Affirmative Action and Asians

Why does it not help asians when
1. They are even more minority than blacks or hispanics
2. They are the most discriminated against group. (Seriously, if you go to school, asians are the only ones being made fun of because of their race)

Asians are generally very high up on the socioeconomic scale. Even from the perspective of the most zealous "social justice" advocate, they don't need the help.

At 4/22/2012 2:45:40 PM, thett3 wrote:
Asians are generally very high up on the socioeconomic scale. Even from the perspective of the most zealous "social justice" advocate, they don't need the help.

...what? They certainly do "need the help".

For one, it tends to be only certain groups of Asians that are very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, etc). And even then it's far from uniform. Other groups of Asians aren't, generally speaking, very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, etc.) That all groups of Asians get lumped together is one of those massive problems with that "model minority" stereotype.

For two, Asian Americans (speaking about all groups now) still face a lot of systemic discrimination and unique hurdles.

See:

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.amazon.com...
http://www.latimes.com...
http://articles.latimes.com...
http://www.eeo1.com...

At 4/22/2012 3:11:08 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

At 4/22/2012 2:45:40 PM, thett3 wrote:
Asians are generally very high up on the socioeconomic scale. Even from the perspective of the most zealous "social justice" advocate, they don't need the help.

...what? They certainly do "need the help".

For one, it tends to be only certain groups of Asians that are very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, etc). And even then it's far from uniform. Other groups of Asians aren't, generally speaking, very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, etc.) That all groups of Asians get lumped together is one of those massive problems with that "model minority" stereotype.

But the fact of the matter is that Asians are generally better off, even if those groups you mentioned generally arent. The government will hesitate to pass legislation to help out a certain race (not ethnicity) when they're better off than most.

For two, Asian Americans (speaking about all groups now) still face a lot of systemic discrimination and unique hurdles.

See:

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.amazon.com...
http://www.latimes.com...
http://articles.latimes.com...
http://www.eeo1.com...

You don't honestly expect me to read through all of those, do you? You might as well have just linked me to a google search with the keywords "asians are discriminated against" .

At 4/22/2012 2:44:41 PM, 1dustpelt wrote:
Why does it not help asians when
1. They are even more minority than blacks or hispanics
2. They are the most discriminated against group. (Seriously, if you go to school, asians are the only ones being made fun of because of their race)

You're going to need to explain this much more thoroughly.

In terms of the legislation itself, it leaves no ethnicity out from its umbrella of civil legal protection.

In terms of social welfare, there are several tightly-knit Asian communities that show clear preference to those that aren't only "Asian" as a general designation, but also the same or similar (say, Chinese/Korean) nationalities, as well. There are several Asian American education and business grants available. There are entire institutions imbued with the very Asianess of fair-skinned, black haired, Anime-watching Americana, such as Brown University, Cal-Tech University, or Colombia University.

In terms of their stability within American culture, I'd say that Asians are among those who have it better. Dustpelt saying something like "only Asians are picked on at school" is preposterous. I mean, obviously, the OP is Asian, and the OP is biased. There are those who's entire families are inexplicably treated with scorn, and I can guarantee the OP has no idea what that's really like. Being Asian is not a mitigating factor when it comes to marrying into a family or getting a job, so to attempt to aver that they're greatly discriminated against is incomprehensible.

At 4/22/2012 3:11:08 PM, popculturepooka wrote:

At 4/22/2012 2:45:40 PM, thett3 wrote:
Asians are generally very high up on the socioeconomic scale. Even from the perspective of the most zealous "social justice" advocate, they don't need the help.

...what? They certainly do "need the help".

For one, it tends to be only certain groups of Asians that are very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indians, etc). And even then it's far from uniform. Other groups of Asians aren't, generally speaking, very high up on the socioeconomic scale (e.g. Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, etc.) That all groups of Asians get lumped together is one of those massive problems with that "model minority" stereotype.

For two, Asian Americans (speaking about all groups now) still face a lot of systemic discrimination and unique hurdles.

See:

http://www.sciencedaily.com...
http://www.amazon.com...
http://www.latimes.com...
http://articles.latimes.com...
http://www.eeo1.com...

