Cornell Editorial on Affirmative Action
Tim Krueger writing in the Cornell Daily Sun focuses on the higher admissions hurdles that Asian applicants to Cornell face and advocates that something be done about this injustice. By his back of the envelope calculations:
In the interest of space I’ll put the calculations on The Sun website instead of here. The figure I arrive at suggests that Cornell would have around 258 more domestic Asian/Pacific Islander undergrads in the absence of racial considerations in our admissions process.
He began his editorial with some promise by making note of the distorting effect of racial preferences, but he just couldn’t commit to the consequences of a merit system and falls back on tinkering with racial gerrymandering but unlike most of the advocates of Affirmative Action, with their stale, run of the mill, pronouncements, Mr. Krueger offers us a grand vision:
Noting that Cornell is a truly global institution, can the geographic limits of its responsibility to educate defensibly be established within the U.S.? I would argue not. And if Cornell has a global responsibility, any affirmative action policy rooted in this second “instrumental” argument would be expected to aim for a student body that’s a microcosm of global, not simply U.S., demographics.
Seeing as a) Asian Americans have indeed been subject to extreme experiences, even within the past century (deportation, concentration camps, reproductive manipulation, ghettoization), and b) even aggregating the domestic and international Asian populations at Cornell only gives us less than half of 42 percent – the percentage of the world projected to be Asian by 2011 – I find it hard to justify Cornell’s policies towards prospective Asian students.
So let’s cut to the chase, what does he propose be done about the plight of Asians not being admitted on merit? Implement a merit-based admissions system? Nope:
Does this mean Cornell should end racial considerations in admissions? Of course not – the rest of Berkeley’s demographic story boasts a black population of only 3.8 percent. . . . . Either of the above constructions of affirmative action justifies its application towards blacks, Latinos and Native Americans. The loosening of admissions standards for Asians should instead come at the expense of white applicants. This would strengthen the academic caliber of our student body while furthering our commitment to diversity; the combination should not be taken lightly.
I eagerly await news of Mr. Krueger’s withdrawal from Cornell in order to make room for the meritorious Asian or the Diversity-embodying Black, Hispanic or Native American. Come on Mr. Krueger, do your part.
Do you think that he feels that the most conspicuously over-represented variety of whites should be the group to take the hit? Neither do I.
Could it be possible, BioIgnoramus, that the “over-represented variety” to whom you refer might yet still be significantly under-represented from the viewpoint of strictly meritocratic admission standards? That’s the way it seemed last time I checked–over 50 years ago– but maybe things have changed for the better (or for the worse, depending on your point of view).
Sometimes change of perspective helps. Ain’t it better to have ‘em over-represented treating orthopedic, cardiovascular, and contagious maladies than laying in wait for you as trial lawyers and stock-market manipulators? Just sayin’. You’d be surprised to learn how much curative power lies in learning to “look on the bright side.”
If universities taught anything of value there would be something at stake in these debates.
Take out the advanced sciences, law and medicine and most of the rest (95% or more of the classload) is filler.
Self starters don’t need no stinkin’ degrees.
white people white people white people. i second bio, ‘The loosening of admissions standards for Asians should instead come at the expense of Jews.’ Cant say that thoughoÂrÂnÂellsun.com
Email this fuckhead: tkrueger@ÂcÂ
“Take out the advanced sciences, law and medicine and most of the rest (95% or more of the classload) is filler.”
You exaggerate – you’ve forgotten engineering. It’s more like 80% filler.
inculcating values? why not just have elementary school kids repeat the golden rule over and over again? as tangoman notes social engineering is always fine with professors until they come under the blowtorch.
In response to the suggestion that Jewish students admission should be limited, I would like to point out that the idea have been tried many times and in many places. To give an example near to home, my Father could not enter into any university in our home country Hungary (the policy was called Numerus Nullus, and it was adopted after the unsatisfactory results of the previous policy of Numerus Clausus which limited the percentage of students to 4%, the pecentage of Jews in the Hugarian population of those times). While some of his friends went to study to foreign universities (like Paris), he studied non-university commerce (now it is academic and is called MBA). All for the better. A contemporary case is the system adopted by the Soviet Union – few Jews were accepted in the central universities of Moscow and Leningrad, so the mass of Jews went to second rate universities in the Far East or studied in home circles. The consequence of the marginalization of young Jews who could not integrate themselves to existing academic frameworks was that they had no jobs nor carriers to lose, and they were hurt and desperate enough to take risks and buy up on credit much of Russia’s industry during the Yeltsin era of privatization. The bottom line that is makes no good to anybody to exclude any group of people, be it blacks, japanese, chinese, jews, muslims, whatever. America and Britain are the countries that most successfully integrated their Jewish and other minorities. The quota system in place now is the most crazy thing to do, it causes tension and social stress, and will end badly. You cannot exclude a large group of talented Chinese from the best universities, not only because it is evil and wasteful of human talent, but also because you turn your best and most energetic young people into your enemies and fanatic destroyers of social order. I am a Zionist and we in Israel are very keen to attract young American Jews to our universities, but for good or bad they enjoy open doors and equality in the best universities of the world i.e. those of the United States. Moreover, European universities are desperate for talented young students and will welcome them any time.
