“Back then, I still held the middle-class belief that hard work and education were the most important factors for getting ahead. But since graduating from Yale, I have learned that there are subtler, rarely discussed, aspects of social class.”
I would argue that education is very highly correlated with these other aspects of social class. So highly correlated that there is hardly a distinction actually. For at least the last 20 years, university education has become an indoctrination for these beliefs. If one publicly disagrees, they will be hounded and discriminated against. You can basically forget about grad school if you are known to be anti-diversity.
There’s a position to be had between being ‘woke’ and ‘anti-diversity’. Apparently, these young Asians are anything but independent thinkers.
Mitsu Hadeishi
3 years ago
Interesting article but some corrections are in order. First: the premise that affirmative action is the chief cause of disadvantage for Asian applicants to Harvard is intuitively appealing but incorrect (as a Harvard alum I’m more familiar with Harvard’s case than Yale’s). Multiple studies have shown that in fact the chief reasons are threefold: a VIP preference system (children of large donors, etc.), athletic scholarships, and a preference for legacy applicants. This study concluded that without those three factors the discrepancy between test scores and grades for Asian applicants and those of white applicants would completely disappear.
In other words, Harvard doesn’t discriminate against Asians primarily because of affirmative action for disadvantaged minorities; it discriminates due to affirmative action for wealthy, connected, legacy, and athletic applicants. Ie, “affirmative action for white applicants.”
This is a fact that is well known among the “woke” student body and most alumni such as myself interested in this topic.
A more nitpicky point: the cultural factors he is attributing to the “upper class” are the values of the upper middle class, not the upper class. There are at least two more “classes” above the one he describes as upper class: the moderately actually wealthy (who tend to be Republican/conservative in outlook) and the ultra-wealthy (who can be either very liberal or very conservative).
Mitsu Hadeishi
3 years ago
I tried to post this comment earlier but not entirely clear why it wasn’t approved. Perhaps because of a tongue in cheek remark I made. But I think this is a reasonable counterpoint to the view presented in this article.
The premise of the article seems to be that affirmative action preferences are the main reason for the disadvantages that Asian applicants face with admissions to schools like Harvard. As an Asian-American Harvard alumnus myself, I’ve been following this issue with interest and I felt the results of this study were very relevant.
The study found that if you look at test scores and grades it does appear Asian Americans are at a disadvantage relative to other ethnic groups in terms of Harvard admissions. However the study looked at the effect of the Dean of Admissions policy to favor children of large donors (a somewhat grey area policy which has been confirmed to exist), as well as legacy preferences and athletic scholarships. It turns out that these factors alone can account for 100% of the discrepancy between “expected” admissions rates and actual rates for Asian-Americans.
Many Asian-American alumni and students are aware of this fact. It doesn’t appear that affirmative action is a significant factor disadvantaging Asian applicants.
I personally am in favor of affirmative action for the simple reason that we do not yet live in a society with a level playing field; even children of wealthy African-American parents do far less well in our society than other wealthy children. There is still ample evidence of discrimination, unconscious or not, against certain minorities. For this reason I’m more than willing to accept some moderate disadvantages when it comes to attempting to help minorities who suffer greater disadvantages than Asians do (which is not to say Asians don’t suffer any disadvantages but it is clearly relatively speaking less of a problem.) However, it’s also worth noting that there are other preferences which disadvantage Asian applicants as much or more than affirmative action does.
“Back then, I still held the middle-class belief that hard work and education were the most important factors for getting ahead. But since graduating from Yale, I have learned that there are subtler, rarely discussed, aspects of social class.”
I would argue that education is very highly correlated with these other aspects of social class. So highly correlated that there is hardly a distinction actually. For at least the last 20 years, university education has become an indoctrination for these beliefs. If one publicly disagrees, they will be hounded and discriminated against. You can basically forget about grad school if you are known to be anti-diversity.
There’s a position to be had between being ‘woke’ and ‘anti-diversity’. Apparently, these young Asians are anything but independent thinkers.
Interesting article but some corrections are in order. First: the premise that affirmative action is the chief cause of disadvantage for Asian applicants to Harvard is intuitively appealing but incorrect (as a Harvard alum I’m more familiar with Harvard’s case than Yale’s). Multiple studies have shown that in fact the chief reasons are threefold: a VIP preference system (children of large donors, etc.), athletic scholarships, and a preference for legacy applicants. This study concluded that without those three factors the discrepancy between test scores and grades for Asian applicants and those of white applicants would completely disappear.
In other words, Harvard doesn’t discriminate against Asians primarily because of affirmative action for disadvantaged minorities; it discriminates due to affirmative action for wealthy, connected, legacy, and athletic applicants. Ie, “affirmative action for white applicants.”
This is a fact that is well known among the “woke” student body and most alumni such as myself interested in this topic.
https://www.thecrimson.com/…
A more nitpicky point: the cultural factors he is attributing to the “upper class” are the values of the upper middle class, not the upper class. There are at least two more “classes” above the one he describes as upper class: the moderately actually wealthy (who tend to be Republican/conservative in outlook) and the ultra-wealthy (who can be either very liberal or very conservative).
I tried to post this comment earlier but not entirely clear why it wasn’t approved. Perhaps because of a tongue in cheek remark I made. But I think this is a reasonable counterpoint to the view presented in this article.
The premise of the article seems to be that affirmative action preferences are the main reason for the disadvantages that Asian applicants face with admissions to schools like Harvard. As an Asian-American Harvard alumnus myself, I’ve been following this issue with interest and I felt the results of this study were very relevant.
The study found that if you look at test scores and grades it does appear Asian Americans are at a disadvantage relative to other ethnic groups in terms of Harvard admissions. However the study looked at the effect of the Dean of Admissions policy to favor children of large donors (a somewhat grey area policy which has been confirmed to exist), as well as legacy preferences and athletic scholarships. It turns out that these factors alone can account for 100% of the discrepancy between “expected” admissions rates and actual rates for Asian-Americans.
Many Asian-American alumni and students are aware of this fact. It doesn’t appear that affirmative action is a significant factor disadvantaging Asian applicants.
I personally am in favor of affirmative action for the simple reason that we do not yet live in a society with a level playing field; even children of wealthy African-American parents do far less well in our society than other wealthy children. There is still ample evidence of discrimination, unconscious or not, against certain minorities. For this reason I’m more than willing to accept some moderate disadvantages when it comes to attempting to help minorities who suffer greater disadvantages than Asians do (which is not to say Asians don’t suffer any disadvantages but it is clearly relatively speaking less of a problem.) However, it’s also worth noting that there are other preferences which disadvantage Asian applicants as much or more than affirmative action does.
https://www.thecrimson.com/…