The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Forum
White Students’ Unfair Advantage in Admissions
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As a Chinese-American alumnus who interviews applicants to Yale, I’m often asked one question by Asian-American students and parents: “Will being Asian hurt my chances?”

I deflect these queries, since I’m just a volunteer, not a member of the admissions committee. But I understand their concern.

A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities. A lawsuit filed in 2014 accused Harvard of having a cap on the number of Asian students — the percentage of Asians in Harvard’s student body had remained about 16 percent to 19 percent for two decades even though the Asian-American percentage of the population had more than doubled. In 2016, the Asian American Coalition for Education filed a complaint with the Department of Education against Yale, where the Asian percentage had remained 13 percent to 16 percent for 20 years, as well as Brown and Dartmouth, urging investigation of their admissions practices for similar reasons.

There’s ample evidence that Asian-Americans are at a disadvantage in college admissions. This issue has divided Asians and others who debate the relative benefits of diversity versus meritocracy in our society.

I’ve often heard Asian-Americans express resentment toward blacks and Latinos for benefiting from affirmative action. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.

 
Hide 127 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. FKA Max says:

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.

    http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/

    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    Read More
    • Replies: @MMM
    Excellent! A first-rate response. Thank you for taking the time and trouble; much appreciated.
    , @anon
    A dumb question: How did you get reliable data on Jewish enrollment? Unlike race / ethnicity / nationality / income, I am not aware of any reliable public data that can be sorted by religion.
    , @Wade
    I wish you were leaving your comments (and the quotes from Ron's "Myth of Meritocracy" article of at the NYT instead of here. Those readers are the ones that need to be confronted with the facts.
    , @Jack Highlands
    "As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. "

    And despite the fact that non-Jewish Whites are the progeny for which the Ivy Leagues, and America itself, were founded.

    Thanks for the legwork.
    , @Anonymous
    "But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?"

    I hear ya, but who on earth can say with a straight face that we're living in a meritocracy?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /forum/white-students-unfair-advantage-in-admissions/#comment-1748458
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Chinese “American”…You are the Chinese Fifth Column Lam.

    Bring back the 1882 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act..

    God Bless Dennis Kearney…

    God Bless Samuel Gompers…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, ... all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
    , @scoops
    what is the solution?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Love how the article mentions everyone except the jewish students. seems like mr unz is the only one with balls big enough to say it out loud.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    Asians go back where you came from,you racist slobs!
    , @pachyderm pachyderma
    Lam knows where his bread is buttered... Any mention of Jews, the real culprit, would get his arse kicked to the curb by no less than his superior, Mr. Unz. The Chinaman is not as dumb as you think he is!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. biz says:

    Contrast

    A 2009 Princeton study showed Asian-Americans had to score 140 points higher on their SATs than whites, 270 points higher than Hispanics and 450 points higher than blacks to have the same chance of admission to leading universities.

    with

    White Students’ Unfair Advantage in Admissions”

    The NY Times sure knows how to bury the lede.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. It has nothing to do with whites and everything to do with affirmative action brownie points.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. MMM says:

    I wish the author would cite more evidence of discrimination against Asians than he does. Asians as a group don’t seem to have a problem getting into UC (any campus), and I hear many more complaints from whites than from Asians about discrimination. In fact, the author’s broad contention is so weakly supported I wonder if this isn’t simply more anti-white resentment and rhetoric.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MMM
    After reading some articles about difficulties Chinese students face in China, I understand why it is important to you to find ready acceptance into a U.S. University of your choice, and perhaps you resent whites for being a majority, which isn't the same thing as having unfair advantage. Blaming others isn't self-supportive as is a good attitude and honesty.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-students-go-to-crazy-lengths-in-us-university-applications-2015-2

    http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/06/chinas-unfair-college-admissions-system/276995/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

    But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.

    It always has to come back to whitie doesn’t it……BTW do you want that affirmative action hire to do the work when you are on the operating table?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    BTW do you want that affirmative action hire to do the work when you are on the operating table?
     
    I think you misunderstood the gestalt of this young man's point, Old Sport; allow me to elucidate for you: He is insinuating that you ARE the affirmative action hire.
    , @pyrrhus
    No, as Ron Unz's work has shown, it's preference for Jews. Whites are also discriminated against.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Universities supposedly want diversity and balanced student populations. This is not Asia, and Asian students are certainly intelligent enough to understand that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    You mean Donald Trump and the American should lie down and keep mouths shut and let Chinese, Japanese and Korean run all over them like what the Jews have been doing to them? Or are you saying the Obama administration was run by a bunch of certainly not intelligent people who fail to understand that Asia is not North America therefore American should not be in Asia at all?
    , @Truth
    Dude, were only a month in but that was the comment of the YEAR so far!

    I have to clean up this water I spit on my keyboard.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. jb says:

    I notice the author of the article was extremely careful to endorse continued affirmative action advantages for blacks and Hispanics — I’m sure he understood that the Times would not have published his op-ed otherwise. He simply resents that his own group is at the bottom of the totem pole, and wants that changed.

    All in all, a pretty decent illustration of one of the core doctrines of affirmative action: white people must never come out ahead of anyone else.

    Read More
    • Replies: @artichoke
    Or that whites are the soft target. We don't riot (except for some idiots who do it as allies of others) and don't have protected class status to fight effectively legally.

    But we just elected Trump. Maybe we get a little break now, at least for a while. Let's show that this article's timing is off.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. after rereading mr unz’s article. the undeserving jewish students took up alot of spots from asians and non-jewish whites. 4-5% of top students took up 30-40% of spots.

    that is 25-35% of spots taken away from asians and non jewish whites. that is fucking nuts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Well Mr. Lam, I can see your haven’t perused Amren.com.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  12. MMM says:
    @MMM
    I wish the author would cite more evidence of discrimination against Asians than he does. Asians as a group don't seem to have a problem getting into UC (any campus), and I hear many more complaints from whites than from Asians about discrimination. In fact, the author's broad contention is so weakly supported I wonder if this isn't simply more anti-white resentment and rhetoric.

    After reading some articles about difficulties Chinese students face in China, I understand why it is important to you to find ready acceptance into a U.S. University of your choice, and perhaps you resent whites for being a majority, which isn’t the same thing as having unfair advantage. Blaming others isn’t self-supportive as is a good attitude and honesty.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-students-go-to-crazy-lengths-in-us-university-applications-2015-2

    http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/06/chinas-unfair-college-admissions-system/276995/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    140 > 450.

    It’s simple maths.

    Read More
    • Agree: ben tillman
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. Asians can’t possibly be disadvantaged by 140 points at the Ivy League schools discussed in the article, because almost nobody who isn’t black, Latino, or Native American is admitted to truly elite schools with less than a 1460 on the SAT. The median SAT score for the Harvard’s incoming class is 1540.

    I looked up the study the 140 disadvantage is based on… the pool of universities used in the regression model is described as follows:

    “When we compare the characteristics of our eight NSCE institutions against the top 50 universities as rated by U.S. News & World Report, we find no statistically meaningful differences between the average characteristics of either group. For example, when the NSCE average is given first, the results are: the 2004 acceptance rate (35% v. 38%); total enrollment in fall 2004 (18,000 v. 18,800); 2004 graduation rate (88% v. 87%); percent of classes with fewer than 20 students (61 v. 57); student/faculty ratio in 2004 (10 v. 11); per- cent of full-time faculty (93 v. 92); SAT score of entering freshmen (1360 v. 1350); percent of freshmen in the top 10 percent of their high school class (79 v. 79); and average alumni giving rate (32% v. 28%). Data on total enrollment come from the U.S. Department of Education’s IPEDS database. The remaining figures are drawn from U.S. News & World Re- port (2005).”

    So when you think of the 140 point advantage (based on 1997 data), think of solid but not elite schools like NYU, University of Rochester, or Georgia Tech rather than the Ivy League.

    Read More
    • Agree: 415 reasons
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  15. Polymath says:

    I did some math about this. At the top schools, it seemed like whites benefited as much from the restriction on Asians as they lost to AA for blacks and Hispanics, so it was sort of a wash for them: the full burden of “diversity” fell on the Asian students.

    I teach and tutor math to high school students who are almost all Asian. There are no illusions about this. If Trump had mentioned this and promised to fix it he would have won the votes of Asian (Chinese but also Indian etc.) parents overwhelmingly.

    For lower-tier schools, they don’t care about suppressing Asians much so the diversity burden falls on Asians and Whites equally.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    I did some math about this. At the top schools, it seemed like whites benefited as much from the restriction on Asians as they lost to AA for blacks and Hispanics, so it was sort of a wash for them: the full burden of “diversity” fell on the Asian students.
     
    Perhaps you could show some of your work? I'm guessing you didn't examine the Jew/gentile split.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. hmmmm says:

    There’s a solution that some talented athletes use when competing for victory but continuously finish unvictorious. They work harder, practice more and keep trying.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. MMM says:
    @FKA Max
    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.
     
    ...

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/


    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    Excellent! A first-rate response. Thank you for taking the time and trouble; much appreciated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. I can’t believe what I’m reading…
    “The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.”

    What? But one number is more than triple the other!
    Moreover, by the author’s own numbers, it turns out that whites are discriminated against almost as badly as the Asians!

    Of course, at the end of the day, the hypocrite or moron Andrew Lam fails to point out that a huge proportion of “whites” – at least as far as elite universities are concerned – are really Jews.

    And that gentile whites are extremely discriminated against. As we know from Unz’s article.

    Frankly, modern “liberals” are getting to the point where some of the filth they say is indistinguishable from the Nazi propaganda of the 1930′s. Just as the Jews were to blame for everything then, so are gentile whites to blame for everything now.

    One other thing. Asians are flourishing in the US by every metric – while the life expectancy of whites is falling. But let’s not reality get in the way of prejudice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    Frankly, modern “liberals” are getting to the point where some of the filth they say is indistinguishable from the Nazi propaganda of the 1930′s. Just as the Jews were to blame for everything then, so are gentile whites to blame for everything now.
     
    A signal similarity, though, is that chosenites were over-represented among positions of wealth, power and influence then. Plus ça change!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Joe Wong says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    Chinese "American"...You are the Chinese Fifth Column Lam.

    Bring back the 1882 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act..

    God Bless Dennis Kearney...


    God Bless Samuel Gompers...

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Discard
    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.
    , @Mike Zwick
    You should know that most of China was stolen by the Han from indigenous people who were there before the Han Chinese. Not just Tibet, but areas taken from the Hakka, Lao, and the indigenous people of Taiwan.
    , @Harold

    …all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
     
    Ha! I see you know nothing about the ‘first nations’ people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Joe Wong says:
    @Anonymous
    Universities supposedly want diversity and balanced student populations. This is not Asia, and Asian students are certainly intelligent enough to understand that.

    You mean Donald Trump and the American should lie down and keep mouths shut and let Chinese, Japanese and Korean run all over them like what the Jews have been doing to them? Or are you saying the Obama administration was run by a bunch of certainly not intelligent people who fail to understand that Asia is not North America therefore American should not be in Asia at all?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Jason Liu says:

    You cut off the article too early.

    Below, Lam admits that he is a supporter of affirmative action and that he does not like the racial disparities at colleges where Asians are overrepresented.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism. The fact that he seems to “balance” meritocracy with diversity, without actually explaining the value of diversity, tells us that he buys unquestioningly into western ideology, and thus does not have the moral authority to speak on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sure
    Tactical concession. Being against AA is uncouth for the left. He is trying to secure more space for Asians by cracking down on white enrollment(even more). He knows that going after AA in general is a non-starter for the left, since it would cut black/hispanic enrollment by massive amounts.

    He also omits the Jewish share of the student population, which has stayed constant despite dropping Jewish test scores for 25 years. The guy is a massive coward who isn't even good at disguising his agenda. Nice try at attemping to save him, though. Maybe next time.

    , @lavoisier
    Of course that is his purpose. And of course that is why the NYT solicited and published his essay.

    You are unlikely to EVER read anything in the NYT that would contradict the narrative.

    He is nothing but a puppet buying into the party line--hate whitey, and never, ever suggest that Jewish students might be getting preferential treatment at the elite colleges in our nation.
    , @dc.sunsets

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.
     
    Since when is that expected from a leftist, or from the New York Times?
    , @ogunsiron

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism.
     
    Reminds me of some of the chinese-american "community activists" in SF who blame the chinese for the violence they meet at the hand of NAMS. They tell old chinese people that the "youfs" attack on them are OK because old chinese are racist, etc. In my own town, for years the antiracism king was chinese and he was very intersectional.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. res says:
    @Polymath
    I did some math about this. At the top schools, it seemed like whites benefited as much from the restriction on Asians as they lost to AA for blacks and Hispanics, so it was sort of a wash for them: the full burden of "diversity" fell on the Asian students.

    I teach and tutor math to high school students who are almost all Asian. There are no illusions about this. If Trump had mentioned this and promised to fix it he would have won the votes of Asian (Chinese but also Indian etc.) parents overwhelmingly.

    For lower-tier schools, they don't care about suppressing Asians much so the diversity burden falls on Asians and Whites equally.

    I did some math about this. At the top schools, it seemed like whites benefited as much from the restriction on Asians as they lost to AA for blacks and Hispanics, so it was sort of a wash for them: the full burden of “diversity” fell on the Asian students.

    Perhaps you could show some of your work? I’m guessing you didn’t examine the Jew/gentile split.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Discard says:
    @Joe Wong
    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, ... all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. lavoisier says: • Website

    This subject and this web site is why I have nothing but admiration for Mr. Unz. The man is committed to telling the truth, no matter how uncomfortable that truth might be. In short, he pursues subjects and ideas that are hazardous to your health in our distorted and dishonest world.

    He can be cowed sometimes when confronted by the leftist collective, but he is a real mensch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Sure says:
    @Jason Liu
    You cut off the article too early.

    Below, Lam admits that he is a supporter of affirmative action and that he does not like the racial disparities at colleges where Asians are overrepresented.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism. The fact that he seems to "balance" meritocracy with diversity, without actually explaining the value of diversity, tells us that he buys unquestioningly into western ideology, and thus does not have the moral authority to speak on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    Tactical concession. Being against AA is uncouth for the left. He is trying to secure more space for Asians by cracking down on white enrollment(even more). He knows that going after AA in general is a non-starter for the left, since it would cut black/hispanic enrollment by massive amounts.

    He also omits the Jewish share of the student population, which has stayed constant despite dropping Jewish test scores for 25 years. The guy is a massive coward who isn’t even good at disguising his agenda. Nice try at attemping to save him, though. Maybe next time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    You seem confused about my stance towards Asian leftists. It is roughly the same as my stance towards white leftists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Jason Liu
    You cut off the article too early.

    Below, Lam admits that he is a supporter of affirmative action and that he does not like the racial disparities at colleges where Asians are overrepresented.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism. The fact that he seems to "balance" meritocracy with diversity, without actually explaining the value of diversity, tells us that he buys unquestioningly into western ideology, and thus does not have the moral authority to speak on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    Of course that is his purpose. And of course that is why the NYT solicited and published his essay.

    You are unlikely to EVER read anything in the NYT that would contradict the narrative.

    He is nothing but a puppet buying into the party line–hate whitey, and never, ever suggest that Jewish students might be getting preferential treatment at the elite colleges in our nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MMM
    "Of course that is his purpose. And of course that is why the NYT solicited and published his essay.

    "You are unlikely to EVER read anything in the NYT that would contradict the narrative.

    "He is nothing but a puppet buying into the party line–hate whitey, and never, ever suggest that Jewish students might be getting preferential treatment at the elite colleges in our nation."

    ............

    Exactly. Thank you for saying it -- spot on.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Tulip says:

    I would be very interested who these “whites” the NYT is so concerned about really are in terms of nationality. Are the Ivies swamped with Scotch-Irish from Appalachia, or French Canadians from Northern Vermont, or is it more demographically Upper West-Side? Can we expect a follow up story?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. Svigor says:

    FKA Max
    says:

    January 31, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    Bingo. At the very least, every time we hear “White Privilege,” they need to hear “Jewish Privilege” in return. Jewish Privilege is huge, much bigger than White Privilege, and nobody even talks about it, much less fights against it. On the contrary, Jewish Privilege is so profound that supposedly privileged Whites can’t even mention it, much less challenge it, without risking their jobs and social standing. Now that’s Privilege.

    Eventually, at the very least, blacks and Muslims are going to tumble to this, and start using it as their trump card against Jews.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    In other words, any east Asian in United States territory is guilty of receiving stolen goods, and so should be deported to east Asia.

    We didn’t do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren’t as bad as that bunch of subhumans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America
     
    The best thing about that meme is how it totally elides all of the warfare/migration/land theft that happened while the first nations inhabited the Americas.

    It really gets tiresome to see my people get criticized for essentially the same things that every successful human society has been guilty of while all of those other societies are presented as desirable role models. Another bonus is how despite blacks (etc.) creating all that is good in America they have absolutely zero responsibility for any of the first nations issues. Then there is the role of the Spanish in all of this (A key reason to limit to North America as he did, but that still isn't good enough). How do we reconcile that with Hispanics as a protected class?