Lol, it's not really a surprise that in a racial society, those who consider themselves supreme don't leave out Asians in the perceived inferiority of every other group they separate from themselves, although they hold them in higher regard than everyone else they distinguish themselves from.

Yes, if you're name is Kwon Li, you're probably going to end up better off than Qwan Jackson, even if you never end up reaching Richard Anderson.

Proponents of affirmative action are anti-Asian. It's a not infrequent argument for affirmative action that "If we didn't have it, there are universities in California that could fill their entire freshman class with Asians."
(The universities in question speak in terms of 80%, not entire).

As Reagan responded to this, "So what?"

And yet we still have affirmative action.

Btw, this:

2. They are the most discriminated against group. (Seriously, if you go to school, asians are the only ones being made fun of because of their race)

Is simply false.
Absurdly so.
Everyone is made fun of for their race at some school or another. I was myself in middle school (when I went to a middle school where whites were a minority.)

The main difference is that the common stereotypes about asians, especially ones that will apply in primary or secondary school (the environs you seem to speak of) aren't very derogatory, and as a result one can be a bit more open about "Ooh, you must be good at math!" than, say, "you smoke crack?"

I am Asian. I like affirmative action.

The social structures we live in that give, for example, blacks and Latinos a disadvantage in academic settings is clearly and obviously harmful, but the social structures we live in that give Asians an advantage in academic structures is a stereotype that is also harmful.

Asians are expected to achieve greater academically. When we are not, we are taught to be ashamed. Moreover, we are taught that academic success is the only type of success to achieve, above music, or art, or even vague sh1t like love. Many of my Asian friends have been abused by their parents for not performing well in school. This is harmful. In a sense, we are taught not to be human. There is way more to life than academics.

We have to fight these hierarchical power structures. They cut both ways.

Also, what are you talking about, OP? Blacks and Latinos get discriminated just as much--if not more--than Asians do. Just different ways. Whereas the Asian male has been desexualized and the Asian female hypersexualized--and these are legitimate concerns--blacks and Latinos are thought to be violent and criminal.

Which is worse?

Oooh, ooh, I've got an idea!

Why not dole out affirmative action points based on socioeconomics only?

At 4/23/2012 2:01:22 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
The social structures we live in that give, for example, blacks and Latinos a disadvantage in academic settings is clearly and obviously harmful, but the social structures we live in that give Asians an advantage in academic structures is a stereotype that is also harmful.

Sorry, for the triple post, but...

Also, even if the the social structures we live in that give Asians an advantage in academic settings weren't harmful, I'd still be for affirmative action.

I don't want my admission into a university to take the place of someone, for example, a black or Latino, who, because of social structures out of her control, was disadvantaged in the admissions process, in the first place. In other words, I do not want the privileges that white society has arbitrarily given to me--at the expense of others! That's just disgusting.

At 4/23/2012 2:20:21 AM, Wnope wrote:
Oooh, ooh, I've got an idea!

Why not dole out affirmative action points based on socioeconomics only?

...because race is inseparable from economics. This is why we call it "socioeconomics."

The reason that, for example, blacks and Latinos make less than whites is because of the racist structures that white people have set up. That, again, is the reason for economic disparity. The two are inseparable, get it?

At 4/23/2012 2:24:43 AM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/23/2012 2:20:21 AM, Wnope wrote:
Oooh, ooh, I've got an idea!

Why not dole out affirmative action points based on socioeconomics only?

...because race is inseparable from economics. This is why we call it "socioeconomics."

The reason that, for example, blacks and Latinos make less than whites is because of the racist structures that white people have set up. That, again, is the reason for economic disparity. The two are inseparable, get it?

To be clear, let's say you have a black family that makes 40K a year, and a white family that makes 40K a year, and a black family that makes 100K a year, and a white family that makes 100K a year.

Clearly the black family that makes 40K a year is more disadvantaged than the white family that makes 40K a year.

Clearly the black family that makes 100K a year has worked much harder to get there than the white family that 100K a year. The black family had to fight much harder against the white family's structures.

At 4/23/2012 2:27:42 AM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/23/2012 2:24:43 AM, PoeJoe wrote:

At 4/23/2012 2:20:21 AM, Wnope wrote:
Oooh, ooh, I've got an idea!

Why not dole out affirmative action points based on socioeconomics only?

...because race is inseparable from economics. This is why we call it "socioeconomics."

The reason that, for example, blacks and Latinos make less than whites is because of the racist structures that white people have set up. That, again, is the reason for economic disparity. The two are inseparable, get it?

To be clear, let's say you have a black family that makes 40K a year, and a white family that makes 40K a year, and a black family that makes 100K a year, and a white family that makes 100K a year.

Clearly the black family that makes 40K a year is more disadvantaged than the white family that makes 40K a year.

Clearly the black family that makes 100K a year has worked much harder to get there than the white family that 100K a year. The black family had to fight much harder against the white family's structures.

What about a black family that makes 60k versus a white family that makes 40k?

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.

Granted, my definition of affirmative action is mainly about government scholarship and loan programs. I don't think entrance quotas themselves are productive. Instead, scholarship and loan programs should give minorities an equal chance against a majority that is generally wealthier.

So, it's not that you get into school because you're black/asian/etc. It's that you are able to afford any education opportunity you are given. Schools don't give points for being a minority, but minorities gain more access to higher learning than they otherwise would because they can afford to take the time to get a diploma.

If a minority member is able to pay for access to higher education, I don't see why that money should go to him/her as opposed to someone who otherwise would not have access to higher education.

Because blacks and other minorities are disproportionately poorer than whites, then even if you completely ignored race when selecting applicants, the benefits would skew towards those racial minorities, but ONLY racial minority members with economic needs.

I'm open to the argument that scholarship/loan programs should have racial preferences, but that is quite different from a school rejecting someone based on their race. Instead, affirmative action should give minorities the chance to compete economically with whites, but ONLY minority members who actually need that boost.

At 4/23/2012 2:01:22 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
I am Asian. I like affirmative action.

The social structures we live in that give, for example, blacks and Latinos a disadvantage in academic settings is clearly and obviously harmful, but the social structures we live in that give Asians an advantage in academic structures is a stereotype that is also harmful.

Asians are expected to achieve greater academically. When we are not, we are taught to be ashamed. Moreover, we are taught that academic success is the only type of success to achieve, above music, or art, or even vague sh1t like love. Many of my Asian friends have been abused by their parents for not performing well in school. This is harmful. In a sense, we are taught not to be human. There is way more to life than academics.

We have to fight these hierarchical power structures. They cut both ways.

I kind of agree with what you wrote, but I don't see how affirmative action is going to help against this. The problems mentioned are social in context, and something that affirmative action would not necessarily address. Affirmative action would help people in areas of employment, education and business.

Plus, I'm not sure about the negative effects of the structure embedded into us. I mean, I am an Asian myself, and I do agree that education is much more important than love or relationships or whatever. Yes, Music and sports are not encouraged as a main career, but then- isn't that a common assertion made by most of the parents? It is quite logical too, considering the struggle that would have to be faced by any person to make it. . Th eonly difference I feel is that in the western culture, the influence of parents is very less than that in an Asian household.

But the fact of the matter is that Asians are generally better off, even if those groups you mentioned generally arent. The government will hesitate to pass legislation to help out a certain race (not ethnicity) when they're better off than most.:

The point is that it serves to invalidate the necessity or the efficacy of AA. Asians face just as much, if not more, outright racism. Yet you say they don't need help because they generally are better off. Well, if they're better off despite the racism, then there is no correlation between racism and performing poorly. Rather it's evidence that the very pretense of AA is bullsh*t.

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

Some people arent in an economic situation where they can afford to feed their family and pay for college. Thats when scholarships and loans are useful. How is it offensive to offer a scholarship the person decides he doesnt want? I know several people who would be unable to gain higher levels of education becausw of the conditions they were born into.

At 4/23/2012 2:40:30 PM, Wnope wrote:

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

Some people arent in an economic situation where they can afford to feed their family and pay for college. Thats when scholarships and loans are useful. How is it offensive to offer a scholarship the person decides he doesnt want? I know several people who would be unable to gain higher levels of education becausw of the conditions they were born into.:

I misunderstood what you were saying or was attempting to respond to someone else. I see here you would do away with race being a determining factor in AA cases. My contention doesn't apply to you. My bad for not reading it properly.

