Asian-Americans Being Discriminated Against by Affirmative Action
Posted by: DeusEx
in Race & Racism
on February 08, 2010 
From today's Boston Globe:
"Princeton sociologist Thomas Espenshade, who reviewed data from 10 elite colleges, writes in “No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal’’ that Asian applicants typically need an extra 140 points to compete with white students. In fact, according to Princeton lecturer Russell Nieli, there may be an “Asian ceiling’’ at Princeton, a number above which the admissions office refuses to venture."
"Asians - who constitute 5 percent of the US population - faced an uphill slog. They tended to get excellent scores, take advantage of AP offerings, and shine in extracurricular activities. Frequently, they also had hard-knock stories: families that had immigrated to America under difficult circumstances, parents working as kitchen assistants and store clerks, and households in which no English was spoken."
Oops, turns out that grossly overinclusive and underinclusive progressive affirmative action policies are now discriminating against not only white Americans, but also against Asian-Americans, who "should" be exhibiting the same lower test scores as African-Americans and Hispanics if we buy the progressive story about the insurmountable odds facing racial minorities in the United States and the negligibility of cultural choices.
Can we please end this hypocritical and immoral experiment in social engineering? Affirmative Action has become a counter-productive embarrassment, not only to progressives, but also to our country as a whole. It fuels resentment in all camps, exacerbates racial clansmanship, and turns our meritocracy on its head.
The same supposed goals of Affirmative Action could be accomplished just as well through aid to underprivileged students of all races, but as this story illustrates, Affirmative Action is not really about fairness or equality at all. It is about irrational self-hatred, vengeance, racial clansmanship, and pandering to Democratic voters.
Tagged in: Untagged
Comments (7)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comments
written by DeusEx, February 09, 2010
Bruce, you bring up a number of issues. I will try to address them all.
Who AA Benefits and Why
You miss the point of why this article is so damaging for AA proponents. The entire foundation of AA is built upon the philosophical justification that certain groups are being held back by discrimination and economic hardships that occurred in the past. The success of Asian Americans in higher education blows the lid off of that fundamental assumption, because Asian-Americans are clearly disadvantaged in both areas, implying that the real problems many minority individuals have today are cultural in nature. Also, AA still isn't benefiting whites, it is simply discriminating against both Asian Americans and White Americans now. It all goes to show how absurd and flawed the whole system is, as I said above, grossly overinclusive AND underinclusive - the mark of a bad law.
The Footrace Analogy
The quote you reference is a favorite of AA supporters, and it illustrates my point perfectly. AA supporters treat racial groups as if they are homogeneous entities, the individuals within intertwined and acting as one body i.e. "the blacks", "the whites", "the Hispanics" and other groups all racing against each other in a footrace. There are two extremely racist and unfair assumptions going on here, the first is that the circumstances or motivations of any individual within one of those supposed groups has anything to do those of any other individual simply because they share the same skin color. Second, that all the people within these supposed groups are acting to benefit their own racial group and competing against the other racial groups. The analogy is a poor one, and the basis of it is despicable, just like AA because it doesn't treat people like the individuals they are and deserve to be treated as.
The Minimal Impact Theory of AA
Bruce, you can downplay the negative impact of AA on white or other individuals all you want, and from what I understand about your personal life experience, I can see why you would have such a flawed understanding of what really goes on in highly specialized professions. Sure, hiring a black car mechanic over a white car mechanic might not be a huge deal for the white mechanic, since that is a relatively low skilled job (or it may be in this economy). But you actually have it backwards, when AA takes place in the stratosphere of specialization and talent, it can literally make the difference between a decade of hard work and extraordinary talent resulting in a great career or the unemployment line. No, people do not simply land on their feet no matter what if they come from a rich family and get good scores. People at tier 1 law schools right now are literally competing for a handful of jobs. Those who are displaced by AA will mostly end up jobless and without prospects for at least a year or two until the economy recovers and firms start hiring again. I know white individuals who have worked hard their entire lives, took out 150k in loans, and achieved top 20% in their law classes and lost jobs to black individuals because of AA. Do you have any idea what that does the the profession and what impact it will have for those people? My friend went to Princeton and is now unemployed. He is beside himself and doesn't know what to do. He will not simply be okay because he is white. My other (black) friend who gets B's and C's was hired by a firm through a diversity program. By the way, that black individual's father is a doctor and his mother is a businessperson, by his own admission he has never been discriminated against in his life. Why should he benefit from AA just because of his skin color? Please do not write off individuals based upon their backgrounds and make declarative statements about them, people do not deserve to be treated that way. They deserve to be treated as individuals and on their merits. AA is itself a hopelessly flawed and racist program that cannot be supported by any true egalitarian.