    I think we need to start a counter meme lamenting the loss of American megafauna to the people of the first nations. It's not like whites are blameless in this (e.g. buffalo, passenger pigeon), and arguably we are even worse, but there was more low hanging fruit for the first invaders (another potential meme). We could call it "Shed a tear for the Mammoth" and make videos with CGI mammoths crying while they and their environment are destroyed by the first invaders. Here is some science since I know that is just as important as emotional appeals to the left: http://www.livescience.com/46081-humans-megafauna-extinction.html
    (hopefully that last comment was blatant enough to eliminate the need for any /sarc tags)

    One of the most impressive things about some of the left's success is how successfully they have flipped the script from "the winners write the history", therefore are portrayed favorably, to "the winners are villains because the losers lost." I guess that's an example of it being good to own the megaphone.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Meh We've ethnically cleansed most of them already and the genetic tests on the Hakka show that they're basically indistinguishable from the Han. As far as I'm concerned, right of conquest is totally valid.

    One could even make an argument that pre-1800s, the conquering country would be the only one that could be reasonably expected to provide for the welfare of the inhabitants, anyway, because if prevented from use of force and imposition of soverignty, they would simply find alternate methods of causing destabilization.

    , @peterike

    At the very least, every time we hear “White Privilege,” they need to hear “Jewish Privilege” in return.
     
    Indeed, I tried using "Jewish Privilege" at the New York magazine comments section. I was quickly banned. Privilege has its advantages.
    , @Anonymous
    "We didn’t do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren’t as bad as that bunch of subhumans."


    Not to mention what they're currently doing in Tibet, or Xinjiang. It's one thing to criticize people hundreds of years ago, living by standards that people hundreds of years ago had, as opposed to the "enlightened" current view, that its wrong to conquer and rule. But what do Chinese today have as an excuse? Certainly they can't claim to not 'know better'. And it's not like people hundreds of years ago, being screwed over by other people hundreds of years ago- at best someone might have a claim to soil a dead man's name. But living people in Tibet have a legitimate grievance against the Chinese government and living Chinese citizenry who largely support it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. keuril says:

    There are so many things wrong with this article I don’t know where to begin. This guy is barking up the wrong tree, and not because of the reason most people on this thread suspect. The real problem is the way the debate has been framed.* I will try to unpack some of these issues below.

    I don’t want to cover everything in this post, but to begin with, it’s important to understand that the student body at selective schools is composed of various groups serving different institutional priorities.** Articles like this start with the false premise that most of the spots on campus are decided meritocratically. This is why they think SAT scores are so important. But an understanding of how the sausage is made dispels this myth.

    Most obviously, there are the various races, but there are also athletes, legacies, socio-economic (poor and/or first-gen), and International. Legacies and athletes are each about 15% at the top Ivies—that’s 30% of enrollment right there, assuming little overlap. Most of these two groups are going to be white people. There are also going to be a lot of first-gen students, 15% at Harvard. This will also include a decent number of white people. http://www.imfirst.org/harvard-university/#.WJHa4JFOKhA

    Just as a WAG, if whites make up two-thirds of Legacies + Athletes (i.e., 20% of enrollees), and a third of first-gen (i.e., 5%), then 25% of enrollees are hooked whites.*** Since Harvard’s total enrollment of whites is 43.8%, this means only about 19% of spots are available to US whites who are not a legacy, recruited athlete, or socioeconomic hook. Whites presumably also make up a majority of hooked VIPs and development cases—this might be another 1% of spots for hooked whites. So: 18% unhooked whites vs 25.8% hooked. About 40% of whites aren’t hooked vs 60% hooked.

    Now, of course there will also be Asian legacies, recruits, and other hooks, but I suspect their percentages are quite a bit lower. It might be (WAG) like 10% hooked vs 90% unhooked. Since Harvard has 18.6% Asian enrollees, that would be about 17% Asian enrollees who are unhooked, vs. 18% whites who are unhooked. As Ron Unz has shown, there’s no doubt that Asians as a group are much stronger on average than whites, but whites still overwhelm Asians in terms of general population and applicants, so I have a hard time believing it is much more difficult for an unhooked Asian to get into a Harvard than it is for an unhooked white.

    You can play around with the WAG weightings, but I believe the general observation is the same: a very small group of whites enjoys an outsized benefit from the hook system, and the price is paid by unhooked whites and unhooked Asians. Under the current system, any further advantage conferred to unhooked Asians must come at the expense of unhooked whites, who are themselves already being screwed royally by the preference system. This is what schools like Harvard mean when they say that Asians are not disadvantaged because of their *race*—this is true as far as it goes. What they are not saying is that the preference system itself has problems, resulting in the aggregate enrollment numbers we see. Like, if they got rid of athletic recruits and legacies, there would undoubtedly be more unhooked Asians and unhooked whites. The aggregate Asian percentage would rise, and the aggregate white percentage would fall, but more students in both groups would be admitted on merit.

    So, I feel this meritocracy discussion is a bit of a distraction from the real issues. Why should athletes, in particular, receive preferential admissions? Why should legacies? These are institutional priorities, that is all. Nothing to do with academic meritocracy, but with other issues, like fundraising and “tradition” and mens sana in corpore sano BS. But those are topics for another day.

    *Also, as PoorGradStudent has mentioned, the Espenshade study is not directly applicable to the top schools that Lam is complaining about (he names Harvard and Yale in particular), and those SAT numbers are a bit of a red herring.

    **To the extent possible, I am citing numbers on actual enrollees, not admittees. This is an important distinction, because not every person who is admitted enrolls, and there are predictable differences in enrollment rates (“yield”) among different groups. For example, legacies and athletic recruits are much more likely to enroll than, e.g., an academically strong non-legacy, non-athletic-recruit black. This is why Harvard might admit 13-14% blacks vs 6.8% enrollment, whereas it admits 22% Asians vs. 18.6% enrollment. Lam does not seem to understand this distinction.

    ***I understand that some Legacies would have gotten in unhooked, but many would not have.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Lots of interesting analysis there. It's too bad we can't get the relevant data to make a rigorous analysis. And we know the admissions departments will never release it without the legal equivalent of a gun to the head.

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population? Does Ron address that in his writings?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Jason Liu says:
    @Sure
    Tactical concession. Being against AA is uncouth for the left. He is trying to secure more space for Asians by cracking down on white enrollment(even more). He knows that going after AA in general is a non-starter for the left, since it would cut black/hispanic enrollment by massive amounts.

    He also omits the Jewish share of the student population, which has stayed constant despite dropping Jewish test scores for 25 years. The guy is a massive coward who isn't even good at disguising his agenda. Nice try at attemping to save him, though. Maybe next time.

    You seem confused about my stance towards Asian leftists. It is roughly the same as my stance towards white leftists.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Astuteobservor II
    Love how the article mentions everyone except the jewish students. seems like mr unz is the only one with balls big enough to say it out loud.

    Asians go back where you came from,you racist slobs!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    haha goddamn, did steve sailer open his pet kettles? you should stick with him. that is your safe space :P
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Just another brick in the wall.

    Asians vs blacks vs whites vs latinos vs gays vs jews vs……………

    How long do we wait for people to finally give up this yammer-yammer-yammer and simply start slitting throats?

    [Yes, I'm well aware the blacks and some of the browns are early-adopters, but I'm talking about when this circus well and truly raises its tent and the blood starts to flow in rivers.]

    Stocks are near All Time Highs. People still think they’ll get their future cash flows from pensions, social security, Medicare, etc. People still behave like the government can spend without limit or the need to actually TAX.

    Talk about a long-lived Extraordinary Popular Delusion. When this decades-long lurch into collective madness finally ends, each man and woman in America will see all these “diverse” groups around them as a target-rich environment, and I’m not being metaphorical.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. @Jason Liu
    You cut off the article too early.

    Below, Lam admits that he is a supporter of affirmative action and that he does not like the racial disparities at colleges where Asians are overrepresented.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism. The fact that he seems to "balance" meritocracy with diversity, without actually explaining the value of diversity, tells us that he buys unquestioningly into western ideology, and thus does not have the moral authority to speak on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    Since when is that expected from a leftist, or from the New York Times?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. res says:
    @Svigor

    FKA Max
    says:

    January 31, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!
     
    Bingo. At the very least, every time we hear "White Privilege," they need to hear "Jewish Privilege" in return. Jewish Privilege is huge, much bigger than White Privilege, and nobody even talks about it, much less fights against it. On the contrary, Jewish Privilege is so profound that supposedly privileged Whites can't even mention it, much less challenge it, without risking their jobs and social standing. Now that's Privilege.

    Eventually, at the very least, blacks and Muslims are going to tumble to this, and start using it as their trump card against Jews.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
     
    In other words, any east Asian in United States territory is guilty of receiving stolen goods, and so should be deported to east Asia.

    We didn't do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren't as bad as that bunch of subhumans.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America

    The best thing about that meme is how it totally elides all of the warfare/migration/land theft that happened while the first nations inhabited the Americas.

    It really gets tiresome to see my people get criticized for essentially the same things that every successful human society has been guilty of while all of those other societies are presented as desirable role models. Another bonus is how despite blacks (etc.) creating all that is good in America they have absolutely zero responsibility for any of the first nations issues. Then there is the role of the Spanish in all of this (A key reason to limit to North America as he did, but that still isn’t good enough). How do we reconcile that with Hispanics as a protected class?

    I think we need to start a counter meme lamenting the loss of American megafauna to the people of the first nations. It’s not like whites are blameless in this (e.g. buffalo, passenger pigeon), and arguably we are even worse, but there was more low hanging fruit for the first invaders (another potential meme). We could call it “Shed a tear for the Mammoth” and make videos with CGI mammoths crying while they and their environment are destroyed by the first invaders. Here is some science since I know that is just as important as emotional appeals to the left: http://www.livescience.com/46081-humans-megafauna-extinction.html
    (hopefully that last comment was blatant enough to eliminate the need for any /sarc tags)

    One of the most impressive things about some of the left’s success is how successfully they have flipped the script from “the winners write the history”, therefore are portrayed favorably, to “the winners are villains because the losers lost.” I guess that’s an example of it being good to own the megaphone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. res says:
    @keuril
    There are so many things wrong with this article I don't know where to begin. This guy is barking up the wrong tree, and not because of the reason most people on this thread suspect. The real problem is the way the debate has been framed.* I will try to unpack some of these issues below.

    I don't want to cover everything in this post, but to begin with, it's important to understand that the student body at selective schools is composed of various groups serving different institutional priorities.** Articles like this start with the false premise that most of the spots on campus are decided meritocratically. This is why they think SAT scores are so important. But an understanding of how the sausage is made dispels this myth.

    Most obviously, there are the various races, but there are also athletes, legacies, socio-economic (poor and/or first-gen), and International. Legacies and athletes are each about 15% at the top Ivies—that's 30% of enrollment right there, assuming little overlap. Most of these two groups are going to be white people. There are also going to be a lot of first-gen students, 15% at Harvard. This will also include a decent number of white people. http://www.imfirst.org/harvard-university/#.WJHa4JFOKhA

    Just as a WAG, if whites make up two-thirds of Legacies + Athletes (i.e., 20% of enrollees), and a third of first-gen (i.e., 5%), then 25% of enrollees are hooked whites.*** Since Harvard's total enrollment of whites is 43.8%, this means only about 19% of spots are available to US whites who are not a legacy, recruited athlete, or socioeconomic hook. Whites presumably also make up a majority of hooked VIPs and development cases—this might be another 1% of spots for hooked whites. So: 18% unhooked whites vs 25.8% hooked. About 40% of whites aren't hooked vs 60% hooked.

    Now, of course there will also be Asian legacies, recruits, and other hooks, but I suspect their percentages are quite a bit lower. It might be (WAG) like 10% hooked vs 90% unhooked. Since Harvard has 18.6% Asian enrollees, that would be about 17% Asian enrollees who are unhooked, vs. 18% whites who are unhooked. As Ron Unz has shown, there's no doubt that Asians as a group are much stronger on average than whites, but whites still overwhelm Asians in terms of general population and applicants, so I have a hard time believing it is much more difficult for an unhooked Asian to get into a Harvard than it is for an unhooked white.

    You can play around with the WAG weightings, but I believe the general observation is the same: a very small group of whites enjoys an outsized benefit from the hook system, and the price is paid by unhooked whites and unhooked Asians. Under the current system, any further advantage conferred to unhooked Asians must come at the expense of unhooked whites, who are themselves already being screwed royally by the preference system. This is what schools like Harvard mean when they say that Asians are not disadvantaged because of their *race*—this is true as far as it goes. What they are not saying is that the preference system itself has problems, resulting in the aggregate enrollment numbers we see. Like, if they got rid of athletic recruits and legacies, there would undoubtedly be more unhooked Asians and unhooked whites. The aggregate Asian percentage would rise, and the aggregate white percentage would fall, but more students in both groups would be admitted on merit.

    So, I feel this meritocracy discussion is a bit of a distraction from the real issues. Why should athletes, in particular, receive preferential admissions? Why should legacies? These are institutional priorities, that is all. Nothing to do with academic meritocracy, but with other issues, like fundraising and "tradition" and mens sana in corpore sano BS. But those are topics for another day.

    *Also, as PoorGradStudent has mentioned, the Espenshade study is not directly applicable to the top schools that Lam is complaining about (he names Harvard and Yale in particular), and those SAT numbers are a bit of a red herring.

    **To the extent possible, I am citing numbers on actual enrollees, not admittees. This is an important distinction, because not every person who is admitted enrolls, and there are predictable differences in enrollment rates ("yield") among different groups. For example, legacies and athletic recruits are much more likely to enroll than, e.g., an academically strong non-legacy, non-athletic-recruit black. This is why Harvard might admit 13-14% blacks vs 6.8% enrollment, whereas it admits 22% Asians vs. 18.6% enrollment. Lam does not seem to understand this distinction.

    ***I understand that some Legacies would have gotten in unhooked, but many would not have.

    Lots of interesting analysis there. It’s too bad we can’t get the relevant data to make a rigorous analysis. And we know the admissions departments will never release it without the legal equivalent of a gun to the head.

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population? Does Ron address that in his writings?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population?
     
    It's a good question, which I doubt has been treated rigorously anywhere. From anecdotal experience, nearly every white-christian-male undergrad (and many a female) was a recruited athlete, and many jews were legacies.

    Possibly also worth mentioning is that very few jews were on financial aid IME, which does make them more appealing; though admissions is ostensibly 'need-blind' in the Ivy League. But the cost of education is just one component there: the potential for truly interesting donations further down the road may be a lot more compelling. Even if 'naming rights in perpetuity' are inevitably part of the equation.

    , @keuril

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?
     
    I just compared the numbers they published—in that sense they are "real". However, I wouldn't take them too literally, since the published numbers for admits were for SCEA (early admissions), not total admissions. Nevertheless, i believe it is valid that there are vastly different yields among different demographics. Here's a senior thesis by a Williams grad that goes into the subject in depth: http://ephblog.com/2010/03/03/30245/

    I think one could disentangle the results for various demographics (including whites) from the various press releases and other publications, given sufficient time and interest and interpolative talents. As for lower black yield, it's not a secret that top black students have a wide range of choices. The last several years there have been articles in early April (right after regular decision results come out) about black kids who got into all eight Ivies. Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there's a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Joe Wong
    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, ... all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    You should know that most of China was stolen by the Han from indigenous people who were there before the Han Chinese. Not just Tibet, but areas taken from the Hakka, Lao, and the indigenous people of Taiwan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @Father O'Hara
    Asians go back where you came from,you racist slobs!

    haha goddamn, did steve sailer open his pet kettles? you should stick with him. that is your safe space :P

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Technically, I am an Anglo-Irish Franco-Prussian American. Since Europe is a mess, I have no particular desire to return to any of the lands of my forebears. (They probably wouldn’t take me back anyway.) Since that is the case, I dispense with all the adjectives and refer to myself simply as an American.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. Harold says:
    @Joe Wong
    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, ... all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    …all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.

    Ha! I see you know nothing about the ‘first nations’ people.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. M_Young says:

    Espenshade found that poor and working class whites were 1/7 as likely to gain admission to the elite university he studied as similarly situated Asians. He also found that activities, like 4-H, that signaled whiteness reduced admissions chances.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. @Svigor

    FKA Max
    says:

    January 31, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!
     
    Bingo. At the very least, every time we hear "White Privilege," they need to hear "Jewish Privilege" in return. Jewish Privilege is huge, much bigger than White Privilege, and nobody even talks about it, much less fights against it. On the contrary, Jewish Privilege is so profound that supposedly privileged Whites can't even mention it, much less challenge it, without risking their jobs and social standing. Now that's Privilege.

    Eventually, at the very least, blacks and Muslims are going to tumble to this, and start using it as their trump card against Jews.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
     
    In other words, any east Asian in United States territory is guilty of receiving stolen goods, and so should be deported to east Asia.

    We didn't do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren't as bad as that bunch of subhumans.

    Meh We’ve ethnically cleansed most of them already and the genetic tests on the Hakka show that they’re basically indistinguishable from the Han. As far as I’m concerned, right of conquest is totally valid.

    One could even make an argument that pre-1800s, the conquering country would be the only one that could be reasonably expected to provide for the welfare of the inhabitants, anyway, because if prevented from use of force and imposition of soverignty, they would simply find alternate methods of causing destabilization.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Svigor says:

    The best thing about that meme is how it totally elides all of the warfare/migration/land theft that happened while the first nations inhabited the Americas.

    Yep. I delved into a couple of (PC) books about Indians recently. There were several Indian-on-Indian genocides mentioned in each. Entire cultures wiped out, and lost to history. Whites have probably done far more to preserve Amerind culture than Amerinds ever will.

    The whole idea of “First Peoples” is retarded. These people spoke different languages, had widely different cultures, and certainly had varying structures of authority. They were constantly at one another’s throats. The only thing that links them (in the minds of leftists) is historical geography, and racial similarity; meaning, if you believe in “First Peoples Solidarity,” you believe in “White Peoples Solidarity” too.

    The worst part of this is that it’s always some Jew, or some greasy Asian, or some Muslim, or some other trash bringing up the Amerinds. So the pushback that emerges is their fault, not the Amerinds’.

    I think we need to start a counter meme lamenting the loss of American megafauna to the people of the first nations.

    I actually mentioned this the last time some leftist, racist, white-envying moron (but, I repeat myself) brought this subject up. The Amerinds totally exterminated all the prehistoric megafauna on the continents. Talk about your environmental catastrophes. And think of all the Diversity lost forever…

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    The worst part of this is that it’s always some Jew, or some greasy Asian, or some Muslim, or some other trash bringing up the Amerinds. So the pushback that emerges is their fault, not the Amerinds’.
     
    That's a good point. I should probably think more about that before getting too snarky about the first nations. It's just hard to take the virtue signalling from the non-Amerinds without making any response.


    I actually mentioned this the last time some leftist, racist, white-envying moron (but, I repeat myself) brought this subject up.
     
    What kind of response did you get? One of the things working to make me more polarized right now is the utter imperviousness of most of those people to logical arguments in my experience. I just can't believe how many otherwise educated and intelligent people shut down their logical faculties because PC.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Svigor says:

    I wonder if anyone’s ever done the metrics on how many Amerinds were killed by alliances between Europeans and Amerinds. I bet it’s a pretty high percentage. Amerinds of the time liked the European Colonists a Hell of a lot more than modern leftists do. Amerinds did an awful lot of cultural appropriation from the Europeans, too, from riding horses to muskets to the clothes on their backs and their forms of gov’t.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ogunsiron
    To this day in Canada you have tribes that stick to the (European) side they chose back in the 1700s. Some tribes like the Huron got very close to the French and still are. Some, like the Mohawk, never liked the French, sided with the English and still don't like the French.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Svigor says:

    Oh, and then there were the Sioux, who were so vicious to the tribes they preyed upon that the latter leaped at the first opportunity to ally with Europeans against their hated oppressors, and were more than eager to acquire modern weapons to kill the Sioux.

    This is all above and beyond the usual Amerind banditry, murder, kidnapping and rape of women, etc., that went on between Amerind tribes and cultures, mind you.

    Contra the commie rag Guardian, if anything, it is the oppressive nature of the Sioux which makes “Fighting Sioux” an inappropriate mascot.

    The Crow and the Pawnee hated the Sioux, and vice-versa. They were blood enemies. Oh, speaking of the Pawnee:

    Pawnee People @ Wikipedia

    [MORE]

    Morning Star ritual

    The Skidi Pawnee practiced human sacrifice, specifically of captive girls, in the “Morning Star ritual”. They continued this practice regularly through the 1810s and possibly after 1838, the last reported sacrifice. They believed the longstanding rite ensured the fertility of the soil and success of the crops, as well as renewal of all life in spring. The sacrifice was related to the belief that the first human being was a girl, born of the mating of the Morning Star, the male figure of light, and Evening Star, a female figure of darkness, in their creation story.[11]

    Typically, a warrior would dream of the Morning Star, usually in the autumn, which meant it was time to prepare for the various steps of the ritual. The visionary would consult with the Morning Star priest, who helped him prepare for his journey to find a sacrifice. With help from others, the warrior would capture a young unmarried girl from an enemy tribe. The Pawnee kept the girl and cared for her over the winter, taking her with them as they made their buffalo hunt. They arranged her sacrifice in the spring, in relation to the rising of the Morning Star. She was well treated and fed throughout this period.[11]

    When the morning star rose ringed with red, the priest knew it was the signal for the sacrifice. He directed the men to carry out the rest of the ritual, including the construction of a scaffold outside the village. It was made of sacred woods and leathers from different animals, each of which had important symbolism. It was erected over a pit with elements corresponding to the four cardinal directions. All the elements of the ritual related to symbolic meaning and belief, and were necessary for the renewal of life. The preparations took four days.[11]

    A procession of all the men and boys, even carrying male infants, accompanied the girl out of the village to the scaffold. Together they awaited the morning star. When the star was due to rise, the girl was placed and tied on the scaffold. At the moment the star appeared above the horizon, the girl was shot with an arrow, then the priest cut the skin of her chest to bleed. She was quickly shot with arrows by all the participating men and boys to hasten her death. The girl was carried to the east and placed face down so her blood would soak into the earth, with appropriate prayers for the crops and life she would bring to all life on the prairie.[11]

    About 1820–1821, news of these sacrifices reached the East Coast; it caused a sensation among European Americans. Before this, US Indian agents had counseled Pawnee chiefs to suppress the practice, as they warned of how it would upset the American settlers, who were arriving in ever greater number. Knife Chief ransomed at least two captives before sacrifice. For any individual, it was extremely difficult to try to change a practice tied so closely to Pawnee belief in the annual renewal of life for the tribe. In June 1818, the Missouri Gazette of St. Louis contained the account of a sacrifice. The last known sacrifice was of Haxti, a 14-year-old Oglala Lakota girl, on April 22, 1838.[12]

    Writing in the 1960s, the historian Gene Weltfish drew from earlier work of Wissler and Spinden to suggest that the sacrificial practice might have been transferred in the early 16th century from the Aztec of present-day Mexico. More recently, historians have disputed the proposed connection to Mesoamerican practice. They believe that the sacrifice ritual originated separately within ancient traditional Pawnee culture.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. Svigor says:

    At the moment the star appeared above the horizon, the girl was shot with an arrow, then the priest cut the skin of her chest to bleed. She was quickly shot with arrows by all the participating men and boys to hasten her death.

    I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that being shot with arrows until you die is a relatively slow way to go. It’s not like the movies, where people invariably die quickly after one arrow. Think pincushion, and bleeding out after you’re lucky enough to have a major blood vessel severed. There’s nothing hasty or quick about it at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.
    , @Twinkie

    I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that being shot with arrows until you die is a relatively slow way to go. It’s not like the movies, where people invariably die quickly after one arrow. Think pincushion, and bleeding out after you’re lucky enough to have a major blood vessel severed. There’s nothing hasty or quick about it at all.
     
    You are right that it's not like the movies. On the other hand, arrows - depending on what kind of arrowheads you use - can generate enormous wound channels... unlike bullets.

    The weaknesses of arrows are mainly two-fold, 1) the rapid dissipation of kinetic energy and 2) the high parabolic arc of the projectile and high wind sensitivity that severely limits accuracy, especially at longer ranges.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Svigor says:

    I think maybe I’m starting to re-think my response to “YOU GENOCIDED THE INDIANS!!!” Until now, my strategy has been to counter with criticism of Amerinds (who are (or rather, were), to be fair, WIIIIDE open to criticism from a leftist standpoint). But I’m beginning to think Discard may have a more appropriate response:

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.

    It really is no business of the grease of Asia. The Chinese have plenty of wrongdoing to answer for, though, like the commies, most of it has been inflicted on their own kind. The grease of Asia cares not one whit about the Amerinds. So why should I let them bait me into bashing the Amerinds?

    Same goes for white leftist scum, and Jewish leftist scum, and the rest. They don’t care about the Amerinds. They know nothing about the Amerinds. And in the case of the foreign leftists, it’s none of their damned business.

    I think I might just insist that people prove some connection to the issue, before I get into the issue. It’s not fair to Amerinds to let everyone else wave the Amerinds’ bloody shirts, as if their own. If the Amerinds want to get into an argument over it, that’s another story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    For what it is worth, its usually raised as a logical consistency of "who's land was it first." The correct response,I think, is that the law of conquest is relevant and if it wasn't, then China and a ton of other countries couldn't really exist either.

    Almost no one can claim to be the first people, except possibly some of the natives of Finland or the like.

    As far as the American Indians were, they were interesting and they did have some particularly brutal practices, but I don't think that it was any more so than most tribal people, period. At some point, actual violence is constrained by how small and nonspecialized a population is - you really need Aztec level of organization before you manage to accomplish human sacrifice at a truly awe-inspiring rate.
    , @ganderson
    No! The Indians were traveling bands of St. Francis of Assisi impersonators... no, really!
    , @Anonymous
    It's people who never actually lived with Am. Indians who glorify them. Much like its the leftists from 99.9% white areas whose interactions with blacks consist of exchanging hellos with their friendly Jamaican doorman on the way out each morning. People of the time who had to actually interact with real Am. Indians (not the 3/4 white domesticated modern variety) often had a different view. Mark Twain, who lived in a time where some Americans were beginning to live in a world free of Amerinds, wrote about the contrast with reality :

    http://twain.lib.virginia.edu/projects/rissetto/redman.html

    , @Stealth
    Non-white immigrants and their descendants receive the benefits of the European colonization of North America. If there be guilt, they share in it, just like native-born white Americans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. res says:
    @Svigor

    The best thing about that meme is how it totally elides all of the warfare/migration/land theft that happened while the first nations inhabited the Americas.
     
    Yep. I delved into a couple of (PC) books about Indians recently. There were several Indian-on-Indian genocides mentioned in each. Entire cultures wiped out, and lost to history. Whites have probably done far more to preserve Amerind culture than Amerinds ever will.

    The whole idea of "First Peoples" is retarded. These people spoke different languages, had widely different cultures, and certainly had varying structures of authority. They were constantly at one another's throats. The only thing that links them (in the minds of leftists) is historical geography, and racial similarity; meaning, if you believe in "First Peoples Solidarity," you believe in "White Peoples Solidarity" too.

    The worst part of this is that it's always some Jew, or some greasy Asian, or some Muslim, or some other trash bringing up the Amerinds. So the pushback that emerges is their fault, not the Amerinds'.

    I think we need to start a counter meme lamenting the loss of American megafauna to the people of the first nations.
     
    I actually mentioned this the last time some leftist, racist, white-envying moron (but, I repeat myself) brought this subject up. The Amerinds totally exterminated all the prehistoric megafauna on the continents. Talk about your environmental catastrophes. And think of all the Diversity lost forever...

    The worst part of this is that it’s always some Jew, or some greasy Asian, or some Muslim, or some other trash bringing up the Amerinds. So the pushback that emerges is their fault, not the Amerinds’.

    That’s a good point. I should probably think more about that before getting too snarky about the first nations. It’s just hard to take the virtue signalling from the non-Amerinds without making any response.

    I actually mentioned this the last time some leftist, racist, white-envying moron (but, I repeat myself) brought this subject up.

    What kind of response did you get? One of the things working to make me more polarized right now is the utter imperviousness of most of those people to logical arguments in my experience. I just can’t believe how many otherwise educated and intelligent people shut down their logical faculties because PC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @Svigor
    I think maybe I'm starting to re-think my response to "YOU GENOCIDED THE INDIANS!!!" Until now, my strategy has been to counter with criticism of Amerinds (who are (or rather, were), to be fair, WIIIIDE open to criticism from a leftist standpoint). But I'm beginning to think Discard may have a more appropriate response:

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.
     
    It really is no business of the grease of Asia. The Chinese have plenty of wrongdoing to answer for, though, like the commies, most of it has been inflicted on their own kind. The grease of Asia cares not one whit about the Amerinds. So why should I let them bait me into bashing the Amerinds?

    Same goes for white leftist scum, and Jewish leftist scum, and the rest. They don't care about the Amerinds. They know nothing about the Amerinds. And in the case of the foreign leftists, it's none of their damned business.

    I think I might just insist that people prove some connection to the issue, before I get into the issue. It's not fair to Amerinds to let everyone else wave the Amerinds' bloody shirts, as if their own. If the Amerinds want to get into an argument over it, that's another story.

    For what it is worth, its usually raised as a logical consistency of “who’s land was it first.” The correct response,I think, is that the law of conquest is relevant and if it wasn’t, then China and a ton of other countries couldn’t really exist either.

    Almost no one can claim to be the first people, except possibly some of the natives of Finland or the like.

    As far as the American Indians were, they were interesting and they did have some particularly brutal practices, but I don’t think that it was any more so than most tribal people, period. At some point, actual violence is constrained by how small and nonspecialized a population is – you really need Aztec level of organization before you manage to accomplish human sacrifice at a truly awe-inspiring rate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ogunsiron

    As far as the American Indians were, they were interesting and they did have some particularly brutal practices, but I don’t think that it was any more so than most tribal people, period
     
    They were. I hope to eventually read a few (old) books on them.

    I imagine that Americans/Canadians used to be much more knowledgeable about the colonial period and the several centuries of (difficult) coexistence between the Amerinds and the Europeans.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. MMM says:
    @lavoisier
    Of course that is his purpose. And of course that is why the NYT solicited and published his essay.

    You are unlikely to EVER read anything in the NYT that would contradict the narrative.

    He is nothing but a puppet buying into the party line--hate whitey, and never, ever suggest that Jewish students might be getting preferential treatment at the elite colleges in our nation.

    “Of course that is his purpose. And of course that is why the NYT solicited and published his essay.

    “You are unlikely to EVER read anything in the NYT that would contradict the narrative.

    “He is nothing but a puppet buying into the party line–hate whitey, and never, ever suggest that Jewish students might be getting preferential treatment at the elite colleges in our nation.”

    …………

    Exactly. Thank you for saying it — spot on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. ogunsiron says:
    @Jason Liu
    You cut off the article too early.

    Below, Lam admits that he is a supporter of affirmative action and that he does not like the racial disparities at colleges where Asians are overrepresented.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism. The fact that he seems to "balance" meritocracy with diversity, without actually explaining the value of diversity, tells us that he buys unquestioningly into western ideology, and thus does not have the moral authority to speak on behalf of Asian-Americans.

    If his purpose is to simply be a yellow face for liberalism, then he should just say that up front.

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism.

    Reminds me of some of the chinese-american “community activists” in SF who blame the chinese for the violence they meet at the hand of NAMS. They tell old chinese people that the “youfs” attack on them are OK because old chinese are racist, etc. In my own town, for years the antiracism king was chinese and he was very intersectional.

    Read More
    • Replies: @wrd9
    These Paris Chinese must be racist, too. /sarc

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/759995/North-African-youth-gangs-Chinese-migrants-Paris
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. ogunsiron says:
    @Svigor
    I wonder if anyone's ever done the metrics on how many Amerinds were killed by alliances between Europeans and Amerinds. I bet it's a pretty high percentage. Amerinds of the time liked the European Colonists a Hell of a lot more than modern leftists do. Amerinds did an awful lot of cultural appropriation from the Europeans, too, from riding horses to muskets to the clothes on their backs and their forms of gov't.

    To this day in Canada you have tribes that stick to the (European) side they chose back in the 1700s. Some tribes like the Huron got very close to the French and still are. Some, like the Mohawk, never liked the French, sided with the English and still don’t like the French.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. ogunsiron says:
    @Daniel Chieh
    For what it is worth, its usually raised as a logical consistency of "who's land was it first." The correct response,I think, is that the law of conquest is relevant and if it wasn't, then China and a ton of other countries couldn't really exist either.

    Almost no one can claim to be the first people, except possibly some of the natives of Finland or the like.

    As far as the American Indians were, they were interesting and they did have some particularly brutal practices, but I don't think that it was any more so than most tribal people, period. At some point, actual violence is constrained by how small and nonspecialized a population is - you really need Aztec level of organization before you manage to accomplish human sacrifice at a truly awe-inspiring rate.

    As far as the American Indians were, they were interesting and they did have some particularly brutal practices, but I don’t think that it was any more so than most tribal people, period

    They were. I hope to eventually read a few (old) books on them.

    I imagine that Americans/Canadians used to be much more knowledgeable about the colonial period and the several centuries of (difficult) coexistence between the Amerinds and the Europeans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. ganderson says:
    @Svigor
    I think maybe I'm starting to re-think my response to "YOU GENOCIDED THE INDIANS!!!" Until now, my strategy has been to counter with criticism of Amerinds (who are (or rather, were), to be fair, WIIIIDE open to criticism from a leftist standpoint). But I'm beginning to think Discard may have a more appropriate response:

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.
     
    It really is no business of the grease of Asia. The Chinese have plenty of wrongdoing to answer for, though, like the commies, most of it has been inflicted on their own kind. The grease of Asia cares not one whit about the Amerinds. So why should I let them bait me into bashing the Amerinds?

    Same goes for white leftist scum, and Jewish leftist scum, and the rest. They don't care about the Amerinds. They know nothing about the Amerinds. And in the case of the foreign leftists, it's none of their damned business.

    I think I might just insist that people prove some connection to the issue, before I get into the issue. It's not fair to Amerinds to let everyone else wave the Amerinds' bloody shirts, as if their own. If the Amerinds want to get into an argument over it, that's another story.

