主流媒体报道SCA5,形势似乎对我们不利啊 (转载)# CivilSociety - 华人政治
z*e
1 楼
【 以下文字转载自 SanFrancisco 讨论区 】
发信人: zhangfance (fan), 信区: SanFrancisco
标 题: 主流媒体报道SCA5,形势似乎对我们不利啊
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 6 16:44:05 2014, 美东)
哪位给个中文翻译。
http://www.mercurynews.com/immigration/ci_25505076/affirmative-
Affirmative action debate create rifts in ethnic communities
The backlash by Chinese-American activists against a measure aimed at
restoring affirmative action in the admissions process at California's
public universities has set off political fisticuffs between ethnic groups
accustomed to battling side-by-side.
In a state where Latinos -- most of whom support SCA5, the proposed
constitutional amendment -- are about to become the largest ethnic group but
where Asian-Americans take up nearly 40 percent of all University of
California slots, the clash puts a spotlight on an evolving political
landscape in which members of minority groups now overwhelmingly make up the
majority of the state's population.
There are even schisms within the Asian-American community, where anger is
directed at Chinese-Americans who say they support affirmative action in
hiring, but fear its application at elite UC schools such as UC Berkeley and
UCLA, which now admit fewer than one in five in-state freshman applicants.
They say the policy will take precious university spots from their children
and give them to Latinos, blacks and students from other Asian and Pacific
Islander groups who currently have difficulty gaining access to state
schools.
Last year, 78 percent of Chinese-American students applying to a UC campus
landed a coveted spot in the freshman class, according to fall 2013 data
from UC. However, just 57 percent of Filipino-Americans and 48 percent of
Pacific Islanders were admitted, rates similar to those of blacks and
Latinos.
Fifty-five percent of Latino and 45 percent of African-American applicants
were admitted to UC last year, compared with 65 percent of white applicants.
California Democrats clearly are worried that the controversy might cause
significant numbers of Asian-Americans -- who now vote solidly Democratic --
to turn to the Republican Party. And the GOP has extended a welcome mat.
"Morally inconsistent" is what Karin Wang, of the Los Angeles civil rights
organization Asian Americans Advancing Justice, calls the embrace of
affirmative action in hiring, but not admissions. Supporters say affirmative
action will only help others, but it will not hurt excellent students. "It
shows self-interest operating above shared societal interests."
But that position is rejected by the 80-20 Initiative, whose fiery website
blasts affirmative action in college admissions. Last month, the site urged
California members to register as Republicans "to scare the (Democratic)
Party."
It's part of the group's plan to "play one party against another," said S.B.
Woo, who co-founded the nonpartisan Asian-American political action
committee. "I want the Democratic Party to know that if they keep on pushing
SCA5, then lots of people will be voting on the Republican side."
The group points to Princeton University research that found Asian-American
applicants need much higher SAT scores than all other groups to gain
admission to elite universities.
"The way Asian-American students are treated ... is a gross violation of the
14th Amendment," which requires equal protection under the law to all
people, Woo said. "Is it a surprise to you that in 1965, when affirmative
action first came out, every minority supported it? I did, too. But as used
in college admissions, it's hurting everyone."
If passed by voters, SCA5 would repeal parts of Proposition 209, a 1996
initiative that banned affirmative action and was at the time panned by
Asian-American voters.
A few weeks ago, the proposed constitutional amendment sailed through the
California Senate. Then, just as it appeared to be headed toward the
November ballot, a vociferous social media protest from Chinese-American
groups stopped it cold.
Assembly Speaker John Perez and Sen. Ed Hernandez, strong Latino backers of
SCA5, were forced to propose a number of statewide task force meetings to
reintroduce the amendment and perhaps rewrite parts that upset many Asian-
American voters.
"We suddenly found ourselves up against some pretty vile stuff," said
Hernandez, the amendment's author, about 80-20's website, which brashly
congratulated Asian activists for halting SCA5. Hernandez hopes the string
of panels will "heal any rifts" between Asian-Americans and Latinos.
"There was a bombardment of negative information from Chinese-language media
who framed it as a return to quotas," said Vincent Pan, executive director
of San Francisco's Chinese for Affirmative Action. "They whipped the issue
into a frenzy."
