I do not agree with all of these opinions, I am just telling you how this community, which is mostly still poor and not "model minority", views a lot of what is coming out of elite institutions in the name of progress and equality.
John McWhorter made a comment in a Reason interview that affirmative action really should be about socioeconomic status and not race. Back in the day race would have been a highly correlative proxy for income and wealth, but that it is becoming increasingly less predictive and advantaging middle and upper class minorities when today they almost no meaningful disadvantages relative to their white and asian peers of the same socioeconomic class.
They see Communism rising in America and support Trump.
Hell, if they were well off in South Vietnam before the communists came, it just goes to show that if your family had the mental foundations necessary for success, even if you hit rock bottom you still have the attitude to climb back up.
> Certain private universities, most notably Harvard, introduced policies which effectively placed a quota on the number of Jews admitted to the university. According to historian David Oshinsky, on writing about Jonas Salk, "Most of the surrounding medical schools (Cornell, Columbia, Pennsylvania, and Yale) had rigid quotas in place. In 1935 Yale accepted 76 applicants from a pool of 501. About 200 of those applicants were Jewish and only five got in." He notes that Dean Milton Winternitz's instructions were remarkably precise: "Never admit more than five Jews, take only two Italian Catholics, and take no blacks at all."[16] As a result, Oshinsky added, "Jonas Salk and hundreds like him" enrolled in New York University instead.[17] Physicist and Nobel laureate Richard P. Feynman was turned away from Columbia College in the 1930s and went to MIT instead. See also Numerus clausus in the United States.
(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_quota )
Today it's "too many asians"
There is clearly an anti-white, anti-asian agenda at these top schools now.
I'm for fair admissions and I'd hope race would not be a factor in admissions - only personal experiences/circumstance. Something that would level the floor a bit more to allow for people of less privileged backgrounds to shine and allow for real diversity of thought into the university environment. That said, it won't likely ever happen. My experience of a school with a 30% Asian student body was not great for many reasons but one reason was how hard it was to make friends. I did not make almost any Asian friends because most of the Asian student body was a very insular group of people. I spoke about this with Asian coworkers/peers who outwardly acknowledged it at the university. Now, I work with Asian coworkers who openly express their interest in being with Asians more than other races. I don't know if that same mentality is as abundant across other groups but imagine going to a school where 30% of the class refuses to interact with you. It does not make for a great student body.
It's worth noting and emulating. Punishing success is the path to mediocrity. Instead other groups should take note and ask themselves "what should our community be doing so that we can also emulate the success that that group has had?"
Any solution that doesn't involve trying to trying to get every group to emulate the success of the groups doing it right will eventually lower standards.
There is a soft bigotry in low expectations.
https://1776unites.com/featured-essays/the-1619-project-perp...
I'm not Jewish, but I have nothing but profound respect for that community because they have such great values that they are consistently crushing it and helping one another succeed. Just take the absolute atrocity many of them suffered in WWII and yet 75 years later, many of those that had everything stripped from them have succeeded better than probably any other community would have given the same adversity.
You're ignoring how problematic that culture is. It isn't a culture that can be emulated across the board because it's inherently exclusionary. It's not that these groups of people who have risen to the top are helping everyone - they're only helping their own. How should that be a desirable thing unless you're also selfish and discriminatory?
If anyone is only helping those of their own race rather than helping anyone - it's a problematic culture. (And - inherently - racist)
College is a zero-sum game. You either get in or you don't, and there is a limited amount of space. It would be nice if everyone treated each other as a cohesive whole rather than splitting up in groups as you've labeled and desire people to do. That attitude is what creates more divisiveness and tribalism.
The dichotomy isn't between helping people outside your community or within your community.
That dichotomy I'm highlighting is between having a culture of helping one another or not having that culture.
The communities that aren't helping those within their community, typically aren't helping people outside their community either. There are plenty of cities and neighborhoods in this country where there isn't much community service, participation in the community and taking pride in helping your community succeed relative to other communities out there. I grew up in a predominantly Jewish town as a kid. The level of involvement from the parents in the school system was off the charts. Since moving away from that community, I've never once seen anyplace else that came even close to that level of civic involvement.
It doesn't even have to be community based on race. It can be as simple as volunteering in your neighborhood or city.
Communities that grow rich have a culture of service to one another whether that community is delineated along racial or geographical lines or if that community is global. The size of the group or whether there is exclusion or not is orthogonal to my point. This culture change is easiest to begin at home and within your community.
One of the big differences I've noticed between liberals and conservatives is that with liberals, community starts with the world, then moves to the country, then the state, then the county, then the city/town, then the neighborhood, then the family. With conservatives it's the opposite. Community and obligation to one another begins with the family and moves to the neighborhood, then the city/town, then county, then state, then country and then world.
Although, I agree. I just want all cultures to thrive. However, Whites doing this would be called out for nepotism and labeled supremacists in their own countries. You don’t see this reaction in Japan, Israel, Mexico, etc.
I'm not a conservative, but I agree with this piece by the American Conservative: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of...
Notice how Jewish admissions tanked after the college found a socially acceptable anti-semitic policy.
If you want to get into Harvard, I recommend striving to demonstrate greater fealty to the hardest of hard left-wing ideals than your fellow applicants, as that will become the real criterion for admission as fast as they feel like they can make it.
Anecdotally, I went to a technical school but some of my biggest shifts in perspective came from interacting with liberal arts and minority students.