    No! The Indians were traveling bands of St. Francis of Assisi impersonators… no, really!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. ganderson says:

    Brian Moore’s Black Robe, both the novel and Bruce Beresford’s movie, are good curatives to what I like to call “Kevin Costnerism”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  55. MBlanc46 says:

    The post-1965 Asians should never have been let into the country in the first place, so they’ve got no legitimate complaint.

    Read More
    • Agree: KenH
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    why stop at 1965? why not retroactively deport all asians? hah

    you know that is what you want :P
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. artichoke says:
    @jb
    I notice the author of the article was extremely careful to endorse continued affirmative action advantages for blacks and Hispanics -- I'm sure he understood that the Times would not have published his op-ed otherwise. He simply resents that his own group is at the bottom of the totem pole, and wants that changed.

    All in all, a pretty decent illustration of one of the core doctrines of affirmative action: white people must never come out ahead of anyone else.

    Or that whites are the soft target. We don’t riot (except for some idiots who do it as allies of others) and don’t have protected class status to fight effectively legally.

    But we just elected Trump. Maybe we get a little break now, at least for a while. Let’s show that this article’s timing is off.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. KenH says:

    But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites.

    Nothing like slanty eyed logic. Non-Jewish whites are woefully underrepresented at all Ivy league schools based upon an article I recall reading several years ago. I think whites are around 23-25% of most Ivy league schools despite being 61-62% of the population while Jews, at 2.5.% of the population also make up 23-25% of the student body. So when Mr. Chinese American alumnus bewails discrimination in favor of whites it’s Jews being given preferential treatment, not whites, native born or otherwise.

    More importantly, the Ivy League was created by learned white men so whites should be accorded special treatment even though they’re not getting it. If Asians don’t like it they can they can head back whence they came.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. @MBlanc46
    The post-1965 Asians should never have been let into the country in the first place, so they've got no legitimate complaint.

    why stop at 1965? why not retroactively deport all asians? hah

    you know that is what you want :P

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    All levity aside, 1965 really is the watershed.

    It should be the yardstick by which policy is measured; because before that we had a real country, a real America, and ever since we have progressively disintegrated until now we have very little chance left, and not much resembling a Nation or a People.

    What's been shaping up, instead, ever since 1965 is a polyglot third-world cesspool of primitive, warring tribes presided over by a preening yet slightly sadistic (and also largely tribal) überclass.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Truth says:
    @interesting
    I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

    But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.


    It always has to come back to whitie doesn't it......BTW do you want that affirmative action hire to do the work when you are on the operating table?

    BTW do you want that affirmative action hire to do the work when you are on the operating table?

    I think you misunderstood the gestalt of this young man’s point, Old Sport; allow me to elucidate for you: He is insinuating that you ARE the affirmative action hire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. Truth says:
    @Anonymous
    Universities supposedly want diversity and balanced student populations. This is not Asia, and Asian students are certainly intelligent enough to understand that.

    Dude, were only a month in but that was the comment of the YEAR so far!

    I have to clean up this water I spit on my keyboard.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Binks007 says:

    In general, Asians tend not to be very good alumni. They have the reputation of not giving to the school after they graduate. This is something that the schools are very much aware. No matter how large, schools certainly want their Endowment to grow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    In general, Asians tend not to be very good alumni. They have the reputation of not giving to the school after they graduate.
     
    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.

    Back about a quarter century ago when I was a student-worker at the development office of my undergraduate Ivy League alma mater, I provided financial dossiers of numerous wealthy Asian figures (both American citizens and foreigners) whose children were near college age. Nearly all of these children were courted and offered admissions and, yes, the parents of all those admitted and accepted gave substantial donations (obviously I was not privy to the discussions with those parents, so I do not know whether there was a direct quid pro quo, but there most likely was).

    On the other hand, the children of Asian immigrants frequently come from families with relatively high income, but low net worth because they have not had generations of compounding wealth that many affluent white families have. So many of them are not in a position to give substantial donations until they themselves reach the age at which the funding of their own children's education is no longer a concern.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @FKA Max
    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.
     
    ...

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/


    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    A dumb question: How did you get reliable data on Jewish enrollment? Unlike race / ethnicity / nationality / income, I am not aware of any reliable public data that can be sorted by religion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max


    It is important to recognize that all of these enrollment statistics are far less precise than we might ideally desire. As mentioned earlier, over the last couple of decades widespread perceptions of racial bias in admissions have led a significant number of students to refuse to reveal their race, which the official statistics classify as “race unknown.” This group almost certainly consists of Asians and whites, but it is impossible for us to determine the relative proportions, and without this information our above estimates can only be approximate.

    Similarly, nearly all our figures on Jewish enrollment were ultimately drawn from the estimates of Hillel, the national Jewish campus organization, and these are obviously approximate. However, the Hillel data is the best we possess for recent decades, and is regularly used by the New York Times and other prominent media outlets, while also serving as the basis for much of Karabel’s award-winning scholarship. Furthermore, so long as any latent bias in the data remained relatively constant, we could still correctly analyze changes over time.

    For these sorts of reasons, any of the individual figures provided above should be treated with great caution, but the overall pattern of enrollments—statistics compiled over years and decades and across numerous different universities—seems likely to provide an accurate description of reality.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. FKA Max says:
    @anon
    A dumb question: How did you get reliable data on Jewish enrollment? Unlike race / ethnicity / nationality / income, I am not aware of any reliable public data that can be sorted by religion.

    It is important to recognize that all of these enrollment statistics are far less precise than we might ideally desire. As mentioned earlier, over the last couple of decades widespread perceptions of racial bias in admissions have led a significant number of students to refuse to reveal their race, which the official statistics classify as “race unknown.” This group almost certainly consists of Asians and whites, but it is impossible for us to determine the relative proportions, and without this information our above estimates can only be approximate.

    Similarly, nearly all our figures on Jewish enrollment were ultimately drawn from the estimates of Hillel, the national Jewish campus organization, and these are obviously approximate. However, the Hillel data is the best we possess for recent decades, and is regularly used by the New York Times and other prominent media outlets, while also serving as the basis for much of Karabel’s award-winning scholarship. Furthermore, so long as any latent bias in the data remained relatively constant, we could still correctly analyze changes over time.

    For these sorts of reasons, any of the individual figures provided above should be treated with great caution, but the overall pattern of enrollments—statistics compiled over years and decades and across numerous different universities—seems likely to provide an accurate description of reality.

    http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Thank you; the reason I asked is, many Jews are heavily intermarried with non-Jews and it is hard to classify those who may be only 0.5, 0.375, 0.25, 0.125 Jewish as Jews. Same problem with Asians too.

    Another question: Why don't the Asians simply declare themselves as "race unknown" or white (or more blatantly, the dark skinned ones can declare themselves as black) and gum up the classification system. AFAIK, there is no machinery for detecting racial or ethnic truth or accuracy in the bureaucracy. I would guess it is even less for religion.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Twinkie says:
    @Binks007
    In general, Asians tend not to be very good alumni. They have the reputation of not giving to the school after they graduate. This is something that the schools are very much aware. No matter how large, schools certainly want their Endowment to grow.

    In general, Asians tend not to be very good alumni. They have the reputation of not giving to the school after they graduate.

    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.

    Back about a quarter century ago when I was a student-worker at the development office of my undergraduate Ivy League alma mater, I provided financial dossiers of numerous wealthy Asian figures (both American citizens and foreigners) whose children were near college age. Nearly all of these children were courted and offered admissions and, yes, the parents of all those admitted and accepted gave substantial donations (obviously I was not privy to the discussions with those parents, so I do not know whether there was a direct quid pro quo, but there most likely was).

    On the other hand, the children of Asian immigrants frequently come from families with relatively high income, but low net worth because they have not had generations of compounding wealth that many affluent white families have. So many of them are not in a position to give substantial donations until they themselves reach the age at which the funding of their own children’s education is no longer a concern.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.
     
    It's sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Twinkie says:

    It is as if the Unz piece on the “American meritocracy” were never published. Asian activists – whose views on affirmative action does not mirror that of the general Asian-American population – still support affirmative action and try to redirect Asian resentment toward that broken system away from the real beneficiaries (Jews, blacks, and Hispanics) to yet another set of victims, the non-Jewish whites.

    It’s predictably loathsome and intellectually dishonest.

    I am a naturalized Asian immigrant, but my white wife hails from the rural Midwest, and we live part of the year in West Virginia. In both places (especially the latter), I sometimes see appalling poverty among whites, far worse than anything in the urban ghetto (and for all that test scores are higher and crime rate lower in the former over the latter). Where is the affirmative action for their children? Their lives and struggles are in no way alleviated by the mythical “white privilege” that is constantly and tiresomely denounced by left-wing activists).

    I think it’s high time that we remove race from affirmative action, and instead make it one based on economics. My children won’t benefit from it, of course, due to the affluence of their parents, but they won’t need it and, more importantly, it would be better for the country and go a great length toward reducing both the socio-economic status imbalance and the regional one in future elite factories that is the Ivy League.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keuril

    I sometimes see appalling poverty among whites, far worse than anything in the urban ghetto (and for all that test scores are higher and crime rate lower in the former over the latter). Where is the affirmative action for their children
     
    Top colleges now definitely give preference to those with socioeconomic disadvantage, regardless of race. In their admissions materials, you will see frequent reference to the percentage of first-gen or Pell Grant recipients. You can also check out the website admitsee, where if you pay their fee you can see pretty much the entire application (minus actual transcripts and recommendations) of kids who got into all sorts of schools. In the case of non-athlete whites or Asians who get into top schools with below-average (for the school) standardized tests, they are almost all socioeconomic cases.
    , @anarchyst
    "Affirmative action" would have been more palatable to all, if it were based on economic status instead of race.
    Why should Michael Jordan's offspring get an "affirmative action" preference while a poor Appalachian white kid gets ostracized and marginalized for his "white privilege"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. zero671 says:

    “The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.” Why? 450 > 3 x 140.

    “Still, I’ve always supported affirmative action, though I’d much prefer that it was based on socio-economic disadvantage rather than race alone. All students benefit from having a racially diverse class. I would not have preferred to go to a Yale that was predominantly Asian.” The author does not justify why he supports affirmative action, nor why he thinks it should be based on SES rather than race. Clearly students that are denied admission based on their color do NOT benefit from campus racial diversity. For those who are admitted, perhaps excellence is more valuable than diversity. Why wouldn’t he have wanted to go to a predominantly Asian Yale? Does he judge an individual’s merit based on his/her race? What’s wrong with Asians?

    “Colleges should grant an advantage to blacks and Hispanics because they continue to face barriers to equal access and opportunity. The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.” Has anyone ever proven that racism causes black SAT scores to drop by 450 points, or Hispanic scores to drop by 270? Asians are, in fact, advantaged in some ways over whites. For example, Asian-American households have the highest median income out of any group (http://www.epi.org/blog/new-census-data-show-no-progress-in-closing-stubborn-racial-income-gaps/). Additionally, Asians have a lower out-of-wedlock birth rate than whites (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_12.pdf). At least in the case of Stuyvesant HS given in the article, some Asian-Americans attend more selective high schools as well.

    “In California, where race-based affirmative action was eliminated in 1996, admission at the University of California at Berkeley is 42 percent Asian. I do not like this degree of racial imbalance. But for too long, many elite colleges have done too much to orchestrate the racial composition of their classes. It seems obvious that continuing to hold Asian percentages at near-constant levels required excessive tipping of the scales to the detriment of Asians — and America’s long-cherished traditions of fairness and equal opportunity.” Asians are indeed overrepresented at UCB relative to their share of the CA state population, which is about 15% (http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/06). However, why is this too much a degree of “racial imbalance” for the author, while other schools should increase Asian admissions? What is the threshold for racial imbalance, and why?

    “This is not an exact science, and I am not advocating drastic change. I think increasing the Asian percentage of enrollment by more than 10 percentage points from current levels could begin to upset the racial balance in a detrimental way.” Why 10%? What makes that the magic number?

    “But allowing Asian enrollment to increase would serve to acknowledge that meritocracy, like racial diversity, is a goal worth striving for even if we know it will not be fully attained.” Even the 22% Asian representation at Harvard is a vast overrepresentation relative to the US population at large (5.6% – https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/00). Essentially, what the author seems to be arguing for is meritocracy for Asians, affirmative action for blacks and Hispanics, and whites get screwed. This seems not only logically inconsistent, but deeply racist.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. The correct title of this mewling whine is:

    “Asian Students’ Unfair Disadvantage in Admissions”

    And an alternate, correcter title:

    “Extreme Black Privilege in Admissions at Top Universities”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. Svigor says:

    For what it is worth, its usually raised as a logical consistency of “who’s land was it first.” The correct response,I think, is that the law of conquest is relevant and if it wasn’t, then China and a ton of other countries couldn’t really exist either.

    And the Indians were always conquering one another, driving one another off of their land. You can’t swing a stick in early American history or prehistory without hitting this stuff. I can’t see how their conquests were legitimate, and Whites’ weren’t, without some kind of racialist theory that grants legitimacy of conquest to the Indian race, but denies it to the White race.

    The entire Indian way of life was based on the Right of Conquest. Before, and during, European contact.

    To this day in Canada you have tribes that stick to the (European) side they chose back in the 1700s. Some tribes like the Huron got very close to the French and still are. Some, like the Mohawk, never liked the French, sided with the English and still don’t like the French.

    Yep. Word is the Pawnee are “traitors” for siding with the Whites against the Sioux.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  69. Wade says:
    @FKA Max
    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.
     
    ...

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/


    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    I wish you were leaving your comments (and the quotes from Ron’s “Myth of Meritocracy” article of at the NYT instead of here. Those readers are the ones that need to be confronted with the facts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    No comments allowed on this one... this is why I suggested it to be discussed here at the Unz Review, and Mr. Unz graciously featured it.

    I think my suggested article fulfills all the necessary criteria; it was on the frontpage of the NY Times website, etc. [...]
    I would love to have the article discussed at the Unz Review, especially since it relates to your The Myth of American Meritocracy article.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1748151

    In the comments, provide links to suggested external articles as starting points for Forum discussions, along with brief descriptions or justifications.

    Articles dealing with controversial or provocative topics published in influential outlets are preferable, especially if the publications or the particular authors do not allow comments themselves or heavily censor them.


    I’m guessing the person who wrote this op-ed piece did not read Mr. Unz’s piece
     
    - http://www.unz.com/forum/suggestion-thread-for-forum-articles/#comment-1747147

    I used to be a semi-regular commenter at the online version of the NY Times; a little over a year ago (September 2015) their moderators and/or commenting software/algorithm stopped approving my comments, and I gave up commenting there. My last comments were highly critical of the Merkel/EU refugee policy.

    This is how I see Mr. Unz; he is one of the few elites/institutional guardians who thinks for himself:


    The key to throwing off these chains of mental immaturity is reason. There is hope that the entire public could become a force of free thinking individuals if they are free to do so. Why? There will always be a few people, even among the institutional "guardians," who think for themselves. They will help the rest of us to "cultivate our minds." Kant shows himself a man of his times when he observes that "a revolution may well put an end to autocratic despotism . . . or power-seeking oppression, but it will never produce a true reform in ways of thinking." The recently completed American Revolution had made a great impression in Europe; Kant cautions that new prejudice will replace the old and become a new leash to control the "great unthinking masses."
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answering_the_Question:_What_is_Enlightenment%3F#Basic_understanding
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. FKA Max says:
    @Wade
    I wish you were leaving your comments (and the quotes from Ron's "Myth of Meritocracy" article of at the NYT instead of here. Those readers are the ones that need to be confronted with the facts.

    No comments allowed on this one… this is why I suggested it to be discussed here at the Unz Review, and Mr. Unz graciously featured it.

    I think my suggested article fulfills all the necessary criteria; it was on the frontpage of the NY Times website, etc. [...]
    I would love to have the article discussed at the Unz Review, especially since it relates to your The Myth of American Meritocracy article.

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1748151

    In the comments, provide links to suggested external articles as starting points for Forum discussions, along with brief descriptions or justifications.

    Articles dealing with controversial or provocative topics published in influential outlets are preferable, especially if the publications or the particular authors do not allow comments themselves or heavily censor them.

    I’m guessing the person who wrote this op-ed piece did not read Mr. Unz’s piece

    http://www.unz.com/forum/suggestion-thread-for-forum-articles/#comment-1747147

    I used to be a semi-regular commenter at the online version of the NY Times; a little over a year ago (September 2015) their moderators and/or commenting software/algorithm stopped approving my comments, and I gave up commenting there. My last comments were highly critical of the Merkel/EU refugee policy.

    This is how I see Mr. Unz; he is one of the few elites/institutional guardians who thinks for himself:

    The key to throwing off these chains of mental immaturity is reason. There is hope that the entire public could become a force of free thinking individuals if they are free to do so. Why? There will always be a few people, even among the institutional “guardians,” who think for themselves. They will help the rest of us to “cultivate our minds.” Kant shows himself a man of his times when he observes that “a revolution may well put an end to autocratic despotism . . . or power-seeking oppression, but it will never produce a true reform in ways of thinking.” The recently completed American Revolution had made a great impression in Europe; Kant cautions that new prejudice will replace the old and become a new leash to control the “great unthinking masses.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answering_the_Question:_What_is_Enlightenment%3F#Basic_understanding

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Svigor says:

    What kind of response did you get? One of the things working to make me more polarized right now is the utter imperviousness of most of those people to logical arguments in my experience. I just can’t believe how many otherwise educated and intelligent people shut down their logical faculties because PC.

    I can’t remember. It was in one of the threads here, in case you were thinking I meant IRL. I don’t discuss politics with morons IRL.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    Angelo Codevilla does a nice job discussing the origins & function of Political Correctness.

    http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

    As he noted in a column carried by Unz.com, eventually people will wax nostalgic for the moderation of President Trump.

    PC was the apogee of centuries of Left-handed Cthulhu's growth, with the last 50 years its "blow off top." Trump's election signals the first, tiny turn in the Right direction and those still embedded in Yesterday are throwing apoplectic fits.

    They ain't seen nuttin.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Svigor

    What kind of response did you get? One of the things working to make me more polarized right now is the utter imperviousness of most of those people to logical arguments in my experience. I just can’t believe how many otherwise educated and intelligent people shut down their logical faculties because PC.
     
    I can't remember. It was in one of the threads here, in case you were thinking I meant IRL. I don't discuss politics with morons IRL.

    Angelo Codevilla does a nice job discussing the origins & function of Political Correctness.

    http://www.claremont.org/crb/article/the-rise-of-political-correctness/

    As he noted in a column carried by Unz.com, eventually people will wax nostalgic for the moderation of President Trump.

    PC was the apogee of centuries of Left-handed Cthulhu’s growth, with the last 50 years its “blow off top.” Trump’s election signals the first, tiny turn in the Right direction and those still embedded in Yesterday are throwing apoplectic fits.

    They ain’t seen nuttin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @FKA Max


    It is important to recognize that all of these enrollment statistics are far less precise than we might ideally desire. As mentioned earlier, over the last couple of decades widespread perceptions of racial bias in admissions have led a significant number of students to refuse to reveal their race, which the official statistics classify as “race unknown.” This group almost certainly consists of Asians and whites, but it is impossible for us to determine the relative proportions, and without this information our above estimates can only be approximate.

    Similarly, nearly all our figures on Jewish enrollment were ultimately drawn from the estimates of Hillel, the national Jewish campus organization, and these are obviously approximate. However, the Hillel data is the best we possess for recent decades, and is regularly used by the New York Times and other prominent media outlets, while also serving as the basis for much of Karabel’s award-winning scholarship. Furthermore, so long as any latent bias in the data remained relatively constant, we could still correctly analyze changes over time.

    For these sorts of reasons, any of the individual figures provided above should be treated with great caution, but the overall pattern of enrollments—statistics compiled over years and decades and across numerous different universities—seems likely to provide an accurate description of reality.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    Thank you; the reason I asked is, many Jews are heavily intermarried with non-Jews and it is hard to classify those who may be only 0.5, 0.375, 0.25, 0.125 Jewish as Jews. Same problem with Asians too.

    Another question: Why don’t the Asians simply declare themselves as “race unknown” or white (or more blatantly, the dark skinned ones can declare themselves as black) and gum up the classification system. AFAIK, there is no machinery for detecting racial or ethnic truth or accuracy in the bureaucracy. I would guess it is even less for religion.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @jimbojones
    I can't believe what I'm reading...
    "The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians."

    What? But one number is more than triple the other!
    Moreover, by the author's own numbers, it turns out that whites are discriminated against almost as badly as the Asians!

    Of course, at the end of the day, the hypocrite or moron Andrew Lam fails to point out that a huge proportion of "whites" - at least as far as elite universities are concerned - are really Jews.

    And that gentile whites are extremely discriminated against. As we know from Unz's article.

    Frankly, modern "liberals" are getting to the point where some of the filth they say is indistinguishable from the Nazi propaganda of the 1930's. Just as the Jews were to blame for everything then, so are gentile whites to blame for everything now.

    One other thing. Asians are flourishing in the US by every metric - while the life expectancy of whites is falling. But let's not reality get in the way of prejudice.

    Frankly, modern “liberals” are getting to the point where some of the filth they say is indistinguishable from the Nazi propaganda of the 1930′s. Just as the Jews were to blame for everything then, so are gentile whites to blame for everything now.

    A signal similarity, though, is that chosenites were over-represented among positions of wealth, power and influence then. Plus ça change!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @res
    Lots of interesting analysis there. It's too bad we can't get the relevant data to make a rigorous analysis. And we know the admissions departments will never release it without the legal equivalent of a gun to the head.

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population? Does Ron address that in his writings?

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population?

    It’s a good question, which I doubt has been treated rigorously anywhere. From anecdotal experience, nearly every white-christian-male undergrad (and many a female) was a recruited athlete, and many jews were legacies.

    Possibly also worth mentioning is that very few jews were on financial aid IME, which does make them more appealing; though admissions is ostensibly ‘need-blind’ in the Ivy League. But the cost of education is just one component there: the potential for truly interesting donations further down the road may be a lot more compelling. Even if ‘naming rights in perpetuity’ are inevitably part of the equation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @Svigor

    At the moment the star appeared above the horizon, the girl was shot with an arrow, then the priest cut the skin of her chest to bleed. She was quickly shot with arrows by all the participating men and boys to hasten her death.
     
    I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that being shot with arrows until you die is a relatively slow way to go. It's not like the movies, where people invariably die quickly after one arrow. Think pincushion, and bleeding out after you're lucky enough to have a major blood vessel severed. There's nothing hasty or quick about it at all.

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.
     
    You are misinformed. Please see my response to "Svigor" above. Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @Astuteobservor II
    why stop at 1965? why not retroactively deport all asians? hah

    you know that is what you want :P

    All levity aside, 1965 really is the watershed.

    It should be the yardstick by which policy is measured; because before that we had a real country, a real America, and ever since we have progressively disintegrated until now we have very little chance left, and not much resembling a Nation or a People.

    What’s been shaping up, instead, ever since 1965 is a polyglot third-world cesspool of primitive, warring tribes presided over by a preening yet slightly sadistic (and also largely tribal) überclass.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The 1965 immigration bill was passed under false pretenses. The American people were promised it wouldn't change our demographics, but obviously it did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Twinkie

    In general, Asians tend not to be very good alumni. They have the reputation of not giving to the school after they graduate.
     
    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.

    Back about a quarter century ago when I was a student-worker at the development office of my undergraduate Ivy League alma mater, I provided financial dossiers of numerous wealthy Asian figures (both American citizens and foreigners) whose children were near college age. Nearly all of these children were courted and offered admissions and, yes, the parents of all those admitted and accepted gave substantial donations (obviously I was not privy to the discussions with those parents, so I do not know whether there was a direct quid pro quo, but there most likely was).

    On the other hand, the children of Asian immigrants frequently come from families with relatively high income, but low net worth because they have not had generations of compounding wealth that many affluent white families have. So many of them are not in a position to give substantial donations until they themselves reach the age at which the funding of their own children's education is no longer a concern.

    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.

    It’s sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    It’s sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants…
     
    Except that there IS evidence for that phenomenon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/21/whats-behind-racial-differences-in-restaurant-tipping/

    Now why don't you be a good boy and fetch me a similar article about Asian under-donation to their American almae matres?

    Here, let me help: http://harvardpolitics.com/harvard/culture-behind-asian-donations-u-s-universities/

    On September 8, Harvard University received the largest alumni donation in its 378-year history when alumnus Gerald Chan gave a whopping $350 million to the School of Public Health...

    According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Department of Education data, Hong Kong has become the top international source of large gifts to U.S. colleges. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong donations make up 17 percent of the world’s total donations to U.S. universities. Both China and Hong Kong figure prominently in the list of top ten sources of donations to U.S. colleges from January 2007 to November 2013. Hong Kong is first, with $181 million worth of donations given to U.S. colleges. China is eighth, at $60.4 million. Furthermore, the biggest beneficiaries of these donations are elite colleges in the U.S., such as Princeton, Yale, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and Harvard.
     
    Ooops. That's evidence contrary to the claim of Asian under-donation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Twinkie says:
    @Svigor

    At the moment the star appeared above the horizon, the girl was shot with an arrow, then the priest cut the skin of her chest to bleed. She was quickly shot with arrows by all the participating men and boys to hasten her death.
     
    I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that being shot with arrows until you die is a relatively slow way to go. It's not like the movies, where people invariably die quickly after one arrow. Think pincushion, and bleeding out after you're lucky enough to have a major blood vessel severed. There's nothing hasty or quick about it at all.

    I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that being shot with arrows until you die is a relatively slow way to go. It’s not like the movies, where people invariably die quickly after one arrow. Think pincushion, and bleeding out after you’re lucky enough to have a major blood vessel severed. There’s nothing hasty or quick about it at all.

    You are right that it’s not like the movies. On the other hand, arrows – depending on what kind of arrowheads you use – can generate enormous wound channels… unlike bullets.

    The weaknesses of arrows are mainly two-fold, 1) the rapid dissipation of kinetic energy and 2) the high parabolic arc of the projectile and high wind sensitivity that severely limits accuracy, especially at longer ranges.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Twinkie says:
    @Kyle McKenna
    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.

    You are misinformed. Please see my response to “Svigor” above. Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.
     
    Look up "Sports For Psychopaths" for even more fun.
    , @Truth
    ...And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.
    , @res
    Do you have any hard data about this? I don't doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?

    I'm also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative. (saw comment 83 after I wrote this but left in for completeness)

    To give my baseline, I have known bowhunters and seen both the bows and broadheads close up. Also have done a tiny bit of archery with target arrows. And know and agree with the deer culling argument given the lack of predators.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Twinkie

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.
     
    You are misinformed. Please see my response to "Svigor" above. Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.

    Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.

    Look up “Sports For Psychopaths” for even more fun.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Look up “Sports For Psychopaths” for even more fun.
     
    That's not an intelligent argument. It's just name-calling.

    Do you eat meat? You like to get it nicely wrapped in plastic from the grocery store, don't you?

    I used to bow hunt deer a lot (old injuries are making it harder and harder each year for me). Never once lost an wounded animal in all those years. All were consumed (mostly turned into jerky and sausage).

    I hate to break it to you, but there is an extreme over-population of deer in many suburban areas. They wreak havoc with car accidents (human fatalities and injuries), and the life for the deer isn't too great either. Many municipalities will hire bow hunters to cull the population because they consider bows less dangerous in high density areas.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. Truth says:
    @Twinkie

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.
     
    You are misinformed. Please see my response to "Svigor" above. Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.

    …And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    …And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.
     
    No matter what you're armed with, I suspect hunting wild pigs is dangerous unless you're doing it from a tree stand or a helicopter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Twinkie says:
    @Kyle McKenna

    Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.
     
    Look up "Sports For Psychopaths" for even more fun.

    Look up “Sports For Psychopaths” for even more fun.

    That’s not an intelligent argument. It’s just name-calling.

    Do you eat meat? You like to get it nicely wrapped in plastic from the grocery store, don’t you?

    I used to bow hunt deer a lot (old injuries are making it harder and harder each year for me). Never once lost an wounded animal in all those years. All were consumed (mostly turned into jerky and sausage).

    I hate to break it to you, but there is an extreme over-population of deer in many suburban areas. They wreak havoc with car accidents (human fatalities and injuries), and the life for the deer isn’t too great either. Many municipalities will hire bow hunters to cull the population because they consider bows less dangerous in high density areas.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    Wow, I didn't realize you were still going at it over here. No worries, I'll indulge you another time or two.

    The reference was to a web search, and if you knew how to use a search engine you'd have found the answer to your query.

    Meanwhile, I'm a vegetarian but I don't think it's wrong to eat meat. I just think it's wrong to cause unnecessary suffering. HTH.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. Twinkie says:
    @Kyle McKenna

    I hear this claim often, but I have not seen any evidence for it.
     
    It's sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants...

    It’s sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants…

    Except that there IS evidence for that phenomenon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/21/whats-behind-racial-differences-in-restaurant-tipping/

    Now why don’t you be a good boy and fetch me a similar article about Asian under-donation to their American almae matres?

    Here, let me help: http://harvardpolitics.com/harvard/culture-behind-asian-donations-u-s-universities/

    On September 8, Harvard University received the largest alumni donation in its 378-year history when alumnus Gerald Chan gave a whopping $350 million to the School of Public Health…

    According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Department of Education data, Hong Kong has become the top international source of large gifts to U.S. colleges. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong donations make up 17 percent of the world’s total donations to U.S. universities. Both China and Hong Kong figure prominently in the list of top ten sources of donations to U.S. colleges from January 2007 to November 2013. Hong Kong is first, with $181 million worth of donations given to U.S. colleges. China is eighth, at $60.4 million. Furthermore, the biggest beneficiaries of these donations are elite colleges in the U.S., such as Princeton, Yale, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and Harvard.

    Ooops. That’s evidence contrary to the claim of Asian under-donation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    That's actually what we call an anecdote. I won't insult you further by explaining why your additional "evidence" is barely better than random data. Or do you insist?

    You can start with the first post in this thread, which you appear to have missed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Dear Mr. Lam:

    Re the alleged injustice suffered by Asians (or blacks or so-called Latinos – many of whom are really white) in college admissions, allow me to remind you that you should be grateful that any of you are admitted at all. The institutions you aspire to enter were created by white men for their children, not for a horde of foreigners. If Asians don’t like it they can build their own colleges and universities. You do not move into somebody else’s house then start rearranging the furniture. The truth is that I admire Asians but it is also true that their parents turn many of them into grinds hoping to get them in the Ivy League. Let me remind you that it has always been the goal of these places to form the whole person, not a race of test takers. Before moaning that Asians are being discriminated against you might want to make an honest assessment of these Asian applicants. I suspect you will find that the whites are more rounded and sophisticated persons who bring much more to a campus environment. Again, I applaud the diligence and hard work of many Asians but save us the crying towel nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit. If you dare to consider other metrics as well, you're surely in conflict with meritocratic principles!

    We saw this several decades ago with jews, and more recently we're seeing it with asians.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. peterike says:
    @Svigor

    FKA Max
    says:

    January 31, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!
     
    Bingo. At the very least, every time we hear "White Privilege," they need to hear "Jewish Privilege" in return. Jewish Privilege is huge, much bigger than White Privilege, and nobody even talks about it, much less fights against it. On the contrary, Jewish Privilege is so profound that supposedly privileged Whites can't even mention it, much less challenge it, without risking their jobs and social standing. Now that's Privilege.

    Eventually, at the very least, blacks and Muslims are going to tumble to this, and start using it as their trump card against Jews.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
     
    In other words, any east Asian in United States territory is guilty of receiving stolen goods, and so should be deported to east Asia.

    We didn't do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren't as bad as that bunch of subhumans.

    At the very least, every time we hear “White Privilege,” they need to hear “Jewish Privilege” in return.

    Indeed, I tried using “Jewish Privilege” at the New York magazine comments section. I was quickly banned. Privilege has its advantages.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. peterike says:

    Naturally, there are no comments allowed on this piece at the Times. And in a bit of delicious irony, right below the article the Times advertises it’s own services with the slogan: “Truth. It’s hard to find.”

    Certainly is around those parts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    I noticed that exact juxtaposition.
    The irony is rich, but somehow I doubt they perceive it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Truth
    ...And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.

    …And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.

    No matter what you’re armed with, I suspect hunting wild pigs is dangerous unless you’re doing it from a tree stand or a helicopter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    No matter what you’re armed with, I suspect hunting wild pigs is dangerous unless you’re doing it from a tree stand or a helicopter.
     
    Wild pigs are not gentle creatures, that's for sure. But they taste so very good!

    I know guys who hunt wild pigs with a bunch of large powerful dogs and a big knife. That's a bit too wild even for me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. wrd9 says:
    @ogunsiron

    That is to say that Lam is openly declaring that he is not acting in the interests of Asians, but in the interests of leftism.
     
    Reminds me of some of the chinese-american "community activists" in SF who blame the chinese for the violence they meet at the hand of NAMS. They tell old chinese people that the "youfs" attack on them are OK because old chinese are racist, etc. In my own town, for years the antiracism king was chinese and he was very intersectional.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. res says:
    @Twinkie

    One of several reasons I detest the hunting of animals with bow and arrow. Some victims are never even retrieved.
     
    You are misinformed. Please see my response to "Svigor" above. Bow hunting is usually done at much closer ranges than with rifles.

    Do you have any hard data about this? I don’t doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?

    I’m also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative. (saw comment 83 after I wrote this but left in for completeness)

    To give my baseline, I have known bowhunters and seen both the bows and broadheads close up. Also have done a tiny bit of archery with target arrows. And know and agree with the deer culling argument given the lack of predators.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Do you have any hard data about this? I don’t doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?
     
    I have no data, but it's drilled into most hunters that allowing a prey animal to die a slow, agonizing death is very unethical and is in poor form.

    I’m also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative.
     
    I think I am pretty good, but by no means uniquely good or ethical in that I will NOT take a shot unless I know that I have a very high percentage chance of retrieving the prety, whether I am hunting with a rifle, a shotgun, a black powder gun, a handgun or a bow. Much of that, though, is based on experience and judgment... which is why it's a good idea to accompany young ones to hunts until they develop the maturity necessary to be a good, ethical hunter. But that's like anything else in life - the person who terrifies me the most nowadays is a neighborhood teenager behind his first car!

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called "social justice warriors." They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @FKA Max
    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.
     
    ...

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/


    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    “As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors.

    And despite the fact that non-Jewish Whites are the progeny for which the Ivy Leagues, and America itself, were founded.

    Thanks for the legwork.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. pyrrhus says:
    @interesting
    I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

    But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.


    It always has to come back to whitie doesn't it......BTW do you want that affirmative action hire to do the work when you are on the operating table?

    No, as Ron Unz’s work has shown, it’s preference for Jews. Whites are also discriminated against.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Twinkie

    Look up “Sports For Psychopaths” for even more fun.
     
    That's not an intelligent argument. It's just name-calling.

    Do you eat meat? You like to get it nicely wrapped in plastic from the grocery store, don't you?

    I used to bow hunt deer a lot (old injuries are making it harder and harder each year for me). Never once lost an wounded animal in all those years. All were consumed (mostly turned into jerky and sausage).

    I hate to break it to you, but there is an extreme over-population of deer in many suburban areas. They wreak havoc with car accidents (human fatalities and injuries), and the life for the deer isn't too great either. Many municipalities will hire bow hunters to cull the population because they consider bows less dangerous in high density areas.

    Wow, I didn’t realize you were still going at it over here. No worries, I’ll indulge you another time or two.

    The reference was to a web search, and if you knew how to use a search engine you’d have found the answer to your query.

    Meanwhile, I’m a vegetarian but I don’t think it’s wrong to eat meat. I just think it’s wrong to cause unnecessary suffering. HTH.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    The reference was to a web search
     
    Non sequitir.

    Meanwhile, I’m a vegetarian but I don’t think it’s wrong to eat meat. I just think it’s wrong to cause unnecessary suffering.
     
    Bow hunting does not cause any more or worse suffering to the prey than other forms of hunting. So, your opposition to bow hunting on that ground is simply ignorance and prejudice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Twinkie

    It’s sort of like negroes and tipping in restaurants…
     
    Except that there IS evidence for that phenomenon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/01/21/whats-behind-racial-differences-in-restaurant-tipping/

    Now why don't you be a good boy and fetch me a similar article about Asian under-donation to their American almae matres?

    Here, let me help: http://harvardpolitics.com/harvard/culture-behind-asian-donations-u-s-universities/

    On September 8, Harvard University received the largest alumni donation in its 378-year history when alumnus Gerald Chan gave a whopping $350 million to the School of Public Health...

    According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Department of Education data, Hong Kong has become the top international source of large gifts to U.S. colleges. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong donations make up 17 percent of the world’s total donations to U.S. universities. Both China and Hong Kong figure prominently in the list of top ten sources of donations to U.S. colleges from January 2007 to November 2013. Hong Kong is first, with $181 million worth of donations given to U.S. colleges. China is eighth, at $60.4 million. Furthermore, the biggest beneficiaries of these donations are elite colleges in the U.S., such as Princeton, Yale, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and Harvard.
     
    Ooops. That's evidence contrary to the claim of Asian under-donation.

    That’s actually what we call an anecdote. I won’t insult you further by explaining why your additional “evidence” is barely better than random data. Or do you insist?

    You can start with the first post in this thread, which you appear to have missed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    That’s actually what we call an anecdote.
     
    An anecdote would be if I knew an Asian alum who made a donation. An Asian alum setting the record for the biggest donation ever is called a "sample maximum" in statistical terms.

    I won’t insult you further by explaining why your additional “evidence” is barely better than random data. Or do you insist?
     
    Yes, I insist. In particular, let's talk about this:

    According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Department of Education data, Hong Kong has become the top international source of large gifts to U.S. colleges. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong donations make up 17 percent of the world’s total donations to U.S. universities. Both China and Hong Kong figure prominently in the list of top ten sources of donations to U.S. colleges from January 2007 to November 2013. Hong Kong is first, with $181 million worth of donations given to U.S. colleges. China is eighth, at $60.4 million. Furthermore, the biggest beneficiaries of these donations are elite colleges in the U.S., such as Princeton, Yale, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and Harvard.
     
    Although this does not "prove" that Asians over-donate (or donate on par with others), it certainly lends weight on the opposite side of the claim that Asian alums under-donate.

    In point of fact, let's back up a little. You claimed earlier that the alleged phenomenon of Asian alums not giving money is akin to blacks under-tipping - well-known, but not demonstrated empirically. But contrary your claim, black under-tipping IS empirically demonstrated and has been studied by scholars.

    So, let's see a similar empirical study about the alleged Asian under-donations to their almae matres. The last time I checked the proponents of a claim have the obligation to provide supporting evidence.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @peterike
    Naturally, there are no comments allowed on this piece at the Times. And in a bit of delicious irony, right below the article the Times advertises it's own services with the slogan: "Truth. It’s hard to find."

    Certainly is around those parts.

    I noticed that exact juxtaposition.
    The irony is rich, but somehow I doubt they perceive it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @Chris Bridges
    Dear Mr. Lam:

    Re the alleged injustice suffered by Asians (or blacks or so-called Latinos - many of whom are really white) in college admissions, allow me to remind you that you should be grateful that any of you are admitted at all. The institutions you aspire to enter were created by white men for their children, not for a horde of foreigners. If Asians don't like it they can build their own colleges and universities. You do not move into somebody else's house then start rearranging the furniture. The truth is that I admire Asians but it is also true that their parents turn many of them into grinds hoping to get them in the Ivy League. Let me remind you that it has always been the goal of these places to form the whole person, not a race of test takers. Before moaning that Asians are being discriminated against you might want to make an honest assessment of these Asian applicants. I suspect you will find that the whites are more rounded and sophisticated persons who bring much more to a campus environment. Again, I applaud the diligence and hard work of many Asians but save us the crying towel nonsense.

    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit. If you dare to consider other metrics as well, you’re surely in conflict with meritocratic principles!

    We saw this several decades ago with jews, and more recently we’re seeing it with asians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit.
     
    Then there's the opposite observation that people who perform poorly on standardized tests will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly irrelevant and have no relationship to merit.

    Funny how that works.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Winston says:

    Yet foreigners dominate in hard sciences and math in grad school.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. Lots of federally entitled, protected class white people of diversity.

    All of these white diversity (victim cult) people benefit from university admission quotas, some more than others:

    [MORE]

    white Jewish
    white Women
    white Queers
    white Hispanic
    white Disabled
    white Veterans
    white Muslim
    white Zionist

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  99. res says:
    @Kyle McKenna
    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit. If you dare to consider other metrics as well, you're surely in conflict with meritocratic principles!

    We saw this several decades ago with jews, and more recently we're seeing it with asians.

    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit.

    Then there’s the opposite observation that people who perform poorly on standardized tests will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly irrelevant and have no relationship to merit.

    Funny how that works.

    Read More
    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @Astuteobservor II
    oh snap. haha, you are good :)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. you’re right–not many bad ass Asians in the arts

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  101. @Astuteobservor II
    Love how the article mentions everyone except the jewish students. seems like mr unz is the only one with balls big enough to say it out loud.

    Lam knows where his bread is buttered… Any mention of Jews, the real culprit, would get his arse kicked to the curb by no less than his superior, Mr. Unz. The Chinaman is not as dumb as you think he is!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @FKA Max
    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!

    The same is not true for whites, so there is no reason they should have preference over Asians in college admissions. It would be ludicrous to state that whites have been disadvantaged in comparison to Asian-Americans.
     
    ...

    However, if we separate out the Jewish students, their ratio turns out to be 435 percent, while the residual ratio for non-Jewish whites drops to just 28 percent, less than half of even the Asian figure. As a consequence, Asians appear under-represented relative to Jews by a factor of seven, while non-Jewish whites are by far the most under-represented group of all, despite any benefits they might receive from athletic, legacy, or geographical distribution factors. The rest of the Ivy League tends to follow a similar pattern, with the overall Jewish ratio being 381 percent, the Asian figure at 62 percent, and the ratio for non-Jewish whites a low 35 percent, all relative to their number of high-ability college-age students.

    Just as striking as these wildly disproportionate current numbers have been the longer enrollment trends. In the three decades since I graduated Harvard, the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    I just discovered this amazing tool here at the Unz Review, yesterday. Highly recommended:

    http://www.unz.com/enrollments/


    The Late, Great American WASP
    The old U.S. ruling class had plenty of problems. But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579268301043949952

    Having been a good student, no matter how good the reputation of the school—and most of the good schools, we are coming to learn, are good chiefly in reputation—is no indication of one’s quality or promise as a leader. A good student might even be more than a bit of a follower, a conformist, standing ready to give satisfaction to the powers that be so that one can proceed to the next good school, taking another step up the ladder of meritocracy.
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1734270

    But, I think, qualitatively, Chinese immigrants are far more dangerous and can do a lot more damage and harm to the U.S., e.g., industrial and military espionage, takeover of higher education institutions, etc., than African Americans or Hispanics could ever do, because of their higher IQs. [...]
    Buying influence…

    Largest Donors to Harvard No Longer Chinese

    http://www.asianphilanthropyforum.org/donor-harvard-chinese/

    American-Buddhist billionaires, who are most likely ethnically Jewish, are selling out to the Chinese
     

    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    Thanks again, for this amazing website and your amazing content and research, Mr. Unz!

    “But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?”

    I hear ya, but who on earth can say with a straight face that we’re living in a meritocracy?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite's main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.

    I think this would ensure a more genuine and solid meritocracy and elite.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist

    Organizations provide a convenient infrastructure from which a predator can prey on others for financial gain or to otherwise exploit others (sexually, mentally, physically).
    [...]
    Membership in a legitimate institution, be it a club, a branch of the military, or a corporation, gives legitimacy to individuals. We are more respectful and trusting when we are told a certain person is a VP or head of sales for XYZ company rather than just a stranger off the street.
    [...]
    There is, it should be noted, no religion or sect that screens for psychopathy as defined by Robert Hare that I am aware of. All you need is to be ordained, or you declare yourself a religious leader and the way is clear for the predator. And so while some organizations, such as in law enforcement, screen for pathologies by using psychometric tools, very few religious organization do so. Which is why the predator would benefit from joining or leading such an organization. Across the planet, there is almost no scrutiny or due diligence that is or will be conducted.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/im-not-sure-why-but-this-headline-cracks-me-up/#comment-1747028

    He calls them “subclinical” psychopaths. They’re the charming predators who, unable to form real emotional bonds, find and use vulnerable women for sex and money (and inevitably abandon them). They’re the con men like Christophe Rocancourt, and they’re the stockbrokers and promoters who caused Forbes magazine to call the Vancouver Stock Exchange (now part of the Canadian Venture Exchange) the scam capital of the world. (Hare has said that if he couldn’t study psychopaths in prisons, the Vancouver Stock Exchange would have been his second choice.)
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/pavlov-nowhere/#comment-1744223

    Personally, I believe that the MAOA gene is more important and has more of an effect on the functioning or non-functioning of a society than “just” IQ. [...]

    There is not that much difference between Western and Asian IQs, but the difference in the frequency of the low(er)-activity MAOA (3R) allele between those two races is quite significant, and I posit the reason why Western/White societies are less corrupt, etc. than Asian societies
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1725649

    Jews and the Chinese seem to be equally ambitious and competitive, some might even call it cunning. Interestingly, the two groups/races seem to have comparable IQs and seem to be carrying the low-activity 3-repeat MAOA allele at very similar rates
    [...]
    As both authors belong to one of the above groups and coming from an immigrant family, namely Chua being Chinese and Rubenfeld being Jewish, Chua further claims that “Chinese Americans are three generations behind the Jews” as both Jewish Americans and Chinese Americans share lots of similar behaviors
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1730862
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Svigor

    FKA Max
    says:

    January 31, 2017 at 11:55 pm GMT • 500 Words

    Thanks so much, Mr. Unz!
     
    Bingo. At the very least, every time we hear "White Privilege," they need to hear "Jewish Privilege" in return. Jewish Privilege is huge, much bigger than White Privilege, and nobody even talks about it, much less fights against it. On the contrary, Jewish Privilege is so profound that supposedly privileged Whites can't even mention it, much less challenge it, without risking their jobs and social standing. Now that's Privilege.

    Eventually, at the very least, blacks and Muslims are going to tumble to this, and start using it as their trump card against Jews.

    You should know the North America belongs to the first nations of the North America, the current regimes in the North America are illegitimate, they are thieves, war criminals and criminals of crimes against humanity; they stole the North America from the rightful owners thru lies, cheating, snakeoil salesman trickery, organized violence, Kangaroo Court proceedings, genocides, torturing, force feeding drugs, raping, … all kinds sins beyond the imagination of human beings.
     
    In other words, any east Asian in United States territory is guilty of receiving stolen goods, and so should be deported to east Asia.

    We didn't do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren't as bad as that bunch of subhumans.

    “We didn’t do to the Indians what the Chinese did to the Dzungars, so we aren’t as bad as that bunch of subhumans.”

    Not to mention what they’re currently doing in Tibet, or Xinjiang. It’s one thing to criticize people hundreds of years ago, living by standards that people hundreds of years ago had, as opposed to the “enlightened” current view, that its wrong to conquer and rule. But what do Chinese today have as an excuse? Certainly they can’t claim to not ‘know better’. And it’s not like people hundreds of years ago, being screwed over by other people hundreds of years ago- at best someone might have a claim to soil a dead man’s name. But living people in Tibet have a legitimate grievance against the Chinese government and living Chinese citizenry who largely support it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Svigor
    I think maybe I'm starting to re-think my response to "YOU GENOCIDED THE INDIANS!!!" Until now, my strategy has been to counter with criticism of Amerinds (who are (or rather, were), to be fair, WIIIIDE open to criticism from a leftist standpoint). But I'm beginning to think Discard may have a more appropriate response:

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.
     
    It really is no business of the grease of Asia. The Chinese have plenty of wrongdoing to answer for, though, like the commies, most of it has been inflicted on their own kind. The grease of Asia cares not one whit about the Amerinds. So why should I let them bait me into bashing the Amerinds?

    Same goes for white leftist scum, and Jewish leftist scum, and the rest. They don't care about the Amerinds. They know nothing about the Amerinds. And in the case of the foreign leftists, it's none of their damned business.

    I think I might just insist that people prove some connection to the issue, before I get into the issue. It's not fair to Amerinds to let everyone else wave the Amerinds' bloody shirts, as if their own. If the Amerinds want to get into an argument over it, that's another story.

    It’s people who never actually lived with Am. Indians who glorify them. Much like its the leftists from 99.9% white areas whose interactions with blacks consist of exchanging hellos with their friendly Jamaican doorman on the way out each morning. People of the time who had to actually interact with real Am. Indians (not the 3/4 white domesticated modern variety) often had a different view. Mark Twain, who lived in a time where some Americans were beginning to live in a world free of Amerinds, wrote about the contrast with reality :

    http://twain.lib.virginia.edu/projects/rissetto/redman.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Kyle McKenna
    All levity aside, 1965 really is the watershed.

    It should be the yardstick by which policy is measured; because before that we had a real country, a real America, and ever since we have progressively disintegrated until now we have very little chance left, and not much resembling a Nation or a People.

    What's been shaping up, instead, ever since 1965 is a polyglot third-world cesspool of primitive, warring tribes presided over by a preening yet slightly sadistic (and also largely tribal) überclass.

    The 1965 immigration bill was passed under false pretenses. The American people were promised it wouldn’t change our demographics, but obviously it did.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites. The 450-point advantage that the Princeton study demonstrated blacks have over Asians draws the most attention. But the number that is most revealing is the 140-point advantage for whites over Asians.

    If that’s his notion of a rational argument, then I know at least one Asian-American who does not belong in college – regardless of what his SAT is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  107. FKA Max says:
    @Anonymous
    "But are we really better off with a country run by the self-involved, over-schooled products of modern meritocracy?"

    I hear ya, but who on earth can say with a straight face that we're living in a meritocracy?

    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite’s main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.

    I think this would ensure a more genuine and solid meritocracy and elite.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist

    Organizations provide a convenient infrastructure from which a predator can prey on others for financial gain or to otherwise exploit others (sexually, mentally, physically).
    [...]
    Membership in a legitimate institution, be it a club, a branch of the military, or a corporation, gives legitimacy to individuals. We are more respectful and trusting when we are told a certain person is a VP or head of sales for XYZ company rather than just a stranger off the street.
    [...]
    There is, it should be noted, no religion or sect that screens for psychopathy as defined by Robert Hare that I am aware of. All you need is to be ordained, or you declare yourself a religious leader and the way is clear for the predator. And so while some organizations, such as in law enforcement, screen for pathologies by using psychometric tools, very few religious organization do so. Which is why the predator would benefit from joining or leading such an organization. Across the planet, there is almost no scrutiny or due diligence that is or will be conducted.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/im-not-sure-why-but-this-headline-cracks-me-up/#comment-1747028

    He calls them “subclinical” psychopaths. They’re the charming predators who, unable to form real emotional bonds, find and use vulnerable women for sex and money (and inevitably abandon them). They’re the con men like Christophe Rocancourt, and they’re the stockbrokers and promoters who caused Forbes magazine to call the Vancouver Stock Exchange (now part of the Canadian Venture Exchange) the scam capital of the world. (Hare has said that if he couldn’t study psychopaths in prisons, the Vancouver Stock Exchange would have been his second choice.)

    http://www.unz.com/jthompson/pavlov-nowhere/#comment-1744223

    Personally, I believe that the MAOA gene is more important and has more of an effect on the functioning or non-functioning of a society than “just” IQ. [...]

    There is not that much difference between Western and Asian IQs, but the difference in the frequency of the low(er)-activity MAOA (3R) allele between those two races is quite significant, and I posit the reason why Western/White societies are less corrupt, etc. than Asian societies

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1725649

    Jews and the Chinese seem to be equally ambitious and competitive, some might even call it cunning. Interestingly, the two groups/races seem to have comparable IQs and seem to be carrying the low-activity 3-repeat MAOA allele at very similar rates
    [...]
    As both authors belong to one of the above groups and coming from an immigrant family, namely Chua being Chinese and Rubenfeld being Jewish, Chua further claims that “Chinese Americans are three generations behind the Jews” as both Jewish Americans and Chinese Americans share lots of similar behaviors

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1730862

    Read More
    • Replies: @FKA Max
    Some additional information/comments on why, in my opinion, it is important to test for both IQ (Intelligence Quotient) and PQ (Psychopathy Quotient):

    According to one hypothesis, some traits associated with psychopathy may be socially adaptive, and psychopathy may be a frequency-dependent, socially parasitic strategy, which may work as long as there is a large population of altruistic and trusting individuals, relative to the population of psychopathic individuals, to be exploited.[98][116]
     
    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#Other_theories

    In the first hour, Kevin outlines his recent work, which explores theories of a genetic basis for altruism and the lack of ethnic awareness or kinship oriented nepotism. He explains recent scientific studies that are finding there is perhaps a genetic or evolutionary reason for the kind of pathological altruism found in Northern Europe.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1723128

    On the inappropriate use of the naturalistic fallacy in evolutionary psychology

    The naturalistic fallacy is mentioned frequently by evolutionary psychologists as an erroneous way of thinking about the ethical implications of evolved behaviors. However,evolutionary psychologists are themselves confused about the naturalistic fallacy and use it inappropriately to forestall legitimate ethical discussion. We briefly review what the naturalistic fallacy is and why it is misused by evolutionary psychologists. Then we attempt to show how the ethical implications of evolved behaviors can be discussed constructively without impeding evolutionary psychological research. A key is to show how ethical behaviors, in addition to unethical behaviors, can evolve by natural selection.
     
    - http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1026380825208

    Full paper: http://evolution.binghamton.edu/dswilson/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/DSW14.pdf

    This was actually my original point, that corrupt and sociopathic/psychopathic high(er)-IQ individuals/races can do a lot more damage than low(er)-IQ ones, in terms of financial damage caused by their crimes, etc., and many so-called “race realists” and IQists completely ignore this dynamic, or even welcome it, which really makes them Social Darwinists, in my opinion.

    There have been anecdotal reports that at least one UK bank was using a psychopathy measure to actively recruit psychopaths.[37]
     
    – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace#Screening

    I think Social Darwinsts are dangerous.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    He Who Controls Test Prep Controls the Future


    Seriously, if you can get your followers to score higher on the gatekeeper tests, they may become the ruling class of the future—a lesson that American conservatives might ponder. In general, American conservatives have felt that it wouldn’t be sporting for them to think in any organized fashioned about how to game tests such as the SAT. But the older civilizations have little patience for such boyish innocence.
     
    … typical, pathological WASP/Northern European altruism/idealism at its finest/worst. I am like this too, I rather quit the game altogether, than to play with the overambitious or cheats. WASP Flight.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/he-who-controls-test-prep-controls-the-future/#comment-1512545

    Recent comment from commenter education realist:

    The “growing” Asian dominance is in part because of higher IQ average, but given the relative ease of the SAT, a good chunk of the explanation is wholesale cheating and gaming by Asians–the “smart” or “fancy” kind.
    [...]
    Like I said: if Asians are in the academic setting, rich whites leave. And not because they don’t like competition. But because they despise what happens to the schools.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/brookings-race-gaps-in-sat-math-scores-are-as-big-as-ever/#comment-1755427

    This is all, unfortunately, the ultimate consequence and outcome of WASP flight.

    Abbott Lawrence Lowell’s even earlier prediction has come true.

    “The summer hotel that is ruined by admitting Jews meets its fate, not because the Jews it admits are of bad character, but because they drive away the Gentiles [WASPs], and then after the Gentiles [WASPs] have left, they leave also.”
     
    – http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2005/11/3/writing-the-wrong-a-lawrence-lowell/

    No WASPs, no authentic Ivy League, no true Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, etc., etc.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/dennis-dale-mediocrity-and-its-discontents/#comment-1460381
    , @Reg Cæsar

    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite’s main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.
     
    Don't forget the somatotypes:

    http://www.messynessychic.com/2013/11/12/that-time-harvard-and-yale-took-naked-photos-of-all-their-freshmen-students/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. Stealth says:
    @Svigor
    I think maybe I'm starting to re-think my response to "YOU GENOCIDED THE INDIANS!!!" Until now, my strategy has been to counter with criticism of Amerinds (who are (or rather, were), to be fair, WIIIIDE open to criticism from a leftist standpoint). But I'm beginning to think Discard may have a more appropriate response:

    No business of yours, Wong. Go home and oppress some Maylays or something.
     
    It really is no business of the grease of Asia. The Chinese have plenty of wrongdoing to answer for, though, like the commies, most of it has been inflicted on their own kind. The grease of Asia cares not one whit about the Amerinds. So why should I let them bait me into bashing the Amerinds?

    Same goes for white leftist scum, and Jewish leftist scum, and the rest. They don't care about the Amerinds. They know nothing about the Amerinds. And in the case of the foreign leftists, it's none of their damned business.

    I think I might just insist that people prove some connection to the issue, before I get into the issue. It's not fair to Amerinds to let everyone else wave the Amerinds' bloody shirts, as if their own. If the Amerinds want to get into an argument over it, that's another story.

    Non-white immigrants and their descendants receive the benefits of the European colonization of North America. If there be guilt, they share in it, just like native-born white Americans.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. FKA Max says:
    @FKA Max
    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite's main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.

    I think this would ensure a more genuine and solid meritocracy and elite.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist

    Organizations provide a convenient infrastructure from which a predator can prey on others for financial gain or to otherwise exploit others (sexually, mentally, physically).
    [...]
    Membership in a legitimate institution, be it a club, a branch of the military, or a corporation, gives legitimacy to individuals. We are more respectful and trusting when we are told a certain person is a VP or head of sales for XYZ company rather than just a stranger off the street.
    [...]
    There is, it should be noted, no religion or sect that screens for psychopathy as defined by Robert Hare that I am aware of. All you need is to be ordained, or you declare yourself a religious leader and the way is clear for the predator. And so while some organizations, such as in law enforcement, screen for pathologies by using psychometric tools, very few religious organization do so. Which is why the predator would benefit from joining or leading such an organization. Across the planet, there is almost no scrutiny or due diligence that is or will be conducted.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/im-not-sure-why-but-this-headline-cracks-me-up/#comment-1747028

    He calls them “subclinical” psychopaths. They’re the charming predators who, unable to form real emotional bonds, find and use vulnerable women for sex and money (and inevitably abandon them). They’re the con men like Christophe Rocancourt, and they’re the stockbrokers and promoters who caused Forbes magazine to call the Vancouver Stock Exchange (now part of the Canadian Venture Exchange) the scam capital of the world. (Hare has said that if he couldn’t study psychopaths in prisons, the Vancouver Stock Exchange would have been his second choice.)
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/pavlov-nowhere/#comment-1744223

    Personally, I believe that the MAOA gene is more important and has more of an effect on the functioning or non-functioning of a society than “just” IQ. [...]

    There is not that much difference between Western and Asian IQs, but the difference in the frequency of the low(er)-activity MAOA (3R) allele between those two races is quite significant, and I posit the reason why Western/White societies are less corrupt, etc. than Asian societies
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1725649

    Jews and the Chinese seem to be equally ambitious and competitive, some might even call it cunning. Interestingly, the two groups/races seem to have comparable IQs and seem to be carrying the low-activity 3-repeat MAOA allele at very similar rates
    [...]
    As both authors belong to one of the above groups and coming from an immigrant family, namely Chua being Chinese and Rubenfeld being Jewish, Chua further claims that “Chinese Americans are three generations behind the Jews” as both Jewish Americans and Chinese Americans share lots of similar behaviors
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1730862

    Some additional information/comments on why, in my opinion, it is important to test for both IQ (Intelligence Quotient) and PQ (Psychopathy Quotient):

    According to one hypothesis, some traits associated with psychopathy may be socially adaptive, and psychopathy may be a frequency-dependent, socially parasitic strategy, which may work as long as there is a large population of altruistic and trusting individuals, relative to the population of psychopathic individuals, to be exploited.[98][116]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#Other_theories

    In the first hour, Kevin outlines his recent work, which explores theories of a genetic basis for altruism and the lack of ethnic awareness or kinship oriented nepotism. He explains recent scientific studies that are finding there is perhaps a genetic or evolutionary reason for the kind of pathological altruism found in Northern Europe.

    http://www.unz.com/article/precedents-for-pizzagate/#comment-1723128

    On the inappropriate use of the naturalistic fallacy in evolutionary psychology

    The naturalistic fallacy is mentioned frequently by evolutionary psychologists as an erroneous way of thinking about the ethical implications of evolved behaviors. However,evolutionary psychologists are themselves confused about the naturalistic fallacy and use it inappropriately to forestall legitimate ethical discussion. We briefly review what the naturalistic fallacy is and why it is misused by evolutionary psychologists. Then we attempt to show how the ethical implications of evolved behaviors can be discussed constructively without impeding evolutionary psychological research. A key is to show how ethical behaviors, in addition to unethical behaviors, can evolve by natural selection.

    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1026380825208

    Full paper: http://evolution.binghamton.edu/dswilson/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/DSW14.pdf

    This was actually my original point, that corrupt and sociopathic/psychopathic high(er)-IQ individuals/races can do a lot more damage than low(er)-IQ ones, in terms of financial damage caused by their crimes, etc., and many so-called “race realists” and IQists completely ignore this dynamic, or even welcome it, which really makes them Social Darwinists, in my opinion.

    There have been anecdotal reports that at least one UK bank was using a psychopathy measure to actively recruit psychopaths.[37]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_in_the_workplace#Screening

    I think Social Darwinsts are dangerous.

    http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1731013

    He Who Controls Test Prep Controls the Future

    Seriously, if you can get your followers to score higher on the gatekeeper tests, they may become the ruling class of the future—a lesson that American conservatives might ponder. In general, American conservatives have felt that it wouldn’t be sporting for them to think in any organized fashioned about how to game tests such as the SAT. But the older civilizations have little patience for such boyish innocence.

    … typical, pathological WASP/Northern European altruism/idealism at its finest/worst. I am like this too, I rather quit the game altogether, than to play with the overambitious or cheats. WASP Flight.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/he-who-controls-test-prep-controls-the-future/#comment-1512545

    Recent comment from commenter education realist:

    The “growing” Asian dominance is in part because of higher IQ average, but given the relative ease of the SAT, a good chunk of the explanation is wholesale cheating and gaming by Asians–the “smart” or “fancy” kind.
    [...]
    Like I said: if Asians are in the academic setting, rich whites leave. And not because they don’t like competition. But because they despise what happens to the schools.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/brookings-race-gaps-in-sat-math-scores-are-as-big-as-ever/#comment-1755427

    This is all, unfortunately, the ultimate consequence and outcome of WASP flight.

    Abbott Lawrence Lowell’s even earlier prediction has come true.

    “The summer hotel that is ruined by admitting Jews meets its fate, not because the Jews it admits are of bad character, but because they drive away the Gentiles [WASPs], and then after the Gentiles [WASPs] have left, they leave also.”

    http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2005/11/3/writing-the-wrong-a-lawrence-lowell/

    No WASPs, no authentic Ivy League, no true Anglo-Saxon legal tradition, etc., etc.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/dennis-dale-mediocrity-and-its-discontents/#comment-1460381

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. bjdubbs says:

    It’s amazing that the most obvious solution is never considered: Asians start their own university. The Boston Irish didn’t say “Let me in to Harvard!”, they started their own universities. Maybe Asians might want to consider it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  111. But if Asians are being held back, it’s not so much because of affirmative action but because of preference for whites.

    That’s called “legacy” admission. One gets in not on one’s own merit, but on the merit of one’s ancestors. Who built the schools.

    Sounds fair to me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  112. @FKA Max
    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite's main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.

    I think this would ensure a more genuine and solid meritocracy and elite.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy_Checklist

    Organizations provide a convenient infrastructure from which a predator can prey on others for financial gain or to otherwise exploit others (sexually, mentally, physically).
    [...]
    Membership in a legitimate institution, be it a club, a branch of the military, or a corporation, gives legitimacy to individuals. We are more respectful and trusting when we are told a certain person is a VP or head of sales for XYZ company rather than just a stranger off the street.
    [...]
    There is, it should be noted, no religion or sect that screens for psychopathy as defined by Robert Hare that I am aware of. All you need is to be ordained, or you declare yourself a religious leader and the way is clear for the predator. And so while some organizations, such as in law enforcement, screen for pathologies by using psychometric tools, very few religious organization do so. Which is why the predator would benefit from joining or leading such an organization. Across the planet, there is almost no scrutiny or due diligence that is or will be conducted.
     
    - http://www.unz.com/isteve/im-not-sure-why-but-this-headline-cracks-me-up/#comment-1747028

    He calls them “subclinical” psychopaths. They’re the charming predators who, unable to form real emotional bonds, find and use vulnerable women for sex and money (and inevitably abandon them). They’re the con men like Christophe Rocancourt, and they’re the stockbrokers and promoters who caused Forbes magazine to call the Vancouver Stock Exchange (now part of the Canadian Venture Exchange) the scam capital of the world. (Hare has said that if he couldn’t study psychopaths in prisons, the Vancouver Stock Exchange would have been his second choice.)
     
    - http://www.unz.com/jthompson/pavlov-nowhere/#comment-1744223

    Personally, I believe that the MAOA gene is more important and has more of an effect on the functioning or non-functioning of a society than “just” IQ. [...]

    There is not that much difference between Western and Asian IQs, but the difference in the frequency of the low(er)-activity MAOA (3R) allele between those two races is quite significant, and I posit the reason why Western/White societies are less corrupt, etc. than Asian societies
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1725649

    Jews and the Chinese seem to be equally ambitious and competitive, some might even call it cunning. Interestingly, the two groups/races seem to have comparable IQs and seem to be carrying the low-activity 3-repeat MAOA allele at very similar rates
    [...]
    As both authors belong to one of the above groups and coming from an immigrant family, namely Chua being Chinese and Rubenfeld being Jewish, Chua further claims that “Chinese Americans are three generations behind the Jews” as both Jewish Americans and Chinese Americans share lots of similar behaviors
     
    - http://www.unz.com/freed/iq-a-skeptics-view/#comment-1730862

    In my opinion, all applicants and candidates for high-level positions in government, business, the military, etc. and for prestigious elite schools/universities (both students and faculty), which are the springboards into high-level governmental, etc. positions and the elite’s main recruiting grounds, should be both IQ and Psychopathy Checklist tested.

    Don’t forget the somatotypes:

    http://www.messynessychic.com/2013/11/12/that-time-harvard-and-yale-took-naked-photos-of-all-their-freshmen-students/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Twinkie says:
    @Kyle McKenna
    That's actually what we call an anecdote. I won't insult you further by explaining why your additional "evidence" is barely better than random data. Or do you insist?

    You can start with the first post in this thread, which you appear to have missed.

    That’s actually what we call an anecdote.

    An anecdote would be if I knew an Asian alum who made a donation. An Asian alum setting the record for the biggest donation ever is called a “sample maximum” in statistical terms.

    I won’t insult you further by explaining why your additional “evidence” is barely better than random data. Or do you insist?

    Yes, I insist. In particular, let’s talk about this:

    According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Department of Education data, Hong Kong has become the top international source of large gifts to U.S. colleges. As a matter of fact, Hong Kong donations make up 17 percent of the world’s total donations to U.S. universities. Both China and Hong Kong figure prominently in the list of top ten sources of donations to U.S. colleges from January 2007 to November 2013. Hong Kong is first, with $181 million worth of donations given to U.S. colleges. China is eighth, at $60.4 million. Furthermore, the biggest beneficiaries of these donations are elite colleges in the U.S., such as Princeton, Yale, Stanford, the University of California at Berkeley, and Harvard.

    Although this does not “prove” that Asians over-donate (or donate on par with others), it certainly lends weight on the opposite side of the claim that Asian alums under-donate.

    In point of fact, let’s back up a little. You claimed earlier that the alleged phenomenon of Asian alums not giving money is akin to blacks under-tipping – well-known, but not demonstrated empirically. But contrary your claim, black under-tipping IS empirically demonstrated and has been studied by scholars.

    So, let’s see a similar empirical study about the alleged Asian under-donations to their almae matres. The last time I checked the proponents of a claim have the obligation to provide supporting evidence.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Twinkie says:
    @Kyle McKenna
    Wow, I didn't realize you were still going at it over here. No worries, I'll indulge you another time or two.

    The reference was to a web search, and if you knew how to use a search engine you'd have found the answer to your query.

    Meanwhile, I'm a vegetarian but I don't think it's wrong to eat meat. I just think it's wrong to cause unnecessary suffering. HTH.