In simple terms, Hernandez said, affirmative action -- in a Proposition 209
universe -- can help make higher education accessible to a greater diversity
of students. "That's what big-time elite universities back East do," he
said. "They are ripping off many of our best and brightest black, Latino and
Asian students because we don't give them good chances at getting into
school."
Chinese-American parents, however, credit the UC system for treating their
children fairly because admissions are based solely on merit.
FLEXING POWER
As the debate rages, others see the clash as a watershed event for Asian-
Americans learning how to effectively flex their statewide political muscles
. "Our purpose is to educate the Asian community to stand up for their
rights," said Taylor Chow of Asian Americans for Political Advancement.
And yet, civil rights activist Wang warns, "In our really diverse state,
communities like ours have to learn to build bridges and coalitions on all
of these issues." Yes, she added, a group of Chinese-Americans altered the
political process, but "at the expense of alienating other communities."
Being cast as the enemy to other Asian and minority groups is something Chow
says Chinese-Americans are "seriously concerned" about. That's why his
Burlingame group will use other means to push for bringing more resources to
"helping those communities that are underrepresented in the university."
Woo says affirmative action will not become a litmus test. "We are not like
the pro-life or the pro-gun people," he said. "I don't believe (Asian-
Americans) can afford to pick one issue and say that everything else is not
important."
Henry Liem, who wrote a book in Vietnamese about affirmative action, notes
that the policy used to be about making amends for slavery and other gender
and racial injustices that hurt women and people of color.
But times have changed, argues Liem, a philosophy professor at San Jose City
College. With the white population shrinking, discussion around affirmative
action must change.
"It is now the minorities who ... have to figure out how to balance equal
opportunities for all with the recognition of merit and freedom." Because
Asian-Americans are doing so well, they lean toward merit and freedom, while
Latinos are more likely to embrace equal opportunity, Liem said.
"It's diverging in different directions among minorities, which is the
essence of the conflict," he said. "SCA5 is the first warning shot across
the table that the communities have to open a dialogue as soon as possible."
comments:
ranti • 42 minutes ago
blacks just want a free ride into the college system,just like they like
welfare and food stamps,they are more than willing to pay for it with their
Dignity,getting and taking and in this case Demanding extra points because
of the color of their skin,they are demanding to be classified as INFERIOR
TO WHITE AND ASIANS,They are sold on the reverse discrimination race baiters
,and perhaps they are right, on an even playing field they cannot compete
with the whites and asians!
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JackW • an hour ago
The article itself is misleading in the way that it appears SCA5 is only
going to affect Chinese-American negatively in UC admission. Indian American
, Vietnamese American, Korean American, Japanese American, Lebanese American
, etc. (yeah, most of Asian Americans) will be affected negatively.
Why? Because the shared qualities among these groups are the strong focus on
academics, family values, hard working. Taking right to higher education
away from these groups are not only immoral, but illegal against our
constitution.
The SCA5 proponents always try to promote so-called diversity for certain
ethnic groups by using discriminatory behavior against other racial groups.
Does ends really justify means? Do SCA5 proponents really think
discrimination against different ethnic groups is what this country is
founded for?
SCA5 proponents, please answer these questions honestly, instead of keep
misleading people using "Affirmative Actions" which is really about ending
discrimination against minorities. Their action really tarnishes these words
and brings back evil systems like caste system or communism in California.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brady Bell • an hour ago
Allan Bakke and Patrick Chavis. Just Google it.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
P Roppo • an hour ago
I like how the writers attempted to turn this into a Chinese vs Everybody
controversy, while ignoring that Vietnamese (they do live in San Jose too)
have very high admission rates.
All this is is another attempt to cover up the dismal educational habits of
Latinos.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dale Warner • 4 hours ago
This has a macro level that's interesting because it is what my friends and
I have been predicting since 1989. It goes like this. A century ago the
nation was believed to be supporting a unitary stance along the lines
advocated by Roosevelt the First, while a countervailing ideology argued for
what they called pluralism, a notion now so lightweight as to have been
incorporated into the "core values" of the nation, or so we are told.
Interestingly, the use of "pluralism" made its first appearance in American
politics as an argument advocated by the slave states to try to create an
ideological framework which would extend the lifeline of the slave states. A
lot of my own relatives fought to defeat such a construct in the 1860's
only to see the label returned with quite a vicious level of personal
attacks in the first half of the 20th Century. Nowadays people say "
pluralism" with their lips, but in their hearts just don't believe in it.
Pluralism then ideologically morphed into multiculturalism, chiefly noted as
doctrines that invited every one to participate except any of the diversity
of white American cultures which were not explicitly designed around the
concept of "allies." But multiculturalism didn't last, and has morphed on
the West Coast into multiracialism, and this is going to be marked by "
racial" groups' adoption of an attitude toward agency similar to political
parties. It will make such stresses on the Democratic Party that it will
fail before the Republican Party fails.
And the next step will be multinationalism which already exists in some
ethnic and racial groups with their congresses, conferences, and entities
expressing statehood status like a foreign policy, an attitude toward an
aggressive American projection of power all over the globe, and an attempt
to usurp other privileges of statehood. Not even imaginary, this is talked
about in academia here and there around the USA. So the next 50 years should
be very interesting and this California dust-up will provide the template.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Shirt Pants • 4 hours ago
Woah,take a look at that chart and one number sticks out. 68% of Vietnamese-
Americans applicants are admitted to the UC system which is still higher
than whites. Vietnam is still a poor country and is not sending us Google
engineers and neurosurgeons so you can't use that excuse. And Vietnamese-
Americans are as likely to attend a Title 1 school as an African-American
and Latino. Yet they still are admitted at a higher rate than whites. So the
proof is in the pudding, if you want to get into college just work hard and
study.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism Shirt Pants • 3 hours ago
Well said! Asian parents, poor or not, always place education as #1 priority
. Whiners, please work on your own issues. Not all unfulfilled dreams can be
attributed to system/society.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bob Richards • 5 hours ago
The race baiting politics of the Democrat party is beginning to circle
around and bite them in the backside - rather amusing and long overdue.
If Asians work harder and focus more on education than another demographic,
one would expect them to be more successful academically. Why should they be
discriminated against solely for their ethnicity?
Affirmative action is blatant racism - there's no way around that.
Perhaps the state should incarcerate innocent Asians randomly because Asians
are under represented in the prison population?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil • 5 hours ago
"affirmative action ... as used in college admissions, it's hurting everyone
." is factually false!!!
Everyone, really!!!
Does Mercurynews even do a basic check on such horribly erroneous falsehoods!
Majority of these asian/indian/japanese kids' test scores are padded with
expensive private coaching sessions, not to mention that a lot their parents
who have masters degrees and PhD's are already doing extra teaching at home
that is not available to poor minority kids whose family members are not
highly educated, rich, or inclined to spend loads of money to give their
children an unfair advantage in taking tests!
The playing field that uses test score only for comparison is not at all a
level one, and is dangerously rigged against african-american and hispanic
kids from poor neighborhoods and failing government schools!
University of Texas is more diverse in that it allows top 10% of kids from
even the poorest of the poor african-american and hispanic neighborhoods in.
In UT the poor bright kids at least get a chance, in UC they do not!
How come UC and Mercurynews do not publish the ugly truth that these asian/
indian/japanese kids hail from school districts that belong to rich
neighborhoods where the junior/middle/high school rankings and quality of
education are higher to begin with?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JackW firm soil • 37 minutes ago
Your argument is factually wrong. Like others have pointed out, UC admits
top 9% of any high school graduates. Don't label most Asian-Americans are
rich - many are poor ones coming here with pennies. They are certainly in
disadvantage against natively born Black and Hispanics.
Let me ask you a question: should UC admission give preferences to:
1) An Asian American
2) A Black American
3) A Hispanic American
If they all live around the same neighborhood and attend the same schools?
