3
0

Diversity's Dilemma


 invite response                
2019 Feb 9, 1:51pm   2,488 views  11 comments

by cmdrda2leak   ➕follow (1)   💰tip   ignore  

As a fan of game theory, I found this... amusing:

https://kakistocracyblog.wordpress.com/2019/01/14/diversitys-dilemma/


There’s a sort of prisoner’s dilemma now facing a federal judge in the ongoing Harvard race discrimination court battle. As you know, the prisoner’s dilemma is a game theory that suggests self-interest will compel two confederates to betray each other when cooperation would benefit their mutual self-interests. For those unfamiliar with the court proceeding, in it plaintiffs allege that Harvard’s diversity regime is racially discriminatory against Asians rather than merely the whites against whom it was intended to be racially discriminatory. As a result a race other than whites was denied legal protections, which runs counter to the country’s principles.

A prisoner’s dilemma subsequently arose between Asian advocacy groups on one side and college admissions and Big Diversity on the other. As collaborators, they both want the elimination of whites from elite universities, but they also have competing interests as well. Diversity mongers view discrimination against Asians as a bearable price to pay for discriminating against whites. If it took losing the former to banish the latter, there’s not an Ivy League administrator alive who would furrow their brow. That’s a collateral effect of the left’s racial demonization: getting rid of the demons is job one.

That can have impacts beyond the obvious. Asians, like Sarah Jeong for instance, agree that whites need to go; though certainly not at the cost of Asians. That would be discriminatory. Why not just stop admitting dumb blacks instead, they ask in extremely veiled terms.

This tactical conflict amidst strategic alignment created the prisoner’s dilemma we now see playing out in a federal courtroom, the only venue where national policy is now concocted. In this dilemma, Asians and Diversity would benefit by cooperation. Asians could simply front-channel their discontent through colluding media outlets, and institutions like Harvard could pronounce their dignified acquiescence and deny a few more white kids out of each class in exchange for more imported test-mill output from Peking. That’s not ideal for either, but still good collectively for both.

But game strategy says that’s not likely to happen, since one or the other can likely get everything they want by betraying the bargain. And that’s what has happened. Asians, naturally infuriated by being treated like whites, have gone straight to the head of state: a federal judge. In doing so they have sown the potential for both to lose.

If Asians win, diversity as state religion could simply be tossed out like a segregated southern school house. Asians labor under a satisfying delusion that perceived merit will perpetually carry them forward. In reality, mandated diversity has always been their friend and mortally wounding it will accrue to their detriment in ways they have almost certainly not considered. But, of the world’s seven billion minorities, the death of Diversity would cut Asians shallowest, and so they betrayed their POC partners for a wider berth at the Western trough. On the surface that seems reasonable, though in reality both will have lost.

But if Asians lose this case, they risk relegation to a semi-formal state of whiteness. The court could carve out another principled exception to America’s sacred principle of non-discrimination. Taken even further, a thorough judicial enshrinement of Diversity might even mandate strict university admissions in alignment with population demographics. If Diversity is Godliness then you better start getting right with scripture. What makes this particularly amusing is that diversity has been rhetorical subterfuge for anyone-but-whites for so long that its peddlers forget the term has a separate dictionary meaning. Thus a literalistic court could take them at their word and require full proportional diversity in higher education. That would be very bad for diversity indeed.

This could represent a template-altering loss for both plaintiffs and defendants. That’s because the percentage of white gentiles at Harvard isn’t 63% and the percentage of Jews isn’t 3%. Though perhaps Asians would be satisfied if the result of their suit was to go from a current 20% of Harvard to their population’s diversity mandate of 5.6%.

It’s all quite a conundrum. How can whites reconstruct their country in a way that only harms whites? Is there a differential equation for calculating that?

Comments 1 - 11 of 11        Search these comments

1   MisdemeanorRebel   2019 Feb 9, 1:55pm  

cmdrdataleak says
A prisoner’s dilemma subsequently arose between Asian advocacy groups on one side and college admissions and Big Diversity on the other. As collaborators, they both want the elimination of whites from elite universities, but they also have competing interests as well. Diversity mongers view discrimination against Asians as a bearable price to pay for discriminating against whites. If it took losing the former to banish the latter, there’s not an Ivy League administrator alive who would furrow their brow. That’s a collateral effect of the left’s racial demonization: getting rid of the demons is job one.


Racist against Whites OR Fighting Meritocracy. Probably a little of both.
2   cmdrda2leak   2019 Feb 9, 2:01pm  

MisterLearnToCode says
Racist against Whites OR Fighting Meritocracy. Probably a little of both.


I wonder at this point if the war on merit is simply the necessary rhetorical gymnastics that the diversity commissars must practice to continue justifying their paychecks.
3   Ceffer   2019 Feb 9, 2:20pm  

There is massive fraud even amongst the so called merit applicants. Diversity discrimination created the perception that there was no moral high ground in higher education, it was crooked, political and relativistic. Nothing was fair, nothing was just, nothing was ethical, and nothing in the end was real except gaming the system and winning.

In an arena of moral relativity, all methods are fair, and I doubt that most admissions boards are even capable of filtering out the frauds, nor do they care, as long as appearances are maintained. They haven't said a thing about Elizabeth Warren.

I know a guy, now middle aged, who has told me that he got into a highly prized Harvard professional school entirely on faked credentials. His grades and test scores were OK but not great, so he and his family simply invented him for the applications process with fake credentialing and succeeded. Fact is, he got through all the curriculums and tests and did fine. He continued on to have a practice into late middle age and nobody was the worst for wear.

The strange thing was, after seeing all the crap that I saw in higher education, could I really blame him? At a certain level, it's just all exalted bullshit. The only thing diversity discrimination has generated is an environment of rampant unfairness and demoralizing cynicism that has been a baleful infection.

