patrick.net

Patrick says

I think the timing, as with abortion, is a calculated attempt to help Democrats.

As a rule, Democrats are strongly for institutionalized anti-white racism, and fear true meritocracy.

As long as the machinery remains in place to ensure that their privileges remain and they get preferred admissions for their kids based on legacy.

Affirmative action will divide society, loses trust among groups on the way bringing down productivity and weakening country.

I hope and pray this bit of reverse racism is finally done away with. It's inconceivable to me that choosing someone based on their race isn't considered racist.

EBGuy says

,
People who are White may identify as Latinx. Asians are over represented in that statistic. I wonder what are percentages of Asians that attend UCLA and UC Berkeley.

.

Patrick says

I think the timing, as with abortion, is a calculated attempt to help Democrats.

If true, then the Supreme Court is controlled by the dems.

ad says

Asians are over represented in that statistic.

CalTech does not discriminate based on race.

Here's the demographics for the entire University of California system (circa 2020).
Asian Americans predominate at UC and are significantly overrepresented — making up 40.3% of in-state freshmen last year compared with their 19.9% share among California high school graduates eligible for UC admission. By comparison, Latinos made up 31.5% of UC freshmen and 44.7% of that qualified pool; whites were 20.6% at UC and 27% of eligible students and Black freshmen were 4.5% at UC and 4.2% of those who met systemwide admission standards.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-11-01/affirmative-action-divides-asian-americans-ucs-largest-overrepresented-student-group

When will SCOTUS abolish affirmative action on SCOTUS?

EBGuy says

whites were 20.6% at UC and 27% of eligible students

According to the latest census, 35.2% of California is white non-Hispanic. So that means whites are as grossly underrepresented at UC system as Asians are over represented.

Or perhaps a lot of Whites are strategically self-identifying as Lantinx or Hispanic ? And that is why there is a lot less whites enrolled than represented by the population ?

.

ad says

Or perhaps a lot of Whites are strategically self-identifying as Lantinx or Hispanic ? And that is why there is a lot less whites enrolled than represented by the population ?

I actually hope this is the case. Use their bullshit against them.

What if I say none, do they run background check and find out that I was an Asian.

Blue says

What if I say none, do they run background check and find out that I was an Asian.

Blue, my guess is you are Indian American and work for AMD or a major semiconductor company. I am guessing you are an electrical engineer.

Blue, you are still needed cause you will have to do twice the work when they fire all the whites and replace them with "historically socioeconomically disadvantaged minorities", which means hire more non-Asians.

Actually I was more curious to understand how it works if everyone who do not like affirmative action select none. Gov, private companies, universities already know everything about every person but how they respond officially in terms of implementation when dealing with “none”.

There's a huge tell between Cali State Schools and the Ivy's.

The Ivys can and do reject Asians; California HAS to accept them under state law, ironically enough the one based thing that was passed in the 90s I think in Cali.

Blue says

Actually I was more curious to understand how it works if everyone who do not like affirmative action select none. Gov, private companies, universities already know everything about every person but how they respond officially in terms of implementation when dealing with “none”.

Selecting "none" (or "prefer not to answer" ?) for race on an application form is like a peaceful revolt against Wokeism.

However, those selecting "none" are the ones who think they do not benefit from affirmative action. I guess the application reviewers will have to examine other info like a person's first name (Jose, Laquisha, Jamal, Ali, etc.) or the last name (Goldberg, Chang, Gupta, Gomez, Ming, etc.) to intelligently estimate the race or ethnicity of the applicant.

I suspect there are other information factors such as group associations such as lead a teenager bible studies at Korean Baptist church, etc.if they want to figure out the race or ethnicity.
.



.

AmericanKulak says

There's a huge tell between Cali State Schools and the Ivy's.

The Ivys can and do reject Asians; California HAS to accept them under state law, ironically enough the one based thing that was passed in the 90s I think in Cali.

Look at Columbia University falling in the US News rankings. I wonder if that is a harbinger to what you posted. Will the Ivy's suffer or will it get covered up enough to not impact their prestige and rankings ?

How long does that last as far as University of California system like UCLA, UC Davis, UC San Diego, and UC Berkeley ?