If your answer is NO, then there should be no race consideration in college
admission. And I'd assume your answer should be NO since your argument is
all about the poor neighborhood. If your answer is YES, it gets even more
interesting since it sounds you support racism or caste system in the worst
form.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil JackW • 33 minutes ago
"UC admits top 9% of any high school graduates" is false. There is no such
policy. UC already gives preference to advantaged kids from rich
neighborhoods.
Unlike me you are the one who uses the term race!
P.S. - Poor asian kids from chinatown are not getting to UC, rich asian kids
from million dollar plus homes of Cupertino are!
• Reply•Share › One other person is typing…
Avatar
JJL firm soil • 4 hours ago
It's top 9% in california. Really, you should at least look up some facts
before typing all this. Socioeconomic AA is alive and well in California.
The only thing that has been banned is discrimination on the basis of race.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism firm soil • 4 hours ago
Since when being fair means one doesn't have to work on their problems (aka.
no dedication and investment on academy) but find fault from other
hardworking people, and FORCE other people to AA in name of fair. 100% hate,
jealousy and racism!
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil NoRacism • 4 hours ago
"hardworking" => Coming from richer school districts, more expensive private
coaching, more extra help from more educated parents, etc.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism firm soil • 3 hours ago
So what you are against is race + being 'rich' and 'expensive'. Racism +
communism. Well done Democ.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil NoRacism • 30 minutes ago
You are for rich advantaged kids and unscientific/unfair measurement.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Cliff Geneson firm soil • 5 hours ago
What a load of racist crap you are spewing.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil Cliff Geneson • 4 hours ago
The scientific and logical part of Cliff's statement rests on the term "crap
" ;)
He says that University of Texas and most all others are racist.
He says that not admitting students from poor school districts is not racist.
He says that more private tutoring to get test advantage is racist.
He says that creating a level playing field is racist.
P.S. - To the proponents of test score is god measurement system.
Fact: International students in STEM fields who are admitted have higher
test scores that CA students, so why discriminate against them by accepting
them at a lower rate to fill the CA reservation quota?
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thermopylae • 5 hours ago
When white people become the minority do you think they will be excluded
from Affirmative Action programs?
• Reply•Share ›
−
Avatar
Cliff Geneson • 12 hours ago
One side is willing to work, the other is willing to subsist on trough money.
发信人: zhangfance (fan), 信区: SanFrancisco
标 题: 主流媒体报道SCA5,形势似乎对我们不利啊
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Apr 6 16:44:05 2014, 美东)
哪位给个中文翻译。
http://www.mercurynews.com/immigration/ci_25505076/affirmative-
Affirmative action debate create rifts in ethnic communities
The backlash by Chinese-American activists against a measure aimed at
restoring affirmative action in the admissions process at California's
public universities has set off political fisticuffs between ethnic groups
accustomed to battling side-by-side.
In a state where Latinos -- most of whom support SCA5, the proposed
constitutional amendment -- are about to become the largest ethnic group but
where Asian-Americans take up nearly 40 percent of all University of
California slots, the clash puts a spotlight on an evolving political
landscape in which members of minority groups now overwhelmingly make up the
majority of the state's population.
There are even schisms within the Asian-American community, where anger is
directed at Chinese-Americans who say they support affirmative action in
hiring, but fear its application at elite UC schools such as UC Berkeley and
UCLA, which now admit fewer than one in five in-state freshman applicants.
They say the policy will take precious university spots from their children
and give them to Latinos, blacks and students from other Asian and Pacific
Islander groups who currently have difficulty gaining access to state
schools.
Last year, 78 percent of Chinese-American students applying to a UC campus
landed a coveted spot in the freshman class, according to fall 2013 data
from UC. However, just 57 percent of Filipino-Americans and 48 percent of
Pacific Islanders were admitted, rates similar to those of blacks and
Latinos.
Fifty-five percent of Latino and 45 percent of African-American applicants
were admitted to UC last year, compared with 65 percent of white applicants.
California Democrats clearly are worried that the controversy might cause
significant numbers of Asian-Americans -- who now vote solidly Democratic --
to turn to the Republican Party. And the GOP has extended a welcome mat.
