More Tales Of White Supremacy And White Privilege

[katsteve2012]

When we look at that Harvard lawsuit, the Asians should lose. This suit however is not about Asians, It's about Edward Blum, a racist trying to end affirmative Action.

I'm not certain what the outcome of their lawsuit will be, however one thing for certain is that if the measly number of Blacks who are actually admitted to Harvard were completely removed from the equation, the overall outcome for Asians would not really change significantly.

 

[IM2]

ALL RISE!

This mornings Lesson:

Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College.

Today with a right-wing majority on the supreme court, thanks to the two stolen seats, Affirmative Action could be on the chopping block, with odds looking very bad for its survival. Much of this is due to the tireless racism of one Edward Blum. Blum has tried countless times to end affirmative action. He has latched on to Asians to use this time in his maniacal quest to return America to white supremacy. Let us look at the particulars in Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. It is a case first filed in 2014.

In this case, the contention is that Asians are discriminated against based on the number of Asians turned down for Harvard admission. More than 30,000 students each year apply to Harvard. In 2019, there were 36,000 applicants for 1,600 slots. That meant 34,400 students of all races were not admitted. The claim is Asians get excluded to add black and Hispanic students. Ironically the claim is not made about Asians being passed over for white legacy students. Students for Fair Admissions claimed that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Title VI “prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federal financial assistance programs and activities.” Here is where the claim gets sticky. But before we get to that, we need to understand what courts use as regulations guiding a decision in cases such as this.

When a case such as this goes to court, the court considers many things. As it pertains to this case, the First Circuit Court determined that Harvard’s policy satisfied “strict scrutiny” and did not discriminate against Asians relative to admissions.

It is time to look at Blum's claim. He claims Asians are discriminated against in admissions. Harvard admission numbers do not support his claim. Asians are 6 percent of the American population, but they were 25.9 percent of the students entering Harvard in 2021. That is a full ten percentage points more than African Americans (15.9%) and more than double the percentage of both Hispanics(12.5%) and Native Americans(11%). In fact, there were more Asians admitted into Harvard than Hispanics and Native Americans combined. Additionally, a study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research and reported on the NBC.com website on September 20, 2019, revealed this:

“Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, legacies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.”

Here, we see that whites are provided entry by a plethora of other preferences they would not qualify for if not for connections they have due to their race. The study shows that Asians are not adversely impacted because Harvard must admit blacks and Hispanics that are presumably unqualified. Instead, we see white ALDC students who would not qualify under any other circumstance who get accepted at more than double the percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans who meet the same criteria. Edward Blum and his fake Students for Fair Admissions “organization” have whined to the supreme court for years, bringing meritless garbage case after case. Is this the end of affirmative action when the facts plainly show that more unqualified white students are admitted into Harvard due to preferences they get that nonwhites would not? Those preferences are the real cause of whatever reduction in admissions Blum claims.

Equal protection means that government entities must treat all individuals the same when the circumstances or situations are the same. Students for Fair Admissions claimed that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Title VI “prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in federal financial assistance programs and activities.” The numbers show that when the circumstances and situations are the same, meaning ALDC preferences, 2.68 times more whites get admitted due to this preference than Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, and Native Americans. Judging by the Equal Protection clause, those same groups are not receiving equal protection as determined by the 14th Amendment relative to ALDC preferences.

 

[IM2]

I'm not certain what the outcome of their lawsuit will be, however one thing for certain is that if the measly number of Blacks who are actually admitted to Harvard were completely removed from the equation, the overall outcome for Asians would not really change significantly.

True.. But since Lisa decided to show such disrespect, I posted some information about the case.

 

[katsteve2012]

True.. But since Lisa decided to show such disrespect, I posted some information about the case.

Thanks, I just noticed, and am reading it now.

 

[Paul Essien]

But Jews are so oppressed.?right ? Lisa558 ?

Whites are just so sh&t on. Right Lisa ?

Everyone is just rolling out the red carpet for us. Right lisa ?

