asian descent can tell you.
Kicking out Asians to provide “proportionate representation to whites” is exactly what is going on at TJ! It’s what we’ve been talking about for 400 posts! It’s what you’re allegedly defending!
Wow…so if you can find a single Asian who agrees with you that means that Asians love being discriminated against, but a formally conducted vote among the 5.6 million Asians in California to the contrary obviously just means that they are all being “misled by conservative media” and therefore don’t count. Truly breathtaking.
Like we are seeing here at TJHSST? The largest beneficiary of this lottery are white kids.
Blacks are 13-15% of harvard’s entering class. About 2/3rds of that is based on race. Almost all of it as at the expense of asians. That’s not just a few spaces. That’s a 33- 50% increase over current admissions.
So wait, asians are being tricked into voting for their own interests? that is a very unique take.
I’m of asian descent and i’m telling you you’re wrong and since my race gives me authority to speak on the topic, so I guess this debate is over. None of your experts are actually exercising their expertise, they are expressing their personal opinions.
That is just selectively omitting the rest, the whole piece is to show that statements like the one you made follows a very incomplete and misleading narrative.
Vox does explain it better here:
In short, conservatives are taking another swing at dismantling affirmative action — hoping the case makes it to the Supreme Court, where a new conservative majority could rule broadly and outlaw affirmative action. And, yet again, they are centering the debate around Asian Americans.
This story, of racial bonuses and penalties due to affirmative action, has created an internal tension for Asian Americans: Many of us know race-conscious policies are necessary to remedy systemic racism. But we are also told that Asian Americans are penalized for those same policies.
It’s a tension white affirmative action opponents have exploited, time and again, to make their argument against race-conscious policies and to seek a broader coalition for their movement.
But if Asian Americans have long resisted being recruited to their cause, this latest campaign has a new wrinkle. “This time around, there is a wealthier, very small, and extremely vocal group of Asians who are on board — and very willing to play the part,” said Colorado State University education professor OiYan Poon, who has been studying this group.
The story on which this movement is built contains some fundamental misunderstandings. The idea that affirmative action doles out bonuses and penalties obscures the far more complicated reality of how the policy actually works. But of greater concern is that this story — of merit artificially tweaked to engineer a certain racial demographic — implies that there is an objective way to measure who is deserving and who isn’t. And it suggests that if we went purely by this idea of merit, it is white and Asian people who would be on top, and that that is the natural state of the world.
It has little bearing on any points you go on to make, but while average incomes are high, the free/reduced lunch rate for FCPS was 31% last year. I didn’t look at the other feeder districts.
Many also though the same would happen with slavery. But more to the point, very in the open discrimination and doors closed to Asians in the past fell for other reasons for Asians in the past. But that once those restrictions were removed the chances for Asians improved although with other misleading narratives in place.
And we’ve come back to the top of the circle with another round of “affirmative action is anything that I say it is and affirmative action is always good.”