It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Propaganda Over Race in University Admissions

page: 1
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:46 PM
link   
This is a very complicated issue (and some may find boring). However, I think that isnt is an important issue, even more so now in a climate where identity politics is running amok.

Universities are enamored with the idea of "White privilege". People constantly suggest that we need things such aas affirmative action to give other races a chance to have access to higher education.

One of the unintended (well maybe) consequences of the affirmative action mindset is that some races that aren't white are being adversely affected. Namely, people of Asian background.

I had heard stories for a while now that people of Asian ethncity actually try too hide their race because schools feel their are too many asians in their universities.

Now the first thing to mention is that this clearly proves the "white privilege" line. Asians Americans out perform whites in almost every category, IQ graduation level, crime level, income, Asian Americans dominate white people in all of these areas despite the supposed "white privilege" (which I will call WP from here on out).

But if we do accept the idea of WP, the why should Asians be punished by the policies set up to fight it? This alone proves why race focused policies are a bad idea, they have unintended consequences.

I will get to links with the data later, but the idea behind affirmative action is that college admissions of race should be close to the percentage of population of those races. Hence if 13% of the population is black, the Harvard should have about 13% of their students be black. The problem is the Asian population has been rising significantly, yet there numbers at universities are remaining stagnate.

And there is all sorts of anomalies like this.

Now onto the impetus of my thread.

Enter the New York Times.

The paper of record in the US, the great bastion of journalism, they decided to take on this issue. (I don't like the NYT if you can't tell)

They highlighted how unfair the system is to Asian Americans. The title of their article.

"White Students’ Unfair Advantage in Admissions"

www.nytimes.com... ss®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=article

Yep, you got that right. The affirmative action policies that decide to give minority races more advantages for their race to get into universities, according to the NYT, its white people that benefit. How do they come to this conclusion?


A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities.


You see, they have to score 140 points higher than whites, therefore this a policy to benefit whites. Oh, ignore the fact that Hispanics get 270 more points, or blacks get 450 more points.

This is the insanity of identity politics. It is unfair that Asians have to score 140 more points than whites, but a-ok for them to have to score even more points higher than blacks and hispanics.

The NYT article goes on to discuss things like white enrollment is high at universities.

Now, enter a real journalist, Mr. Ron Unz. His cite the Unz report is awesome, and has voices from all sides of the political aisle.

He did a great study of this in 2012 (of which not much has changed) about what this NYT article is about.

Here is the article.

www.unz.com...

It is long, but I think it is a fantastic read. He approaches the issue from a scientific point of view, and does his best to list all possible reasons for his findings.

He focuses on IVY league schools.

In it he shows how asians are hurt, how insanely corrupt the admissions system is, and even gives potential solutions.

However, I wanted to focuses on how it addresses the NYT claim that white people are most benefited.

It turns out that a look at the numbers of admissions at Harvard will show that there is seems to be no bias against Asians. However, a closer look shows otehrwise.

Now this is a confusing segment, and I just want to explain where the author is getting these percentages. He is taking the top scores on a national test, taking the percentages of race by them, and then seeing how that applies to admissions. In other words, if the to 90% of test scores are asian, but only 5% of students are asians, they would have a low perncatge rate of enrollment vs. ability.

So here is the article.


When examining statistical evidence, the proper aggregation of data is critical. Consider the ratio of the recent 2007–2011 enrollment of Asian students at Harvard relative to their estimated share of America’s recent NMS semifinalists, a reasonable proxy for the high-ability college-age population, and compare this result to the corresponding figure for whites. The Asian ratio is 63 percent, slightly above the white ratio of 61 percent, with both these figures being considerably below parity due to the substantial presence of under-represented racial minorities such as blacks and Hispanics, foreign students, and students of unreported race. Thus, there appears to be no evidence for racial bias against Asians, even excluding the race-neutral impact of athletic recruitment, legacy admissions, and geographical diversity.

However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.


So in other words, when we seperate white chirstians for jewish people, we see that for some reason the percentage of Jews enrolled far outpaces bith asians and other whites. This is despite the fact that jews are a very small percentage pf population, and they score no better than other whites and far worse than Asians on test score.

In fact, the NYT article is 100% wrong. The group that is actually most underrepresented in Ivy league schools are white Christians.

...continued below....




posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:52 PM
link   
In addition, the article looks into the extracurriculars that students have, and found that activities that suggest that someone might be a white gentile actually HURT their chances of being admitted. These activities include church groups, and groups like the Future Farmers of America.

So why is this important?

First, it shows how corrupt and ineffective University admissions are, and how they are anti white and asian but heavily pro jewish.

Secondly, it shows how the corrupt media will spin facts that show whites are being affected negatively and spin it to show the exact opposite to demonize whites.

This is why idenity politics is not only divisive, but can be used to justify racist policies against the perceived "privileged."