 

[Lisa558]

So your story has changed once again. Originally it was penniless to affluence in 10 years, now you've given your family twice the amount of time to achieve the goal, I guess once you realized the fault in the timeline.

Intentions matter when it comes to certain criminal offenses. It would appear that you like many other members of this message board subscribe to the false theory that being a racist is not a crime therefore you can say anything you want no matter whether it's accurate enough, whether it's defamatory or not and like many only double down on your beliefs should anyone dare to point out to you that you're mistaken.

You erroneously believe that my communications with you are an attempt to get you to believe as I do else you will be called a racist yet nothing could be further form the truth. The fact is, you are such an anomaly to what my experiences with Jewish have been that I kept thinking that you are just misinformed (no malice intended), have no real knowledge of American history and certainly little to no knowledge of African American history, etc. yet the more I talked to you, the more obvious it became that you consider yourself superior to black people, or at least poor black people. I haven't a clue if you consider yourself superior to poor white people but it wouldn't surprise me in the least to find that you look down on them as well, as if it's their own fault that they're poor.

Then I thought, maybe it's something else, like the way old money carries themselves and perceives the trashy nouveau riche. The thing that comes across more than anything else is 1) your disdain for those you consider beneath you and 2) your inability to analyze a situation without introducing your own biases into it.

So I told my brother about you and how you keep insisting that racism has nothing to do with why blacks have always had more than twice the number of people living in poverty that whites. He was pretty surprised when I told him you claim to be Jewish and his assessment was "she's just ignorant then". He's an investigator and he's pretty astute when it comes to pegging personalities and traits in people.

A person who engages in intentional behavior knowing that their behavior can put others at risk is not a good person. A person who has been shown how and why their behavior puts others at risk yet still continues to pursue that course of action can be called reckless, selfish, inconsiderate, etc. When a person engages in this behavior to the detriment of a certain vulnerable minority population, after they have been advised about the risks they're creating for that population, then yeah, I consider that behavior to be evil and the person engaging in it as evil.

Ignorance can be excused because we are all ignorant of certain things. I also understand wanting to remain ignorant because as they say ignorance is bliss and it's obvious that you're not interested in learning anything especially since you complain when you feel too much attention is being paid to black people, or the lives that black people lives, or apparently too many black people portrayed in advertisements.

If I didn't know any better I'd say you were more upset at being called evil than when it was pointed out to you that the things you were posting make you appear to be a racist. And just to be clear racism IS evil as are the people who practice it.

I didn’t read your entire diatribe aftet your first sentence in which you WRONGLY accused me of changing the timeline. I didn’t. It was from poverty to middle class in 10 years, and then another 10 years from that point to affluence.

The problem is that you are so unwilling to admit that blacks in poverty could get out by making the right choices - and still want to say it’s racism. That is why you are obviously looking for a loophole in a story of people who were born into abject poverty, did all the right things, and went from being poor at age 20 living in a tenement with their parents to owning a house in the suburbs at age 30.

In fact, the reason you asked for all the details is you are hunting for a reason that a poor Jew could succeed amidst terrible antisemitism to give an excuse for blacks who don’t. (Never mind blacks today are given an advantage with affirmative action that Jews sure never has - just the opposite as Jew quotas went up.)

Here’s the story again:

1) Grandparents arrived penniless, with no education, and unable to speak the language,
2) Father born into poverty.
3) Father raised with MARRIED parents, where education, following the law, and hard work were emphasized.
4) Father studies hard throughout school, avoiding gangs, and during the years his European family was murdered for being Jewish
5) Father wins admission to highlycompetitive college, tuition free (similar parallel story on my mother’s side)
6) Father works a job during college to help pay for family’s food (same for mother), has to drop out at one point because his father got sick and family needed full-time income, but went back as soon as possible
6) Graduated, gets job, and rents small room in someone’s house. Meets and marries my mother, and together they rent a small apartment, putting away money for a downpayment on a house. Took about 8 years from Dad’s graduation to accomplish this.

So, in summary, it took Dad just 8 years - not 10 - to move from being the poor Jewish boy with a new college degree to an owner of a house in the suburbs.