Who AA Benefits and Why
You miss the point of why this article is so damaging for AA proponents. The entire foundation of AA is built upon the philosophical justification that certain groups are being held back by discrimination and economic hardships that occurred in the past. The success of Asian Americans in higher education blows the lid off of that fundamental assumption, because Asian-Americans are clearly disadvantaged in both areas, implying that the real problems many minority individuals have today are cultural in nature. Also, AA still isn't benefiting whites, it is simply discriminating against both Asian Americans and White Americans now. It all goes to show how absurd and flawed the whole system is, as I said above, grossly overinclusive AND underinclusive - the mark of a bad law.
The Footrace Analogy
The quote you reference is a favorite of AA supporters, and it illustrates my point perfectly. AA supporters treat racial groups as if they are homogeneous entities, the individuals within intertwined and acting as one body i.e. "the blacks", "the whites", "the Hispanics" and other groups all racing against each other in a footrace. There are two extremely racist and unfair assumptions going on here, the first is that the circumstances or motivations of any individual within one of those supposed groups has anything to do those of any other individual simply because they share the same skin color. Second, that all the people within these supposed groups are acting to benefit their own racial group and competing against the other racial groups. The analogy is a poor one, and the basis of it is despicable, just like AA because it doesn't treat people like the individuals they are and deserve to be treated as.
The Minimal Impact Theory of AA
Bruce, you can downplay the negative impact of AA on white or other individuals all you want, and from what I understand about your personal life experience, I can see why you would have such a flawed understanding of what really goes on in highly specialized professions. Sure, hiring a black car mechanic over a white car mechanic might not be a huge deal for the white mechanic, since that is a relatively low skilled job (or it may be in this economy). But you actually have it backwards, when AA takes place in the stratosphere of specialization and talent, it can literally make the difference between a decade of hard work and extraordinary talent resulting in a great career or the unemployment line. No, people do not simply land on their feet no matter what if they come from a rich family and get good scores. People at tier 1 law schools right now are literally competing for a handful of jobs. Those who are displaced by AA will mostly end up jobless and without prospects for at least a year or two until the economy recovers and firms start hiring again. I know white individuals who have worked hard their entire lives, took out 150k in loans, and achieved top 20% in their law classes and lost jobs to black individuals because of AA. Do you have any idea what that does the the profession and what impact it will have for those people? My friend went to Princeton and is now unemployed. He is beside himself and doesn't know what to do. He will not simply be okay because he is white. My other (black) friend who gets B's and C's was hired by a firm through a diversity program. By the way, that black individual's father is a doctor and his mother is a businessperson, by his own admission he has never been discriminated against in his life. Why should he benefit from AA just because of his skin color? Please do not write off individuals based upon their backgrounds and make declarative statements about them, people do not deserve to be treated that way. They deserve to be treated as individuals and on their merits. AA is itself a hopelessly flawed and racist program that cannot be supported by any true egalitarian.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bruce Reilly, February 09, 2010
First let me say I dont speak for every AA supporter, nor for everyone where I work. Nor can I say to what degree federal legislation impacts every element of race in our economy. I know that its commonly dealt with in college admissions, but do firms receive some tax incentive for maintaining a "diversity program?"
Some of us consciously choose to develop a diverse workforce, and we do it for various reasons. But one thing that does not go away is Nepotism. It is real, whether intentional or not. I dont think it is coincidental that there are surnames that run the gamut of state jobs, for example. Look at our judges and state reps, cross-referenced against clerks, magistrates, and everything else. You go to the DMV and think its a family owned business. Look at our politicians: Chaffee, Lynch, Caprio, Kennedy. If you didn't list their first names, you could write a story set in any decade over the past 50 years.