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I find it sickening that there is any sort of discrimination. May the best student win.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Heaven forbid that somebody is rewarded on merit.
Can't have to many of this type or that type of people.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Grambler

I find it sickening that there is any sort of discrimination. May the best student win.


I agree. I will say the Unz somewhat disagrees, and suggests a mix of meritocracy and lottery for Ivy league admissions.

The problem with this OP is that it is very difficult to wrap your head around all of the figures, so I don't think many people will respond.

But that is why I think it is so important, it shows the absurdity of identity politics, and how academia and the media will twist the numbers to not only keep flyover country type white people out of these universities, but then actually demonize them while doing so.
edit on 6-2-2017 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:11 PM
link   
Well done OP.
Lots of statistics for the leftists to ignore and call you racist here.
Should be a fun one.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JAY1980
Well done OP.
Lots of statistics for the leftists to ignore and call you racist here.
Should be a fun one.


Thanks, I appreciate it.

If people want to ignore the stats I am fine with it.

Here are a couple little tidbits from the article that should outrage people on the left as well.

Apparently the average salary of an admissions person is very small, and as a result there are many stories of them being bribed with all sorts of things to allow wealthy students in.

And it also goes into the history of how these major universities have historically tried to control what races entered the university by introducing nebulous criteria to exclude races they weren't comfortable with.

Just because its white people and asians today doesn't mean the races that will get screwed over tomorrow wont be different ones. This is why identity politics is so bad.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
This is all going to go away in a few years with the emergence of online education.

Factors like race will be irrelevant, when people sign up online, to take their university degrees.

At the moment, it's a temporary inconvenience, to have to factor in race into the admissions process.

But, universities try to get a diverse student body, so that people from differing backgrounds can meet and interact on campus, since that's also a major part of the current educational experience.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH
This is all going to go away in a few years with the emergence of online education.

Factors like race will be irrelevant, when people sign up online, to take their university degrees.

At the moment, it's a temporary inconvenience, to have to factor in race into the admissions process.

But, universities try to get a diverse student body, so that people from differing backgrounds can meet and interact on campus, since that's also a major part of the current educational experience.





You have a point about online universities. The problem is that as long as this society accepts that the leaders of our country in politics, education, tech, and many other fields must come from the prestigious Ivy league schools,

and those leagues are engaged in racists practices to keep certain races (and conservative voices) out of their universities,

we have a big problem.

Is it any wonder that the medias, politicians, the entertainment industry and academia are so out of touch with the average person when those groups are all comprised mainly of graduates of these racist Ivy league schools?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

You need to watch out. You are about to step on the race IQ landmine. Which is completely in line with your data, and answers the reason Jews are scoring like that.
Anyways Back on Topic

Thomas Sowell has done some great stuff on this problem. Thomas Sowell has noted that this kind of affirmative is very very bad for hispanics and blacks. They are placing smart minority students in schools above their ability.
You don't send a white kid with 22 ACT and 3.0 to harvard, why would you send a person of color with the same scores there?
In reality affirmative action admissions are doing everyone a disservice.
Cutting education cost and financial aid is how we help persons of color.





posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: jellyrev
a reply to: Grambler

You need to watch out. You are about to step on the race IQ landmine. Which is completely in line with your data, and answers the reason Jews are scoring like that.
Anyways Back on Topic

Thomas Sowell has done some great stuff on this problem. Thomas Sowell has noted that this kind of affirmative is very very bad for hispanics and blacks. They are placing smart minority students in schools above their ability.
You don't send a white kid with 22 ACT and 3.0 to harvard, why would you send a person of color with the same scores there?
In reality affirmative action admissions are doing everyone a disservice.
Cutting education cost and financial aid is how we help persons of color.




Thomas Sowell is great.

I am not worried about stepping on any land mines. I know who I am, and my judgements for people are based on their character not things like race, sexuality or any other type of descriptive characteristic. I will not be bullied into being silent for fear of being called a name.

As far as the Jewish IQ thing, the article I listed doesn't back this up. It shows that actually although at one point Jewish people scored much higher on tests than the average person, that is no longer the case as their scores hav dropped back towards the mean.

Asian students however do seem to score much higher on tests than any other group.

So the question is given the fact that jewish people scores are just about average, and they are only about 2% of the population, why are they over 25% of Ivy league students?

And why does that come at the expense of primarily white and asian students.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: jellyrev


In reality affirmative action admissions are doing everyone a disservice.
Cutting education cost and financial aid is how we help persons of color.



It would be a disservice if affirmative action were practiced indefinitely.

However, in the short term, it's just a corrective action.

It's not really about putting minority students into schools above their ability, but about creating opportunities for the "next" generation of minority students.

All studies show, that the children of educated parents are more likely to succeed in collage.

Since minority groups were deliberately held back in the past, they didn't get the opportunity to go to the good colleges, and thus that pool of educated parents is missing from parts of the population.

The idea behind affirmative action, is to correct this imbalance, and put back that educated parent pool, so that the future generations of minority students wouldn't need any affirmative action to help them enter the best colleges and universities. They would have grown up in the "right home environments" to stimulate their interests and motivations, just like the white kids always had.

So many people think that affirmative action is about the current crop of students, that they miss the entire point of it.

It's all about correcting a "generational problem" that passes down from one generation to the next. That if your mom and dad never went to college, then it is most likely you won't either.

That's all it is.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

"Generational problem"?

Ok, well how long is a generation?

Because affirmative actions has been around since the late 60's.

And what about Asians that were also deliberately held back? Too bad so sad for them?

I wouldn't want to be the one to have to tell an asian prospective student "Sorry, even though you are more than qualified we can't accept you because schools use to favor white people, therefore for almost 50 years now we have had to have affirmative action for blacks so they could catch up. Oh whats that? Well yes, asians too were prejudiced again, but you have to wait your turn unitl black people have had enough time. Maybe your great grandchildren will have shot to get judged based on their ability"



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:47 PM
link   
If an employer said that they were going to pay black people less than other ethnic groups because black people aren`t as smart as those other groups, the $hit would hit the fan,
but telling black people that they aren't as smart as other ethnic groups so they don`t have to score as high on college entrance exams to be accepted, seems to be just fine.

apparently they don`t mind being dumb if it means they will be given more free stuff and special treatment, but when they have to work for something suddenly they want to be treated equal and want the same compensation as the people who were smarter than them when they were being free stuff for being dumb.
edit on 6-2-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-2-2017 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

I have always said that black people should be tired of others telling them they are not smart enough to compete with whites.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The whole concept of identity politics is an absolute fail. The fact that we allow ANY favoritism of any kind is keeping us mired in the dark ages of racism and discrimination. The best thing we can do is simply STOP making race a category and stop tracking it...you know...all of us are just humans.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AMPTAH

"Generational problem"?

Ok, well how long is a generation?

Because affirmative actions has been around since the late 60's.


Slavery in North America lasted for 245 years. And even after slavery, blacks were still being held back for decades.

That's a significant break in the generational line.

I'd think that at least 200-300 years is necessary to compensate for the break in links to one's ancestors.



And what about Asians that were also deliberately held back? Too bad so sad for them?


Asians were never slaves. They maintain their links to their ancestors. They inherit the work and study ethic of their parents. That's why they do well on their own today.



I wouldn't want to be the one to have to tell an asian prospective student "Sorry, even though you are more than qualified we can't accept you because schools use to favor white people,


Again, that's a diversity issue. Not really affirmative action. Universities, for example, accept students from all over the world, but have "quotas" for each country or region of the world, that once filled, will result in the denial of entry to all other qualified students from the same region that's filled.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

when will we know that they have been justly compensated and are on equal footing with other races?

Having a black president seems to me to be proof that they have achieved equal footing and that they can accomplish anything they want to in America.



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
The life of a Goyim, eh?



posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: AMPTAH


Slavery in North America lasted for 245 years. And even after slavery, blacks were still being held back for decades.

That's a significant break in the generational line.

I'd think that at least 200-300 years is necessary to compensate for the break in links to one's ancestors.


Then you misused the word generational didn't you.

I am sorry but I couldn't disagree with you more.

200-300 years? Thats absurd.

There is so many reasons for this to be so, but lets hit a couple.

So why do blacks that had no ancestors in the US during slavery get affirmative action? Why do Hispanic people? Why are there such a high percentage of jewish people?

At some point within 300 years, hispanics will probably be the majority in the US. They have no cultural connection to slavery, but you think they too should have to continue to pay for slavery that happened hundreds of years in the past that they have no connection too?

If a black person goes to China, should China have to give that person affirmative action because of slavery?

I find your proposed treatment of blacks, suggesting that they need a crutch for up to 300 years is belittling toward blacks. I think that racist will endorse this policy to help keeps blacks as their little pets that will allies rely on them.

I think that what these affirmative action peddling people fear more than anything is a black community that is given an equal chance to prove that they are every bit as resourcful, hard working and free thinking as the rest of us.





Asians were never slaves. They maintain their links to their ancestors. They inherit the work and study ethic of their parents. That's why they do well on their own today.


They were mistreated, had laws passed in the 1800's to keep them out, were interned during world war two, but none of that affected them. In fact, for some reason they are doing better than white people despite the supposed white privilege. So I guess they must be punished even more than whites for 300 years in the name of black equality?

If this alone isn't proof of white identity politics fails.





Again, that's a diversity issue. Not really affirmative action. Universities, for example, accept students from all over the world, but have "quotas" for each country or region of the world, that once filled, will result in the denial of entry to all other qualified students from the same region that's filled.



We are not talking other countries. The courts have ruled that racial quotas are illegal, and the universities deny they do them. So are you arguing these courts are breaking the law by having racial quotas?



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join