No reason that blacks can’t do the same - or similar. I say “similar” because my dad, may he RIP, was way above average in intelligence, and not everyone can win a tuition-free college education. But there is NO reason why just about anyone - yes, even blacks! - can’t apply themselves, avoid gangs, don’t have babies, and get a tuition-free community college degree. So while average people might have trouble moving from poverty to the middle class in 8 years, they can at least move out of poverty into the working class.

 

[Lisa558]

As far as the SCOTUS case in which the black racists on this forum are using percentages as a defense - there are x% of blacks in the country and only x% making up the student body at Harvard - that is NOT THE ISSUE.

At issue is whether it is a violation of the equal protection clause to not only apply lower standards to one particular race in order to get more of that race admitted, despite lower grades and scores, but whether it is a violation to specifically devise a “personality” test on which questions are developed to which another specific race (Asians) will be found lacking, and thus can justify why they are being rejected despite being better students.

One simply cannot devise tests in which it is predetermined that one race will score better, and one lower, in order to justify admissions standards based on race. What’s next? Since it is well known that blacks can run faster - why, I don’t know, but it’s a fact - why doesn’t Harvard just admit students based on their times from a 50 yard dash?

 

[JoeB131]

In your opinion, they just aren't that bad presumably because
1. It didn't affect you personally or any of your loved ones or people
2. It only affected black people

When the Murrah building in Oklahoma City was bombed, was that also "just not that bad"? Why or why not?

Bombing the Murrah Building was not as bad as the Holocaust. 12 million people died in the Holocaust vs. 168 in the Tulsa building. It may or may not have been as bad as the Tulsa Riots because we don't really know how many people died in the Tulsa riots. (Some sources put the number as low as 36, some as high as 300)

Now, nobody I know was killed in any of those incidents. (I did have a cousin one removed who was in the Wehrmacht who died in WWII, and another more distant cousin who was a Catholic Priest who was thrown in a camp for saying something the Nazis didn't like).

 

[JoeB131]

Most companies are like wellls fargo

Yes, they are... which is why I vote Democratic.
But at the end of the day, if I can't go out because someone Kim Fox cut loose on his third offense might mug me, I might have to rethink that bit of "Social justice".
If I face potential lawsuits because I hired someone I liked rather than a preferred minority, I would definitely rethink that position.

And this is where you guys have shot yourselves in the foot. You went from "the police need reform" to "All Cops are Bastards", "Defund the Police" and letting the thugs run wild, and people are going from "that sounds reasonable' to "are you fucking nuts?"

In Chicago, we are down to the lowest level of police that we've had in 30 years, so bad that Lightfoot has lowered the standards at the police academy to get at least some recruits.

 

[Lisa558]

ROFLMAO! "Quoting a liberal rag"?
You are really "out there".

I simply "QUOTED"
what is in the lawsuit itself, and I fully understand what Harvard did by implementing the "personality test", so there is no need to explain it.

Perhaps YOU should take the time to actually read the lawsuit itself.

In YOUR gleeful pursuit of creating the narrative that "favoritism" at Harvard towards Black applicants is the primary reason for the lawsuit, YOU predictably, and not surprisingly sidestepped the fact that the lawsuit clearly states that the "likeability/personality" test favors White applicants over Asian applicants, which makes it abundantly clear that Asians are being discriminated against in favor of ALL other races at Harvard, not just Blacks, as you obviously believe.

It includes WHITE applicants as well as Black and Hispanic applicants.

As far as Asians "winning" their lawsuit, what makes you think that I don't support the fact that they should?

SMDH. Expressing common sense to a preschooler is far easier than attempting any form of reasoning with the likes of you.

And likewise, no use wasting my time with the likes of you. But I will:

The lawsuit is about picking and choosing students based on race above all, and blacks are the group who gain most by that. Latinos also gain, to a lesser extent. Asians are the group who most lose by that. Whites also lose, to a somewhat lesser extent when compared to Asians, although the anti-white discrimination is blatant there too, and they as well are rejected in favor of blacks with far poorer academic qualifications.