So the way I see it, to incorporate the quotation: AA is one small counterweight to nepotism. And perhaps after a few generations, the nepotism is harder to maintain (checks and balances to employers' decisions).
My feeling is that if there is no diversity of thought in the Boardroom, it is only symbolic where there is diversity in skin color. Obama is a perfect example.
And I don't believe the push for AA came from some desire to balance all ethnic ships in the sea. And I don't know if Asian-Americans were even on the Civil Rights radar in 1965. I do know that this nation got fat off particular African slave labor. No disrespect to the Irish indentured servants or the Chinese railroad servitude, but it was Black America who fueled the inheritances of many... including our Capitol Building.
I wonder what it is like to go to work every day in a grandiose building built by slaves, knowing there has never been proper Reparations? I guess it depends on one's POV.
Some of us consciously choose to develop a diverse workforce, and we do it for various reasons. But one thing that does not go away is Nepotism. It is real, whether intentional or not. I dont think it is coincidental that there are surnames that run the gamut of state jobs, for example. Look at our judges and state reps, cross-referenced against clerks, magistrates, and everything else. You go to the DMV and think its a family owned business. Look at our politicians: Chaffee, Lynch, Caprio, Kennedy. If you didn't list their first names, you could write a story set in any decade over the past 50 years.
So the way I see it, to incorporate the quotation: AA is one small counterweight to nepotism. And perhaps after a few generations, the nepotism is harder to maintain (checks and balances to employers' decisions).
My feeling is that if there is no diversity of thought in the Boardroom, it is only symbolic where there is diversity in skin color. Obama is a perfect example.
And I don't believe the push for AA came from some desire to balance all ethnic ships in the sea. And I don't know if Asian-Americans were even on the Civil Rights radar in 1965. I do know that this nation got fat off particular African slave labor. No disrespect to the Irish indentured servants or the Chinese railroad servitude, but it was Black America who fueled the inheritances of many... including our Capitol Building.
I wonder what it is like to go to work every day in a grandiose building built by slaves, knowing there has never been proper Reparations? I guess it depends on one's POV.
-
- +0
-
-
written by DeusEx, February 09, 2010
Bruce, 60 years ago my family were being thrown into ovens in Europe, and they came to this country with nothing, so the people moaning about slavery 160 years ago can cry me a river. Every group has been unfairly treated at some point. Irish, Italians, Chinese, Jews, you name it. If somebody wants reparations for slavery, they can get in line. The fact of the matter is that nobody alive today in the United States participated in that activity on either side, to pay reparations now would just be further injustice. All of this stems from the misguided notion that people can be lumped into homogeneous groups rather than as individuals. There is no such thing as "the blacks" or "the whites", there are only individuals who will all come from different backgrounds and have different skill sets, beliefs, family situations, and aspirations. This is the fatal flaw of AA, and from where the absurd results I described above stem.
AA is required policy by many public agencies. As for the private sector, it's mostly insulation against Title VII disparate impact lawsuits. A firm or school that does not engage in AA now is almost certain to be sued, and Title VII is extremely Plaintiff-friendly by design. Even when employers prevail, a Title VII suit can easily cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars and bad publicity. It is easier to just have an AA program as a hedge against it.
AA is required policy by many public agencies. As for the private sector, it's mostly insulation against Title VII disparate impact lawsuits. A firm or school that does not engage in AA now is almost certain to be sued, and Title VII is extremely Plaintiff-friendly by design. Even when employers prevail, a Title VII suit can easily cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars and bad publicity. It is easier to just have an AA program as a hedge against it.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bruce Reilly, February 10, 2010
If you propose that American descendants of slavery get in line, well around here they would be second in line after the Native Americans. Can we agree that a few groups jumped the line? The Irish, Italian, Eastern Europeans, and Jews were never quite so oppressed by the American government policies, and not for quite so long a time.
But lets take "your people," who I will assume are Jewish by the ovens reference. European Jews were LIBERATED by the US soldier and taxpayer- including over a million Black U.S. soldiers (back when practically every Black American was a descendent of slavery). Keep in mind, we aren't talking about global humanitarianism here; we are discussing the policies of the nation we are both owner/operators in.
But globally speaking, did your people go from ovens to neglect? Maybe some little policy generations later? No. The world carved out a nation for you. One in which openly discriminates against those of different ethnic backgrounds than Jewish. Would you say deporting freed slaves to Liberia is similar?
West Germany paid 3 Billion Marks to the state of Israel and 450 million to the World Jewish Congress. The money went to infrastructure, and in the 1950's it was practically all of Israel's income. And not everyone who emigrated to Israel was a camp survivor, nor family member, thus the beneficiaries are not only those directly impacted as you suggest it should be. Not every German put your people in ovens either (nor a single Palestinian), and the monies paid from blue collar Germans' tax dollars don't reflect the global corporate folks who truly pushed that war.
And the U.S.? Our tax coffers have paid for investigations and negotiations with German insurance companies and Swiss banks to dig out funds they never repaid to the survivors, or money owed where there is no survivor. It is likely that nobody working at DeutscheBank in the 1990's actually worked there during WWII (maybe one old cleaning lady), nor even retaining any shareholders. But if my grandfather was a shareholder, and I inherited his shares, and if that dividend was propped up by exploitation of your people... wouldn't you agree that my pocket won't get so fat? The US Government thinks so.
Furthermore, Israel benefits from a "Special Relationship" with America. Not my term- I've heard it from every president since Carter. And I don't think I need to insult you by pointing out how much American tax dollars go towards Israel's military budget. What did the American people do to Jews that requires us going out of pocket for F-16's and Tomahawk missiles?
"Reparations" is not a concept unique to Black slavery in America. Court settlements by large corporations are a form of reparations. Class Action suits, the Rhode Island Victim's Fund, Germany at Versailles, the $20,000 to each Japanese-American we imprisoned. It took two decades to compensate our citizens just for property loss (Nisei), and four decades until Reagan signed for reparations.
But why nothing for Slavery? Because it was legal? America was three to four generations behind the world in abolishing slavery. A lot happened between Haitian freedom in 1804 and Appomatox Courthouse in 1865. Speaking of which: France imposed Reparations on Haiti for its rebellion!
Title VII also says that Blacks and Latinos can't be discriminated against for employment based on criminal convictions... and yet we know that there is a common box on applications: "Have You Ever Been Convicted of a Felony?"
I don't know of any Reparations proponents who are advocating a cash sum to individuals. I have only ever heard, and I agree with, targeted infrastructure investment. It would look different in different places, yet programs in South Providence and New Orleans 9th Ward might draw from the same mix of ingredients: jobs, schools, affordable housing FOR SALE. You can't consider American economic history without recognizing inheritance and concentrated wealth... and THAT is where we do indeed have living beneficiaries of slavery. YOU may have just come in off a spaceship, but you also happened to be born into a mother with special immigration status in America.
Affirmative Action is actually a cruel joke when considering the magnitude of our nation's slave-owning past. And the nation established (as Reparations) for your people, by the way, last year demanded another billion Euros from Germany and discounts on two warships for their Navy.
But lets take "your people," who I will assume are Jewish by the ovens reference. European Jews were LIBERATED by the US soldier and taxpayer- including over a million Black U.S. soldiers (back when practically every Black American was a descendent of slavery). Keep in mind, we aren't talking about global humanitarianism here; we are discussing the policies of the nation we are both owner/operators in.
But globally speaking, did your people go from ovens to neglect? Maybe some little policy generations later? No. The world carved out a nation for you. One in which openly discriminates against those of different ethnic backgrounds than Jewish. Would you say deporting freed slaves to Liberia is similar?
West Germany paid 3 Billion Marks to the state of Israel and 450 million to the World Jewish Congress. The money went to infrastructure, and in the 1950's it was practically all of Israel's income. And not everyone who emigrated to Israel was a camp survivor, nor family member, thus the beneficiaries are not only those directly impacted as you suggest it should be. Not every German put your people in ovens either (nor a single Palestinian), and the monies paid from blue collar Germans' tax dollars don't reflect the global corporate folks who truly pushed that war.
And the U.S.? Our tax coffers have paid for investigations and negotiations with German insurance companies and Swiss banks to dig out funds they never repaid to the survivors, or money owed where there is no survivor. It is likely that nobody working at DeutscheBank in the 1990's actually worked there during WWII (maybe one old cleaning lady), nor even retaining any shareholders. But if my grandfather was a shareholder, and I inherited his shares, and if that dividend was propped up by exploitation of your people... wouldn't you agree that my pocket won't get so fat? The US Government thinks so.
Furthermore, Israel benefits from a "Special Relationship" with America. Not my term- I've heard it from every president since Carter. And I don't think I need to insult you by pointing out how much American tax dollars go towards Israel's military budget. What did the American people do to Jews that requires us going out of pocket for F-16's and Tomahawk missiles?
"Reparations" is not a concept unique to Black slavery in America. Court settlements by large corporations are a form of reparations. Class Action suits, the Rhode Island Victim's Fund, Germany at Versailles, the $20,000 to each Japanese-American we imprisoned. It took two decades to compensate our citizens just for property loss (Nisei), and four decades until Reagan signed for reparations.
But why nothing for Slavery? Because it was legal? America was three to four generations behind the world in abolishing slavery. A lot happened between Haitian freedom in 1804 and Appomatox Courthouse in 1865. Speaking of which: France imposed Reparations on Haiti for its rebellion!
Title VII also says that Blacks and Latinos can't be discriminated against for employment based on criminal convictions... and yet we know that there is a common box on applications: "Have You Ever Been Convicted of a Felony?"
I don't know of any Reparations proponents who are advocating a cash sum to individuals. I have only ever heard, and I agree with, targeted infrastructure investment. It would look different in different places, yet programs in South Providence and New Orleans 9th Ward might draw from the same mix of ingredients: jobs, schools, affordable housing FOR SALE. You can't consider American economic history without recognizing inheritance and concentrated wealth... and THAT is where we do indeed have living beneficiaries of slavery. YOU may have just come in off a spaceship, but you also happened to be born into a mother with special immigration status in America.
Affirmative Action is actually a cruel joke when considering the magnitude of our nation's slave-owning past. And the nation established (as Reparations) for your people, by the way, last year demanded another billion Euros from Germany and discounts on two warships for their Navy.
-
- +0
-
-
written by DeusEx, February 10, 2010
Bruce, first of all, I don't have "a people." Have you really been hearing anything I've been saying? I don't lump people into groups by race, ethnicity, sex, and then ascribe supposed motives, desires, and circumstances to them collectively. It is precisely that kind of line of thinking that I consider racist and reprehensible and the cause of so many of our problems today. I treat people as individuals - period.
Needless to say that any of the benefits "my people" supposedly received in the form of aid and support for Israel have never translated into any real benefit for me as an individual in any way whatsoever. Nor do I want any reparations or aid just because I happened to be born to someone of a certain skin color or ethnicity or line of descendants, none of which have anything to do with who I really am and the choices I make as an individual. And like there aren't any black nations in Africa?
I found it very strange that you would harp on European Jews being liberated by US soldiers - who do you think black slaves in America were liberated by? Hey, my family have always been Northerners - when do we get our check in the mail for the drain our our resources to fight the Civil War? You can see where this line of historical reparations reasoning quickly becomes absurd.
Economic disadvantage is not a "black" problem or a "Hispanic" problem. It is a problem that spans people of all races. By supporting race-based affirmative action, you are giving undeserved windfalls to people who grew up in privilege simply because of their skin color and tacking on further obstacles to individuals who grew up in poverty simply because they happen to be white. Don't you see the injustice in that? I have always said that I support replacing race-based affirmative action with aid based upon economic disadvantage regardless of race. Why you are reluctant to support the same - I cannot even fathom, it just makes so much practical and moral sense.
Needless to say that any of the benefits "my people" supposedly received in the form of aid and support for Israel have never translated into any real benefit for me as an individual in any way whatsoever. Nor do I want any reparations or aid just because I happened to be born to someone of a certain skin color or ethnicity or line of descendants, none of which have anything to do with who I really am and the choices I make as an individual. And like there aren't any black nations in Africa?
