Sadly, this opinion of Asian Americans taking the seats of other underrepresented groups is not just Levine's, but one heard in the murmurs at yesterday's rally from some Latinas standing in the crowd behind me. I was offended at first -- weren't we here at the rally standing in solidarity together as a people of color fighting for equity?

!

I want to comment now, but I'll save my take for later...

:) This post has nothing to do with Affirmative Action, the term South Asian is almost proverbial now; you have milked it dry. Time to switch gears.

over-and-out
//

I'm pretty sure Jed Levine's piece was satire.
***
This brings me back to the idea of what makes an one an Asian American. Levine mentions Mao and Kim Jong but not Jawaharlal or Mohandas.

usa is usa because it operates on a strict merit based manner

this applies for college admissions,jobs,sports, whatever

they aim and get the best and brightest at whatever they do

it just so happens that in the academic realm, the majority of the people are immigrant asians - the white boy who wrote that article can say whatever he says, but usa is number 1 in the world because of its asian population

there is a deeper issue that needs to be addressed when considering the low number of latino and black admissions in UC system - you cannot help them by just using affirmative action to admit them to colleges

the simple reason why usa is number 1 is because they pass things like proposition 209

india is currently going through debate on quotas - it can learn a thing or two form usa

I'm pretty sure Jed Levine's piece was satire.

:) yes.

If the law school were to directly reflect the 10.3% [p.46] South Asian American population that we have in California, that would be the of the 340 law students in the 2008 class, that means there should be at least 35 desis in the entering class. I'm not sure about the exact stats, but I believe last year's class only had 13 South Asians.

i think you made a mistake here (typo). from page 48:

12% of the population is asian. on that page they have breakdowns of the percentage of asian indians, sri lankans, pakistanis, bangladeshis of this 12%, doing the math i get that 1.24% of california's population is brown, not 10.3%. with the numbers above re: law school, 3.8% of incoming are brown, so there is overrepresentation (though the slightly younger age profile of asian indians should mitigate this).

Last month, the satirical article written by Jed Levine at the UCLA Bruin caused some ruckus in the Asian American blogosphere...His main gripe? There are too many Asian Americans on UCLA's campus and their numbers on campus should be limited to make room for other ethnicities...

That's what a lot of people thought at first, but if you read the article carefully, it's actually a satire; he's actually attacking the Black and Latino students who he feels want special preferences/affirmative action by sarcastically saying that Asian Americans weaseled there way into UCLA because of their merit, instead of affirmative action.

Do desis even care about affirmative action?

As far as I've been able to tell, at least among people my age (mid 20s) and younger, they generally don't care about it much or are against it; those who support affirmative action (which I generally do) seem to be in the minority.

If the law school were to directly reflect the 10.3% [p.46] South Asian American population that we have in California

Thats an outrageously false statistic. Do you really think there are more than 3 million desis in California??

I'm going to comment anyway to say that NOT taking race into account is part of the reason why there aren't many south asian students in the law school at UCLA. If desis don't care about AA now, they really should start to.

Otherwise entrance into higher education becomes a numbers game both with regard to test scores and gpa(which I personally think is mostly fair) and population size (not fair). A south asian student who has great scores, ECs, and a great gpa should not get lost in the shuffle because there are 10 applicants with similar stats who all happen to be east asian.

They are overrepresented among college professors, engineers and technology workers. Between 10 percent and 12 percent of all medical-school students are Indians, according to the American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, the biggest physicians' group in the nation after the American Medical Association.

cite. this is probably an overestimate, but, you've all looked at facebooks or what not from your friends in med school right? browns (indians) are WAY overrepresented in medical schools.

I'm going to comment anyway to say that NOT taking race into account is part of the reason why there aren't many south asian students in the law school at UCLA. If desis don't care about AA now, they really should start to.

taz was wrong about the numbers. your argument makes more sense for southeast asians, who do complain about being lumped with other asians (though less vietnamese, who are doing better than the hmong).

browns (indians) are WAY overrepresented in medical schools

this is like saying blacks are overrepresented in basketball,nfl, or american sports in general

the only this is, if you said, you would be considered a racist

asians are still a minority , quit undermining them by repeatedly saying overrepresented, while they are just doing what they are good at

The Opportunity Costs of Affirmative Action:
The study, described in an article published in the June issue of Social Science Quarterly, also found that eliminating affirmative action would significantly raise the number of Asian-American students, while having little effect on white students.

asian american students are perceived as over-achieving freaks by many admissions boards, who are looking for "well rounded" students of "good character." we know what that means :)

asian american students are perceived as over-achieving freaks by many admissions boards, who are looking for "well rounded" students of "good character." we know what that means :)

i think you made a mistake here (typo). from page 48:

Thanks Razib- totally typo (and considering that of 13% Cali are Asian Americans I should have caught that sooner.)

from dan golden's the price of admission: "these Asian kids are all alike -- strong scores and grades, science and music, but I can't really tell them apart." (admissions officer) here golden is interviewed by a public radio host (white, robin young), and she is surprised at the extent of discrimation against asians in admissions. she assumed that the overrepresentation of asians was because of "international students." :)

now, for real, has anyone who went to an elite school experienced a white individual of sub-par academic performance dismiss their admission because "they are a minority" (you know, all minorities are alike!)? i've heard of this from many people. the inverse of white skin privilege, the stigma of needing special standards.... (except when you're colored and you're treated like a SAT feak).

Two things:
If we want to play statistics in this manner, you might want to consider how many "south asian" or even "asian american" students there are in ALL fields rather than just law. If we take the percentage of people who are of Asian descent PLUS those from pacific islander descent thats about 12.5%. We definitely make up more than our share in certain disciplines that are currently popular in the community. the point I am trying to make is that sure our representation is a bit lower in law schools when reflected against the population but I'm sure its also a bit higher elsewhere. I don't think we can just make this a seats game. Who are we taking them from and where are they going?

Personally I'd love to see a meritocratic system bermuda triangle but you're fooling yourself if you think this is one. I will give two very short examples.
One : Try taking a testmasters or kaplan class on the LSAT, GRE, SAT or any other standardized exam. A thousand plus dollars later try imagining how well you would have done without that class.
Two: Try imagining going to school in a town without a bookstore or movie theater and a waning public library. A school that doesnt allow afterschool activities except for quizbowl and detention for fear of encouraging loitering and possibly violence. If you don't believe it exists try Helena, AR. How far will a kid from here get without a couple of superbly inspired, overworked teachers? How is it meritocratic?

asian american students are perceived as over-achieving freaks by many admissions boards, who are looking for "well rounded" students of "good character." we know what that means :)

That they don't want a university full of students who spend friday and saturday night at the library? Or maybe they don't want all their students to be pre-med/law?