The reason the Harvard case has a better chance of winning is because it is discriminating against one MINORITY, to the advantage of another minority. It makes it harder to justify. In the UNC case, it is brought by a white, and will be harder to win for that reason, given the negative attitude toward the majority population these days. Plus, Harvard’s case is more obnoxious with the personality test they used to exclude Asians.

These racist policies have to stop, and I believe they will - finally - when SCOTUS announces its decision in June 2023. BTW, the new justice will recuse herself from the case, since she has a conflict of interest regarding Harvard.

 

[JoeB131]

I didn’t read your entire diatribe aftet your first sentence in which you WRONGLY accused me of changing the timeline. I didn’t. It was from poverty to middle class in 10 years, and then another 10 years from that point to affluence.

The problem is that you are so unwilling to admit that blacks in poverty could get out by making the right choices - and still want to say it’s racism. That is why you are obviously looking for a loophole in a story of people who were born into abject poverty, did all the right things, and went from being poor at age 20 living in a tenement with their parents to owning a house in the suburbs at age 30.

In fact, the reason you asked for all the details is you are hunting for a reason that a poor Jew could succeed amidst terrible antisemitism to give an excuse for blacks who don’t. (Never mind blacks today are given an advantage with affirmative action that Jews sure never has - just the opposite as Jew quotas went up.)

Here’s the story again:

1) Grandparents arrived penniless, with no education, and unable to speak the language,
2) Father born into poverty.
3) Father raised with MARRIED parents, where education, following the law, and hard work were emphasized.
4) Father studies hard throughout school, avoiding gangs, and during the years his European family was murdered for being Jewish
5) Father wins admission to highlycompetitive college, tuition free (similar parallel story on my mother’s side)
6) Father works a job during college to help pay for family’s food (same for mother), has to drop out at one point because his father got sick and family needed full-time income, but went back as soon as possible
6) Graduated, gets job, and rents small room in someone’s house. Meets and marries my mother, and together they rent a small apartment, putting away money for a downpayment on a house. Took about 8 years from Dad’s graduation to accomplish this.

So, in summary, it took Dad just 8 years - not 10 - to move from being the poor Jewish boy with a new college degree to an owner of a house in the suburbs.

No reason that blacks can’t do the same - or similar. I say “similar” because my dad, may he RIP, was way above average in intelligence, and not everyone can win a tuition-free college education. But there is NO reason why just about anyone - yes, even blacks! - can’t apply themselves, avoid gangs, don’t have babies, and get a tuition-free community college degree. So while average people might have trouble moving from poverty to the middle class in 8 years, they can at least move out of poverty into the working class.

The problem is, once again- that your grandparents were considered "White enough" to access the mainstream. There was never systematic anti-semitism in this country like Jim Crow. Good for them that they worked hard, but there are black kids who work just as hard and don't get access.

 

[JoeB131]

I am not the one who originally said that. People such as James Comey and Bill Bratton have made such statements and I do think they know this history of law enforcement better than you.

The comment you ran your mouth about was made by an Asian.

Yes, I guess there are whiners in every group, what's your point. This person was whining because society had expectation of her (I assume it was a female). Oh, how awful for her.

I actually did take a few minutes to review your claims about "Successful" Asians vs. Poor ones. Not surpisingly, the way you got to poverty is by taking the smallest groups like the Hmong and Laotian (who don't have large support groups) compared to the Indians, Chinese and Koreas who do. .

And your ancestors were white and were allowed things blacks could not have. There is no
equivalence no matter how badly you try making one. Germans practiced racism against blacks. The Nazi war prisoners got more respect than blacks did in America.

Yeah, here's what my Dad "got" to do.
He got to serve in WWII, which gave him PSTD for the rest of his life. Except they didn't know what that was in the 1950's.
He got to work as a sheet metal worker with Asbestos which contributed to his getting lung cancer and dying at 56.

Yup, he was really privileged. Despite that, he worked hard all his life, raised five kids (one of which wasn't his) to be solid citizens, to actually improve on what he had by making us work hard in school. I was the first in my family to graduate from College in 1985. Neither of my parents lived to see it. So pardon me if I don't get weepy about "privilege", sure I'll admit I drew some better cards, but I also played those cards better.