j, learn to figure out a joke.
right j, i was obviously calling for a serious cap on jewish admissions. if it looks like a duck etc
J says:
You cannot exclude a large group of talented Chinese from the best universities, not only because it is evil and wasteful of human talent,
Tell me why it is evil? In what was is it wasteful of human talent.
Remember, that the writer of that article is saying that talented white Americans (mostly male, because heaven forfend we should turn away females) should make way for foreign Chinese students (note, not Asian Americans) and for other groups with who have demonstrated less talent. (After all, that is what affirmative action is all about!)
Not everyone has the gene for recognising sarcasm. (“gene”: geddit?)
J.
As a zionist, do you have a problem opening up admissions for Asian students in Israel in the same fashion you advocate for the USA?
THIS THREAD IS NOT GOING TO DEVOLVE INTO JEW TALK!!!!. don’t make me delete the whole post if you start making me waste my time deleting too many comments.
To Razib, Thank for the answer. Sorry for over-reacting. My fault.
To It’s a long way…: I feel that the ethnic quota system is evil. On the other hand, I agree that on this issue I am not an objective observer. Quotas have always been applied against my kind. But demanding quotas against White Americans is most astonishing. I hope it is another joke because it cannot end well.
I’ve never heard before that schools should try to be representative of the world before. Perhaps they are getting Hansonian?
I’ve never heard before that schools should try to be representative of the world before.
well, i made an error earlier. krueger is a student. and a government major. so i don’t expect he has a good model of the world or any real tools to analyze what he knows.
Krueger is a student? That’s even worse. It means that the academic lobotomy squad is functioning well, and we can look forward to many decades more of this dysfunctional thinking.
Quite right, Razza. Now, about the Finns…..
The college is for the average people. You dont need to extend extra help to the really bright.
They will always find a way to make a living or discover something if they need to. BUT really talented people should be in the company of equally talented people.
So you need to train the average for skills like medical, accounting, engineering, veterinary professions, (etc) but when it comes to the professions that require original concepts like programming and other science related subjects, you need to gather all Mensa-like people to generate good results.
So its okay to use admission quota on the ordinary courses. But for courses that require original thinking, let the losers fall off the bucket. Imagination is much more important than education so says Einstein.
Can you measure the ability to imagine in standardized IQ tests?
Canadian universities are blind to race in admission policies.
There is a lot of diversity in Canadian universities, but not all groups are represented proportionately.
So far as I am aware, the topic is rarely discussed in the media nor of much concern to the public.
I also do not believe race relations in Canada are any worse than in the US.
Henri: I also do not believe race relations in Canada are any worse than in the US.I think race relations here in the US may be a tad bit more complex than in Canada.
There is a lot of diversity in Canadian universities, but not all groups are represented proportionately.
13.4% of Canada’s population consist of visible minorities with 4%-5% Asian compared to 3% Black and 0.7% Latin Americans, and most of this population consists of recent immigrants who’ve entered through a stringent screening process. US universities aren’t having much trouble with recent African or Caribbean immigrants either.
The problem that Canadian universities don’t face is a large population of low performing minorities demanding representation in universities.
Do you get the sense that this whole line of thinking has now formally jumped the shark? I mean, outside of an isolated bubble, can you imagine making this proposal in public, where people could laugh at you? And the funny comment about bringing back the Jewish Quota was spot-on, because what’s being proposed here is exactly the same, just applied to a different overperforming group. (And it’s a reaction to quotas screwing over a *different* overperforming group, in ways that are even more like the Jewish Quota.)
The whole line of argument for academic affirmative action is bankrupt. It can survive only so long as it’s kept hidden in complicated formulas or secretive admissions processes, which seems to me to be basically what the Supreme Court case a few years back said. If put to any kind of popular vote, it gets clobbered. If discussed or described openly, it sounds just as dumb and evil as it is.