I found it very strange that you would harp on European Jews being liberated by US soldiers - who do you think black slaves in America were liberated by? Hey, my family have always been Northerners - when do we get our check in the mail for the drain our our resources to fight the Civil War? You can see where this line of historical reparations reasoning quickly becomes absurd.
Economic disadvantage is not a "black" problem or a "Hispanic" problem. It is a problem that spans people of all races. By supporting race-based affirmative action, you are giving undeserved windfalls to people who grew up in privilege simply because of their skin color and tacking on further obstacles to individuals who grew up in poverty simply because they happen to be white. Don't you see the injustice in that? I have always said that I support replacing race-based affirmative action with aid based upon economic disadvantage regardless of race. Why you are reluctant to support the same - I cannot even fathom, it just makes so much practical and moral sense.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Bruce Reilly, February 10, 2010
"my family were being thrown into ovens in Europe, and they came to this country with nothing, so the people moaning about slavery 160 years ago can cry me a river. Every group has been unfairly treated at some point. Irish, Italians, Chinese, Jews, you name it. If somebody wants reparations for slavery, they can get in line"
Given the further context, I believe you in the quest for ethnic group elimination. I just don't believe that our culture operates/operated anywhere close to being color-blind. The choice to give Jews preferential group status is just an example of modern choices being made about certain "People."
I'm not against Class-Based economic development. In fact, I could be criticized for my opinions over the years for detracting from institutionalized racism by identifying closest with Class Consciousness.
However, if someone (you or otherwise) is not willing to stand up and fight for "aid based upon economic disadvantage regardless of race" (as you put it)- I have to view their criticisms of Affirmative Action with skepticism.
Many detractors of AA have NO INCLINATION for ANY targeted assistance; the group includes elitists, fascists, and racists alike. Poor Whites are often manipulated into opposing social programs because elites have categorized them as programs that help "Illegals" or "Lazy Minorities" etc.
So DX, I hope you've at least given your donations (time or money) to Jobs With Justice, Ocean State Action, and Direct Action for Rights and Equality...
All are fighting for resources to be targeted at those in economic disadvantaged situations.
Given the further context, I believe you in the quest for ethnic group elimination. I just don't believe that our culture operates/operated anywhere close to being color-blind. The choice to give Jews preferential group status is just an example of modern choices being made about certain "People."
I'm not against Class-Based economic development. In fact, I could be criticized for my opinions over the years for detracting from institutionalized racism by identifying closest with Class Consciousness.
However, if someone (you or otherwise) is not willing to stand up and fight for "aid based upon economic disadvantage regardless of race" (as you put it)- I have to view their criticisms of Affirmative Action with skepticism.
Many detractors of AA have NO INCLINATION for ANY targeted assistance; the group includes elitists, fascists, and racists alike. Poor Whites are often manipulated into opposing social programs because elites have categorized them as programs that help "Illegals" or "Lazy Minorities" etc.
So DX, I hope you've at least given your donations (time or money) to Jobs With Justice, Ocean State Action, and Direct Action for Rights and Equality...
All are fighting for resources to be targeted at those in economic disadvantaged situations.
-
- +0
-
-
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
I believe it was LBJ who said you cannot remove the chains from a man, put him at the starting line and expect him to have an equal opportunity to win. There are debilitating scars, family wealth, and cultural forces to consider.
But my take is that it is silly to compare the statistics of elite universities and think this is the proper forum to debate race, education, and equal opportunity. The young person who just misses the cut at Princeton (along with 90% of the applicants, most all of whom have incredible credentials) will surely rise elsewhere if they truly got the goods.
Let us compare at the public high school level.
If 50% of the White kids in Providence weren't graduating from high school and 90% of the teachers were Black and Latino... our political leadership (and conservative commentators) would be having seizures. Then add in that the police are increasing their officers in every school and 10% of those White kids are passing through the juvenile court system.
DX: throw your Ivy League studies in the sewer. If you want to talk race and equality, lets talk public schools.