I am not sure what frustrates me more... racist white people or blacks who wallow in self-pity blaming others for their failures.

 

[JoeB131]

Today with a right-wing majority on the supreme court, thanks to the two stolen seats, Affirmative Action could be on the chopping block, with odds looking very bad for its survival. Much of this is due to the tireless racism of one Edward Blum. Blum has tried countless times to end affirmative action. He has latched on to Asians to use this time in his maniacal quest to return America to white supremacy. Let us look at the particulars in Students for Fair Admissions v. President & Fellows of Harvard College. It is a case first filed in 2014.

So whose fault is that? Hillary arguably lost because black people didn't show up to vote in 2016. So Trump didn't steal those seats, you gave them to him.

“Using publicly released reports, we examine the preferences Harvard gives for recruited athletes, legacies, those on the dean’s interest list, and children of faculty and staff (ALDCs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African American, Asian American, and Hispanic, the share is less than 16% each. Our model of admissions shows that roughly three quarters of white ALDC admits would have been rejected if they had been treated as white non-ALDCs. Removing preferences for athletes and legacies would significantly alter the racial distribution of admitted students, with the share of white admits falling and all other groups rising or remaining unchanged.”

I would be the first one to get rid of ALDC's. But we've made athletics an important part of college, including the idiocy of Title IX that requires scholarships for girls sports no one would care about otherwise. Legacies exist because it's the alumni that make Harvard and other elite schools as powerful as they are. So if you got rid of ADLC and AA, what would the student body look like? It would be more Asian and White and less Hispanic and Black.

Also, who benefits from AA? The poor black kid from the Ghetto, or the middle class black kid from the suburbs?

Again, worked two minimum wage jobs and joined the military to go to a State College, I just can't get that worked up about this. The ironic thing is the state college I went to, UIC, was originally built to provide college access to inner city youth. Today it's enrollment is less than 9% black.

 

[katsteve2012]

And likewise, no use wasting my time with the likes of you. But I will:

The lawsuit is about picking and choosing students based on race above all, and blacks are the group who gain most by that. Latinos also gain, to a lesser extent. Asians are the group who most lose by that. Whites also lose, to a somewhat lesser extent when compared to Asians, although the anti-white discrimination is blatant there too, and they as well are rejected in favor of blacks with far poorer academic qualifications.

The reason the Harvard case has a better chance of winning is because it is discriminating against one MINORITY, to the advantage of another minority. It makes it harder to justify. In the UNC case, it is brought by a white, and will be harder to win for that reason, given the negative attitude toward the majority population these days. Plus, Harvard’s case is more obnoxious with the personality test they used to exclude Asians.

These racist policies have to stop, and I believe they will - finally - when SCOTUS announces its decision in June 2023. BTW, the new justice will recuse herself from the case, since she has a conflict of interest regarding Harvard.

And?
Asians academically outperform ALL races(INCLUDING WHITES) in most universities all over America.
I acknowledged that.

What I specifically pointed out was YOUR failure to acknowledge that the likeability/personality test penalizes Asian applicants in favor of WHITE applicants, yet you STILL appear to be unwilling to acknowledge that fact, even though it is clearly pointed out in the lawsuit.

Coming from YOU, that was expected, and not the least bit surprising, even though YOU are the one who initially brought up the likeability/personality test in the first place.

That aside, if you were to get your wish, and the miniscule number of potential Black applicants, as well as those who are actually enrolled in and attending Harvard were to disappear today, the overall outcome for Asians would likely not change significantly.

If anything, "legacy" admissions would likely increase even more.

That being said, YES, you did waste your time...... just like I wasted mine reading your response.

 

[Lisa558]

And?
Asians academically outperform ALL races(INCLUDING WHITES) in most universities all over America.
I acknowledged that.

What I specifically pointed out was YOUR failure to acknowledge that the likeability/personality test penalizes Asian applicants in favor of WHITE applicants, yet you STILL appear to be unwilling to acknowledge that fact, even though it is clearly pointed out in the lawsuit.