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

No, dear PARADIGM, affirmative action is in fact and most certainly not the institutionalization of a condescending attitude toward racial minorities. Here, once again, you're merely and plainly projecting the supercilious thinking that's characteristic of your own mentality, projecting it as the rationale of affirmative action – a straw-man rationale that you can easily attack. Well, those of us who advocate affirmative action certainly don't share your mentality about race and would very much appreciate it if you and your fellow rightists would give the psychological projection a rest. But, of course, you-all won't, because you do seem to have your issues about race and need your projective and rationalizing thinking to disguise them. This has been made quite amply clear in the responses that I've received in my thread about race and capitalism. Yes, dear conservatives, you all have quite far to go before you transcend race.

At 4/23/2012 2:04:24 AM, PoeJoe wrote:
Also, what are you talking about, OP? Blacks and Latinos get discriminated just as much--if not more--than Asians do. Just different ways. Whereas the Asian male has been desexualized and the Asian female hypersexualized--and these are legitimate concerns--blacks and Latinos are thought to be violent and criminal.

Which is worse?

Excellent points.

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic. Who really got to where they are on their own?

http://www.debate.org...

Not saying that Affirmative Action should be based on race at all, but you can't deny that some people have more opportunities.

At 4/23/2012 4:13:48 PM, tulle wrote:

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic. Who really got to where they are on their own?

http://www.debate.org...

Not saying that Affirmative Action should be based on race at all, but you can't deny that some people have more opportunities.

In an ideal world where we had enough resources to investigate each case, affirmative action would take into account networking effects, which in practice would translate to a relative advantage for minorities who lack the "old boy" system.

Really, if a minority members has a good network of white people, he can get certain jobs even quicker than a white person whose social interactions lead to zero networking effects.

At 4/23/2012 4:13:48 PM, tulle wrote:

At 4/23/2012 8:06:40 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

I'm not saying that race is a non-issue, only that affirmative action should predominantly be focused on total class mobility instead of predominantly racial lines.:

No, affirmative action needs to just go away because it is ineffective and hypocritical. It does not bridge any gaps, perceived or actual, and it's highly offensive. Here, you need my help because you're pathetic and can't do it on your own.

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic. Who really got to where they are on their own?

http://www.debate.org...

Not saying that Affirmative Action should be based on race at all, but you can't deny that some people have more opportunities.

Yes, except the US had rapid economic growth after slavery ended. Furthermore, do you really think US blacks are worse off then blacks in Africa?

I don't want to deter the discussion, but given that you've moved on to Affirmative action and blacks, and the validity of affirmative action in general, does that mean you agree that asians do not need affirmative action?

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic.:

Affirmative Action IS racism, and that's the problem. It gives people jobs, not account of their skill or credentials, but on account of *wait for it* their race. It's a racist policy intended to counteract racist policies, which in the annals of logic, is a total contradiction.

Who really got to where they are on their own?:

Depends on what you mean by on your own.

Not saying that Affirmative Action should be based on race at all, but you can't deny that some people have more opportunities.:

Is the solution to remove other people's opportunities to correct it?

At 4/24/2012 2:34:26 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic.:

Affirmative Action IS racism, and that's the problem. It gives people jobs, not account of their skill or credentials, but on account of *wait for it* their race. It's a racist policy intended to counteract racist policies, which in the annals of logic, is a total contradiction.

Strawman.

At 4/24/2012 12:41:58 AM, darkkermit wrote:

Yes, except the US had rapid economic growth after slavery ended. Furthermore, do you really think US blacks are worse off then blacks in Africa?

Fair enough and no lol

At 4/24/2012 3:21:29 PM, Ren wrote:

At 4/24/2012 2:34:26 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:

Well that's the thing, a lot of white people do have help and did have help to get to where they are. I don't see why acknowledging some people need help makes them pathetic.:

Affirmative Action IS racism, and that's the problem. It gives people jobs, not account of their skill or credentials, but on account of *wait for it* their race. It's a racist policy intended to counteract racist policies, which in the annals of logic, is a total contradiction.

Strawman.:

Care to expound?