Seems like the California Dems can easily start neglecting the Asian population (Indian, Korean, Chinese, etc.) and vote on a proposition to put in racial quotas at University of California system.

.

I went through full scale affirmative-action crap back in where I come from. It is nothing but vote buying scheme for commies and few years of vacation for receivers paid by tax payers. Only very few catch up both in education and jobs and utilize the resources but rest have no clue and waste valuable resources even worse focus more on protesting to get even more resources and promote more hate. Its a perpetual system. It divides the people and introduce the modern 'cast' system. Nothing good comes out of it.

Blue says

Its a perpetual system.

I would say it's more of that here in the USA than in your birthplace country of India. I am thinking its one reason why productivity has been lagging besides remote worker laziness. Corporations are hiring strictly because of diversity quotas and they are feeling the pinch as far as productivity.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2022/10/31/supreme-court-hears-oral-arguments-affirmative-action-n2615239

"I didn't go to racially diverse schools, but there were educational benefits, and I'd like you to tell me expressly when a parent sends a kid to college that they don't necessarily send them there to have fun or feel good or anything like that," Thomas pressed. "They send them there to learn physics or chemistry or whatever their study. So tell me what the educational benefits are.”

In response, Park claimed there is a “truth-seeking function of learning in a diverse environment” and argued that students in racially diverse schools perform better and “[reduces] bias between people of different backgrounds.”

"I don't put much stock in that because I've heard similar arguments in favor of segregation, too,” Thomas responded.

Thomas has long been a critic of affirmative action. CNN pointed out that Thomas wrote in 2003 that “The Constitution abhors classifications based on race, not only because those classifications can harm favored races or are based on illegitimate motives, but also because every time the government places citizens on racial registers and makes race relevant to the provision of burdens or benefits, it demeans us all.”

AmericanKulak says

The Ivys can and do reject Asians; California HAS to accept them under state law, ironically enough the one based thing that was passed in the 90s I think in Cali.

They actually tried to strike this from the California constitution two years ago with Prop 16. It was roundly defeated 57.2% to 42.8 % EDIT48.8%.
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SEC. 31.
(a) The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

EBGuy says

It was roundly defeated 57.2% to 48.8%.

WHAT?!!

EBGuy says

They actually tried to strike this from the California constitution two years ago with Prop 16. It was roundly defeated 57.2% to 48.8%.
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SEC. 31.
(a) The State shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting.

Be patient and give it another couple of years and this will be removed via proposition vote by the Democrat voters of California. And then the UCLA's and UC Berkeley's can rightfully discriminate against Asians, or it can chose the more safe path and admit no whites (except for those who self identify as Jewish).

.

https://www.breitbart.com/education/2022/10/31/harvard-lawyer-struggles-to-explain-why-asian-applicants-are-given-lower-personal-scores/

Alito asked Waxman to explain why Asian applicants scored lower on the “personal” criterion. Waxman tried to evade the question, then described the difference on the personal score as small, and finally resorted to citing the district court’s decision in Harvard’s favor, which concluded that there was no discrimination. However, he admitted that the district court had not had full access to the precise criteria used in evaluating an applicant’s personal score.

Waxman then argued that the personal score was merely a form of “triage” to manage a large number of applications, and had no statistical effect on the outcome.

“Then why do you do it?” Alito asked.

Asians also suffer severe discrimination in Ivy League admissions, just like non-Jewish white people do.

cisTits says

Awesome. We're ready for this great next step to end d & I waste and racism at the workplace! Go SCOTUS!

NYT piece is an opinion, not editorial.

Eric Holder says

NYT piece is an opinion, not editorial.

Which is their way of publishing certain things without having to shoulder much responsibility. But they still very much control what appears on their site, and how much it gets promoted.

And I may have won a million dollars. This is pre election posturing, to give the Democrats leverage to pile on the race hate rhetoric, they miscalculated the RvW abortion card, and sacrificed it to the political alter. They were expecting a blowback from the conservative base, they exoected to be not prochoice, but pro:(Don't want too many people of color, so lets snip them out of the womb and "Nip It, in the BUD!", like the Democrats think) but that wasn't what happened.
Now they want to fool around with their bread and butter, affirmative action. I say they wont do diddly squat with it, but they wont tell us that until after the election. It's just to use as smear grease, that's all it is.