Coming from YOU, that was expected, and not the least bit surprising, even though YOU are the one who initially brought up the likeability/personality test in the first place.

That aside, if you were to get your wish, and the miniscule number of potential Black applicants, as well as those who are actually enrolled in and attending Harvard were to disappear today, the overall outcome for Asians would likely not change significantly.

If anything, "legacy" admissions would likely increase even more.

That being said, YES, you did waste your time...... just like I wasted mine reading your response.

OK….let’s not waste any more of each other’s time. Wishing you the best.

And P.S. I never said I wish the blacks would disappear from Harvard. Thats just what nasty leftist do: they claim their political opponents say something they never did, to make them sound racist. It is a very low road that Dems are going down, calling everyone who won’t submit to the leftist agenda, or the new thing, a white suoremacist.

I am saying the opposite: Race should be irrelevant, and radisr policies abolished. What I’ve been saying is that race should not be a factor in admissions at all. If that means fewer blacks qualify for Harvard, and more Asians do, then fine. There are many other educational opportunities available for those who don’t qualify for Harvard based on merit.

I know from my work in admissions that about 1 in 3 blacks would qualify under the higher white standards, and 2 in 3 blacks would not. (I don’t know how many blacks would qualify under the even higher Asian standards since my work was before all the rampant anti-Asian effort.)

Right now we have standards for blacks, much higher standards for whites, and slightly higher standards above that for Asians. Time to out a stop to all the racism from Democrats.

 

[katsteve2012]

OK….let’s not waste any more of each other’s time. Wishing you the best.

And P.S. I never said I wish the blacks would disappear from Harvard. Thats just what nasty leftist do: they claim their political opponents say something they never did, to make them sound racist. It is a very low road that Dems are going down, calling everyone who won’t submit to the leftist agenda, or the new thing, a white suoremacist.

I am saying the opposite: Race should be irrelevant, and radisr policies abolished. What I’ve been saying is that race should not be a factor in admissions at all. If that means fewer blacks qualify for Harvard, and more Asians do, then fine. There are many other educational opportunities available for those who don’t qualify for Harvard based on merit.

I know from my work in admissions that about 1 in 3 blacks would qualify under the higher white standards, and 2 in 3 blacks would not. (I don’t know how many blacks would qualify under the even higher Asian standards since my work was before all the rampant anti-Asian effort.)

Right now we have standards for blacks, much higher standards for whites, and slightly higher standards above that for Asians. Time to out a stop to all the racism from Democrats.

Of course you did not "say it" verbatim.
One does not need to be anothers "political opponent" in order to interpret their obvious sentiments.

Of course you know this already, so save the political zealotry for someone who has a similar agenda to yours.

Tschüss, and happy trails.

 

[Blues Man]

All i see hear is whining and more whining.

Maybe if you people stopped worrying about all the ways you have been screwed and instead actually focus on doing something with your lives you'd all be happier.

 

[Lisa558]

Of course you did not "say it" verbatim.
One does not need to be anothers "political opponent" in order to interpret their obvious sentiments.

Of course you know this already.

Tschüss, and happy trails.

And you’re wrong. All I want is for the same standards to be applied for admissions, regardless of race.

I really wonder which admissions program you worked with since you are oblivious to the pro-black, anti-white (and now anti-Asian) antics that go on.

 

[Lisa558]

All i see hear is whining and more whining.

Maybe if you people stopped worrying about all the ways you have been screwed and instead actually focus on doing something with your lives you'd all be happier.

Yes, and here’s the thing: is it really a fate worse than death to have blacks who don’t qualify for Harvard (once race-based preferential treatment is abolished) go to a 2nd tier college, or even a decent state college? They can still be very successful.

 

[Blues Man]

Yes, and here’s the thing: is it really a fate worse than death to have blacks who don’t qualify for Harvard (once race-based preferential treatment is abolished) go to a 2nd tier college, or even a decent state college? They can still be very successful.

Such a small percentage of college wannabes get into Harvard anyway so it really doesn't matter