There are the ‘First Nations’ who do enjoy affirmative actions policies. But they are only 3% of the population, so the impact on the rest of the population is very small.
Leaving aside Krueger’s point (which is stupid), his writing style seems pretty juvenile.
You need affirmative action in the US. If you take off the affirmative action in the US, the asians would take all the seats in colleges and universities. This would expose the lie that the affirmative action brings down the number of caucasians. Lack of it would bring it down more, so the aff action is an excuse.
Canada chooses it immigrants by point system. Engineer – 5 points. Nurses – 6 points, etc etc. SO the immigrants are more educated than the native population. Educated people = better society.
Now in the US, its a free-for-all system. People walking from the Mexico borders, the uneducated chinese coming through the Long Beach ship containers, the mail order brides from Japan,
the refugees from Vietnam.. etc, etc, etc…
Now match those ignorance to the ignorance of the natives of inner states, and of the ghetto people, you got total chaos.
nurses, au pairs etc are useful for balancing otherwise male-balannced migration patterns, which tend to skew the sex ratio leading to widespread prostitution and sex trafficing to satisfy their needs
the male skewed migration to the uk has undoubtedly increased sex trafficing from eastern europe
No, not really. There is a scarcity of nurses from UK to US. I heard, one agency earns 10,000 dollars for every college-educated , CGFNS-nurse they can bring in.
You must be pretty wicked to suggest that female professionals are only good as extra vaginas.
Shame on you.
nurses, au pairs etc are useful for balancing otherwise male-balannced migration patterns
I think race relations here in the US may be a tad bit more complex than in Canada.
Sure, if you’re referring to blacks and perhaps Hispanics in certain southern states, but not for the East Asians discussed or any other groups really.
13.4% of Canada’s population consist of visible minorities…
Yes, but almost all of those visible minorities live in just three cities: Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. Toronto’s population is almost half visible minorities. What percentage then of University of Toronto students should be visible minorities, 13.4% or 50%? Luckily the admissions policy is based on merit and administrators do not need to struggle with the tricky issue of defining the school’s constituency. Also, Canada may not, but Toronto does have some large disadvantaged communities which would be helped by affirmative action in university admissions.
I interpreted Kreuger’s call for Cornell to reflect global demographics as nothing more than elitism. He’s not arguing it for community colleges. The idea is less ridiculous than it seems at first blush.
You need affirmative action in the US. If you take off the affirmative action in the US, the asians would take all the seats in colleges and universities. This would expose the lie that the affirmative action brings down the number of caucasians. Lack of it would bring it down more, so the aff action is an excuse.
You are saying that the USA is, in fact, like Malaysia or South Africa, where there are “reverse” or “corrective” discrimination mechanisms in place to favour dumb natives against more capable minorities? I would like to comment but I am giving myself some time to digest this new idea.
J: This is the same purpose as the Jewish quota of days past, right? And assuming the difference in average IQ and culture that seems to exist between Asians and white Americans, it seems like the same idea could apply.
This would be a disaster, of course. I don’t want the best white male protestant cardiologist, I want the best cardiologist. Similarly, Intel wants the best guys designing their next chip, not the best WASPs.
albatross
Right. But human beings are social animals, and cold optimizations like you propose are impracticable. As for me, I dont know any just and efficient and stable solution for diverse societies. Maybe muddling through by obscure procedures as now done is the best that can be achieved. I dont know.
Quotas? Why? We’re all equal, right?
I propose a lottery. Let everyone, regardless of race, gender, creed, politics, ecological beliefs, etc., with the requisite SATs and all-other-things-being-equal credentials, throw their names into a spinning keg and then the university president can hire some random somebodies to draw the lucky winners. That function alone should add a few jobs to the economy.
It’s the only fair way.
Fair but unefficient.
I recall hearing that 20-30% of admission to elite schools such as Yale, Harvard, and maybe Cornell go to “legacy” applicants such as the children of alumni and donors. If this is true, then does it not represent the largest obstacle to merit based admissions far larger than the wildest dreams of any diversity promoting leftie?
Not only legacies, but also recruited athletes have to be taken into account. They get admissions help and are majority white. I’m sure very few recruited athletes are Asian. This may account for the difference. You can’t replace the offensive line with more computer geeks, or alumni will complain.
When the geeks take over the universities, sports will not be football or basketball but chess , video gaming and puzzle solving. Athletes are only important in the universities because …. Jeez, I cant even think of a reason why athletes should be in the universities.