It's great that asians score well on tests and all that... And I am well aware of the fact that not every asian student goes into those career paths. Trust me, I know this. But there are many *good* reasons for why a university would want not just well-rounded individuals, but well-rounded student bodies. Especially when funding (especially for private universities) relies so heavily on maintaining a variety of different academic and non-academic programs.

And honestly, a high gpa and test-score starts to look really unimpressive when its not coupled with an interesting or challenging background.

of course political active desis will protest rollback of affirmative action. asian american activists did during the 90s even though repeal of racial considerations increased their numbers. the general trend is that the unis just kick out the more marginal asian american students, so, the super-achievers know they are safe. this is the handicap principle, but adding disadvantages to your group in the game you show what a stellar individual you are to even make it through the more stringent cordon. it is a display of liberal bonafides to be in favor of diversity even when it hurts your own group. but group is the major issue here: i will make the prediction that asian american activists who support diversity policies as they are generally practiced (e.g., higher standards for asian americans) aren't marginal students from families who can barely afford to send them to school, they are the best and the brightest and most secure who have no worries. you know you've made it :)

The numbers are wrong because the study she cites says that 10.3% of the ASIAN population of California is South Asian. Not the TOTAL population of CA.

Especially when funding (especially for private universities) relies so heavily on maintaining a variety of different academic and non-academic programs.

1) most sports programs lose money actually
2) the sports programs which are marginal tend to be where they place very wealthy kids
3) yes, funding is important, rich kids parents donate a lot, and this tends to be old money (something asian americans are not)

That they don't want a university full of students who spend friday and saturday night at the library? Or maybe they don't want all their students to be pre-med/law?

this is a fair point. nevertheless, from the data i've seen the extent of discrimination goes further than is necessary.

And honestly, a high gpa and test-score starts to look really unimpressive when its not coupled with an interesting or challenging background.

i don't know anyone who would apply to elite schools without extracirriculars. you saw the part about music?

there is some truth to the contention that asian americans have parents who bring a 'cram school' mentality to the game. but, only some. these are american kids who do sports and are active in music.

but in any case. it's fine to discriminate, i'm not sweating it, one the upsides that even idiot asian americans are perceived to be brains. but, people should be honest about it. the assertion above by the white talk show hostess is symptomatic ("i thought they were international students"). there are different kinds of minorities with different experiences. it is fine by me if admissions boards discriminate against middle class asian american applications in favor of hyper-wealthy white jocks and poor black & latino kids*, but everyone should know what's going on so we have our victim-meters properly calibrated.

* half of 'blacks' at harvard are biracial (and half of the rest west indian) and the vast majority are middle to upper middle class, but that's a different story

but everyone should know what's going on so we have our victim-meters properly calibrated.

Oh Razib. :)

That they don't want a university full of students who spend friday and saturday night at the library? Or maybe they don't want all their students to be pre-med/law?

First, you make an assumption here that, all achievers spend friday nights in the library. I guess you do know that that is not true. Also, for many who do, what is wrong with that? That it is not cool? Or is friday night some kind of national ritual all Americans must participate in? Frankly, I did my share of the usual friday night partying when I first landed in the US, but found it a largely vapid exercise. I am certainly through with that now.

And honestly, a high gpa and test-score starts to look really unimpressive when its not coupled with an interesting or challenging background.

Ok, I have to go now, to spend my saturday evening in the library. I can see this is going to be one long thread :-D .

recent harvard grad matt yglesis, and liberal pundit, knows the score.

The New Jews:

What tends to get less attention is the extent to which the mechanisms formerly used to informally cap the number of Jewish students haven't so much been dismantled as merely redirected at Asian-Americans. All of the major departures from a strict academic meritocracy -- affirmative action, legacy preferences, athletic recruitment, emphasis on extracurricular activities, geographical diversity, etc. -- just so happen to cut against Asian applicants. As a result, just as with Jews back in the day, the Asian-Americans who wind up admitted have substantially better test scores and other academic qualifications than do the non-Asians. Karabel notes all this near the end of the book, but doesn't really draw any conclusions. Nor do I, really, have any conclusions to draw either since strict meritocracy doesn't seem to me to actually be a particularly worthy social ideal.

btw, where do i stand on affirmative action? i guess i generally oppose. but the reality is that it is probably here to stay, so i think we should just be sure to know how it really works out. e.g., the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women, not blacks (for example). the beneficiaries of affirmative action who are black at elite universities are not typical black americans:

Ethnic self-identification of Harvard black students

Black American, 57.1%
Afro-Caribbean, 21.2%
African, 13.6%
Bi-ethnic or biracial, 25.9%

(i was wrong about the biracial %, doubled it in my original post)

and, 50% of the fathers of black Harvard freshmen have advanced degrees....

1) most sports programs lose money actually 2) the sports programs which are marginal tend to be where they place very wealthy kids 3) yes, funding is important, rich kids parents donate a lot, and this tends to be old money (something asian americans are not)

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of theatre programs and liberal arts departments. Who is going to support academia if everyone runs off to be a doctor? I was going to make your 3rd point but I don't know the alumni donation rates across ethnicities... but I think we can all assume that rich white people give the most money to their alma maters...

i don't know anyone who would apply to elite schools without extracirriculars. you saw the part about music?

You're talking ECs when I'm talking life experiences. It is easy to make the right choices and get top scores when you have a whole community of people telling you that's what should be done. If you are from a community where most people haven't gone to college, where your parents don't even know what an SAT is, and where half the kids in your HS don't graduate (raises hand) a lower test score (gpa, not so much...) can be more impressive.

With AA, groups are measured against each other. So if asians have to have high test scores its because that's the standard thats been set within that group.

half of 'blacks' at harvard are biracial (and half of the rest west indian) and the vast majority are middle to upper middle class, but that's a different story

1. How do you know the ethnic makeup of the black students at Harvard?

and

2. I'm assuming you mention this because you think they got in with lower test scores... how do you know this the case for every black student at Harvard?