Now, we have a diversity fraud who is running for president on the Dem ticket, after the Obama cardboard cutout Presidency. The absurdity has come full cycle.
4   Bd6r   2019 Feb 9, 2:35pm  

cmdrdataleak says
Asians, like Sarah Jeong for instance, agree that whites need to go


I do not think that one stupid bitch represents Asians. Most Asians I know are for merit-based hires and admissions, perhaps because those benefit them more than anyone else by a trillion miles.

cmdrdataleak says
deny a few more white kids out of each class in exchange for more imported test-mill output from Peking


Imported not from Peking, but from Los Angeles or Houston. Internationals do not go under the same admission rules as domestics, and they need much higher scores and/or be somehow visible in media.

cmdrdataleak says
Asians labor under a satisfying delusion that perceived merit will perpetually carry them forward. In reality, mandated diversity has always been their friend and mortally wounding it will accrue to their detriment in ways they have almost certainly not considered.


I don't see how it will wound them? They stand to benefit at expense of everyone else if diversity initiatives are axed.

Hope Asians succeed with their lawsuit and affirmative discrimination is tossed out of the window.

I get the point of the article (D-voting minority may kill a D-supported program), but it is filled with bizarre statements.
5   theoakman   2019 Feb 9, 2:38pm  

Asians are by far the biggest victims of diversity mandates.
6   Al_Sharpton_for_President   2019 Feb 9, 4:30pm  

d6rB says
Hope Asians succeed with their lawsuit and affirmative discrimination is tossed out of the window.
Agree, but what will likely happen is they will allow more Asians in, but continue to discriminate against whites.
7   curious2   2019 Feb 9, 4:51pm  

cmdrdataleak says
Diversity's Dilemma


Diversity's bigger dilemma is between Muslims and all those whom Islam says to kill.

The biography of Aayan Hirsi Ali illustrates that dilemma. She was allowed to immigrate to the Netherlands from Africa because she filled out a form stating she was Muslim, and thus qualified for the Petrodollar corruption program to spread Islam. She got elected to the Dutch parliament on the same program. Then, she revealed that although her parents had been Muslim, she was an atheist, and thus an apostate. She was also a blasphemer, because atheists assert implicitly that Islam is false. Islam commands the death penalty for blasphemers and especially apostates (who are seen as traitors). Following the murders of Pym Fortuyn and Theo Van Gogh, Aayan Hirsi Ali began receiving credible death threats, and had to flee the Netherlands for the USA.

It is not possible to combine Islam with anything else. It's like bringing "diversity" to a gold fish bowl by adding pirhanas. It might look "diverse" until feeding time, but that "diversity" is unstable and ultimately unsustainable. The process takes long enough that the current decision makers have retired and/or died before the consequences become obvious, but most countries that have allowed themselves to become more than 20% Muslim are already more than 90% Muslim:

curious2 says

sagacious1 says

sagacious1 says

Is Islam incompatible with other forms of government?

Ultimately, you cannot long combine Islam and democracy without sliding into Sharia, which crushes all other religions and western notions of liberty. In most countries that have Muslim majorities, most Muslims demand Sharia. Read about Asia Bibi on death row in Pakistan, and the assassination of Governor Taseer, and the incarceration of the former governor of Jakarta, Basuki Purnama (Ahok), now in prison sentenced for blasphemy, and see some of the consequences. As Islam metastasizes through a society, it takes over and kills everything else: most countries that have more than 20% Muslims, have more than 90% Muslims. As Nassim Taleb wrote, the west is "committing suicide" by importing Islam.
***
More than 20 Muslim countries have already agreed a world plan against blasphemy [including online], and the Islamic State has published online kill lists including Americans living in America. It reminds me of a poem:

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out,
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out,
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out,
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.
"

Atheists are disbelievers, blasphemers, and now by definition terrorists according to Saudi law.
8   MisdemeanorRebel   2019 Feb 16, 9:10pm  

Patrick says

They should have put in the numbers. Harvard undergrads are about 25% Jewish.

https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/The-most-heavily-Jewish-US-college-and-other-facts-about-Jews-at-American-colleges-437701


Hmmm... This is mostly about Penn, but Harvard was peak Jew in the 1920s. This article says about 15% these days, but raises an interesting question: "Are Jews the new Old Elite WASPs?"

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/272350/the-vanishing-ivy-league-jew
9   MisdemeanorRebel   2019 Mar 4, 9:11am  

Patrick says
So in spite of being 63% of the population, whites get only 22.3% of the spots at Harvard.


And many of those are Alumni Affirmative Action. Leaving fewer admissions based on Merit.
10   Shaman   2019 Mar 4, 11:09am  

I’d say even fewer than that considering all the legacy sponsorships from the old money which I assume are predominantly white.
Honestly, unless you’re some sort of Leftist activist who is nationally famous (Hogg), a White guy ain’t getting in.

A true racist would look at those demographics and conclude that Harvard was a shit school full of low class minorities. Why exactly do so many people want to attend that institution?
11   Ceffer   2019 Mar 4, 12:07pm  

Even the 'merit' is often forged. You look at some of those CV's with targeted activities, nobody has the energy or the hours in the day to do all that shit.

At Big U, it didn't take long for some of the guys to start asking me to take tests for them. I did for a frat brother, but the results were so good, they guy got slammed as a fraud because they knew compared to his previous results it couldn't have been him. Another who got into Stanford med re-cycled all my English papers and got the same straight A's that I got.

I remember my first encounter with a sociopathic student from back East who got in as a fake, who said that when you cite activities, Olympic fencing and equestrian activities were shoo-ins.

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste