Asians have known this for awhile, and they call it the “Asian Tax.” Meaning Asians have to be more accomplished than peers from other racial groups to get into elite schools.
An Asian applicant with 1140 SAT has same chance of getting into a school as a Black applicant with score of 690, or a White applicant with score of 1000.
“Asian Tax” of 50 points off of your SAT score when applying to elite schools.
Asians noticed this “Asian Tax” sometime in the 1980s and in 1988, some of them asked the Department of Education to investigate Harvard’s admissions policies and practices. At that time, Harvard undergrad was 20% Asian. The findings from that investigation: Asians are at a disadvantage because fewer of them are applying as legacies and recruited athletes and they’re not well rounded enough. Fair enough, most Asians accepted the conclusion and began to make adjustments. It’s 2019 and Asian enrollment has remained at around 20% since then, even though Harvard’s incoming class size has remained the same and:
- Asian population in the US has doubled from 3 percent to 6 percent.
- Asians are the only group whose test scores have risen since 1988. Since then, test scores for all other racial groups — especially for Blacks and Hispanics — have fallen.
- Far more Asians applying today are legacies, and legacies get preferred treatment
- Far more Asians applying today are recruited athletes, and athletes get preferred treatment
The 2018 Harvard admissions lawsuit shows that if Harvard were to admit students based solely on grades and test scores and extracurriculars, Asians would be 48% of the freshman class. If preferences for recruited athletes and legacies are given, it’d be 43%.
Harvard rates applicants on a scale of 1-6 — 1 being the highest — in the following categories:
- Academic
- Extracurricular
- Athletic
- Personal Traits (as determined by reading of Personal Statement, I assume)
- Recommendation letters (2 teachers, counselor)
- Alumni (interview) personal and Overall rating
Asian applicants score overall highest in Extracurriculars, Academic, Recommendation Letters, and Alumni Interview. They score overall the lowest on Personal Traits. Harvard consistently rated Asian applicants lower than others on traits like “humor, sensitivity, grit, leadership, integrity, helpfulness, courage, kindness and many other qualities” when determining the personal rating according to an analysis of more than 160,000 student records.
Asian applicants score the highest on Recommendation Letters (written by people who typically know the applicant for years) and Alumni Interview yet lowest on Personal Traits. Let that sink in. How is that possible? Blatant racial discrimination behind closed doors that’s later repackaged as liberal benevolence to the public — affirmative action for Blacks and Hispanics — is how.
Because I don’t think the rejected Asian applicant who has a perfect SAT score and is valedictorian and lettered in two sports and did a solo at Carnegie Hall at age 14 lacks “grit.” And it’s the Asians who have the “courage” to open businesses in the most dangerous neighborhoods in America, the sort of neighborhoods White liberals love to talk about helping but never visit. Maybe the problem is that too many Asian applicants lack the “sensitivity” White liberals are looking for in an applicant — they don’t spend enough time talking about their good intentions while refusing responsibility for their fucked up results, choosing instead to blame others for the failure of their ideas and methods.
White liberals decided that these gooks — defending Koreatown during LA Riots because LAPD was too chickenshit to protect the neighborhood — lack the courage to deserve a spot at Harvard.
Difference Between a Liberal and a Conservative
The difference between a liberal and a conservative isn’t in their intentions — they both want to make the world a better place — it’s that liberals are in love with their intentions while conservatives only care about results. Put simply, liberals are covert narcissists prone to bouts of envy, they’re sentimentalists in love with the sound of their crying sessions about injustice and suffering. They post pretentious ignorant shit like this on Facebook:
Anyone who doesn’t care about Human Rights should UNFRIEND ME NOW.
because deep down, they love virtue signaling too much to figure out that much of the non-Western world hears “Human Rights” as a Westerner’s polite battle cry to take over the world and shove democracy (which, to the surprise of most Americans, most people in the world don’t want) and the US petro-dollar down everyone’s throats. To which the virtue signaler replies: “that’s not what I meant.” Some of us don’t care what you meant, we only care about what happens. Unintended consequences, anyone?
Here’s another difference between a conservative and a liberal: when a conservative doesn’t like you, he’ll point a shotgun at your face and tell you to get the fuck off his lawn. A liberal who doesn’t like you will invite you to her house and if you don’t want to go, she’ll insist and then try to turn you into the sort of person she likes. The conservative is an asshole while the liberal is a tyrant. (Combine the two and you get American imperialism).
Unintended Consequences: Affirmative Action’s Affect on Blacks and Hispanics
What would you think about yourself if you got into school with significantly lower scores and grades than average? Pick:
a) I’d feel like a fraud, undeserving of my place in school
b) I’d justify my place by emphasizing the wrongs done to my kind
c) I’d convince myself that those who score higher have terrible personalities while mine is much better than theirs
Option A – Imposter Syndrome – is the best option. The low self-esteem can drive one to work harder to catch up.
Option B is the play victim option. Waste life getting a PhD in Ethnic Studies or Sociology to make a living out of managing victim status.
Option C is the vanity option. A lifetime of narcissistic delusions. That would explain why Blacks have the highest self-esteem of any group, despite performing the worst in life.
Your kid needs surgery. What would think if you found out that your surgeon — only two years out of residency — got into medical school despite getting a “C” in O-chem and had below average MCAT scores? Would you find another doctor or would you tell yourself that test scores and grades don’t matter much, they’re racially biased anyway, and that this surgeon deserves a chance?
You take the toughest classes, graduate at the top of your class, have perfect scores, and contribute to school clubs. (This isn’t an exaggeration, many Asian students with such a profile are getting rejected from elite schools). You watch significantly less accomplished students in your class get into schools you’re rejected from. How do you feel? What are you thinking?
There are more unintended consequences, such as mismatches in student ability and school difficulty that results in significantly lower graduation rates for affirmative action admits and students settling for easier majors, bullshit majors really, in order to graduate.
The point is, study after study shows that this kind of racial discrimination — packaged as White liberal benevolence — hurts a lot of people, especially Blacks and Hispanics. The only ones it helps are White Liberals, and not just because it keeps out Asian students who’d push them closer to the bottom of the grading curve.
Intended Consequences: Personal Salvation for White Liberals
Affirmative action doesn’t take spots from White applicants. It takes them from Asian applicants, as evidenced by what happened when UC Berkeley got rid of affirmative action in 1998: Asian population shot up (35% to a high of 48%), but for Whites it stayed the same (and has since fallen from 32% to 22% today). The purpose of Affirmative Action isn’t to help Blacks and Hispanics — the mismatch hurts them lots — it’s to make White liberals look benevolent and to keep Asians out because White liberals hate Asians.
Sure, they love Asians who have become the sort of person they like — Champagne Socialists who hate Rednecks.
The person who wrote this yelp review is Asian, June Chu, former Dean of Pierson College at Yale University. White liberals love her because she hates the same people they hate and supports liberal policies such as Affirmative Action.
But they hate that the mere existence of Asians proves White liberal theories about how the world works and how to make it a better place wrong. Asians prove that you don’t need feminism for women to have rewarding careers in fields such as medicine and engineering and business. Asians prove that test scores have less to do with class and more to do with culture. Asians prove that being poor doesn’t make people obese. Asians show that low self-esteem, not high self-esteem, is correlated with high achievement. Asians prove that being a minority in America isn’t crippling. Again, liberals care more about their intentions than results, which means they never blame themselves when their ideas lead to disaster. Instead of adapting their ideas to how people are, they force other people to adapt to their ideas — that’s tyranny, that’s how totalitarianism begins, by telling people what to feel and think. And that’s what left-wing nut case Chairman Mao did when his social and economic programs — including a radical affirmative action program — ruined China, he doubled down and blamed “reactionaries” for the disaster and sent them to re-education camps, where many died.
This Chinaman is a White Liberal. He ruined China. By the time he died, 90 percent of Chinese people lived in poverty.
And doubling down is precisely what White liberals of all races are doing today. When they hear that affirmative action makes people question the intellectual qualifications of ALL Blacks and Hispanics, they call those doing the questioning racists. When they hear that affirmative action induces panic and self-doubt in Blacks and Hispanics, they blame microaggressions and the lack of safe spaces. When they hear that Asians are pissed about the unfairness, they tell them — get this — that Asians owe their success to the civil rights work of Blacks and Hispanics and should therefore step aside. To the White liberal, anyone who doesn’t sing along with the liberal narrative is a deplorable reactionary and must be ostracized, just like in Maoist China.
A pragmatist, Deng Xiaoping, replaced White liberal Chairman Mao. Today, China’s poverty rate is 4% because its leaders only care about results, and not about people’s egos.
I’m not saying that White liberals don’t want to help Blacks and Hispanics. They do but what they don’t realize is that their first priority is to help themselves vis-a-vis “helping” Blacks and Hispanics and whomever else is victim of the day. What they seek through their efforts is personal salvation to alleviate their anxiety and guilt about being White, and that salvation comes from a Black person telling them that they are in fact good people fighting the good fight. That explains why White liberals can continuously and fantastically ignore bad results and blame others for the failure of their ideas and methods. White liberals don’t care that affirmative action makes life worse for most Blacks and Hispanics and introduces a new source of racial tension. They only care that most Blacks support affirmative action. That support, not good results, is what makes the White liberal feel good, similar to a mother who feels good as she watches her children enjoy candy that’s bad for them. It’s sick and twisted.
Are Asians the new Jews?
Look to the past to understand the present — people and institutions don’t change much. When the Jewish population at Harvard went from 7% in 1900 to 25% in 1925, then Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell was alarmed about the cultural damage they might do to Harvard and pushed to cap Jewish enrollment at 15%. Since White Anglo Saxon Pricks (WASP) are a polite bunch, they had to repackage this effort to impose racial quotas as something benign. So they introduced preference for legacies — most legacies were WASPs — and sold it as a way to increase donations from alums and to enhance networking. They also began to evaluate the character of applicants, ostensibly to ensure that only students of high moral character attend Harvard when in fact, they now admit, it was to handicap Jewish applicants. Sounds like the same shit they’re doing to Asian applicants today except now they admit to having kept Jews, but not Asians out.
Look to the past to understand the present. Not much has changed.
Harvard is a private institution, they can do whatever the fuck they want, just as I can eject from my business any customer I want. What some Asians are looking for from Harvard and other schools isn’t an end to racial quotas — White liberals and anyone else can be as racist as they want, I couldn’t care less — but an admission that they’re used to keep Asians out. People just want to know where they stand so they can make adjustments and manage expectations. And I’ll take the conservative who tells me to get the fuck off his lawn while pointing a gun at me over the liberal who drags me inside her house and then tries to turn me into someone she likes. I don’t need to be brainwashed, I just need to know if I’m welcomed. Now get the fuck off my lawn.
