Part of affirmative action (AA) involves addressing some of the issues specific to american society, I have no clue how diversity is handled outside the US but would love to hear someone else's experience
To a certain degree prejudice is ingrained in the US. Not officially in laws, but in attitudes that some (not all) people hold. Not any one specific group of people either, but prejudice across different ethnic groups. AA isn't independent of this prejudice, just a more recent and politicized form of it
I think the way that it has been discussed in recent years isn't going to sustain itself long term. The way that higher education discriminates against Asians is especially egregious
(source: "The reason that it is harder for Asian Americans to get into Harvard is that their “personal ratings” (a subjective evaluation of personal qualities) are, on average, significantly lower than for white applicants." (https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2019/10/01/why-th...))
The same "personal rating" bs was historically used to limit the number of Jewish applicants. At the end of the day, the Asian applicants would likely benefit from just not providing race or selecting the "other" category.
The only way that the current system can sustain itself is by having people honestly self identify, yet there's no legal ramifications for not doing this. If people genuinely want to end this system, all they have to do is stop giving it real data to work with
part of the problem with Asian Americans in the application process is that they are treated just as Asians. My Computer Science Program at University of Pennsylvania was about 74% Asian, 20% Indian, and 5% European. There was <1% you can attribute to anyone else.
Problem is, the 74% Asian was almost entirely Chinese born Chinese, and I do feel it hurt the program. They did not want to join groups with non-Chinese people because they preferred speaking Chinese in group projects. They didn't want to talk to you before or after class if you were not speaking Mandarin. The chit chat and sharing of ideas is the whole point of higher education IMO. There were other problems not related to the fact they only wanted to speak Chinese their whole duration of their time in the program (such as talking during class, cheating, etc.) but I wont go into that. The point is, having nearly 70% of the program being Chinese born Chinese made the education experience worse. Unfortunately, American born Chinese (or even Korean) gets lumped into the Asian group and they have to compete against 1 billion Chinese applicants taking paper GRE tests (cheating on these paper tests is common, as you can buy the answers ahead of the test ).
Shouldn't the 26% learned Mandarin and thus integrated with this group? I think that would have solved the problem. It is unreasonable for minority to expect the majority to follow their whims.
The US lacking an "official" language is too often treated as some kind of gotcha, but to answer your question it would be to avoid the very scenario described by OP. The lingua franca of that University is English.
I know you want to use AA as a weapon, to drive out these Chinese students you don't like out of school. Beware, someday, AA can also be weaponized against you. This was exactly what Nazi was using.
No. I am suggesting that races shouldn't be lumped together, such as Asian Americans should be in a different 'bucket' than people from China. For what its worth, I don't believe in race based diversity at all; I believe in geographic diversity.
To a certain degree prejudice is ingrained in the US. Not officially in laws, but in attitudes that some (not all) people hold. Not any one specific group of people either, but prejudice across different ethnic groups. AA isn't independent of this prejudice, just a more recent and politicized form of it
I think the way that it has been discussed in recent years isn't going to sustain itself long term. The way that higher education discriminates against Asians is especially egregious
(source: "The reason that it is harder for Asian Americans to get into Harvard is that their “personal ratings” (a subjective evaluation of personal qualities) are, on average, significantly lower than for white applicants." (https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstmann/2019/10/01/why-th...))
The same "personal rating" bs was historically used to limit the number of Jewish applicants. At the end of the day, the Asian applicants would likely benefit from just not providing race or selecting the "other" category.
The only way that the current system can sustain itself is by having people honestly self identify, yet there's no legal ramifications for not doing this. If people genuinely want to end this system, all they have to do is stop giving it real data to work with