1) i was wrong about the biracial number

2) this study

3) how do you know this the case for every black student at Harvard?, i'm not god, so i don't know, nor do i believe it is true of every black student at harvard. in any case, the problem is diminished at harvard since along with howard they get the creme. it is more of an issue at the non-harvard elites.

It is easy to make the right choices and get top scores when you have a whole community of people telling you that's what should be done. If you are from a community where most people haven't gone to college, where your parents don't even know what an SAT is, and where half the kids in your HS don't graduate (raises hand) a lower test score (gpa, not so much...) can be more impressive.

1) easier, not easy

2) please note that 50% of blacks students have fathers with advanced degrees. the problem with race-based affirmative action is that it doesn't have the SES results that most claim for it. there is a large black middle class, over half of the community. it isn't like they aren't applying to college. i grant there are cultural issues, i just don't believe that it is proper to assert them without the context of the fact that black students at elite universities differ in color, but are often quite privileged.

Oneup,

i don't particularly want to get into a discussion about admissions policies re: non-asians. my only point in responding to the topic here is that different minority groups have different interests on this issue. and, different segments within the minorities have different interests. a korean american kid with a 1600 SAT and 4.25 GPA and a bunch varsity letters + music + outstanding community service is in a different place than a korean american kid with a 1450 SAT a 3.9 GPA 1 varsity letter + music + ho hum community service. i think the former can support affirmative action pretty easily since there are a wide arrange of unconstrained options. the latter, less so, because they're marginal.

2) please note that 50% of blacks students have fathers with advanced degrees. the problem with race-based affirmative action is that it doesn't have the SES results that most claim for it. there is a large black middle class, over half of the community. it isn't like they aren't applying to college. i grant there are cultural issues, i just don't believe that it is proper to assert them without the context of the fact that black students at elite universities differ in color, but are often quite privileged.

This is the thing, no where in that article does it say that the black students admitted to harvard had significantly lower stats than other racial groups. You seem to be claiming that as the case, since that's usually what people who go the SES based AA route want to claim.

What I want to know is: How do you know those black students with educated parents and higher SES didn't get in on their own "merit" like everyone else at harvard? Why do they have to be AA admits?

a korean american kid with a 1600 SAT and 4.25 GPA and a bunch varsity letters + music + outstanding community service is in a different place than a korean american kid with a 1450 SAT a 3.9 GPA 1 varsity letter + music + ho hum community service. i think the former can support affirmative action pretty easily since there are a wide arrange of unconstrained options. the latter, less so, because they're marginal.

Isn't the latter person screwed regardless?

First off, Thank GOD that UC Berkeley doesn't do affirmative action!
Secondly, what is it that Ivy Leagues want, exactly? No one really seems to know! At least with the UC's that I applied to, I was sure that my grades and, yes, test scores fell in the "accepted student" range based on last year's and the years' before stats. But, with Ivy Leagues, even if your grades and test scores are outstanding, your teachers love you, and you've got a few extracurriculars as well, somehow, they can decide you're not "well-rounded" enough or some other BS like that and reject your petootie, when a kid who's taking Regular Pre-Calc as a senior (you took Honors Pre-Calc as a sophomore, followed by AP Calc BC and AP Stats) but is biracial and has "legacy" at Harvard on her dad's side gets in!! I don't get it! Will AA help me, a South Asian Indian American, or is it already hurting me??!
(Sorry for the rant, guys -- touchy issue for me. Especially since my parents won't get off my case about my abysmal 0-4 batting average at the Ivys I applied to!).

re-#31
What do you mean by 'screwed'?

*Sigh* I think I was the (brown version of the) latter person in Razib's example. And thus I got "screwed" -- no Ivy acceptancs for me!

What do you mean by 'screwed'?

I mean that with AA, the latter person might not get in to allow for an URM... and without it, that person won't get in because he is competing with someone with similar background and higher scores/better stats.

diversity in terms of race is NOT equivalent to diversity in terms of background (economic, culture, society etc). the later is good for universities when it can be achieved. i think most affirmative program supporters tend to confuse one with another.

asians are still a minority , quit undermining them by repeatedly saying overrepresented, while they are just doing what they are good at

wtf?!? this is exactly what so many other SA friends of mine have to fight against when they tell their parents that they don't want to go into medicine/engineering. there's a lot of talk about the confines of "the model minority" stereotype, let's not buy into it ourselves.

White Flight

Interesting article.

., the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women, not blacks (for example).

The irony. Members of the race that enslaved blacks are benefitting from a progam orginally designed to counter the legacy of slavery. With all this talk of diversity, whatever happened to the shackled runner metaphor?

wtf?!? this is exactly what so many other SA friends of mine have to fight against when they tell their parents that they don't want to go into medicine/engineering. there's a lot of talk about the confines of "the model minority" stereotype, let's not buy into it ourselves

true dat - i dont see how you got the impression that asians HAVE to do engineering/medicine from what i wrote - i for one dont care about this at all - do whatever you want, and if anybody, even if your parents oppose you - all the more reason for you to do what you want ;-)

however it is simply wrong and silly to say that those who do choose to go into these fields are overrepreesnting asians -

another thin- most commenters on this blog are doctors, lawyers, engineers whatever -

its hypocritical of people in these professions to say that asians are over represented in these fields - if you feel this way, quit what you are doing and do something else - to ease the overrepresentattion problem ofcourse ;-)

FYI, the Supreme Court, with its two new radical conservative additions, is very likely to rule that affirmative action violates the equal protection clause. The recently retired Justice O'Connor was part of the 5-4 razor thin majority that upheld the Univ of Michigan's affirmative action program in Gratz v. Bollinger. AA programs might well be limited to private institutions very soon.

The gap in SAT scores persists even at the highest levels of achievement. A study of the 1989 applicants to five highly-selective universities found that white candidates' average combined SAT score was 186 points higher than the corresponding SAT average for African American applicants. Close to 75 percent of the white applicants scored over 1200 on the SAT, while 29 percent of black applicants did. The results of this study were reported in the 1998 book b>The Shape of the River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering Race in College and University Admissions, by Derek Bok and William Bowen, former presidents of Harvard and Princeton universities.

cite (bok & bowen favor affirmative action in admissiosn)

FYI, the Supreme Court, with its two new radical conservative additions, is very likely to rule that affirmative action violates the equal protection clause.

they'll find ways to get around it. these rulings are pretty much irrelevant IMO aside from throwing up bureaucratic hurdles. admissions boards can look at where the applicant lives and crank the conditional probabilities based on other clues in their application if they have particular diversity goals.

FYI, the Supreme Court, with its two new radical conservative additions, is very likely to rule that affirmative action violates the equal protection clause

quite possible. but it won't affect private universities. for that to happen the SC will have to rule that AA violates the '64 civil rights act...still possible but less likely.

also, just a reality check, the vast majority of americans do not attend selective institutiosn where this matters.

AA programs might well be limited to private institutions very soon.

oops sory desi new yorker, see you pointed this out already. btw, I like the term "radical conservative," talk about being out of touch with reality. This stuff has been mainstream since at least 1980.

additionally, there is something to be said for principle. e.g., it doesn't always have to be "how does it affect my group?" there are many asian americans who favor diversity even if it hurts there group, and there are african americans who favor race-blind admissions even if it hurts their group. since people here like to remind me i'm 'bangladeshi' i suppose i should be pissed about being lumped in with those high achieving indian americans, but whatever. whatever the rules of the game, they should be transparent.

but the reality is that it is probably here to stay,

way too pessimistic razib. It's hardly a popular program so it can be destroyed by plebiscite or on constitutional grounds with more conservative judges.

AA would be a goner if the republicans chose to make it a bigger issue. but they haven't. bush is too compassionate.

way too pessimistic razib. It's hardly a popular program so it can be destroyed by plebiscite or on constitutional grounds with more conservative judges.

doesn't matter. implementation is the key. you can 'ban' affirmative action but there are ways to get around it. whatever happened to switching from the SAT to the SAT II a few years back? black activists were angry with latinos seeing as how spanish was avail. as one of the subject tests and it seemed an unfair leg up....

Oneup:
My apologies for my second comment in #23. I did not realize you meant life experiences. In fairness, nor did a few others, till you clarified in #26.

It is easy to make the right choices and get top scores when you have a whole community of people telling you that's what should be done. If you are from a community where most people haven't gone to college, where your parents don't even know what an SAT is, and where half the kids in your HS don't graduate (raises hand) a lower test score (gpa, not so much...) can be more impressive.

I am entirely with you on this. It is easy to do well when someone hands you the rulebook, and you just have to follow the rules. Its much harder when you have to figure out the rulebook yourself.
I think we need AA (and in the Indian context, reservations for backward castes). But again, it is extremely hard to come up with parameters that ensure that a small already-privileged subset of those classes/castes does not walk away with the pie. This is an issue that does not get sufficient attention.

One thing that really irks me about the AA debate among progressives is that it's often presented as a "you're either for it or against it" discussion. If people are committed to removing social barriers to education, the question should not be: "are you for or against AA?" The question should be: "Does AA maximize equality in access to education? If not, what would?"

Personally, if I had to choose between AA or no AA, I guess I would choose AA. That being said, however, if I could choose between heavily investing in the improvement of urban schools (such as reducing class sizes, building new schools, reducing the teacher shortage, and hiring smarter principals) and AA, I would obviously choose the former. I think AA is just an easy band-aid that does little to address the roots of social inequalities. But for now, unfortunately, it seems like that's the only option we have available.

My apologies for my second comment in #23. I did not realize you meant life experiences. In fairness, nor did a few others, till you clarified in #26.

Its cool, I should have been clearer. And for the record, there's nothing wrong with having students who study through the night on weekends. I am home most weekends myself... but that can't be everybody. I absolutely love having a variety of everything from race to culture to SES... I've been in situations where everyone is largely the same and I find myself learning little and extremely bored.

Personally, if I had to choose between AA or no AA, I guess I would choose AA. That being said, however, if I could choose between heavily investing in the improvement of urban schools (such as reducing class sizes, building new schools, reducing the teacher shortage, and hiring smarter principals) and AA, I would obviously choose the former. I think AA is just an easy band-aid that does little to address the roots of social inequalities. But for now, unfortunately, it seems like that's the only option we have available.

^IAWTC

One thing that really irks me about the AA debate among progressives is that it's often presented as a "you're either for it or against it" discussion. If people are committed to removing social barriers to education, the question should not be: "are you for or against AA?" The question should be: "Does AA maximize equality in access to education? If not, what would?"

That's true for both sides. By once being a ballot measure (yes or no vote), such framing is to be expected.

if I could choose between heavily investing in the improvement of urban schools (such as reducing class sizes, building new schools, reducing the teacher shortage, and hiring smarter principals) and AA, I would obviously choose the former.

if your in California, a lot of blame falls squarely on prop 13 and the 'low taxes at all costs' junta.

Affirmative action and other issues should be looked at from the point of view of if it helps your community or hurts it. I believe that affirmative actions hurts certain segments of SA population. SA population is very diverse with very many different experience depending on many factors. We are over represented in medical field... but also in taxi drivers, liquor store clerks etc. So lumping S ASIANs as one group hurts a significant number of our brothern/sistern? who don't have the same back ground/advantages as a typical doctors child. I hope our political leaders(if there are any) stand firmly against Affirmative action.

Kumar Barve puts it best: Affirmative action is an important issue not because I am brown, but because I am American. Given the low,low, low levels of Indian-Americans and other South Asians in this county, our view of whether it helps or hurts us is like asking if it helps or hurts Armenian-Americans or Persian-Americans. The reason we want affirmitive action is because we know there are too many white people at the top schools and jobs, and that having a litle color there won't hurt. Or, if you are opposed to that, then it your view of what America should look like that plays a role.

Thear some liberal arts colleges accept head shots from applicants...

WTF!? What do looks have to do w/ aptitude/brain power? As for the overrep of minorities...

I once had the misfortune to be in a class w/ 2 Cali freshmen guys (rich/white/whiny), who complained that they had to come to "crappy" ASU instead of go to "awesome" local school, UC Irvine. One referred to it as "Univeristy of Chinese Immigrants"- I'm NOT kidding! I was embarrassed, but later figured that these two lacked the brain to compete against those going into UC Irvine, and were using the Asian FOBc and Asian-Americans as scapegoats. As my dad says, everyone has to COMPETE in this world!

everyone has to COMPETE in this world!
And don't hate if you are not good enough to compete!

As a privileged white male I'm sure that I benefited from some intrinsic benefits. I do not oppose affirmative action provided whomever it benefits is reasonably qualified. Likewise quotas do not bother me as long as it's not some large percentage 25% or 50%. Everyone opposed to AA seems to think that the spots reserved for this minority or that minority will be given to someone grossly incompetent.

If you're a white guy just worry about being qualified and better than the other white guys applying. Unfortunately the real world is as much as about who you know as it is about what you know. It's not fair that someone gets a job simply because she or he (note the non-misoginistic use of both gender pronouns) because she or he went to the same school as the person in charge of hiring but that's life.

I'm sure glad I live in Texas where we've got this whole gender, immigrant, minority equality thing figured out.....

From Jed Levine in response to my friend Lu Lu:

Lu Lu, should any racists on campus try to cite this article as a justification for anything, it will simply prove how stupid they really are. This article is a SATIRE (not a joke, not an honest proposition) on affirmative action and is making fun of people who would believe such absurd things about Asians. It would be like someone citing Jonathan Swifts "A Modest Proposal" as justification for eating children: Just plain dumb.

I agree with you that having minority groups fight amongst themselves is terrible. That's why this article was written. I took affirmative action to it's most extreme conclusion. Affirmative action would help black and Latino students at the expense of Asian students and that would be a terrible thing. People deserve to get into UCLA based on relevant criteria. If we want to fix this lack of diversity we need to focus on the root of the problem, not its most superficial symptom.

This article is not "putting down" Asians, but rather creating an absurd voice (me) that is proposing this god-awful idea to illustrate the fallacy of affirmative action. Nothing in this article is to be taken at face value, the backwards logic, sarcastic tone, and absolute absurdity combine to make it a clever and pertinent satire. If you read this and realize that my proposal and logic is completely false, why would you give credit to the poorly-written race-baiting?

Please don't advocate people clogging up the e-mail boxes of "every editor" at the Bruin. Sending your comments to the viewpoint editor and/or the editor in chief should be enough to get your point across. That being said, they gave their approval of this column before we went to print and have continued to support it unconditionally.

Regards,
Jed

The irony. Members of the race that enslaved blacks are benefitting from a progam orginally designed to counter the legacy of slavery. With all this talk of diversity, whatever happened to the shackled runner metaphor?

There is no irony in this - any government program designed to aid the disadvantaged benefits two groups - the middle class and the very well off minority of the disadvantaged group. It's a matter of numbers - if you want to win re-election, you have to make sure that programs and benefits accrue to the largest number of people. So, since AA is no loner about redressing Jim Crow discrimination, but it is now about "diversity", a white girl who grew up in the suburbs is just as valuable as a black girl from the projects.

The "gender split" in AA which is most visible among black students, will probably soon appear among South Asians. My sister, when applying to grad schools for chemistry, was worried that she may not cut it. I re-assured her that since she was a woman in an overwhlemingly male field, and that the few women in it are foreign-born grad students, she shouldn't worry so much. Plus, being Indian, the admissions board may feel it is their responsibility to redress several thousand years of oppressive Indian culture - what with the dowry burings, sati, and the like. A friend of mine, a woman of SE Asian descent, managed to get into Northwestern's MBA program, despite an ordinary undergrad GPA from U of Chicago, avg. GMAT scores, and a couple years of marketing under her belt. Had she been a SE Asian man, I'm not so sure she would have gotten in.

Razib raises a good point - for those of us brown folk who had very good, but not stellar, credentials, AA will be a net loss.

Why is there no affirmative action in NFL / NBA? A lot more colour and diversity in the top sport events would be fun. When rich black sports stars talk about AA in the top sports then I ll accept that

I have a few questions:

1. I have limited athletic/musical ability and come from a background with almost zero support of sport/music. Should I not get preferential treatment in the sports / musical arenas. If I understand correctly, in sport and music it is just merit that matters. eg. The ability to kick a ball / run fast/ sing / dance (your skin colour is immaterial). There are billions of dollars available in sport and music. Hey, why should those with limited ability be excluded? Since we are talking about % representation let us distribute the medals at the Olympics using population !!!

2. Having a clear and open test enables those from a less privileged background to compete. This "well rounded" candidate theory does eliminate the truly marginalized. Let me explain: If it is just SAT then you know what you need to do and you can focus on that. You can then decide if it is worth spending 1000 dollars to improve your score. If it is not just SAT but also other criteria, then a marginalized candidate needs to spread their resources to meet other criteria. Yet, this may not be enough. How about ignoring high school. Just the outcome of one test (SAT). Will that help or disadvantage the marginalized ?

3. Do the children of Black CEO's claim AA? How about publishing the list of AA candidates.

4. "Alumni" factor in admissions. Why is this not an issue that agitates the liberal minded. This is nepotism at its worst.

just one thing

YAY Kumar Barve!
That is how you get around minorities fighting minorities

What really irks me about some of the "Death of Diversity" participants is their idea that Asian Americans are not "authentic" minorities and have somehow struggled less than they have (hierarchy of oppression). I hate how my experiences are somehow less relevant b/c they do not fit the appropriate historical context. A hijab-wearing Muslim girl growing up in a farming community in the Midwest should be given AA just for that.

Second, why should state demographics determine public university enrollment? I find Taz's very literal number crunching a bit unsettling. Then again, government jobs do tend to overrepresent the state's dunce population quite well...

Last, progressive coalition building is a two-way street. If blacks/Latinos/Native Americans want sympathy for their cause, the need to recognize the struggles of other racial/religious minorities as well. The deafening silence on the Muslim issue, for example, is astonishing. (Yes, I know there are black Muslims, but not very vocal ones at UCLA.)

haroun, integrating the misery function from t = initiation to t = present, i think native americans and blacks have a "leg up" on other minority groups in cummulative misery.

re: genetics = wormz. elegans baby.

Razib-

Thanks for the response. But it's a bit sloppy to think that misery can be quantified. How do you posit Hispanics into the equations?

Re genetics, I'm a geneticist....are you a researcher? Just curious as to where in the field you're coming from...thx

AA should be pared down and applied in a limited form. For eligibility, the candidate must demonstrate :
- that s/he is a direct descendant of a US slave or somebody oppressed under US segregation. Descendants of Jamaican slaves, Mexican slaves etc. should not be eligible. They should seek redressal from the respective states (Britain, Mexico etc.) that oppressed them. A foreigner from Africa should not be eligible. Neither should Latinos. I know that this kind of perpetuates the "one drop" rule, but I don't know how the eligibility can be diluted for multiracial people.
- OR that s/he is a direct descendant of a Native American who lived in the US since the USA was constituted.
- AND that his/her household per capita income is less than median US (or median + 25%)
- The program must end in 2020 (or some appropriate date) and can only be extendable by super majority votes in both houses of Congress.

The current diversity based AA programs are BS and must be scrapped.

As for "legacy" programs, they can be justified if the univs can demonstrate that the returns from alumni contributions make up for the "cost" of sub par admittees.

A varsity athlete with a 3.9 and 1450 SAT is marginal? On what planet?

Thanks for the response. But it's a bit sloppy to think that misery can be quantified. How do you posit Hispanics into the equations?

i don't. if you are going to think in terms of groups though, i think native americans and blacks have pride of place in the american misery index. new immigrant groups, less.

but then, i'm not one who thinks that the miseries, sins and glories of ancestors are passed down through the generations. i only pointed out if you accept the premise of past misery being justification of current redress, i think black americans with their history of slavery, and native americans with their history of dispossession have strong cases.

Re genetics, I'm a geneticist....are you a researcher? Just curious as to where in the field you're coming from...thx

not actively right now. i have an interest in evolutionary popuation genetics, and especially epistatic genetic variance. i worked with c., but not elegans :)

A varsity athlete with a 3.9 and 1450 SAT is marginal? On what planet?

on the planet where you have slanty eyes and a feren last name :) and where you apply to an elite school, of course.

I am all for Affirmative Action. I think there is not enough AA. Hell, they should amend the constitution or somethin.

Look around - How many South Asians are there in NBA/NFL/MLB? Hell what about colelge athletics? Just imagine the possibilities.

I have a dream. I have a dream when Peyton Manning and Reggie Bush and Muthukrishnan Srigopalaradhakrishnan will all play together(with the font on their jerseys changed to fit us desis ofcourse). I have a dream that people will be judged not by the height of their bodies or by how far they can throw a ball, but by their character.

Amen.

But in retrospect I had to question -- Do desis even care about affirmative action? Though we had turned out it great numbers at the rally yesterday, I couldn't help but wonder: if we as Asian American are currently being overly represented in the UC system, then does the reversal of proposition 209 even matter to us, or even worse, will it be detrimental to our enrollment?

All this discussion of the overrepresentation of Asian Americans in higher and continuing education is 100% misleading and false. Additionally, it completely fails to disentangle a very diverse population composed of people from over 50 countries and from different backgrounds (e.g. immigrant, naturalized, 2nd gen, 5th gen, etc.). If you throw in socioeconomic standing, region of origin, ethnicity, English-language familiarity, etc., then there are a lot of people left out. There was a lot of really great education done around this a few years ago when UC Regent John Moores wrote that affirmative action hurts Asians. We have to ask ourselves what is this population, and is it reflective? At Cal when I graduated, 50% of the API-A community in undergrad was Chinese-American while Filipinos (the second largest Asian-American group in CA) were less than 10% and non-Vietnamese southeast Asians (who are also particularly concentrated in CA) were less than 1% of the undergrad population. And we can't even talk about Pacific Islanders - I think there were 50 (out of 25,000 undergrads). When you take it to the underrepresentation of Black and Latino students it is similarly horrific. It's important to really think about who is represented in the "Asian" label, and who is included in these monolithic "under" and "over" represented labels, which frankly, are a bit ridiculous.

And it is not surprising that other underrepresented students buy into Levine's satiric argument. I mean, how many people posting here buy into it? A lot. It just reinforces and strengthens the model minority myth, but it also divides people of color communities. It makes it easier to associate "Asians" as being "white" as oppposed to finding links of common struggle. It is also entirely unstrategic, but when so many people buy into it, it takes a lot of awareness and information distribution to even begin to present an alternative model/vision/interpretation.

Further still, all this conversation over who "loses seats" when you move towards a more equitable higher education model and population is a bunch of hooey. It relies on an attitude of entitlement and merit that people buy into whereby they assume that someone else is taking something they deserve. Everyone deserves education and educational access. If it means giving up a bit of privilege, then that's what has to be done.

Further, Asian Americans just "appear" overrepresented. When you look at their enrollment across colleges, particularly outside of the "top 20," their enrollment rates are NOT high. I will have to pull my cites for this one, but API-A's are something like 4% of the total U.S. population and do not make up 4% of the total college population.

At the "higher higher education" level (i.e. grad and professional school) their rates are even lower, particularly in "non traditional" fields and certainly in administration or areas of promotion/management. Also, I think it is worth taking into account that part of the reason there are so many desi doctors and engineers is largely due to the U.S.'s restrictive immigration requirements after the repeal of the Chinese Exclusion Act. This is not some kind of inherent desi/API expertise, or whatnot, it is social engineering through immigration legislation/policy.

And finally, there are of course desis involved in the affirmative action debate on both sides. While I think the number of desis who are politically active and who would associate as social justice activists is already relatively low, historically (and currently) desis have absolutely been involved in racial justice issues in the U.S. And, if you come up to the Bay Area, they are absolutely present in the current discussion, education, and mobilization around Prop. 209.

i'm not one who thinks that the miseries, sins and glories of ancestors are passed down through the generations.

My boy T, is Tibetan, born in South India, raised in a Tibetan refugee camp near Varanasi, worked in Kathmandu until six years ago when he married a Virginia woman. Anyway, he says the first thing about Americans that annoyed him was how every group here thinks they have the monopoly on suffering.

I tend to agree, and would add that I'm starting to see in my students an alarming sense of entitlement. Many think they're going to college on a 'scholarship' with a 2.0 GPA and no extracirriculars plus behavioral problems. Some don't even realize they must apply for these things. They get pissed when I tell them that they have to be a part of the application process because it involves more work.

I don't understand why sports are considered this bastion of black achievement sans AA when their are so few black people representing in the higher ranks of athletics. People who use the sports analogy consistently prove me right about how they don't know. There is a severe abscence of black coaches in the NFL because people have learned to assume that black people are absolutely incapable of doing anything besides follow other people's orders.

The rare occurrence (of having one team with a black coach play against another with a black coach) is a milestone of sorts for a league that in 2002 was pushed into creating a rule to make sure minority coaching candidates would get a fair chance to be hired as NFL head coaches.

And besides that, athletic ability is not going to help when finding solutions for diseases that disproportionally affect black people (sickle cell for one), and athletic ability isn't going to help black people turn over laws that are biased against the black community. I'm annoyed that so many people think that their community suffers because they don't have a lot of atheletes to cheer for.

A varsity athlete with a 3.9 and 1450 SAT is marginal? On what planet?

on the planet where you have slanty eyes and a feren last name :) and where you apply to an elite school, of course.

What sport are we talking about? A lot of the male varsity athletes I know who are asian play sports like tennis and volleyball... which is great but not really the type of athelete most schools want. But asian football/hockey/basketball players are not marginalized to the extent you seem to think. Or maybe it's just my school where I run into these HUGE asian football players.

i'm not one who thinks that the miseries, sins and glories of ancestors are passed down through the generations.

This is partially the current generations of black people's fault. We go on and on about slavery but don't harp on the fact that the generation that lived through the Civil Rights Movement is still around. And we also don't point out that even since the CRM there are still a lot of issues that keep black people at a disadvantage:

For applicants whose annual incomes were less than 80% of the median income in a given metropolitan statistical area (MSA), the rejection rates for conventional mortgages were: blacks, 40.1%; Hispanics, 31.1%; whites, 23.1%, and Asians, 17.2%. When applicants' incomes were in the 100% to 120% range of the MSA median, rejection rates were: blacks, 26.3%; Hispanics, 19.1%; whites, 11.2%; and Asians, 12.6%. Surprisingly, even when blacks' incomes were well above average (more than 120% of the MSA median), they still had the highest rejection rate: blacks, 21.4%; Hispanics, 15.8%; whites, 8.5%; and Asians, 11.2%.(link)

"We had to fight to get our kids into honors classes at Skyline High School .‚.‚. in liberal, progressive Oakland. It was shocking." ... Clarence and Wandra cq STYL not found Boyd of Oakland remember when they got Jared's 1994 class schedule for his first year at Skyline. "She exploded," Boyd said, pointing to his wife. "Here we had this black kid, with a GPA of 3.83. Despite the fact that both his parents requested honors courses, despite the fact that his counselor at junior high recommended it, he did not get one advanced course." (Link)

Many think they're going to college on a 'scholarship' with a 2.0 GPA and no extracirriculars plus behavioral problems.

They may think that, but it most assuredly won't work out for them. It's not like black students have carte blanche in selecting any school. Even the best of us get rejected from a variety of top schools. I know I did.

Anyway, I get so confused. On the one hand there are so many people who say people in the black community don't value education and they don't try to rise up... bootstraps! bootstraps! But then when you have black students trying to do well for themselves, trying to stay off the streets, trying to help their communities... then everyone wants to get mad because they might have to work a little harder to secure a spot at a university. People need to make up their minds.

Further, Asian Americans just "appear" overrepresented. When you look at their enrollment across colleges, particularly outside of the "top 20," their enrollment rates are NOT high. I will have to pull my cites for this one, but API-A's are something like 4% of the total U.S. population and do not make up 4% of the total college population.

i suspect you'll have to get that cite out of your ass :) (clean it please) here is info that took me 2.5 seconds to find via something called google at a site associated with something called the US census:

Asians had the highest proportion with a bachelor’s degree or higher (49.4 percent), followed by Non-Hispanic whites (30.6 percent), African-Americans (17.6 percent) and Hispanics (12.1 percent).

if asian americans are less than their proportion in the college age population, that would have to be (assuming you are correct) because they have low birthrates and fewer college age individuals.

A lot of the male varsity athletes I know who are asian play sports like tennis and volleyball... which is great but not really the type of athelete most schools want.

fyi, the argument in golden's book is that sports like this are actually important as it allows an easy way for wealthy kids into schools who have sub-par academics. i agree that the focus on sports is kind of dumb, it isn't like many people are becoming professional athletes, or even getting full athletic scholarships.

But then when you have black students trying to do well for themselves, trying to stay off the streets, trying to help their communities... then everyone wants to get mad because they might have to work a little harder to secure a spot at a university. People need to make up their minds.

it depends on how you define "little harder." asian american students perceive that their credentials need to be better than those of whites, and far better than those of blacks and hispanics.

Anyway, I get so confused. On the one hand there are so many people who say people in the black community don't value education and they don't try to rise up... bootstraps! bootstraps! But then when you have black students trying to do well for themselves, trying to stay off the streets, trying to help their communities... then everyone wants to get mad because they might have to work a little harder to secure a spot at a university. People need to make up their minds.

also, on this issue, there is a strong perception that the affirmative action policies re: selective universities have a strong socioeconomic bias toward middle and upper middle class blacks. i already cited number for harvard showing that many of the black students there have fathers with advanced degrees, or where immigrants or the children of immigrants (west indians). e.g., mcwhorter that for african american students are berkeley in 1997 65% of the students came from families where the income was more thatn $40,000, and more than 1/3 from families where the income was more than $60,000.

it depends on how you define "little harder." asian american students perceive that their credentials need to be better than those of whites, and far better than those of blacks and hispanics.

And? Its not as if there is a crises of asians not getting into college. People need to deal with dissapointment a little better. Life doesn't stop and communities don't suffer because a couple of asian or white kids don't get into their top choice. AA has been around for a while now, and *most* asian communities continue to flourish academically. Asians are already overrepresented... what more can you want? Because even without AA, asians would still have to score high. That's the standard that's been set.

And lets be honest here. We aren't talking about the total package of an asian person being better than the total package of a black/latino/native american person. A lot of the issue is over the SAT scores. URMs still need to be ranked highly in their class, have taken and done well in the most rigorous courses their school offers, and have done work outside the scope of their schoolwork. People get so worked up over ONE part of a student's entire application.

Even the best of us get rejected from a variety of top schools. I know I did.

I shouldn't have said this, as I am certainly not "the best."

People need to deal with dissapointment a little better. Life doesn't stop and communities don't suffer because a couple of asian or white kids don't get into their top choice.

communities don't suffer, but individuals do (whether not getting into harvard or yale is 'suffering,' that's a personal value).

A lot of the issue is over the SAT scores. URMs still need to be ranked highly in their class, have taken and done well in the most rigorous courses their school offers, and have done work outside the scope of their schoolwork. People get so worked up over ONE part of a student's entire application.

SATs are often a necessary precondition. if you don't hit a particular bottom score many schools won't consider you. of course there's GPAs too.

and the end of day, you're right though that AA are doing fine, overall. as long as people are aware of the standards they have to, and have, lived up to i think it's OK. i do bristle at people like camille though who have to make things up to fit into a one-size-fits-all paradigm.

my understanding is that a lot of brown hotel owners received special loans for minorities. anyone know if this is true?

Peeps, chillax. As someone who was in this very position hardly six months ago, I really don't think it's that big of a deal. Sure, I was disappointed not to get into the Ivy Leagues and Stanford (eech) when I had great scores anf grades (certainly good enough to get in were I not at a heavily Asian private school, where I was competing with the rest of the best), but can I really call settling for Berkeley 'settling'? As long as Prop 209 is upheld and STATE universities don't do this AA business, let the private schools do whatever they want. Certainly AA is no different from their 'legacy' and 'well-rounded' hokum.

To continue with my last thought, I think it's worse (than AA) that kids at public schools can get into selective (private) universities with greater ease than kids at competitive private schools. I'll give you an example: the valedictorian from one of the Bay Area public middle schools transferred to our private high school in sophomore year cuz she was bored at "Mount Pregnant" High (that was the nickname). She stayed for only that one year and returned to Mt. Pregnant the next year because she found our high school too "hard" and, given her competitive valedictorian mentality, would rather settle for being the best at a mediocre public high school than being average at a really good private school, where she could have taken many more AP/Honors courses. I soon forgot about her, as junior year and SAT's rolled around. But a couple months ago a friend of mine who attends Stanford told me that the Mt. Pregnant valedictorian was also attending Stanford. I was shocked. I had dealt with the competition and the stress at our competitive private high school, and my petootie was rejected from Stanford, while she had taken the "easy way out" and had gotten into Stanford. Now, I'm sure my stats were just as good, if not better (and I actually think they WERE better), than hers, but since I was competing with the other private school kids, my stats didn't seem as stellar as hers. See, my school offered about 15 AP courses, of which I took 6, and I had friends who did take between 12-15 AP's during high school. It seems it's better to take all 6 AP's at a school that offers only 6 (and perhaps not the 6 most 'important' ones, either) than to take 6 really strong (science and math, and let's not forget Latin!) AP's at a more competitive high school. So in addition to being screwed by my "Asian" identity, I got screwed over for being competitive at a very competitive high school. That, in my opinion, is more bogus than AA.

mcwhorter that for african american students are berkeley in 1997 65% of the students came from families where the income was more thatn $40,000, and more than 1/3 from families where the income was more than $60,000.

Again, people need to take time to contextualize the information they recieve. A family can consist of many people. I'd like to know how many children were in each of these families.

Going back to the issue of home loans: where do these families live? Are they living in suburbs with good schools, or in poorer neighborhoods because their parents cannot qualify for the loan they need to move?

Also, I mentioned before with the issue of tracking, that even black people who are wealthier are discriminated against academically... which makes using AA for black students from middle class backgrounds more justified.

I read the Mcwhorter article, it still places the majority of the value of a student on SATs.

communities don't suffer, but individuals do (whether not getting into harvard or yale is 'suffering,' that's a personal value).

Like I said: And? That's life... I didn't get into my first choice either. But instead of whining about the athletes and legacies and whoever else that got in over me, I just did the best that I could with the schools that I got into. People need to get over their sense of entitlement.

Maggi,

from what i know the school you go to does matter. e.g., graduates of andover academy or exeter can get in with lower GPAs, etc., than those from public schools for example at many east coast universities. the issue you are alluding to is really problematic in places like texas, where the top 10% of each high school is admitted to the UT system. since there is a lot of asymmetry in schools this causes problems as the 'top 10%' differs qualitatively. also, at elite universities a lot of the admittance seems to have a random scattershot nature after your meet the basic criteria. i know someone who went to stanford who was rejected from tulane, for example. if harvard wanted to it could have a student body composed only of perfect SATs, but as it is they admit a full range (1425 is the 25th percentile from what i recall).

But instead of whining about the athletes and legacies and whoever else that got in over me, I just did the best that I could with the schools that I got into. People need to get over their sense of entitlement.

i get what you are saying, but i do think it is a bit unfair to term students who bust their butts to get stellar credentials, and yet are still rejected from the elite schools that they set their sights on just because they don't fit into a needed demographic. there are more important things in life, but if getting into an elite school is such a trivial thing than why have affirmative action at all?

>>We aren't talking about the total package of an asian person being better than the total package of a black/latino/native american person. A lot of the issue is over the SAT scores

Blacks/Latinos/NativeAmericans should study hard, do their homework, and make an effort to be smart, they can do well. And if they don't they'll get stuck in Iraq.

M. Nam

Maggi, your parents set you up. I would NEVER let my future children go to any of those extremely competitive private schools. They can only (or only want to) take so many students from each school. People really need to learn how things work. Look at any college prep site and you'll see that the tier 1 schools really make a concerted effort to grab kids from public schools. I had to figure out all this stuff on my own and as soon as I learned what was competitive, I changed my schedule to match it. Which sort of hurt me as I had AP teachers who didn't want me in their classes and graded me poorly as a result with grades of C+. Coincedentally those exams were the ones I scored highest on.

See, my school offered about 15 AP courses, of which I took 6, and I had friends who did take between 12-15 AP's during high school.

Honestly, I can see why this might be unimpressive. You had the opportunity to load up and you didn't. You were probably less competitive than you thought (even within your own school) because you had friends who took way more AP classes than you did.

Blacks/Latinos/NativeAmericans should study hard, do their homework, and make an effort to be smart, they can do well. And if they don't they'll get stuck in Iraq.

Heh, Heh, Heh

Hmm, but why take AP classes you're not interested in, for example, if you really like science and math (like I do), you should take all the science and math AP classes (I graduated with 6.5 science credits; the required # was 3). I had friends taking AP Euro and AP US History just for the heck of it, just to "load up." My aim was always to take the courses that interested me. My friends' aim (the ones who got into