"Morally inconsistent" is what Karin Wang, of the Los Angeles civil rights
organization Asian Americans Advancing Justice, calls the embrace of
affirmative action in hiring, but not admissions. Supporters say affirmative
action will only help others, but it will not hurt excellent students. "It
shows self-interest operating above shared societal interests."
But that position is rejected by the 80-20 Initiative, whose fiery website
blasts affirmative action in college admissions. Last month, the site urged
California members to register as Republicans "to scare the (Democratic)
Party."
It's part of the group's plan to "play one party against another," said S.B.
Woo, who co-founded the nonpartisan Asian-American political action
committee. "I want the Democratic Party to know that if they keep on pushing
SCA5, then lots of people will be voting on the Republican side."
The group points to Princeton University research that found Asian-American
applicants need much higher SAT scores than all other groups to gain
admission to elite universities.
"The way Asian-American students are treated ... is a gross violation of the
14th Amendment," which requires equal protection under the law to all
people, Woo said. "Is it a surprise to you that in 1965, when affirmative
action first came out, every minority supported it? I did, too. But as used
in college admissions, it's hurting everyone."
If passed by voters, SCA5 would repeal parts of Proposition 209, a 1996
initiative that banned affirmative action and was at the time panned by
Asian-American voters.
A few weeks ago, the proposed constitutional amendment sailed through the
California Senate. Then, just as it appeared to be headed toward the
November ballot, a vociferous social media protest from Chinese-American
groups stopped it cold.
Assembly Speaker John Perez and Sen. Ed Hernandez, strong Latino backers of
SCA5, were forced to propose a number of statewide task force meetings to
reintroduce the amendment and perhaps rewrite parts that upset many Asian-
American voters.
"We suddenly found ourselves up against some pretty vile stuff," said
Hernandez, the amendment's author, about 80-20's website, which brashly
congratulated Asian activists for halting SCA5. Hernandez hopes the string
of panels will "heal any rifts" between Asian-Americans and Latinos.
"There was a bombardment of negative information from Chinese-language media
who framed it as a return to quotas," said Vincent Pan, executive director
of San Francisco's Chinese for Affirmative Action. "They whipped the issue
into a frenzy."
In simple terms, Hernandez said, affirmative action -- in a Proposition 209
universe -- can help make higher education accessible to a greater diversity
of students. "That's what big-time elite universities back East do," he
said. "They are ripping off many of our best and brightest black, Latino and
Asian students because we don't give them good chances at getting into
school."
Chinese-American parents, however, credit the UC system for treating their
children fairly because admissions are based solely on merit.
FLEXING POWER
As the debate rages, others see the clash as a watershed event for Asian-
Americans learning how to effectively flex their statewide political muscles
. "Our purpose is to educate the Asian community to stand up for their
rights," said Taylor Chow of Asian Americans for Political Advancement.
And yet, civil rights activist Wang warns, "In our really diverse state,
communities like ours have to learn to build bridges and coalitions on all
of these issues." Yes, she added, a group of Chinese-Americans altered the
political process, but "at the expense of alienating other communities."
Being cast as the enemy to other Asian and minority groups is something Chow
says Chinese-Americans are "seriously concerned" about. That's why his
Burlingame group will use other means to push for bringing more resources to
"helping those communities that are underrepresented in the university."
Woo says affirmative action will not become a litmus test. "We are not like
the pro-life or the pro-gun people," he said. "I don't believe (Asian-
Americans) can afford to pick one issue and say that everything else is not
important."
Henry Liem, who wrote a book in Vietnamese about affirmative action, notes
that the policy used to be about making amends for slavery and other gender
and racial injustices that hurt women and people of color.
But times have changed, argues Liem, a philosophy professor at San Jose City
College. With the white population shrinking, discussion around affirmative
action must change.
"It is now the minorities who ... have to figure out how to balance equal
opportunities for all with the recognition of merit and freedom." Because
Asian-Americans are doing so well, they lean toward merit and freedom, while
Latinos are more likely to embrace equal opportunity, Liem said.
"It's diverging in different directions among minorities, which is the
essence of the conflict," he said. "SCA5 is the first warning shot across
the table that the communities have to open a dialogue as soon as possible."
comments:
ranti • 42 minutes ago
blacks just want a free ride into the college system,just like they like
welfare and food stamps,they are more than willing to pay for it with their
Dignity,getting and taking and in this case Demanding extra points because
of the color of their skin,they are demanding to be classified as INFERIOR
TO WHITE AND ASIANS,They are sold on the reverse discrimination race baiters
,and perhaps they are right, on an even playing field they cannot compete
with the whites and asians!
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JackW • an hour ago
The article itself is misleading in the way that it appears SCA5 is only
going to affect Chinese-American negatively in UC admission. Indian American
, Vietnamese American, Korean American, Japanese American, Lebanese American
, etc. (yeah, most of Asian Americans) will be affected negatively.
Why? Because the shared qualities among these groups are the strong focus on
academics, family values, hard working. Taking right to higher education
away from these groups are not only immoral, but illegal against our
constitution.
The SCA5 proponents always try to promote so-called diversity for certain
ethnic groups by using discriminatory behavior against other racial groups.
Does ends really justify means? Do SCA5 proponents really think
discrimination against different ethnic groups is what this country is
founded for?
SCA5 proponents, please answer these questions honestly, instead of keep
misleading people using "Affirmative Actions" which is really about ending
discrimination against minorities. Their action really tarnishes these words
and brings back evil systems like caste system or communism in California.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Brady Bell • an hour ago
Allan Bakke and Patrick Chavis. Just Google it.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
P Roppo • an hour ago
I like how the writers attempted to turn this into a Chinese vs Everybody
controversy, while ignoring that Vietnamese (they do live in San Jose too)
have very high admission rates.
All this is is another attempt to cover up the dismal educational habits of
Latinos.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Dale Warner • 4 hours ago
This has a macro level that's interesting because it is what my friends and
I have been predicting since 1989. It goes like this. A century ago the
nation was believed to be supporting a unitary stance along the lines
advocated by Roosevelt the First, while a countervailing ideology argued for
what they called pluralism, a notion now so lightweight as to have been
incorporated into the "core values" of the nation, or so we are told.
Interestingly, the use of "pluralism" made its first appearance in American
politics as an argument advocated by the slave states to try to create an
ideological framework which would extend the lifeline of the slave states. A
lot of my own relatives fought to defeat such a construct in the 1860's
only to see the label returned with quite a vicious level of personal
attacks in the first half of the 20th Century. Nowadays people say "
pluralism" with their lips, but in their hearts just don't believe in it.
Pluralism then ideologically morphed into multiculturalism, chiefly noted as
doctrines that invited every one to participate except any of the diversity
of white American cultures which were not explicitly designed around the
concept of "allies." But multiculturalism didn't last, and has morphed on
the West Coast into multiracialism, and this is going to be marked by "
racial" groups' adoption of an attitude toward agency similar to political
parties. It will make such stresses on the Democratic Party that it will
fail before the Republican Party fails.
And the next step will be multinationalism which already exists in some
ethnic and racial groups with their congresses, conferences, and entities
expressing statehood status like a foreign policy, an attitude toward an
aggressive American projection of power all over the globe, and an attempt
to usurp other privileges of statehood. Not even imaginary, this is talked
about in academia here and there around the USA. So the next 50 years should
be very interesting and this California dust-up will provide the template.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Shirt Pants • 4 hours ago
Woah,take a look at that chart and one number sticks out. 68% of Vietnamese-
Americans applicants are admitted to the UC system which is still higher
than whites. Vietnam is still a poor country and is not sending us Google
engineers and neurosurgeons so you can't use that excuse. And Vietnamese-
Americans are as likely to attend a Title 1 school as an African-American
and Latino. Yet they still are admitted at a higher rate than whites. So the
proof is in the pudding, if you want to get into college just work hard and
study.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism Shirt Pants • 3 hours ago
Well said! Asian parents, poor or not, always place education as #1 priority
. Whiners, please work on your own issues. Not all unfulfilled dreams can be
attributed to system/society.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bob Richards • 5 hours ago
The race baiting politics of the Democrat party is beginning to circle
around and bite them in the backside - rather amusing and long overdue.
If Asians work harder and focus more on education than another demographic,
one would expect them to be more successful academically. Why should they be
discriminated against solely for their ethnicity?
Affirmative action is blatant racism - there's no way around that.
Perhaps the state should incarcerate innocent Asians randomly because Asians
are under represented in the prison population?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil • 5 hours ago
"affirmative action ... as used in college admissions, it's hurting everyone
." is factually false!!!
Everyone, really!!!
Does Mercurynews even do a basic check on such horribly erroneous falsehoods!
Majority of these asian/indian/japanese kids' test scores are padded with
expensive private coaching sessions, not to mention that a lot their parents
who have masters degrees and PhD's are already doing extra teaching at home
that is not available to poor minority kids whose family members are not
highly educated, rich, or inclined to spend loads of money to give their
children an unfair advantage in taking tests!
The playing field that uses test score only for comparison is not at all a
level one, and is dangerously rigged against african-american and hispanic
kids from poor neighborhoods and failing government schools!
University of Texas is more diverse in that it allows top 10% of kids from
even the poorest of the poor african-american and hispanic neighborhoods in.
In UT the poor bright kids at least get a chance, in UC they do not!
How come UC and Mercurynews do not publish the ugly truth that these asian/
indian/japanese kids hail from school districts that belong to rich
neighborhoods where the junior/middle/high school rankings and quality of
education are higher to begin with?
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
JackW firm soil • 37 minutes ago
Your argument is factually wrong. Like others have pointed out, UC admits
top 9% of any high school graduates. Don't label most Asian-Americans are
rich - many are poor ones coming here with pennies. They are certainly in
disadvantage against natively born Black and Hispanics.
Let me ask you a question: should UC admission give preferences to:
1) An Asian American
2) A Black American
3) A Hispanic American
If they all live around the same neighborhood and attend the same schools?
If your answer is NO, then there should be no race consideration in college
admission. And I'd assume your answer should be NO since your argument is
all about the poor neighborhood. If your answer is YES, it gets even more
interesting since it sounds you support racism or caste system in the worst
form.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil JackW • 33 minutes ago
"UC admits top 9% of any high school graduates" is false. There is no such
policy. UC already gives preference to advantaged kids from rich
neighborhoods.
Unlike me you are the one who uses the term race!
P.S. - Poor asian kids from chinatown are not getting to UC, rich asian kids
from million dollar plus homes of Cupertino are!
• Reply•Share › One other person is typing…
Avatar
JJL firm soil • 4 hours ago
It's top 9% in california. Really, you should at least look up some facts
before typing all this. Socioeconomic AA is alive and well in California.
The only thing that has been banned is discrimination on the basis of race.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism firm soil • 4 hours ago
Since when being fair means one doesn't have to work on their problems (aka.
no dedication and investment on academy) but find fault from other
hardworking people, and FORCE other people to AA in name of fair. 100% hate,
jealousy and racism!
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil NoRacism • 4 hours ago
"hardworking" => Coming from richer school districts, more expensive private
coaching, more extra help from more educated parents, etc.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
NoRacism firm soil • 3 hours ago
So what you are against is race + being 'rich' and 'expensive'. Racism +
communism. Well done Democ.
2 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil NoRacism • 30 minutes ago
You are for rich advantaged kids and unscientific/unfair measurement.
• Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Cliff Geneson firm soil • 5 hours ago
What a load of racist crap you are spewing.
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
firm soil Cliff Geneson • 4 hours ago
The scientific and logical part of Cliff's statement rests on the term "crap
" ;)
He says that University of Texas and most all others are racist.
He says that not admitting students from poor school districts is not racist.
He says that more private tutoring to get test advantage is racist.
He says that creating a level playing field is racist.
P.S. - To the proponents of test score is god measurement system.
Fact: International students in STEM fields who are admitted have higher
test scores that CA students, so why discriminate against them by accepting
them at a lower rate to fill the CA reservation quota?
1 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Thermopylae • 5 hours ago
When white people become the minority do you think they will be excluded
from Affirmative Action programs?
• Reply•Share ›
−
Avatar
Cliff Geneson • 12 hours ago
One side is willing to work, the other is willing to subsist on trough money.