    The reference was to a web search

    Non sequitir.

    Meanwhile, I’m a vegetarian but I don’t think it’s wrong to eat meat. I just think it’s wrong to cause unnecessary suffering.

    Bow hunting does not cause any more or worse suffering to the prey than other forms of hunting. So, your opposition to bow hunting on that ground is simply ignorance and prejudice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Twinkie says:
    @Johann Ricke

    …And bow hunters generally carry pistols for this reason, hunting 200 lb. feral pigs would be potentially quite dangerous without one.
     
    No matter what you're armed with, I suspect hunting wild pigs is dangerous unless you're doing it from a tree stand or a helicopter.

    No matter what you’re armed with, I suspect hunting wild pigs is dangerous unless you’re doing it from a tree stand or a helicopter.

    Wild pigs are not gentle creatures, that’s for sure. But they taste so very good!

    I know guys who hunt wild pigs with a bunch of large powerful dogs and a big knife. That’s a bit too wild even for me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Twinkie says:
    @res
    Do you have any hard data about this? I don't doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?

    I'm also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative. (saw comment 83 after I wrote this but left in for completeness)

    To give my baseline, I have known bowhunters and seen both the bows and broadheads close up. Also have done a tiny bit of archery with target arrows. And know and agree with the deer culling argument given the lack of predators.

    Do you have any hard data about this? I don’t doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?

    I have no data, but it’s drilled into most hunters that allowing a prey animal to die a slow, agonizing death is very unethical and is in poor form.

    I’m also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative.

    I think I am pretty good, but by no means uniquely good or ethical in that I will NOT take a shot unless I know that I have a very high percentage chance of retrieving the prety, whether I am hunting with a rifle, a shotgun, a black powder gun, a handgun or a bow. Much of that, though, is based on experience and judgment… which is why it’s a good idea to accompany young ones to hunts until they develop the maturity necessary to be a good, ethical hunter. But that’s like anything else in life – the person who terrifies me the most nowadays is a neighborhood teenager behind his first car!

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called “social justice warriors.” They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called “social justice warriors.” They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.
     
    It can be difficult to separate this from people who genuinely are trying to lead a more moral life IMHO. However, given the severe consequences for the environment and its animals of ANY first world lifestyle relying on societal amenities, I find it hard to be sympathetic with the associated virtue signaling.

    Although never a hunter, I grew up in a time and place where everyone had hunter safety training in elementary school (a sensible safety precaution there IMHO) and many non-hunters still learned to shoot (even if just a .22 rifle like me). I think what turns many people off from hunting is the seeming bloody brutality of it (or real life on a farm with animals)--very different from urban culture--especially for those who value "refinement." Although I don't live it, I tend to agree with the argument that doing your own killing for food is more honorable than outsourcing it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. As a Yale senior, I remember feeling disillusioned myself when an upper-middle-class black classmate with significantly less academic achievement than I was admitted to a top medical school that had rejected me.

    I know of at least 3 similar cases. white males, all of whom are accomplished including obtaining Summa cum Laude in substantial degrees at decent private colleges, who’ve been turned down repeatedly for admission to med school.

    A poorly qualified white woman I know was accepted virtually instantly. After having graduated from med school, she’s no longer interested in practicing medicine!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  118. @res

    People who perform relatively well on standardized tests (or who simply cheat on them) will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly equivalent to merit.
     
    Then there's the opposite observation that people who perform poorly on standardized tests will invariably tell you that standardized test scores are wholly irrelevant and have no relationship to merit.

    Funny how that works.

    oh snap. haha, you are good :)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. keuril says:
    @Twinkie
    It is as if the Unz piece on the "American meritocracy" were never published. Asian activists - whose views on affirmative action does not mirror that of the general Asian-American population - still support affirmative action and try to redirect Asian resentment toward that broken system away from the real beneficiaries (Jews, blacks, and Hispanics) to yet another set of victims, the non-Jewish whites.

    It's predictably loathsome and intellectually dishonest.

    I am a naturalized Asian immigrant, but my white wife hails from the rural Midwest, and we live part of the year in West Virginia. In both places (especially the latter), I sometimes see appalling poverty among whites, far worse than anything in the urban ghetto (and for all that test scores are higher and crime rate lower in the former over the latter). Where is the affirmative action for their children? Their lives and struggles are in no way alleviated by the mythical "white privilege" that is constantly and tiresomely denounced by left-wing activists).

    I think it's high time that we remove race from affirmative action, and instead make it one based on economics. My children won't benefit from it, of course, due to the affluence of their parents, but they won't need it and, more importantly, it would be better for the country and go a great length toward reducing both the socio-economic status imbalance and the regional one in future elite factories that is the Ivy League.

    I sometimes see appalling poverty among whites, far worse than anything in the urban ghetto (and for all that test scores are higher and crime rate lower in the former over the latter). Where is the affirmative action for their children

    Top colleges now definitely give preference to those with socioeconomic disadvantage, regardless of race. In their admissions materials, you will see frequent reference to the percentage of first-gen or Pell Grant recipients. You can also check out the website admitsee, where if you pay their fee you can see pretty much the entire application (minus actual transcripts and recommendations) of kids who got into all sorts of schools. In the case of non-athlete whites or Asians who get into top schools with below-average (for the school) standardized tests, they are almost all socioeconomic cases.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. keuril says:
    @res
    Lots of interesting analysis there. It's too bad we can't get the relevant data to make a rigorous analysis. And we know the admissions departments will never release it without the legal equivalent of a gun to the head.

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?

    I wonder what the Jew/gentile split is for the un/hooked and how it compares to the overall balance in the student population? Does Ron address that in his writings?

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?

    I just compared the numbers they published—in that sense they are “real”. However, I wouldn’t take them too literally, since the published numbers for admits were for SCEA (early admissions), not total admissions. Nevertheless, i believe it is valid that there are vastly different yields among different demographics. Here’s a senior thesis by a Williams grad that goes into the subject in depth: http://ephblog.com/2010/03/03/30245/

    I think one could disentangle the results for various demographics (including whites) from the various press releases and other publications, given sufficient time and interest and interpolative talents. As for lower black yield, it’s not a secret that top black students have a wide range of choices. The last several years there have been articles in early April (right after regular decision results come out) about black kids who got into all eight Ivies. Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there’s a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    Thanks for the followup! That thesis looks interesting, but it will take some time to read its 24 pages.

    Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there’s a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.
     
    I've been assuming the quasi/Ivies still have the uniform financial aid policies they had in my time. Does anyone know if that is still true? Obviously aid might be an issue other places. IIRC, one of the most compelling "got into all Ivies" stories I read (actually included test scores and other background and they really were impressive!) actually ended up going to a state school because of the aid package (I think he was an upper middle class black, based on extracurriculars).

    Favored prof/major/friends there all seem plausible reasons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. res says:
    @Twinkie

    Do you have any hard data about this? I don’t doubt that fatal and disabling injuries result in retrieval given the range, but how common are injuries which still allow the animal to get away?
     
    I have no data, but it's drilled into most hunters that allowing a prey animal to die a slow, agonizing death is very unethical and is in poor form.

    I’m also interested in your own experience, but I suspect you are better than average at both marksmanship and target choice (e.g. range) so you might not be representative.
     
    I think I am pretty good, but by no means uniquely good or ethical in that I will NOT take a shot unless I know that I have a very high percentage chance of retrieving the prety, whether I am hunting with a rifle, a shotgun, a black powder gun, a handgun or a bow. Much of that, though, is based on experience and judgment... which is why it's a good idea to accompany young ones to hunts until they develop the maturity necessary to be a good, ethical hunter. But that's like anything else in life - the person who terrifies me the most nowadays is a neighborhood teenager behind his first car!

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called "social justice warriors." They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called “social justice warriors.” They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.

    It can be difficult to separate this from people who genuinely are trying to lead a more moral life IMHO. However, given the severe consequences for the environment and its animals of ANY first world lifestyle relying on societal amenities, I find it hard to be sympathetic with the associated virtue signaling.

    Although never a hunter, I grew up in a time and place where everyone had hunter safety training in elementary school (a sensible safety precaution there IMHO) and many non-hunters still learned to shoot (even if just a .22 rifle like me). I think what turns many people off from hunting is the seeming bloody brutality of it (or real life on a farm with animals)–very different from urban culture–especially for those who value “refinement.” Although I don’t live it, I tend to agree with the argument that doing your own killing for food is more honorable than outsourcing it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Although I don’t live it, I tend to agree with the argument that doing your own killing for food is more honorable than outsourcing it.
     
    I personally wouldn't go that far. I don't think it makes me nobler because I make venison steak, sausage, and jerky instead of buying beef versions at the store. However, I object to the hypocrisy of the people who choose the latter and then lecture me about animal cruelty.

    I think what turns many people off from hunting is the seeming bloody brutality of it (or real life on a farm with animals)–very different from urban culture–especially for those who value “refinement.”
     
    A lot of urban and suburban people are completely clueless about the "cruelty" they inflict. For example, despite the rather unhappy lives that puppy mills inflict on the bitches and the puppies, people continue to buy their products. And then even those who go to legitimate breeders don't realize that there is culling of those puppies that display undesirable traits.

    Killing and death are an unavoidable part of animal life. We humans - being graced by God with souls - should not go out of our way to inflict pain and suffering on them, but we should use them to serve our needs. And, yes, that means I am perfectly happy to turn wild piggies into tasty, tasty BBQ and old horse rumps into boots, belts, and holsters.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. res says:
    @keuril

    Some specific questions, are those ** numbers for yields real? Do you have the number for whites as well for comparison? I suppose it would also be possible to infer an estimate if we knew the total yield. Is the black yield reflective of a tendency to apply to many schools (but how would Harvard end up with such a low yield?) or something else?
     
    I just compared the numbers they published—in that sense they are "real". However, I wouldn't take them too literally, since the published numbers for admits were for SCEA (early admissions), not total admissions. Nevertheless, i believe it is valid that there are vastly different yields among different demographics. Here's a senior thesis by a Williams grad that goes into the subject in depth: http://ephblog.com/2010/03/03/30245/

    I think one could disentangle the results for various demographics (including whites) from the various press releases and other publications, given sufficient time and interest and interpolative talents. As for lower black yield, it's not a secret that top black students have a wide range of choices. The last several years there have been articles in early April (right after regular decision results come out) about black kids who got into all eight Ivies. Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there's a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.

    Thanks for the followup! That thesis looks interesting, but it will take some time to read its 24 pages.

    Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there’s a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.

    I’ve been assuming the quasi/Ivies still have the uniform financial aid policies they had in my time. Does anyone know if that is still true? Obviously aid might be an issue other places. IIRC, one of the most compelling “got into all Ivies” stories I read (actually included test scores and other background and they really were impressive!) actually ended up going to a state school because of the aid package (I think he was an upper middle class black, based on extracurriculars).

    Favored prof/major/friends there all seem plausible reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @keuril

    I’ve been assuming the quasi/Ivies still have the uniform financial aid policies they had in my time. Does anyone know if that is still true? Obviously aid might be an issue other places. IIRC, one of the most compelling “got into all Ivies” stories I read (actually included test scores and other background and they really were impressive!) actually ended up going to a state school because of the aid package
     
    I believe the Ivies were sued some years ago for collusion relating to financial aid so they no longer have uniform policies. Of course the top schools tend to give the best aid now as they are so rich, but YMMV. Harvard actually brags that it is usually cheaper to go to Harvard than your state school due to generous financial aid.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. keuril says:
    @res
    Thanks for the followup! That thesis looks interesting, but it will take some time to read its 24 pages.

    Why would somebody not choose Harvard? Maybe they got a better financial aid package somewhere else. Or there’s a prof they like at Yale/Stanford/Princeton. Could be all sorts of reasons, for people who actually have the luxury of choosing between several top schools.
     
    I've been assuming the quasi/Ivies still have the uniform financial aid policies they had in my time. Does anyone know if that is still true? Obviously aid might be an issue other places. IIRC, one of the most compelling "got into all Ivies" stories I read (actually included test scores and other background and they really were impressive!) actually ended up going to a state school because of the aid package (I think he was an upper middle class black, based on extracurriculars).

    Favored prof/major/friends there all seem plausible reasons.

    I’ve been assuming the quasi/Ivies still have the uniform financial aid policies they had in my time. Does anyone know if that is still true? Obviously aid might be an issue other places. IIRC, one of the most compelling “got into all Ivies” stories I read (actually included test scores and other background and they really were impressive!) actually ended up going to a state school because of the aid package

    I believe the Ivies were sued some years ago for collusion relating to financial aid so they no longer have uniform policies. Of course the top schools tend to give the best aid now as they are so rich, but YMMV. Harvard actually brags that it is usually cheaper to go to Harvard than your state school due to generous financial aid.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. scoops says:
    @War for Blair Mountain
    Chinese "American"...You are the Chinese Fifth Column Lam.

    Bring back the 1882 Chinese Legal Immigrant Exclusion Act..

    God Bless Dennis Kearney...


    God Bless Samuel Gompers...

    what is the solution?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Twinkie says:
    @res

    A lot of anti-hunting types are simply hysterical and lack good knowledge of hunting in general. They are cut from the same cloth as the so-called “social justice warriors.” They seem to be driven mostly by emotion and the need to peacock (false) virtue-signaling.
     
    It can be difficult to separate this from people who genuinely are trying to lead a more moral life IMHO. However, given the severe consequences for the environment and its animals of ANY first world lifestyle relying on societal amenities, I find it hard to be sympathetic with the associated virtue signaling.

    Although never a hunter, I grew up in a time and place where everyone had hunter safety training in elementary school (a sensible safety precaution there IMHO) and many non-hunters still learned to shoot (even if just a .22 rifle like me). I think what turns many people off from hunting is the seeming bloody brutality of it (or real life on a farm with animals)--very different from urban culture--especially for those who value "refinement." Although I don't live it, I tend to agree with the argument that doing your own killing for food is more honorable than outsourcing it.

    Although I don’t live it, I tend to agree with the argument that doing your own killing for food is more honorable than outsourcing it.

    I personally wouldn’t go that far. I don’t think it makes me nobler because I make venison steak, sausage, and jerky instead of buying beef versions at the store. However, I object to the hypocrisy of the people who choose the latter and then lecture me about animal cruelty.

    I think what turns many people off from hunting is the seeming bloody brutality of it (or real life on a farm with animals)–very different from urban culture–especially for those who value “refinement.”

    A lot of urban and suburban people are completely clueless about the “cruelty” they inflict. For example, despite the rather unhappy lives that puppy mills inflict on the bitches and the puppies, people continue to buy their products. And then even those who go to legitimate breeders don’t realize that there is culling of those puppies that display undesirable traits.

    Killing and death are an unavoidable part of animal life. We humans – being graced by God with souls – should not go out of our way to inflict pain and suffering on them, but we should use them to serve our needs. And, yes, that means I am perfectly happy to turn wild piggies into tasty, tasty BBQ and old horse rumps into boots, belts, and holsters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. The author’s conclusions are not only bogus they are dishonest. Note how he changes units of measurement … Asian admissions to Harvard remained between 16% and 19% while their share of the general population doubled. That is just stupid and dishonest. If the Asian share of the general population went from 1% to 2% (i.e. doubled) then where is the disadvantage if 16-19% of Harvard admissions is of Asians? All Asians, and that includes people from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, etc., etc. make up less than 6% of the general population. Chinese make up a little more than 1%. In California Asians make up about 12% of the population, yet at UCLA they are 48% of the students admitted; at Berkeley the number is around 40%. Disadvantaged?
    What is the author’s point? That at Harvard Asian admissions should have doubled so they comprise 32-38% of students? That wouldn’t leave much room for Latinos and blacks.
    In addition, who says that those individuals that create the increase in the general population of Asians are equal in intellectual and academic quality as those Asians that preceded them? An Asian from Singapore or Hong Kong may be better equipped to succeed academically than an Asian from Pakistan or Bangladesh.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  127. anarchyst says:
    @Twinkie
    It is as if the Unz piece on the "American meritocracy" were never published. Asian activists - whose views on affirmative action does not mirror that of the general Asian-American population - still support affirmative action and try to redirect Asian resentment toward that broken system away from the real beneficiaries (Jews, blacks, and Hispanics) to yet another set of victims, the non-Jewish whites.

    It's predictably loathsome and intellectually dishonest.

    I am a naturalized Asian immigrant, but my white wife hails from the rural Midwest, and we live part of the year in West Virginia. In both places (especially the latter), I sometimes see appalling poverty among whites, far worse than anything in the urban ghetto (and for all that test scores are higher and crime rate lower in the former over the latter). Where is the affirmative action for their children? Their lives and struggles are in no way alleviated by the mythical "white privilege" that is constantly and tiresomely denounced by left-wing activists).

    I think it's high time that we remove race from affirmative action, and instead make it one based on economics. My children won't benefit from it, of course, due to the affluence of their parents, but they won't need it and, more importantly, it would be better for the country and go a great length toward reducing both the socio-economic status imbalance and the regional one in future elite factories that is the Ivy League.

    “Affirmative action” would have been more palatable to all, if it were based on economic status instead of race.
    Why should Michael Jordan’s offspring get an “affirmative action” preference while a poor Appalachian white kid gets ostracized and marginalized for his “white privilege”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation