Ridiculus Racism In University of California Admission System

Forums: News
Email this Topic • Print this Page

The Associated Press: New UC admissions policy angers Asian-Americans

This is about the the university of California admission system.
A few decades ago the soft-heads figured out that there were to many white people in the universities (which of course was because of racism).
So they changed the system to discriminate based on skin color (which was not racism), to get more minorities in the universities.
Which had the effect that while 12% of Californians are Asians, 40-55% of students in the UC system are Asians. Mostly Asian women (which is not because of racism). So now they are changing the system again, to promote more white people getting into the universities.
When there were to many white people, the reason was clearly racism so that had to be changed. Now that the bulk of student are a minority, that has to be changed, but it can't be racism any more, so it has to be something else.

So my question is, why anybody could support this racism in the name of fighting racism.
And what people are thinking when wanting to promote this or that skin color because the last time they doctored around with promoting based on skin color didn't work out quite well.
And how a society can possibly function if we don't allow the brightest and most qualified ahead, but create some sort of constantly changing quota-system based on race.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 776 • Replies: 4

No top replies

@EmperorNero,

Nero,

Can you look at this without invoking the concept of racism, including from the opposite perspective?

These policies, whether flawed or not, are meant to balance a playing field that favors certain advantaged groups. To try and correct that, even if it means establishing quotas based on ethnicity, is not "racism", which is a policy based on pejorative ideas about the victimized race.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes;60358 wrote:

Nero,

Can you look at this without invoking the concept of racism, including from the opposite perspective?

These policies, whether flawed or not, are meant to balance a playing field that favors certain advantaged groups. To try and correct that, even if it means establishing quotas based on ethnicity, is not "racism", which is a policy based on pejorative ideas about the victimized race.

Okay, I can, but the reason that there were too many white people was clearly the legacy of racism.
Now that there are to many people of a minority, it's something else.
Can't we just accept that it's a culture of effort and discipline, and not racism?

I'm pointing out that they are not leveling the playing field, they are giving special treatment to groups, they perceive as disadvantaged. Which means discriminating against another. That's not leveling the playing field, that's actually accomplishing the opposite.
Now that it backfired, they have to change it again, to discriminate against whom they formerly wanted more of.

Why doctor around with social engineering?
1. It discriminates against those who are most qualified but of the wrong color.
2. Getting ahead because of ones color helps nobody, but keeps them from putting in the effort.
3. Maintaining the myth of racism grants an excuse from personal responsibility.

Why am I as the right-winger the one advocating fricking colorblindness? And the diversity crowd is against that?
Explain it to me, because I don't get the rationale.

0 Replies

@EmperorNero,

I don't think our job is to be rewarding cultures. It should be rewarding individuals, whether or not they come from a family that is in the position to give them all the opportunities in the world.

In fact the only thing I'm reading here that could be read as racist is a stereotypical portrayal of the discipline and effort of "Asian" culture (notwithstanding the fact that my friend's car was stolen by a Laotian gang in Berkeley, CA), and the unmentioned ex vacuo implication that hispanics and Blacks are underrepresented because of some lack of effort or discipline.

1 Reply

@Aedes,

Aedes;60384 wrote:

In fact the only thing I'm reading here that could be read as racist is a stereotypical portrayal of the discipline and effort of "Asian" culture (notwithstanding the fact that my friend's car was stolen by a Laotian gang in Berkeley, CA), and the unmentioned ex vacuo implication that hispanics and Blacks are underrepresented because of some lack of effort or discipline.

Well it's all about skin color for them. If they want underprivileged people to get ahead, they should do that. They should let more people from poor schools in, or something like that. Which hat has nothing to do with skin color.

Aedes;60384 wrote:

I don't think our job is to be rewarding cultures. It should be rewarding individuals, whether or not they come from a family that is in the position to give them all the opportunities in the world.

I disagree, sorry, but you're saying not the most qualified should get ahead, but those according to some arbitrary quota system - which is failing as we can see - to make sure that the disadvantaged don't have to put in effort to get ahead and stay disadvantaged.

0 Replies

Ridiculus Racism In University of California Admission System

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know