You can't give one racial group a disadvantage (Asians) to give another one an advantage.
The phrase "robbing Peter to pay Paul" comes to mind.
The phrase "robbing Peter to pay Paul" comes to mind.
Well .. you have to be careful when talking about groups, because at the individual level it's not clear that this is true. In fact, it isn't true.
For example, Ilhan Omar, a Congresswoman from Minnesota, is a black American. Her ancestors didn't suffer American discrimination. She was born in Somalia to a well-connected, upper-class Somali family. Her personal experience still had trials and tribulations that was unique to her, but it was different than the experience of other black Americans.
Couldn't we give a 'hand-up' to the people that need it by focusing on class, instead of race?
As an added bonus, the black kid will then not feel like it needs some kind of special care as opposed to its white mates, because it won't be reminded all the time that it needs special care just because it's a black kid.
It's also a super American racial lens you've got. As if one hundred percent of Black Americans have a tougher family background than the descendants of Chinese coolies or Vietnamese war refugees. Come on, take off that collectivist worldview and view people as individuals. Collectivism is attractive because it simplifies people into one dimensional avatars, but it leads to wrongs such as the racism on display here.
Perhaps it would help you if you knew that ADOS are pretty upset that Yale keeps admitting the sons and daughters of wealthy African immigrants instead of them.
That doesn't make a difference to a morally upright person. But for a racist such as yourself, maybe know that the policy of racism you're advocating for doesn't even help the group you wish it did.
If they want to change our laws, they should go ahead and meet up and see if they can’t put together a good case for bringing back racism as a legal practice. Seems that’s what they’re trying to do actually.
That said they should also be prepared for the consequences of success because that would give implicit license and justification to a much larger and more powerful group of people in their own country to start discriminating on the basis of race again. Or put another way: there isn’t a world where “reverse racism”—an oxymoron by the way—doesn’t lead back to “anti-reverse racism”, aka “racism”.
We can stop being cruel or not, but we can’t justify bigotry in one direction without giving license to bigotry in the other direction. You would have to convince people to stop looking out for themselves and their children, which is like asking people not to be people. It’s an insane proposition to start with.
Probably because judging people their race makes you no better than those that judged people on their race.
Asian immigrants are not struggling to escape the clutches of centuries old intergenerational poverty. It's not even remotely the same thing.
Asian immigrants are escaping intergenerational poverty that they are suffering from today
The children of people we put in concentration camps or accepted as refugees from e.g. the Khmer Rouge should be punished so the daughter of a hedge fund manager can get into a university named after an executive of the British East India Company? Give me a break.
Then you have specific instances of Asian people (systematically) being mistreated in the US. Chinese railroad construction workers come to mind, who were basically treated as serfs and whose lives were considered "expendable". People with Japanese origins were put into concentration camps during WW II, along with societal repressions against anybody who "looked" Japanese, on top of the general racist stance of the time.
Asian-Americans were effectively as segregated as Black Americans for a long long time. While the Asian-American population might not have experienced slave-labor to the same degree, Asian-American communities certainly were for a long time pushed to the edges of society, usually even physically segregated, systematically and ideologically denied access to upwards social mobility, and so on.
In the US there has been discrimination for over 100 years.
Please stop justifying racism.
> In her majority opinion, O'Connor wrote that "race-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time," adding that the "Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today."
AA will not permit anyone to escape intergenerational poverty. By the numbers, it hasn't done anything to combat it.
"But it doesn't work, so we should keep doing it forever!" seems to be the colleges' position.