The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
If Harvard Had Colorblind Admissions, Its Black Share Would Fall from 15.8% to 0.9%
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Pnin is calculating that if Harvard simply selected admittees randomly among the top 10% of its applicants (as measured on test scores and high school GPA) then

- the Asian share at Harvard would rise from 24.9% to 51.7%,

- the white share would drop slightly from 37.6% to 35.5%,

- the Hispanic share would plummet from 14.9% to 2.7%

- the black share would vanish from 15.8% to 0.9%.

This current black share number (15.8%) is extremely high. Is this related

These numbers come from Table 5.3R on p. 110 of

REBUTTAL EXPERT REPORT OF PETER S. ARCIDIACONO
Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard
No. 14-cv-14176-ADB (D. Mass)

Professor Arcidiacono of the Duke Econ department is a hired gun expert witness for the plaintiffs in the Harvard discrimination case. He’s battling Harvard’s hired gun economics expert David Card. So keep that in mind when evaluating their statements.

This offers an interesting riposte to the ACLU’s recent tweet:

I’m surprised that Harvard has let the black share get so high because my impression is that Harvard has largely been hard-headed about not doing self-defeating things with its admissions policy. Harvard, which is now 382 years old, has been pretty competent over the centuries in admitting students who will be good for the Harvard brand. But making one-sixth of their admittees black means they are getting deep in declining marginal returns.

Perhaps Arcidiacono is playing some kind of game with the data?

Perhaps there is a ratchet effect in terms of black shares? At some point, Harvard’s endowment is doing well, so they spend a lot of money to boost their black share. But then Stanford gets a big windfall and ups the bidding war for black talent. And then Yale jumps in with massive money. Harvard should respond by letting its share of blacks fall as other vastly rich universities go hog wild about bribing blacks to attend. But any decline in blacks could lead to Bad Publicity, so it doubles down. And around and around, until blacks wind up absurdly over-represented at Harvard relative to their academic skills.

Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.

The worry in both cases was that if they just let in the top students, Harvard, like Yogi Berra’s former favorite restaurant, would get so popular that nobody would want to go there anymore.

 
Hide 396 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I would love to see the figures recalculated, after disaggregating that formerly rising ethnicity from the White category (and any other category in which its members might fall).

    • Agree: pyrrhus
    • LOL: Ron Unz
    • Replies: @Lot
    Well just assume that Harvard is exactly 25% Jewish then write several 75,000 word articles about your results.
    , @pyrrhus
    Exactly...And since GPAs are meaningless at Harvard's level, and can be manipulated, how about looking only at SAT scores?
  2. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:

    Well, as I’ve said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black, so everyone can quit complaining, let Harvard make all the reparations they can to atone for whites’ sins. In fact, make the entire Ivy League plus Stanford and MIT all 100% black, including all the faculty and admin, until such a time when black and white incomes are at parity. It’s the least we could do. Whites can go to state colleges. Hispanics and Asians can go back to Latin America and Asia. They have their own universities.

    • LOL: Jus' Sayin'...
    • Replies: @Ralph Seymour
    This is a very good solution. But it should be permanent.

    No going back when the Ivy's go broke from mismanagement and a huge drop in alumni support. Oh, I forgot. Ultimately there will be parity.
    , @The Alarmist

    "Well, as I’ve said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black ...."
     
    We already have that: It's called Howard University.
    , @The preferred nomenclature is...
    Couldn't agree more.
    , @Steve
    I noticed you skipped the hardest and the best, Caltech. Is it because at Caltech students really have to study serious subjects. It has no courses in African studies where dark skinned students get automatic A's.
  3. Is there any change in the intra-white composition, gentile vs. Jew?

    • Replies: @boomstick
    Yeah, the Ashkenazi is interesting given the drop in whites overall.
    , @Ronnie
    Yes - the claimed statistics regarding number of Jewish undergrads at Harvard have been trending downwards in recent years - https://ejewishphilanthropy.com/how-many-jewish-undergraduates/
    Various Jewish organizations have been suggesting that the number of Jewish undergrads at Harvard has been greatly overestimated by Hillel as compared to Ron Unz's original publications on the subject - Hillel International now states that there are only 11% Jewish undergrads at Harvard in 2016 - a few years before that, Hillel stated that there were 25% Jewish undergrads at Harvard and 27% at Yale. In reading the various articles I detected possible obfuscation, smoke and mirrors and a variety of confused attempts to underestimate the percentage of Jewish undergrads at Harvard - perhaps due to the pressure of the Asian's legal action at Harvard - and the possibility that the high percentage of Jews at such colleges would be revealed to the general population on the front page of popular newspapers - where this fact had not previously been presented. One possible explanation of this is that previously Hillel was proud of the fact that 25% of the undergrads at Harvard were Jews - but now Hillel is embarrassed by this startling fact in light of the complaints by Asians that they are denied admission and other less-qualified minorities (including Jews) are accepted.
  4. Without affirmative action Harvard would look less Black than Salt Lake City.

  5. But the black % would still be higher than Liz Warren’s Indian blood so what would be the problem?

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "But the black % would still be higher than Liz Warren’s Indian blood so what would be the problem?"

    Even Razib Khan is more Native American than Elizabeth Warren according to his DNA results and Razib is freaking South Asian.

    Someone from South Asia has more Amerindian ancestry than Oklahoma Elizabeth Warren.
  6. If allowed to immigrate in large enough numbers Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory.

    CLOSE THE DAMN BORDERS ALREADY.

    • Replies: @Lot
    "Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory."

    I'm glad I didn't go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a "grind factory" and Asian parents' influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxk5djyAEN1r4wa4bo1_500.jpg

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/0b/10/75/0b10757a0d32e3abff28de0a712a517f--asian-parents-asian-kids.jpg
  7. Arcidiacono should wear his “Harvard, the Duke of the North” t-shirt during the trial.

  8. Pnin?

    Twitter allows users to adopt fictional character names?

    • Replies: @Lurker
    Is that Mr. Magoo?
    , @theMann
    Ah, the single most snoozational novel of one of the most snoozational writers in human history.


    It is thinly veiled autobiography, btw.

    Remember Nabokov! They guy who managed to make a novel about jailbait pursuit a titanic bore! Truly a write of Herculean...... indifference.
    , @Fred Boynton
    Ahhh, it all makes sense now, I bet Nabokov's novel Pnin is where Anfernee Hardaway's no doubt well-read mother got the inspiration for Anfernee's name.
  9. What is the Blackest Non HBCU university in The U.S?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Wayne State?
    , @Ed
    I’m thinking it’s Georgia State. It’s so black now it’s considered a HBCU even though it’s not. It graduates more black students than any other school in the country.

    https://hechingerreport.org/at-georgia-state-black-students-find-comfort-and-academic-success/


    Over the last five years, Georgia State has turned itself into a leader among U.S. colleges for generating high academic achievement by populations that have often struggled at large, predominantly white institutions: African-American students, lower-income students and first-generation college students.

    With its jumble of slate-gray concrete buildings mixed in with the skyscrapers of downtown Atlanta, Georgia State now graduates more black students with bachelor’s degrees every year than any other nonprofit school in the United States (1,777 in 2015). That stat includes the nation’s historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) like Spelman, Howard and Florida A&M.
     
    , @Muse
    Chicago State University
    , @Anon
    What is the Blackest Non HBCU university in The U.S?

    Maybe, The University of the District of Columbia.

    I couldn't find the school's racial demographics on its web site, but one source identifies the school as 56% black students, about 5% White students, and over 70% black faculty.

    https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/university-of-the-district-of-columbia/student-life/diversity/
  10. @Anon
    Is there any change in the intra-white composition, gentile vs. Jew?

    Yeah, the Ashkenazi is interesting given the drop in whites overall.

    • Replies: @CrunchybutRealistCon
    This is going to be shock therapy and a helluva wake-up for NormieWorld if quotas are ended. It will starkly reveal the consequences of the 1965 Hart Cellar Act, and the fact that the West has slowly been importing an Asian Overclass.
    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America. Bad news all around. We're in for a rough ride with the Coalition of the Fringes scrambling to maintain the Anti-White narrative, while Asians shoulder aside Blacks & Latinos.
    , @Anon
    The Jewish share would almost certainly fall, bigly, as Unz has explained in his seminal 2012 article on the drop in Jewish achievement. The de facto biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action today are Jews among non-black groups. Even Jewish media has written about this. This is part of the reason why there is so much virulent hostility to the idea of adopting meritocracy in the media.
  11. A century ago guys like TR understood the Asiatic threat and addressed it clearly.

    THEY WERE RIGHT. They were not (yet) constrained by Jewish power. Truth still dictated policy.

    Now we live in an age of lies… lies enforced by fear of Jewish power.

  12. @Jefferson
    What is the Blackest Non HBCU university in The U.S?

    Wayne State?

    • LOL: Stan d Mute
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Aw hell naw. Wayne doesn't show up on this forty item list, of which here are the top ten:

    1. University of Maryland, University College (Adelphi, MD): 11,959
    2. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University (Greensboro, NC): 8,381 [HBC]
    3. Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw, GA): 6,929
    4. Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (Tallahassee, FL): 6,892 [HBC]
    5. Prairie View A&M University (Prairie View, TX): 6,666 [HBC]
    6. University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL): 6,361
    7. University of Memphis (Memphis, TN): 6,191
    8. American Public University System (Charles Town, WV): 6,098
    9. Florida International University (Miami, FL): 6,020
    10. Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA): 5,941

    https://www.collegexpress.com/lists/list/colleges-with-the-largest-enrollment-of-black-non-hispanic-students/376/
  13. @Bragadocious
    But the black % would still be higher than Liz Warren's Indian blood so what would be the problem?

    “But the black % would still be higher than Liz Warren’s Indian blood so what would be the problem?”

    Even Razib Khan is more Native American than Elizabeth Warren according to his DNA results and Razib is freaking South Asian.

    Someone from South Asia has more Amerindian ancestry than Oklahoma Elizabeth Warren.

  14. I’ll just point out that you don’t have to graduate from Harvard to be successful. I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    Click here to find out this simple trick!
    , @bomag

    you don’t have to graduate from Harvard to be successful
     
    I'm interested to hear the claimed damages from the plaintiffs. What have been the diminished life prospects to the passed-over Asian students? And have those admitted in their place achieved things they wouldn't have otherwise?

    Plenty will testify that Harvard has not been a particular help, and is often counted as a hindrance.

    , @Paleo Liberal
    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”
    , @scrivener3
    No, no, no, you can work and produce something of value to other people and become rich. You do not even need a degree to do that.

    What Harvard, Yale or Princeton gets you is access to the positions that exert power over your fellow citizens: the Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve, POTUS, Attorney General, Director of the CIA, top law firms, top investment banks, head of NGO's like the World Bank, the Urban League, etc. There you do not work and make a lot of money, you direct and dispose of the efforts of those who do work.

    Direction of the power of the State, which is the one legitimate use of brute force in our society, is almost exclusively in the hands of graduates of a few schools.
    , @gunner29

    I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.
     
    With a user name of Spudboy, you inherited 2000 acres in Idaho and supply McDonalds with french fries for the PNW....Am I right?

    I know a guy in Salinas that grows lettuce on 320 acres and grosses about $1m. Of course he grows at least two crops a year, maybe 3 with some kind of winter crop.
    , @International Jew

    I make close to $500K/year
     
    Add "on the Internet, from my home, working whenever I please" and a bunch of $$$'s and !!!'s, and you'll be almost credible.
  15. What if it was US citizens and permanent residents only?

    Asians being THAT underrepresented sounds too much unless they’re including foreign students..

  16. Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.

    Actually, I don’t think that’s correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it’s become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I’ve heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I’d think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they’d constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That’s actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that “touchy” factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I’ve been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here’s the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    • Replies: @Cassander
    "Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%..."

    What are the chances this will change, even if the Asians prevail?

    Seriously.
    , @Desiderius
    You’re assuming the top whites want to go to Harvard.
    , @Tyrion 2
    You used two different methodologies to create the two data sets you compare - Jews at Harvard and those deserving of admittance. The lady you called a fanatic applied the same methodology to both and found that your work was wrong.

    You responded by failing to address the substance of her point and instead burning a strawman created of her introduction.

    When I pointed this out, you seemingly ignored what really, really is her clear and straightforward rebuttal. It isn't just convincing, it is utterly defeating.

    I can believe that you thought her introduction was her argument but surely you can review it now?
    , @Anon
    Congratulations
    , @Anarcho-Supremacist
    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using "Jewish sounding" surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis. I mean what is a Jewish surname? Most American Jewish surnames are Germanic in origin and the third most common Jewish surname in the US is Miller(ya really Jewish sounding). I mean that is almost the amateur ((( ))) you see from stormfront clowns.
    , @Anonymous

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things.
     
    Should Jews not be categorized under the "Asian" heading, given that they claim their ancestral homeland is in Asia?

    How would such a reclassification alter the basic landscape that is the subject of the lawsuit?
    , @Anonymous
    I have worked at one of Harvard's flagship organizations in Boston. I noticed a peculiar pattern of Jewish overrepresentation in the student/trainee community, quite disproportionate to their ability.

    I have a high regard for Jewish talent overall, and I consider them the race with the highest per-capita giftedness level, but in my organization the majority of the Jews were strangely mediocre.

    The Indians and Chinese in the organization were definitely better, the Whites were probably too.

    I don't understand it.

    I have been at some organizations in NYC where the Jews were obviously the elite - their talent shone through, far surpassing those of other groups. Those experiences really opened my eyes to the abilities of the Jewish people. I expected to find the same thing at Harvard, but I was struck by Harvard Jews' relative incompetence. They weren't bad, not by a long shot, they just weren't all Nobel-prize level geniuses (which is what I was expecting).

    , @Colin Wright
    '...Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That’s actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that “touchy” factor, lots of people never become aware of it...'

    As you say, white gentiles apparently just don't bother to try any more. That's probably true -- unless daddums is pledging a four million dollar 'donation' or they're legacy applicants. But there're enough obsessional Asians out there who can't take a hint...

    Now, there's an element here that is truly comic. The next article you read that goes on and on about 'white privilege,' check out the religious background of the author...

    No promises, but if you want to lay a bet, email me.
  17. @boomstick
    Yeah, the Ashkenazi is interesting given the drop in whites overall.

    This is going to be shock therapy and a helluva wake-up for NormieWorld if quotas are ended. It will starkly reveal the consequences of the 1965 Hart Cellar Act, and the fact that the West has slowly been importing an Asian Overclass.
    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America. Bad news all around. We’re in for a rough ride with the Coalition of the Fringes scrambling to maintain the Anti-White narrative, while Asians shoulder aside Blacks & Latinos.

    • Replies: @Svigor
    At your feet or at your throat.
    , @black sea

    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America.
     
    Yes, but why would they feel anything else?

    Gratitude is usually tinged with resentment and -- as emotions go -- has only a very brief shelf life. I would imagine that many of them believe that they have been allowed into the US because the native population is too weak/stupid/delusional to manage its own affairs or even to understand the implications of this incapacity.

    It's easy to develop a sense of contempt for people who don't understand or defend their own long-term interests.

  18. Anon[897] • Disclaimer says:
    @boomstick
    Yeah, the Ashkenazi is interesting given the drop in whites overall.

    The Jewish share would almost certainly fall, bigly, as Unz has explained in his seminal 2012 article on the drop in Jewish achievement. The de facto biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action today are Jews among non-black groups. Even Jewish media has written about this. This is part of the reason why there is so much virulent hostility to the idea of adopting meritocracy in the media.

    • Replies: @academic gossip

    The Jewish share would almost certainly fall, bigly, as Unz has explained in his seminal 2012 article on the drop in Jewish achievement.
     
    His explanation was wrong.

    There was little or no drop in achievement for Jews (J) compared to white Gentiles (W) on the measures he looked at. There was a severe displacement of (J + W) by Asians causing both J and W to drop. Ron in his way zoomed in on the J part of the decline but ignored the W part. The number of J did collapse but the rate of J relative to W has been much more stable. I would expect it to decrease slowly due to assimilation and admixture but the data don't necessarily show that.


    Even Jewish media has written about this.
     
    Proving that Jewish journalists are as gullible as any other kind. It doesn't make the nonsense correct.
  19. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/stacey-abrams-undocumented-voters-blue-wave/

    The thing of it is, is that blue waves aren’t blue. . . . The blue wave is African-American. It’s white, it’s Latino, it’s Asian, Pacific Islander. It is disabled. It is differently abled. It is LGBTQ. It is law enforcement. It is veterans. It is made up of those who have been told they are not worthy of being here. It is comprised of those who are documented and undocumented. It is comprised of those who have been told they’re successful and those who have been left behind.

    • Replies: @FO337
    Ahh yes, the National Review. I remember them.
  20. Into which majors are most blacks admitted to?

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it’s all about power, not justice or truth.

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @anon

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it’s all about power, not justice or truth.
     
    I agree and I think humanities/pre-law is what most Jews ended up majoring in after getting into Harvard.

    Blacks and Hispanics probably major in ethnic, regional and gender "studies". Someone's got to take those classes. Harvard also needs those classes to fulfill their faculty diversity quota. But maybe that's why so many are admitted, Jews need someone to occupy the left side of the curve.
    , @GU
    The law, once a noble WASP profession, has been severely injured by the foreign influence of the [special people], and to a lesser extent big city political machine Irish, beginning in the early 20gh century.

    But law is still important, and there really are lots of WASPs (and others) fighting the good fight against the shysters. The right needs lawyers.
    , @bj


    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter.
     
    You under estimate the power of politics to determine the success of hard science talent. At best, political power considers competent real world talent to be tax mules.
  21. This is bad for my family.

    Since I am a (very white) member of the Cherokee Nation ok Oklahoma, it is possible my kids are looked upon favorably by admission officers. The most recent of my kids to attend college was accepted at Every Songle School (no Ivies, but this kid is attending a college where said kid’s test scores are in the bottom 10%. OTOH, this kid is doing well in college. Another of my Affirmative Action babies has a 3.9 average as a science major at a well-respected university.

    Still got one more in high school. I am hoping AA could last long enough for all my kids to get into good schools, and graduate or medical school as well.

    Otherwise my kids’ spots will be given to some random kid whose parents came over on H1-B visas to take jobs away from Americans.

    I don’t know exactly when I became cynical.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Since I am a (very white) member of the Cherokee Nation ok Oklahoma,"

    How White is the average Cherokee Nation member? Like 97% European? I read somewhere that the average legally Cherokee person is only 3% Amerindian which is way less Amerindian than Mexicans.


    The Mexicans cleaning the Days Inn hotel rooms are way more Amerindian than the average Cherokee.

  22. @anon
    Well, as I've said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black, so everyone can quit complaining, let Harvard make all the reparations they can to atone for whites' sins. In fact, make the entire Ivy League plus Stanford and MIT all 100% black, including all the faculty and admin, until such a time when black and white incomes are at parity. It's the least we could do. Whites can go to state colleges. Hispanics and Asians can go back to Latin America and Asia. They have their own universities.

    This is a very good solution. But it should be permanent.

    No going back when the Ivy’s go broke from mismanagement and a huge drop in alumni support. Oh, I forgot. Ultimately there will be parity.

  23. Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I’ve taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I’d guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    • Replies: @J
    Not pets. Should racial discrimination against blacks be proved, those institutions could be closed down and its perpetrators sent to jail. That is the law.
    , @Stolen Valor Detective

    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft.
     
    Your comment was very interesting and informative, but be mindful of the fact that Harvard's "black" students are not a representative sample of the US's African-American population. Probably over 50% of them either have considerable European ancestry or are the children of elites from African or Caribbean countries. (https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/24/us/top-colleges-take-more-blacks-but-which-ones.html)
    , @Colin Wright
    '...The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.'

    I'd point out that they're probably mostly 'blacks.' That is to say, I'd guess they're on average three-quarters white, genetically, and usually have been raised in suburbia to boot.

    None of this is doing the bulk of the actual black population any good at all.
    , @Big Bill

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.
     
    Lani Guinier (Harvard prof, 50/50 jew/black IIRC) noted in the early 2000s that Harvard blacks were imported from overseas in large part. In short, Harvard has "black" students, but not nearly as many "African American" students, contrary to what the chart shows.

    Then Obama was elected and the whole subject was dropped.
    , @Anon
    There’s some mostly black community colleges in and around Los Angeles that have their own free bus system that picks them up at various points so they won’t be inconvenienced by having to get there by themselves.
  24. In Flyover Country universities Asians are only slightly overrepresented among the student body compared to vastly overrepresented among the student body in California, The Pacific Northwest, and The Northeast.

    A typical average Flyover Country university might be 7% Asian for example compared to 37% or 47% Asian in the Coastal universities.

  25. @Steve Sailer
    Wayne State?

    Aw hell naw. Wayne doesn’t show up on this forty item list, of which here are the top ten:

    1. University of Maryland, University College (Adelphi, MD): 11,959
    2. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University (Greensboro, NC): 8,381 [HBC]
    3. Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw, GA): 6,929
    4. Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (Tallahassee, FL): 6,892 [HBC]
    5. Prairie View A&M University (Prairie View, TX): 6,666 [HBC]
    6. University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL): 6,361
    7. University of Memphis (Memphis, TN): 6,191
    8. American Public University System (Charles Town, WV): 6,098
    9. Florida International University (Miami, FL): 6,020
    10. Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA): 5,941

    https://www.collegexpress.com/lists/list/colleges-with-the-largest-enrollment-of-black-non-hispanic-students/376/

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    "University of Maryland, University College"? Certainly not Terrapins. That huge number of blacks is only 25% of the school, so its campus (if it has one) wouldn't be all that black.


    "American Public University System"? That's "proprietary", i.e., not public at all, and is mail-order. Its administrative offices are in Charles Town, WV. That is not the state's capital! And its students would rarely if ever meet in person.

    Charles Town is only 13% black. But it is the birthplace of Hamilton Hatter, the founder of West Virginia's HBCU, Bluefield State.
    , @Anon
    I’m pretty sure Crystal Magnum of Duke Lacrosse team fame was working her way thru North Carolina A&T when she made the accusation

    Like Dr Frau Christine Ford Crystal was a psychology major
    , @Jim Christian
    Maryland at #1 can be partially (or mostly) attributed to the Baltimore Campus of same, unless someone shows evidence to the contrary. I used to do some contract work there, it was quite White/Yellow/Jewish as are most of the campuses in the DC area clear down to George Mason, UVA, Virginia Tech and of course William and Mary. My kid went to ODU in Norfolk, it was a little more Black and Hispanic, but among the mostly White/Asian/Jewish youngsters, I noticed lots of military officers there punching their Masters tickets, engineering and whatnot, ALL those guys were White. But that's been going on since I was in the service at Oceana in the 70s and 80s.

    One wonders if they falsify the numbers, fudge as to the numbers? Possible? In addition to the look of things in and around DC, living near Boston now, I pass through Boston College's campus from time to time, through Cambridge, the Harvard-MIT corridor, adjusted for Asians and Jews, it's Whiter than 98 brightness printer paper down there. I wonder if they count janitors as students, lots of those are Black and Hispanic.

    Whatever.
  26. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:

    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself. First they said Asians were not discriminated, but then they said they consider race for diversity, so race isn’t a factor in the rejection but race is a factor in the admission, which is retarded, admission is a zero sum game, when someone gets admitted it means someone else would have to be rejected. Admitting someone because of race therefore must mean rejecting someone else because of race.

    If liberals understood logic, they wouldn’t be liberals.

    • Replies: @Anon
    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself.

    This is why I lost all respect for the law. Law School is really Lie School.

    Now, I don't mind the various AA policies. What bothers me are the lies around them.

    We need a new field of academics called Truth Studies, an attempt to be objectively true as possible about the world we live in. And this calls for integrity.

    AA for blacks should be justified on the fact that blacks are less intelligent.

    If NBA were to allow AA for non-blacks, the only honest justification would be that it's the ONLY way many non-blacks can hope to play.

    All this 'holistic' nonsense is a**holistic. It's total BS.

    Let Harvard and other colleges keep their AA. But let's have some truth as to why.

    Truth Studies Now. Department of Truth. Every college needs it more than ever.
    , @academic gossip

    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself. First they said Asians were not discriminated, but then they said they consider race for diversity, so race isn’t a factor in the rejection but race is a factor in the admission, which is retarded, admission is a zero sum game,
     
    They are saying two things, that don't contradict each other.

    First, that Asians are not harmed in admission, compared to whites, by the consideration of race.

    Second, that the zero sum negative effect on Asian-and-white admission from affirmative action for blacks-and-Hispanics is within the parameters of what is legally permitted, and (according to them this is part of the legal test) is counterbalanced by the (alleged) educational benefit of more diversity for the ones who are admitted.

  27. Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?

    With Harvard and other elite private schools imposing Jewish quotas in the early 20th century, I understood that pressure built within that community to establish institutions like Yeshiva University (which hosts the well-regarded Cardozo law school and used to host Einstein medical school until that was sold to the Mt. Sinai hospital system), Brandies University (founded 1948), and I’m sure others.

    Brandies in fact focuses on recruiting top-decile SAT scorers, and I was always under the impression that its raison d’etre was to give home to high-performing Jewish students excluded from the Ivys because of quotas, but who were posh enough to want that college campus experience instead of going to CUNY, which was the popular choice among the prior generation of Jews who were smart but not admitted to the WASPier schools.

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.

    I mean, we all know about the HBCUs, and how CalTech has a fairly strict merit-based admissions system that has led for many years to class composition numbers that look remarkably like those in the expert report, but I can’t think of an Asian answer to Brandies U. Can anyone here?

    Is it that they’d rather sue than build? If so, we’ve come to a sorry state.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?"

    Colleges in San Diego, The Bay Area, Orange County, and The San Gabriel Valley look like Full Metal Jacket.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    Brandeis. Don't confuse it with these:


    https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/distiller-blog-prod/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/22132408/lairds_apple_brandy_lineup.jpg
    , @anon

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.
     
    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn't start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers. Their success came because of Harvard, not in spite of it. If the Harvard quota had continued for Jews they wouldn't be nearly as successful as a group today. Graduates of these schools form a cartel and actively hire/promote/do business with their own.

    Whoever controls Harvard controls America -- what Harvard does, all other colleges follow, Jews know this. They know the WASPs made a big mistake by ceding control of Harvard to them, they are not about to make the same mistake by ceding their control of Harvard to Asians, whom they know are the biggest threats to unseat them from the pinnacle of success in America. Blacks and hispanics can be admitted in large numbers because they are not real threats.

  28. So, Harvard would basically become Stuyvesant High School. (Or at least its current incarnation.)

    I might be biased as a Stuyvesant alumnus, but that seems like it would be a positive development to me. It’s true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues. (https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management)

    Our friends at Harvard Business School conclude that this shows that companies all across America are all just irrationally cutting into their profit margins by making an already extremely scarce labor supply even smaller by not fully utilizing their Asian employees. (For some reason, companies forget to have this totally irrational and inexplicable bias against Asians during the initial hiring process.)

    I suspect, however, that the administrators above them at Harvard come to a rather different conclusion about why this discrepancy exists, and use that conclusion in determining who is and who isn’t admitted to Harvard. Unlike other such conclusions about different ethnic minorities who face employment discrimination, they probably figured that they wouldn’t take too much flak from ethnic grievance activists by putting it into practice.

    So, yes, I think it’s probably true (though I’m happy to hear countervailing evidence) that a hard-working, high-IQ white guy is more likely to found the proverbial next Microsoft, Facebook or Google than a comparably hard-working and high-IQ Asian guy. This would seem to be a false choice to someone without a stake in the Harvard brand, because surely Harvard could, with its ~$37 billion endowment, afford to admit them both, right? But that would dilute the Harvard brand, which people who currently have a stake in it don’t like. Thus, from the standpoint of maximizing the value of the Harvard brand for current Harvard “shareholders” (to use a valuable analogy that Steve often applies), Harvard is probably acting rationally in its admissions process.

    However, personally, I don’t think that an institution as important in American national life as Harvard should be guided by a philosophy of maximizing its own value at the expense of everyone else. I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process. In my view, the kind of public-spirited “meritocratic elitism” that many early psychometricians believed in—which is to a considerable extent manifested in New York City’s specialized high schools—has much to recommend for it .

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.
     
    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today's Harvard makes smart kids dumb.
    , @ANONYMOUS
    Could someone please just genocide white people off the face of the Earth? As if the others would put up a fight for the ones who resisted. Let's just get this tedium over with already.
    , @peterike

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.

     

    That's an immensely stupid idea. You are taking the key entry gateway to the Elite (both in terms of wealth and influence) and handing it to an alien population which has already shown itself perfectly willing and eager to join the most virulent anti-white, SJW mind-set.

    A sensible nation would, for starters, not allow any non-citizens into its best colleges, period. Secondly, a sensible nation would not allow any Asians to immigrate to it, because nothing good can come of it. And that includes nerdy white men getting cute little Asian wives (future harridans) and further eliminating the white race.

    Massive Asian immigration -- and it's a lot higher than the numbers state -- is a disaster for America.
    , @Andrew
    You'd have to be a fool to believe an unaccomplished 5% of the US population deserves 50% of the seats at Harvard or even their current 25%.

    Harvard matriculates the American managerial, political, scientific and legal elite.

    If American born Asians really merit 50% of Ivy League seats, they should show that by producing at least some semblance of accomplishment in these fields, like the Jews did when they were excluded. Being excluded from an educational institution does not exclude you from showing your talent in work and in the economy and academia. Nor did it prevent you from doing so academically in a slightly lower tier university.

    We have had no Asians ever as important cabinet secretaries or Senators. There is just a single American born Asian Nobel winner. There are no important Asian founded banks or law firms. No Asian jurists or economists of any note. Asians are not 50% of top C-suite managers in American corporations or even 25% or even 10%. American born Asians have not founded a plethora of manufacturing and wholesaling firms. They have not founded any important media companies or journals. There are no important Asian publishers. The most accomplished Asian group in all these regards are actually Indians, not the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese.

    Anyone who has been to an elite university with Asians will not recall them being leaders on campus or the classroom.

    Can someone please explain why Asians deserve even 10% of the seats in any university? The measurement by test score or inflated grades is obviously not sufficient to find Asian Americans of actual merit.
    , @dvorak

    It’s true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues.
     
    I don't even have to read the HBR piece to know that they didn't control for introversion. How many introverts have you seen promoted more than one level upward? And how many years/decades do introverts go between promotions?

    The bamboo ceiling is basically the "introverted with a low need to socially dominate" ceiling. Introverted whites experience the same ceiling.

    Voluble/verbal Indians don't experience a naan ceiling.

  29. @Paleo Liberal
    This is bad for my family.

    Since I am a (very white) member of the Cherokee Nation ok Oklahoma, it is possible my kids are looked upon favorably by admission officers. The most recent of my kids to attend college was accepted at Every Songle School (no Ivies, but this kid is attending a college where said kid’s test scores are in the bottom 10%. OTOH, this kid is doing well in college. Another of my Affirmative Action babies has a 3.9 average as a science major at a well-respected university.

    Still got one more in high school. I am hoping AA could last long enough for all my kids to get into good schools, and graduate or medical school as well.

    Otherwise my kids’ spots will be given to some random kid whose parents came over on H1-B visas to take jobs away from Americans.

    I don’t know exactly when I became cynical.

    “Since I am a (very white) member of the Cherokee Nation ok Oklahoma,”

    How White is the average Cherokee Nation member? Like 97% European? I read somewhere that the average legally Cherokee person is only 3% Amerindian which is way less Amerindian than Mexicans.

    The Mexicans cleaning the Days Inn hotel rooms are way more Amerindian than the average Cherokee.

  30. @Ben Kurtz
    Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?

    With Harvard and other elite private schools imposing Jewish quotas in the early 20th century, I understood that pressure built within that community to establish institutions like Yeshiva University (which hosts the well-regarded Cardozo law school and used to host Einstein medical school until that was sold to the Mt. Sinai hospital system), Brandies University (founded 1948), and I'm sure others.

    Brandies in fact focuses on recruiting top-decile SAT scorers, and I was always under the impression that its raison d'etre was to give home to high-performing Jewish students excluded from the Ivys because of quotas, but who were posh enough to want that college campus experience instead of going to CUNY, which was the popular choice among the prior generation of Jews who were smart but not admitted to the WASPier schools.

    I don't wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it's Jewish quotas -- if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard's brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.

    I mean, we all know about the HBCUs, and how CalTech has a fairly strict merit-based admissions system that has led for many years to class composition numbers that look remarkably like those in the expert report, but I can't think of an Asian answer to Brandies U. Can anyone here?

    Is it that they'd rather sue than build? If so, we've come to a sorry state.

    “Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?”

    Colleges in San Diego, The Bay Area, Orange County, and The San Gabriel Valley look like Full Metal Jacket.

    • Replies: @Ben Kurtz
    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians. Ideally named after some Asian guy. Not an existing public school heavily populated by Asian newcomers, like CUNY was heavily populated by Jews in the early 20th century.

    I'm not aware of any, but I'm willing to take suggestions.
  31. “Diversity is good for everyone.”

    Yeah, that’s the ticket. Blacks browns and Jews favor it because they want to prevent any harm coming to whites and yellows.

    On the other hand, we mustn’t break groups out in any way that specifies Jews as a group because reasons, goy.

  32. @CrunchybutRealistCon
    This is going to be shock therapy and a helluva wake-up for NormieWorld if quotas are ended. It will starkly reveal the consequences of the 1965 Hart Cellar Act, and the fact that the West has slowly been importing an Asian Overclass.
    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America. Bad news all around. We're in for a rough ride with the Coalition of the Fringes scrambling to maintain the Anti-White narrative, while Asians shoulder aside Blacks & Latinos.

    At your feet or at your throat.

    • Replies: @CrunchybutRealistCon
    I suspect a significant % of Asians in the West know deep down that they've been surfing a wave of welcome created for them by a parasitic Pseudo-Elite. Indulging subversion & hate envy from the likes of Sarah Jeong, Aziz Ansari, Fareed Zakaria, Neera Tanden, Jeet Heer & Manka Dhingra....it isn't something a sane & healthy nation would do.
  33. HS performance

    Keep in mind that this is often represented by GPA, which is hardly an objective factor, nor is it consistent among schools to say the least.

  34. @J.Ross
    https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/stacey-abrams-undocumented-voters-blue-wave/

    The thing of it is, is that blue waves aren’t blue. . . . The blue wave is African-American. It’s white, it’s Latino, it’s Asian, Pacific Islander. It is disabled. It is differently abled. It is LGBTQ. It is law enforcement. It is veterans. It is made up of those who have been told they are not worthy of being here. It is comprised of those who are documented and undocumented. It is comprised of those who have been told they’re successful and those who have been left behind.
     

    Ahh yes, the National Review. I remember them.

  35. By the way, Jared Kushner’s admission to Harvard under suspicious circumstances, as recounted in Daniel Golden’s 2006 book The Price of Admission, has often been cited as an example of the distorting role that your choice of financial contributions, ethnic identity, familial ties, et cetera, play in elite university admissions. He was likely admitted over more intelligent and/or hard-working competitors.

    Do you think that having President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and key surrogate as an alumnus has been good or bad for Harvard, though?

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    They'll claim him in the general statistics,(# of alumni with high level government jobs) but not him specifically.
  36. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:

    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff’s report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:

    https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-2-Arcidiacono-Rebuttal-Report.pdf

    Asian-American applicants excel in more than academics. They also have higher extracurricular ratings and overall alumni ratings than any other racial group. Asian-American applicants likewise are stronger than African-American and Hispanic applicants on counselor ratings, teacher 1 ratings, teacher 2 ratings, and alumni personal ratings, and have similar or slightly lower ratings than whites in these categories.

    So much for telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth on the witness stand.

    Liberals have no problem lying under oath because:
    a) they are atheists so don’t care about swearing on a bible
    b) they believe the end justifies the means

    • Replies: @Anon
    For conservatives, only one thing should matter.

    Asians voted 80% Democratic. They are status hogs, and once they graduate from elite schools, they turn into globo-homo pissants like Jerry Kang and Fareed Zakaria. And there's Fukuyama shilling for Soros.

    The real scandal is white people don't sue Ivy League for accepting more Jews than white goyim.
    , @academic gossip

    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff’s report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:
     
    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I'd have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.

    The question relevant to the trial is not average quality of recommendations, on which Asians did well, but recommendation quality controlled for academic quality on which they did worse. The data tables in the expert reports show that Asians have lower average non-academic ratings (personal qualities / recommendations) than whites at each academic index decile. Whether the dean was talking about the plain or controlled ratings isn't clear from the news reporting but it's the controlled ones that matter.

  37. Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.

    Yeah, Ron’s now decided (along with the MSM) that the Jewish Quota Story is now “universally accepted” but it’s never actually been demonstrated, except by secondary effects.

    Even Jerome Karabel, who labored mightily for years, struggled to come up with a smoking gun and admitted that in 1925, for example, the Jewish representation at Harvard was more than 10x its proportion of the general population. Guess whose representation was less than its general proportion, even in 1925?

    It’s sort of like the Sally Hemings story, or maybe Jackie Coakley’s.

  38. @J.Ross
    Aw hell naw. Wayne doesn't show up on this forty item list, of which here are the top ten:

    1. University of Maryland, University College (Adelphi, MD): 11,959
    2. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University (Greensboro, NC): 8,381 [HBC]
    3. Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw, GA): 6,929
    4. Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (Tallahassee, FL): 6,892 [HBC]
    5. Prairie View A&M University (Prairie View, TX): 6,666 [HBC]
    6. University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL): 6,361
    7. University of Memphis (Memphis, TN): 6,191
    8. American Public University System (Charles Town, WV): 6,098
    9. Florida International University (Miami, FL): 6,020
    10. Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA): 5,941

    https://www.collegexpress.com/lists/list/colleges-with-the-largest-enrollment-of-black-non-hispanic-students/376/

    “University of Maryland, University College”? Certainly not Terrapins. That huge number of blacks is only 25% of the school, so its campus (if it has one) wouldn’t be all that black.

    “American Public University System”? That’s “proprietary”, i.e., not public at all, and is mail-order. Its administrative offices are in Charles Town, WV. That is not the state’s capital! And its students would rarely if ever meet in person.

    Charles Town is only 13% black. But it is the birthplace of Hamilton Hatter, the founder of West Virginia’s HBCU, Bluefield State.

    • Replies: @blake121666
    University College is a subsidiary non-selective (100% accepted) branch of the University of Maryland:

    https://www.collegexpress.com/college/university-of-maryland-university-college/3000133/details/

    It is similar to a community college.

    College Park is the flagship campus (with the Terrapins). It is more selective - only 44% acceptance rate. And its tuition is accordingly 43% higher.

    https://www.collegexpress.com/college/university-of-maryland-college-park/2400206/details/
  39. @Ben Kurtz
    Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?

    With Harvard and other elite private schools imposing Jewish quotas in the early 20th century, I understood that pressure built within that community to establish institutions like Yeshiva University (which hosts the well-regarded Cardozo law school and used to host Einstein medical school until that was sold to the Mt. Sinai hospital system), Brandies University (founded 1948), and I'm sure others.

    Brandies in fact focuses on recruiting top-decile SAT scorers, and I was always under the impression that its raison d'etre was to give home to high-performing Jewish students excluded from the Ivys because of quotas, but who were posh enough to want that college campus experience instead of going to CUNY, which was the popular choice among the prior generation of Jews who were smart but not admitted to the WASPier schools.

    I don't wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it's Jewish quotas -- if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard's brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.

    I mean, we all know about the HBCUs, and how CalTech has a fairly strict merit-based admissions system that has led for many years to class composition numbers that look remarkably like those in the expert report, but I can't think of an Asian answer to Brandies U. Can anyone here?

    Is it that they'd rather sue than build? If so, we've come to a sorry state.

    Brandeis. Don’t confuse it with these:

    • Replies: @Ben Kurtz
    Ha! Stupid autocorrect! Got me that time...
    , @FO337
    This is the kind of pr0n this site can use more of...
  40. The non-discriminatory #’s are close to the numbers that you see at CalTech right now. CalTech probably exercising some AA (URM #’s still seem suspiciously high) but not as bad as Harvard.

    White 28%
    Asian 43%
    URM * 16%
    Internat. 8%
    2+ Races ** 5%

    (Probably most of the International and all of the 2+ races are also Asian or part Asian so the total Asian % is over 50%). All URM Hapas count as URM so the only kind of Hapa that is left is white-Asian.

    * URM includes:

    American Indian or Alaskan Native
    Black or African American
    Hispanic or Latino
    Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
    Students who declared two or more races with one of the above identified

    ** Two or More Races does not include students with an underrepresented category identified.

    I wonder at what point CalTech “tips” and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.

    • Replies: @Krastos the Gluemaker
    CalTech somewhat substantially discriminates in favor of students from California (went to high school there that is) and the demographics of California do not match the rest of the country; the numbers are rapidly shifting at "population of 17-year olds" more than the total population of that state, even.

    It's gotten worse over the years, but most of the other people you see talking about this are the rare exceptions that prove the rule to Hanlon's Razor. At least, even CalTech doesn't have sufficient nlp bots to be responsible for this itself and they probably aren't just paying thousands of shills :)
    , @anon

    I wonder at what point CalTech “tips” and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.
     
    I thought SJWs aren't supposed to be 'racist'?
    , @Yan Shen
    I know that the regression models they ran suggest otherwise, but I've always been somewhat confused by the assertion that the percentage of Asian Americans at Harvard under a purely meritocratic system of admissions should mirror that of Caltech. Obviously Caltech undergrads are significantly skewed towards STEM, whereas I assume Harvard undergrads have a much more balanced distribution of majors.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/15/local/la-me-caltech-20120615


    When Christina Kondos receives her bachelor's degree at Caltech's commencement Friday, she will represent a tiny and little-known minority at the prestigious science and engineering campus in Pasadena.

    Kondos is the only one in her graduating class of 247 to have majored in humanities or social sciences — economics and history in her case — without double-majoring in science, math or engineering.

    Since 2008, only a dozen Caltech students have done the same, and they received bachelor of science degrees because Caltech doesn't offer a bachelor of arts, campus officials said.

    Science, of course, rules at Caltech, but it doesn't eliminate the likes of James Joyce or Immanuel Kant.
     

    I assume that Asian Americans are also skewed towards STEM and away from social sciences and humanities. Do you know if schools try to maintain a certain balance in terms of what percentage of students major in various subjects? I guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they're roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases?
    , @map
    Yes...and with all of these Asians at CalTech, what have been the practical results? Where are the advanced technologies we are all supposed to be benefitting from.

    Oh...we have cute Apple toys and apps.
    , @map
    Yes...and with all of these Asians at CalTech, what have been the practical results? Where are the advanced technologies we are all supposed to be benefiting from?

    Oh...we have cute Apple toys and apps.

    Oh...we have the USB port.

    Compare what was discovered and invented between 1920 and 1970 and what was invented since 1970 when all of the Asians started taking slots in universities.

    I can't imagine the fraud and garbage papers produced by these people.
  41. @Dr. X
    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I've taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I'd guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    Not pets. Should racial discrimination against blacks be proved, those institutions could be closed down and its perpetrators sent to jail. That is the law.

  42. @Stolen Valor Detective
    So, Harvard would basically become Stuyvesant High School. (Or at least its current incarnation.)

    I might be biased as a Stuyvesant alumnus, but that seems like it would be a positive development to me. It's true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues. (https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management)

    Our friends at Harvard Business School conclude that this shows that companies all across America are all just irrationally cutting into their profit margins by making an already extremely scarce labor supply even smaller by not fully utilizing their Asian employees. (For some reason, companies forget to have this totally irrational and inexplicable bias against Asians during the initial hiring process.)

    I suspect, however, that the administrators above them at Harvard come to a rather different conclusion about why this discrepancy exists, and use that conclusion in determining who is and who isn't admitted to Harvard. Unlike other such conclusions about different ethnic minorities who face employment discrimination, they probably figured that they wouldn't take too much flak from ethnic grievance activists by putting it into practice.

    So, yes, I think it's probably true (though I'm happy to hear countervailing evidence) that a hard-working, high-IQ white guy is more likely to found the proverbial next Microsoft, Facebook or Google than a comparably hard-working and high-IQ Asian guy. This would seem to be a false choice to someone without a stake in the Harvard brand, because surely Harvard could, with its ~$37 billion endowment, afford to admit them both, right? But that would dilute the Harvard brand, which people who currently have a stake in it don't like. Thus, from the standpoint of maximizing the value of the Harvard brand for current Harvard "shareholders" (to use a valuable analogy that Steve often applies), Harvard is probably acting rationally in its admissions process.

    However, personally, I don't think that an institution as important in American national life as Harvard should be guided by a philosophy of maximizing its own value at the expense of everyone else. I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process. In my view, the kind of public-spirited "meritocratic elitism" that many early psychometricians believed in---which is to a considerable extent manifested in New York City's specialized high schools---has much to recommend for it .

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.

    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today’s Harvard makes smart kids dumb.

    • Replies: @Stolen Valor Detective

    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today’s Harvard makes smart kids dumb.
     
    I seriously doubt that either of those statements are correct, given that psychometric research consistently shows that it's basically impossible, at least as far as we know, to substantially increase your IQ by age 18, and, whatever the flaws of elite universities, I don't think they severely physically maltreat students to the point that their IQs noticeably drop.

    You might object that you mean something like "wisdom," or a inculcation in a different ideology that you prefer relative to the offerings of the current paradigm, as opposed to IQ. Whatever the truth of this, I don't see how a legacy system is useful, let alone necessary, for such ends.

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit, when meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
    , @Lot
    There's nothing wrong with Harvard's legacy system. Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.

    The values behind the "civil rights" lawsuit against Harvard are the same Marxist values that demand heterosexuals be open to dating trannies.
  43. @Jefferson
    "Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?"

    Colleges in San Diego, The Bay Area, Orange County, and The San Gabriel Valley look like Full Metal Jacket.

    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians. Ideally named after some Asian guy. Not an existing public school heavily populated by Asian newcomers, like CUNY was heavily populated by Jews in the early 20th century.

    I’m not aware of any, but I’m willing to take suggestions.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    Suzie Wong U.
    , @J. Dart

    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians.
     
    Soka University of America is probably the closest thing to what you're thinking of. Founded by a huge Buddhist organization from Japan. Tied for 22nd-best liberal arts college in US News & World Report. But still far too small and uninfluential to be called an "elite university" in the same sense as, say, Brandeis.

    From stumbling around on Google & Wikipedia I noticed two other Asian-founded educational institutions (University of the West & Dharma Realm Buddhist University) apparently following the same model of getting funding from a wealthy Buddhist sect in Asia and setting up shop in California where there's always a steady supply of Asian immigrants.

    Everything else I could find was an ESL school, a vocational college, or a blatant visa mill.
  44. @Reg Cæsar
    Brandeis. Don't confuse it with these:


    https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/distiller-blog-prod/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/22132408/lairds_apple_brandy_lineup.jpg

    Ha! Stupid autocorrect! Got me that time…

  45. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Into which majors are most blacks admitted to?

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it's all about power, not justice or truth.

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it’s all about power, not justice or truth.

    I agree and I think humanities/pre-law is what most Jews ended up majoring in after getting into Harvard.

    Blacks and Hispanics probably major in ethnic, regional and gender “studies”. Someone’s got to take those classes. Harvard also needs those classes to fulfill their faculty diversity quota. But maybe that’s why so many are admitted, Jews need someone to occupy the left side of the curve.

  46. @Dr. X
    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I've taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I'd guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft.

    Your comment was very interesting and informative, but be mindful of the fact that Harvard’s “black” students are not a representative sample of the US’s African-American population. Probably over 50% of them either have considerable European ancestry or are the children of elites from African or Caribbean countries. (https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/24/us/top-colleges-take-more-blacks-but-which-ones.html)

  47. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Isn’t having more Asian students a case of More Diversity? They are non-white after all.

    It seems boosting black numbers is a cover for maintaining high Jewish numbers.
    If the system was rigged to favor Jews over Asians, then the issue would be Jews vs Asians, and it might not make Jews look good. After all, Jews count as whites and have a history of how they’d been discriminated by quotas in the past.

    But if the system is rigged to favor blacks, then the system can, under the cover of pro-blackness, rig it for Jews as well. Because blacks are Negroyalty, anything that favors blacks is deemed noble and wonderful. So, if Harvard rigs admission to favor blacks, the very system is Rigging is deemed morally necessary. But once Rigging is allowed on a big scale, it can be used to favor OTHER groups as well, and one of those groups could be Jews.

    Now, Jews are high-achievers and bound to be over-represented in elite institutions, but it’s likely they’d been favored over more deserving Asians and non-Jewish whites none-too-fairly.

    So, it could be Harvard uses the black smoke bomb to hide Jewish sneak entry into the system. Rigging for blacks justified rigging, and once the rigging is justified, it can be rigged to favor not only blacks but Jews as well.

    Now, is Diversity really a good thing in the academia? In some fields, definitely not. Take chemistry or physics or math. Surely, a bunch of white physicists each with high achievement and IQ of 150 will do better work than a Diverse team of physicists whose IQ ranges from 150 t0 100. It’s like an all-black basketball team will play better than a diverse team made up of all races. Sports are about raw objective ability. Same with hard sciences, medicine, math, engineering, and etc. I can’t see how Diversity per se, especially against the spirit of meritocracy, can be a plus. They are really about raw talent and real ability.

    But I can see the use of multiple perspectives in media, history, and humanities. Granted, even without Diversity, intelligent people with empathy can excel and do great work in all fields. There have been many great white scholars on histories and cultures of other peoples.
    Still, there are inbuilt biases, conscious and subconscious, when it comes to social, historical, and cultural matters. Also, sometimes people of a certain culture, being insiders, know and feel something about the culture that others don’t feel. So, I can see the value of contributions of a black scholar in certain fields. Or an Arabian scholar in the field of Middle East studies.
    And surely, the media would do better to have some Palestinian-American pundits even if they aren’t as qualified academically or professionally as Jewish ones. The overwhelming pro-Zionist leaning of US media have totally clouded our understanding of Middle East affairs.

    Also, too many highly educated scumbags in Deep State have made it clear as day that high achievement doesn’t necessarily mean truth, honesty, and integrity. It’s no exaggeration to say many youtube amateurs speak more truth than people in elite media, academia, and Deep State who are obsessed mainly with status and connections(and later their pensions).

    Granted, the problem with Diversity is it often means differences of skin colors but uniformity of ideology(of globo-homo variety). Jonathan Haidt spoke about this. What use is Diversity of skin color if the system welcomes only one kind of thought.. or molds all minds into a single mush?

    In the long run, does meritocracy turn into aristocracy or castocracy? Charles Murray addressed this issue in BELL CURVE and COMING APART(neither of which I read but of which I read about).
    The justification for meritocracy was premised on the idea that the dummies would fall and smarties would rise with every new generation. So, if rich parents have dumb kids, and if poor parents have smart kids, the rich dumb kids will fall and poor smart kids would rise. Now, if every generation had the same numbers of dumb ones at the top(destined to fall to bottom) and smart ones at the bottom(destined to rise to the top), then meritocracy would be justified.
    Suppose there are two pools of fish. One pool is for the big fish, the other pool is for the small fish. So, if big fish give birth to small fish, the latter are tossed into the pool of small fish. And if small fish give birth to big fish, the latter are tossed into the pool of big fish. Now, if generation after generation, big fish continued to give birth to small fish in the Big Fish Pool and if the small fish continued to give birth to big fish in the Small Fish Pool, there can be swapping of the fishes on the basis of size-o-cracy. So, even small fish in the Small Fish Pool can hope to give birth to Big Fish that will make it to the Big Fish Pool. And if even big fish in the Big Fish Pool can end up giving birth to small fish that must be sent to the Small Fish Pool.

    But there is the factor of genetics. If, over time, the big fish birthed in the Small Fish Pool are sent to the Big Fish Pool, the chances are they will give birth to more Big Fish. Over time, the fish in the Big Fish Pool will have many more big fish than small fish due to genetic factors. And over time, the Small Fish Pool will produce less and less Big Fish because the (recessive)genes of Big Fish will have been depleted. Over time, except on occasion, the small fish in the Small Fish Pool will mostly give birth to small fish.
    So, in the end, the Big Fish Pool will mostly birth big fish, and Small Fish Pool will mostly birth small fish. So, despite the ideal of meritocracy, the reality will be a kind of aristocracy or caste-o-cracy. Worse, even the few small fish still born in the Big Fish Pool may not be sent to the Small Fish Pool since the powerful Big Fish feel attachment to them and don’t want to let them go. So, even the small fish are made out to be honorary big fish. Take Jared Kushner. He’s a dumbass, but his father was a Big Fish who paid big bucks to send him to Harvard. And notice how George W. Bush’s girl got into Yale.

    Meritocracy assumed that there will always be lots of talent among the lower depths who could rise the top if given a fair chance. And new room at the top would be made available to the climbers by demoting the dummies born to smart/rich people. But meritocracy genetically depletes the lower classes by taking the smart ones to the top where they stay and marry other smart ones to have smart kids. So over time, meritocracy loses meaning since all the real talent are already concentrated at the top. It’s the Limits of Meritocracy.

    • Replies: @Macumazahn
    Your fish analogy flounders when it assumes two pools. Try something like salmon swimming upstream, perhaps, with the faster ones ending up at the front of the school even though some of the slower ones travel in their parents' wake. Your conclusion deserves to be illustrated/illuminated by a better analogy.
  48. @Reg Cæsar
    Brandeis. Don't confuse it with these:


    https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/distiller-blog-prod/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/22132408/lairds_apple_brandy_lineup.jpg

    This is the kind of pr0n this site can use more of…

  49. Don’t worry! Harvard can very easily keep its black and hispanic admission percentages the same while allowing the asian percentage to rise to its natural level. Harvard will just limit whites to about 10% as recommended by Harvard Law professor Jeannie Suk Gersen in the New Yorker magazine. Suk Gersen explains that Harvard needs to stop or avoid “discriminating against Asians” but also must continue to practice “race-conscious affirmative action.” The only way to make that work, of course, is to discriminate even more against Whites to spare the Asians.

    Suk Gersen is a native of Korea who has married two Jewish Harvard Law professors (she divorced the first one).

  50. why wait? beijing university is 99% chinese today. and it produces…well, i’m sure it will start producing something important at some point here. it’s only 120 years old and only has 40,000 students who are all chinese, but they’re sure to develop something of value at some point.

    back in the real world, we could turn all our universities into east asian colonies and reduce our science, engineering, medicine, and mathematical output by 80 to 90 percent, but at least admissions would be ‘by the book’. ‘just take the best test scores’ they said.

    isn’t that what 100% east asian universities do already?

    • Replies: @anon
    Pretty much all universities in the world outside the US, including all European, Canadian, Australian, NZ universities, admit strictly by test scores.
  51. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    So far Harvard's defense basically contradicts itself. First they said Asians were not discriminated, but then they said they consider race for diversity, so race isn't a factor in the rejection but race is a factor in the admission, which is retarded, admission is a zero sum game, when someone gets admitted it means someone else would have to be rejected. Admitting someone because of race therefore must mean rejecting someone else because of race.

    If liberals understood logic, they wouldn't be liberals.

    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself.

    This is why I lost all respect for the law. Law School is really Lie School.

    Now, I don’t mind the various AA policies. What bothers me are the lies around them.

    We need a new field of academics called Truth Studies, an attempt to be objectively true as possible about the world we live in. And this calls for integrity.

    AA for blacks should be justified on the fact that blacks are less intelligent.

    If NBA were to allow AA for non-blacks, the only honest justification would be that it’s the ONLY way many non-blacks can hope to play.

    All this ‘holistic’ nonsense is a**holistic. It’s total BS.

    Let Harvard and other colleges keep their AA. But let’s have some truth as to why.

    Truth Studies Now. Department of Truth. Every college needs it more than ever.

    • Replies: @Dtbb
    We could get Winston Smith to head it.
    , @GU
    It’s not the lawyers or the judge lying in that case though, it’s one of the litigants. Lose respect for Harvard and its expert witness.
  52. IIRC almost all the things in that Arciadiacono document and especially the “shocking assertions” are tainted by the nonsensical exclusion of about 40% of the dataset because of his gut feelings or whatever the hell reason he went with. (Despite being a huge proportion of admitted students, even non-hooked students, in many years of the underlying dataset the various categories of early-admitted students are excluded for no good reason at all, except of course that it dishonestly makes a certain case look better. Really, excluding up to 40% of the data should just invalidate the whole approach.) That’s of course not the only problem and I didn’t track this down specifically but I looked through it before. Other examples of ridiculously bad omissions in data analysis which even Harvard’s side has noted include disaggregating by state and high school type.

    The glut of recent years of students and especially Asian students over-applying to too many colleges also explains part of what is a broader true picture though. The Orwellian problem of courts not allowing the selective private colleges to “collude” (there’s that word again :D) while med schools doing it are constantly praised by the press and so forth is just one of those unfortunate things. Even if they’re not doing it anyway they’d be better off doing so, and it would put an end to a lot of the gross stories also commonly seen in the press about admission.

    • Replies: @anon
    Arciadiacono omitted students who were definite admits (recruited athletes, development, Dean's list) and those who had little chance of admit due to poor academic index score.
    , @Veracitor
    You lie.
  53. @Dr. X
    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I've taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I'd guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    ‘…The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.’

    I’d point out that they’re probably mostly ‘blacks.’ That is to say, I’d guess they’re on average three-quarters white, genetically, and usually have been raised in suburbia to boot.

    None of this is doing the bulk of the actual black population any good at all.

  54. @Dr. X
    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I've taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I'd guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    Lani Guinier (Harvard prof, 50/50 jew/black IIRC) noted in the early 2000s that Harvard blacks were imported from overseas in large part. In short, Harvard has “black” students, but not nearly as many “African American” students, contrary to what the chart shows.

    Then Obama was elected and the whole subject was dropped.

  55. @Jack D
    The non-discriminatory #'s are close to the numbers that you see at CalTech right now. CalTech probably exercising some AA (URM #'s still seem suspiciously high) but not as bad as Harvard.


    White 28%
    Asian 43%
    URM * 16%
    Internat. 8%
    2+ Races ** 5%

    (Probably most of the International and all of the 2+ races are also Asian or part Asian so the total Asian % is over 50%). All URM Hapas count as URM so the only kind of Hapa that is left is white-Asian.

    * URM includes:

    American Indian or Alaskan Native
    Black or African American
    Hispanic or Latino
    Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
    Students who declared two or more races with one of the above identified

    ** Two or More Races does not include students with an underrepresented category identified.

    I wonder at what point CalTech "tips" and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.

    CalTech somewhat substantially discriminates in favor of students from California (went to high school there that is) and the demographics of California do not match the rest of the country; the numbers are rapidly shifting at “population of 17-year olds” more than the total population of that state, even.

    It’s gotten worse over the years, but most of the other people you see talking about this are the rare exceptions that prove the rule to Hanlon’s Razor. At least, even CalTech doesn’t have sufficient nlp bots to be responsible for this itself and they probably aren’t just paying thousands of shills :)

  56. @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    “Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%…”

    What are the chances this will change, even if the Asians prevail?

    Seriously.

    • Replies: @Lot
    Unz's Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there's no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.
  57. Anonymous[221] • Disclaimer says:

    Fairfax County, VA used to have a gifted program that required a 140+ IQ test. It was almost all white as I recall in the 70s (Asians not yet that numerous). It was a pretty simple system and had kids being bused to elementary (3rd-6th) and 7th-8th center schools (regular schools but with a large separate enclave of “soopies” with separate teachers/classes/rooms). Kids returned to their high schools for 9-12 (no central school) but the widespread availability of accelerated and AP classes enabled an enriched experience.

    TJ opened in fall of 1983. Initially strong students preferred to stay in their regular schools (especially ones like Langley). But eventually it became more common for the strongest students to all gravitate to TJ (enduring long bus ride commutes). I was in the generation that went to soopie school for 3-8. TJ did not open until my senior year and there was no way I was transferring to that–was at second best school after Langley and having a great HS experience and walking to class (no 2 hour round trip bus rides). But I suspect a few years later it would have been a different decision.

    This article says it is now the premier HS in the country (I guess well ahead of Langley, etc.) And Asian dominated.

    https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/04/26/is-the-no-1-high-school-in-america-thomas-jefferson-fairfax-discrimination/

  58. @Reg Cæsar

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.
     
    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today's Harvard makes smart kids dumb.

    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today’s Harvard makes smart kids dumb.

    I seriously doubt that either of those statements are correct, given that psychometric research consistently shows that it’s basically impossible, at least as far as we know, to substantially increase your IQ by age 18, and, whatever the flaws of elite universities, I don’t think they severely physically maltreat students to the point that their IQs noticeably drop.

    You might object that you mean something like “wisdom,” or a inculcation in a different ideology that you prefer relative to the offerings of the current paradigm, as opposed to IQ. Whatever the truth of this, I don’t see how a legacy system is useful, let alone necessary, for such ends.

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit, when meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit...
     
    No it doesn't. It rewards the family's merit. That's an important pillar in any civilization.

    ...meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
     
    Exactly how much "merit" do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It's just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)
  59. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ben Kurtz
    Are there any well-known elite Asian colleges in the U.S.?

    With Harvard and other elite private schools imposing Jewish quotas in the early 20th century, I understood that pressure built within that community to establish institutions like Yeshiva University (which hosts the well-regarded Cardozo law school and used to host Einstein medical school until that was sold to the Mt. Sinai hospital system), Brandies University (founded 1948), and I'm sure others.

    Brandies in fact focuses on recruiting top-decile SAT scorers, and I was always under the impression that its raison d'etre was to give home to high-performing Jewish students excluded from the Ivys because of quotas, but who were posh enough to want that college campus experience instead of going to CUNY, which was the popular choice among the prior generation of Jews who were smart but not admitted to the WASPier schools.

    I don't wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it's Jewish quotas -- if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard's brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.

    I mean, we all know about the HBCUs, and how CalTech has a fairly strict merit-based admissions system that has led for many years to class composition numbers that look remarkably like those in the expert report, but I can't think of an Asian answer to Brandies U. Can anyone here?

    Is it that they'd rather sue than build? If so, we've come to a sorry state.

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.

    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn’t start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers. Their success came because of Harvard, not in spite of it. If the Harvard quota had continued for Jews they wouldn’t be nearly as successful as a group today. Graduates of these schools form a cartel and actively hire/promote/do business with their own.

    Whoever controls Harvard controls America — what Harvard does, all other colleges follow, Jews know this. They know the WASPs made a big mistake by ceding control of Harvard to them, they are not about to make the same mistake by ceding their control of Harvard to Asians, whom they know are the biggest threats to unseat them from the pinnacle of success in America. Blacks and hispanics can be admitted in large numbers because they are not real threats.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    There were a few Jews at Los Alamos in 1944, right?
    , @Stolen Valor Detective

    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn’t start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers.
     
    I don't know if this is necessarily fully true:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_City_College_of_New_York_alumni
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Brooklyn_College_alumni

    That is to say, I agree that Jews didn't "dominate" professions like law, medicine, finance, et cetera, until after quotas on Jewish admissions to Ivy League universities were dropped, but there were quite a lot of very successful Jews who graduated from CUNY colleges, so I'm not sure that the relationship is causal, or at least monocausal.

    , @Unladen Swallow
    I don't know if that is true, Jews were already wealthier than non-Jewish whites by 1950, with a much higher rate of college education as well ( 2 1/2 times as likely ). CCNY was called " The Harvard of the Working Class" and apparently produced more Fortune 500 executives than any university except Yale ( I remember hearing this, don't know the source ). The Ivies collectively didn't really didn't begin accepting a lot of Jews until the 1960's although some like Penn and Cornell took more than the others did.

    I also don't think the Ivies discriminated against all Jews, the German Jews who were both more educated and fewer in number than Eastern European Jews, didn't seem to have any problem getting into the Ivies. German Jews like Robert Oppenheimer and Henry Kissinger had no problem getting into Harvard, well before the Ivies dropped their quotas. However their dominance over certain professions like law, medicine, and finance may not have begun until they started attending Ivies, but they were already doing very well economically before that.

  60. OT Twitter won’t let me have it, but Twitter has confirmed to The Hill that Louis Farrakhan’s tweet “I’m not anti-Semite, I’m anti termite” is not dehumanizing language and will not be censored, nor will it get its tweeter suspended.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "OT Twitter won’t let me have it, but Twitter has confirmed to The Hill that Louis Farrakhan’s tweet “I’m not anti-Semite, I’m anti termite” is not dehumanizing language and will not be censored, nor will it get its tweeter suspended"



    The Left says Louis Farrakhan has a 1st amendment right to be an anti-Semite so he should never be banned from Twitter, the same Left who were glad James Damore, Paula Dean, Hulk Hogan, and Roseanne Barr were fired from their jobs.


    The Left have zero principals which is what makes The Left extremely dangerous.
  61. Don’t forget Stanford’s advantage* as a D-1 football and basketball school (Harvard is comparable in basketball, but that’s it re: Ivies).

    *We need athletes**!

    ** African-Americans

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Harvard has gotten much better at basketball ever since they increased their financial aid dramatically, which allows them to get around the Ivy League ban on athletic scholarships.
  62. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff's report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:
    https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-2-Arcidiacono-Rebuttal-Report.pdf

    Asian-American applicants excel in more than academics. They also have higher extracurricular ratings and overall alumni ratings than any other racial group. Asian-American applicants likewise are stronger than African-American and Hispanic applicants on counselor ratings, teacher 1 ratings, teacher 2 ratings, and alumni personal ratings, and have similar or slightly lower ratings than whites in these categories.
     
    So much for telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth on the witness stand.

    Liberals have no problem lying under oath because:
    a) they are atheists so don't care about swearing on a bible
    b) they believe the end justifies the means

    For conservatives, only one thing should matter.

    Asians voted 80% Democratic. They are status hogs, and once they graduate from elite schools, they turn into globo-homo pissants like Jerry Kang and Fareed Zakaria. And there’s Fukuyama shilling for Soros.

    The real scandal is white people don’t sue Ivy League for accepting more Jews than white goyim.

    • Replies: @anon
    I agree. Many Asians who went to elite schools came out the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers, singing the praises of AA. There's even a group of Asians currently at Harvard who marched in support of AA last weekend.

    And look at Sarah Jeong, Derrick Watson, Theodore Chuang, Ted Lieu et al. who went to Harvard/Stanford, biggest libtards. America is better off if elite schools simply exclude all Asians.

    I really don't care about the Asians, I just want to see the racist hypocrites at Harvard show the world their true colors and eat some humble pie.
  63. @anon

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.
     
    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn't start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers. Their success came because of Harvard, not in spite of it. If the Harvard quota had continued for Jews they wouldn't be nearly as successful as a group today. Graduates of these schools form a cartel and actively hire/promote/do business with their own.

    Whoever controls Harvard controls America -- what Harvard does, all other colleges follow, Jews know this. They know the WASPs made a big mistake by ceding control of Harvard to them, they are not about to make the same mistake by ceding their control of Harvard to Asians, whom they know are the biggest threats to unseat them from the pinnacle of success in America. Blacks and hispanics can be admitted in large numbers because they are not real threats.

    There were a few Jews at Los Alamos in 1944, right?

    • Replies: @FO337
    Remember, yet again, that Karabel shows Harvard's Jewish enrollment at ~30% by 1925.
    , @J.Ross
    Besides or including the spies?
    , @Ben Kurtz
    Ironically enough, J. Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientist, was a Jewish Harvard man, but most of the other prominent nuclear physicists in the Manhattan Project -- Jew and Gentile -- had European training. Names like Teller, Rabi and Szilard come to mind (all central European Jews) as well as Stanislaw Ulam and Enrico Fermi (Catholics) -- all of them trained more or less entirely in Europe.
  64. Yes, it would. And, whatever. How is it not ever more important to zero in on the smartest kids regardless of their race or ethnicity!????

    Return to admitting the smart kids as far as test scores: and, ability, drive, leadership; as far as rough, raw intellect. To me, this is the easiest – it is all about the brains.

    • Replies: @Joe Schmoe
    I think the record shows that Jews really were very smart, hence the Nobel Prizes and many inventions, etc. The Asians really aren't showing that kind results. There are billions of Asians. They are underrepresented in achievement based on their numbers. Not so with Jews whose achievement is stunning given their numbers. Of course Jews have had the tremendous advantage of living in white countries that are not thoroughly corrupt like Asian countries. We just have the individual Asians that are smarter than the other Asians, but the groups themselves aren't really vastly better than Europeans historically. They had writing, math, literature, philosophy, architecture, etc. So, until maybe about 500 years ago, pretty comparable till Europe started pulling ahead. By the 18th, 19th centuries, Europe, were way out front technologically speaking and the Jews were in that mix. If Asians were really that strong, we would see more achievement from them directly, like coming straight out of China, India, Korea, etc. But we don't. It takes the cream off the top of the 3 billion Asians just to do what whites do with smaller numbers, and what Jews do with tiny numbers.
  65. @Jack D
    The non-discriminatory #'s are close to the numbers that you see at CalTech right now. CalTech probably exercising some AA (URM #'s still seem suspiciously high) but not as bad as Harvard.


    White 28%
    Asian 43%
    URM * 16%
    Internat. 8%
    2+ Races ** 5%

    (Probably most of the International and all of the 2+ races are also Asian or part Asian so the total Asian % is over 50%). All URM Hapas count as URM so the only kind of Hapa that is left is white-Asian.

    * URM includes:

    American Indian or Alaskan Native
    Black or African American
    Hispanic or Latino
    Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
    Students who declared two or more races with one of the above identified

    ** Two or More Races does not include students with an underrepresented category identified.

    I wonder at what point CalTech "tips" and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.

    I wonder at what point CalTech “tips” and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.

    I thought SJWs aren’t supposed to be ‘racist’?

  66. @Shaq
    Don’t forget Stanford’s advantage* as a D-1 football and basketball school (Harvard is comparable in basketball, but that’s it re: Ivies).

    *We need athletes**!

    ** African-Americans

    Harvard has gotten much better at basketball ever since they increased their financial aid dramatically, which allows them to get around the Ivy League ban on athletic scholarships.

    • Replies: @Shaq
    Yep, Amaker figured out how to game the Academic Index - get the best player you can find who admissions will let in and pair him with the 4.5 GPA kid who will never play a minute but is the son of a major donor. The average GPA of the recruiting class looks great, but only one or two kids in the class ever see the court.
  67. i know for me, i intuitively sensed this stuff, so i didn’t even bother to apply, and this was all the way back in the early 90s. no way was i going to be admitted, even though i probably qualified under normal conditions. so i didn’t even try. not that i would have went there for sure if i got in, but maybe. harvard wasn’t on my radar or interest list, but you gotta consider it, if harvard says come on in. it’s like the playboy mansion halloween party. i wasn’t thinking about going, but somebody invited me, and now, well, i just might have to go.

    admissions were harder to get thru back then, no common applications or anything like that, so you did maybe 4 or 5 and that was it. for most kids anyway, with the ability to go to these places. plus they all cost like 60 bucks, so if you were lower middle class like me, you couldn’t afford to just blow 600 bucks on 10 applications. eliminating places that you knew for sure would turn you down no matter what was simply money management for us types. my parents weren’t gonna pay for all that. honestly most families in that earning bracket would prefer their son to just go to state, no matter how smart he was, and they would be fine with that.

    15% africans is pure lol. it can’t really be that high can it? i think it would not even be 1% under real conditions. even accounting for africans from africa. i think the 0.9% estimate is even too high.

    i know one athlete who just graduated from harvard who probably had the test scores to go without sports, but he never would have gone to harvard without the sports team wanting him. that’s probably the only way some of these guys are gonna go now.

    it’s mind blowing how many slots they waste every year now on useless admits. not just this place, all the places.

  68. @Jack D
    The non-discriminatory #'s are close to the numbers that you see at CalTech right now. CalTech probably exercising some AA (URM #'s still seem suspiciously high) but not as bad as Harvard.


    White 28%
    Asian 43%
    URM * 16%
    Internat. 8%
    2+ Races ** 5%

    (Probably most of the International and all of the 2+ races are also Asian or part Asian so the total Asian % is over 50%). All URM Hapas count as URM so the only kind of Hapa that is left is white-Asian.

    * URM includes:

    American Indian or Alaskan Native
    Black or African American
    Hispanic or Latino
    Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
    Students who declared two or more races with one of the above identified

    ** Two or More Races does not include students with an underrepresented category identified.

    I wonder at what point CalTech "tips" and white people no longer want to go there at all? Must be getting pretty lonely there for white people.

    I know that the regression models they ran suggest otherwise, but I’ve always been somewhat confused by the assertion that the percentage of Asian Americans at Harvard under a purely meritocratic system of admissions should mirror that of Caltech. Obviously Caltech undergrads are significantly skewed towards STEM, whereas I assume Harvard undergrads have a much more balanced distribution of majors.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/15/local/la-me-caltech-20120615

    When Christina Kondos receives her bachelor’s degree at Caltech’s commencement Friday, she will represent a tiny and little-known minority at the prestigious science and engineering campus in Pasadena.

    Kondos is the only one in her graduating class of 247 to have majored in humanities or social sciences — economics and history in her case — without double-majoring in science, math or engineering.

    Since 2008, only a dozen Caltech students have done the same, and they received bachelor of science degrees because Caltech doesn’t offer a bachelor of arts, campus officials said.

    Science, of course, rules at Caltech, but it doesn’t eliminate the likes of James Joyce or Immanuel Kant.

    I assume that Asian Americans are also skewed towards STEM and away from social sciences and humanities. Do you know if schools try to maintain a certain balance in terms of what percentage of students major in various subjects? I guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they’re roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases?

    • Replies: @Lot
    " guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they’re roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases"

    It wouldn't instantly transform Harvard to CalTech, but its football and basketball and hockey team would go 0-8 in the Ivy League, it would have a lot of math classes with long waitlists and a lot of humanities professors with even less to do. The libraries would also be packed, but somehow at the same time much quieter.
    , @Lot
    "should mirror that of Caltech. "

    Is there actual data showing Caltech doesn't have a NAM preference? Berkeley is legally banned from having one, but does anyway, just not as much as it used to or at peer schools.

    Caltech likely does have AA, just not as much as its peers.
    , @academic gossip
    If Caltech's admission method were adapted to Harvard STEM+humanities, you would not get the Caltech-like demographics listed in the table. Caltech admission is forward looking, trying to predict who will be best in the future. For their prediction they use more data than success rate on the relatively easy (compared to Caltech) tasks the Asian applicants have excelled at. That would filter out a lot more Asians than using an academic index defined by exactly the two parameters that Asians work to maximize.
  69. @CrunchybutRealistCon
    This is going to be shock therapy and a helluva wake-up for NormieWorld if quotas are ended. It will starkly reveal the consequences of the 1965 Hart Cellar Act, and the fact that the West has slowly been importing an Asian Overclass.
    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America. Bad news all around. We're in for a rough ride with the Coalition of the Fringes scrambling to maintain the Anti-White narrative, while Asians shoulder aside Blacks & Latinos.

    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America.

    Yes, but why would they feel anything else?

    Gratitude is usually tinged with resentment and — as emotions go — has only a very brief shelf life. I would imagine that many of them believe that they have been allowed into the US because the native population is too weak/stupid/delusional to manage its own affairs or even to understand the implications of this incapacity.

    It’s easy to develop a sense of contempt for people who don’t understand or defend their own long-term interests.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    People who find it easy to develop a sense of contempt for entire classes of people lack the character to be effective leaders, especially of those people themselves.

    Harvard and the like may flatter themselves that they are training the nation’s (now world’s) leaders but they’ve never done so and are unlikely to start now.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    "It’s easy to develop a sense of contempt for people who don’t understand or defend their own long-term interests."

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

    "The English name "booby" was possibly based on the Spanish slang term bobo, meaning "stupid", as these tame birds had a habit of landing on board sailing ships, where they were easily captured and eaten."
     
    , @CrunchybutRealistCon
    Putting oneself in the shoes of the new Asian arrivals, I suppose the West seems like an all you can eat buffet, hosted by an approval seeking nitwit. The only prerequisite for full access to the buffet is learning how to play the Progressive Stack game. One the common man regains his nerve, this game will end.
    , @James N. Kennett

    It’s easy to develop a sense of contempt for people who don’t understand or defend their own long-term interests.
     
    The Chinese ruling classes must be laughing among themselves at the inability of American and European countries to repel colonists, and our narcissistic and sentimental contortions when we attempt to play racial politics.

    In 200 years time, Chinese historians will study the 21st-century social collapse of the West, and will pity our self-defeating belief system and our utter foolishness; much as we pity the native tribes who, when they first encountered white European explorers, believed they were gods.

    How is it possible to feel anything but contempt for a people who were at the pinnacle of human civilization, and threw it all away because they did not want to be considered racist?
  70. I know a black guy who went to Harvard and was plenty qualified to get in regardless of his skin colour, but he wasn’t American. I wonder what percentage of those remaining black students would be?

    • Replies: @Lot
    Just knowing someone you can't assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted. From the graph, about 19 in 20 HC blacks benefited from not having the "pure meritocratic" admissions the Asian lawsuit people are demanding.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is "Oxbridge material" and inferring he'd also be Harvard material, but the US's ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).
  71. @anon

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.
     
    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn't start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers. Their success came because of Harvard, not in spite of it. If the Harvard quota had continued for Jews they wouldn't be nearly as successful as a group today. Graduates of these schools form a cartel and actively hire/promote/do business with their own.

    Whoever controls Harvard controls America -- what Harvard does, all other colleges follow, Jews know this. They know the WASPs made a big mistake by ceding control of Harvard to them, they are not about to make the same mistake by ceding their control of Harvard to Asians, whom they know are the biggest threats to unseat them from the pinnacle of success in America. Blacks and hispanics can be admitted in large numbers because they are not real threats.

    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn’t start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers.

    I don’t know if this is necessarily fully true:

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

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

    That is to say, I agree that Jews didn’t “dominate” professions like law, medicine, finance, et cetera, until after quotas on Jewish admissions to Ivy League universities were dropped, but there were quite a lot of very successful Jews who graduated from CUNY colleges, so I’m not sure that the relationship is causal, or at least monocausal.

  72. @prime noticer
    why wait? beijing university is 99% chinese today. and it produces...well, i'm sure it will start producing something important at some point here. it's only 120 years old and only has 40,000 students who are all chinese, but they're sure to develop something of value at some point.

    back in the real world, we could turn all our universities into east asian colonies and reduce our science, engineering, medicine, and mathematical output by 80 to 90 percent, but at least admissions would be 'by the book'. 'just take the best test scores' they said.

    isn't that what 100% east asian universities do already?

    Pretty much all universities in the world outside the US, including all European, Canadian, Australian, NZ universities, admit strictly by test scores.

    • Replies: @Gordo

    Pretty much all universities in the world outside the US, including all European, Canadian, Australian, NZ universities, admit strictly by test scores.
     
    Officially yes, there are internal metrics which are not made public.

    Except in France where it is all who your parents know.
  73. @Krastos the Gluemaker
    IIRC almost all the things in that Arciadiacono document and especially the "shocking assertions" are tainted by the nonsensical exclusion of about 40% of the dataset because of his gut feelings or whatever the hell reason he went with. (Despite being a huge proportion of admitted students, even non-hooked students, in many years of the underlying dataset the various categories of early-admitted students are excluded for no good reason at all, except of course that it dishonestly makes a certain case look better. Really, excluding up to 40% of the data should just invalidate the whole approach.) That's of course not the only problem and I didn't track this down specifically but I looked through it before. Other examples of ridiculously bad omissions in data analysis which even Harvard's side has noted include disaggregating by state and high school type.

    The glut of recent years of students and especially Asian students over-applying to too many colleges also explains part of what is a broader true picture though. The Orwellian problem of courts not allowing the selective private colleges to "collude" (there's that word again :D) while med schools doing it are constantly praised by the press and so forth is just one of those unfortunate things. Even if they're not doing it anyway they'd be better off doing so, and it would put an end to a lot of the gross stories also commonly seen in the press about admission.

    Arciadiacono omitted students who were definite admits (recruited athletes, development, Dean’s list) and those who had little chance of admit due to poor academic index score.

    • Replies: @gunner29

    and those who had little chance of admit due to poor academic index score.
     
    I read somewhere this year that Harvard has 2 special programs for the less than prime beef students.

    100 spots for peeps that are just slightly less qualified to be admitted; with a $5 million contribution/bribe, they get in.

    Then 50 spots for somebody that should be going to directional state U; $10 million from them.

    So that's $1 billion a year just from those 150 every new year. That kind of money pays for a lot of 100% scholarships....
  74. OMG! I want the East Asians to win this law suit! And, after their acceptances (after their win), it will be white kids next tier, Jews or Christians…so what is the problem, because back in my time, there were black kids there, too? It is reality. We all know Christian and Jewish kids are more gifted in visio-spatial spectrum, so what the eff? Bring it.

  75. @D. K.
    I would love to see the figures recalculated, after disaggregating that formerly rising ethnicity from the White category (and any other category in which its members might fall).

    Well just assume that Harvard is exactly 25% Jewish then write several 75,000 word articles about your results.

    • LOL: Tyrion 2
    • Replies: @Anon
    Will he start the article with his stabdard :
    Im not an expert and I don't know if any of this is true .
  76. @Krastos the Gluemaker
    IIRC almost all the things in that Arciadiacono document and especially the "shocking assertions" are tainted by the nonsensical exclusion of about 40% of the dataset because of his gut feelings or whatever the hell reason he went with. (Despite being a huge proportion of admitted students, even non-hooked students, in many years of the underlying dataset the various categories of early-admitted students are excluded for no good reason at all, except of course that it dishonestly makes a certain case look better. Really, excluding up to 40% of the data should just invalidate the whole approach.) That's of course not the only problem and I didn't track this down specifically but I looked through it before. Other examples of ridiculously bad omissions in data analysis which even Harvard's side has noted include disaggregating by state and high school type.

    The glut of recent years of students and especially Asian students over-applying to too many colleges also explains part of what is a broader true picture though. The Orwellian problem of courts not allowing the selective private colleges to "collude" (there's that word again :D) while med schools doing it are constantly praised by the press and so forth is just one of those unfortunate things. Even if they're not doing it anyway they'd be better off doing so, and it would put an end to a lot of the gross stories also commonly seen in the press about admission.

    You lie.

    • Replies: @Krastos the Gluemaker
    No, moron, the plaintiffs do exclude early-action/admission/whatever it's called at various points in many parts of their statistical analysis. (It's actually a bit funny because Harvard had literally abolished the process for a few years and then reestablished it, though I'm not sure certain analyses have all the data going that far back in years considered.) This clearly abuses the data and allows additional morons like the "Pnin" account to cherrypick weird numbers.

    Early action alone is not at all the same as athletic/legacy/etc factors except to the most batshit sjw, so it's unscrupulous to lump them together.
  77. @Cassander
    "Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%..."

    What are the chances this will change, even if the Asians prevail?

    Seriously.

    Unz’s Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there’s no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    We need a "Salty" button...
    , @Jefferson
    "Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust."

    Here in The Bay Area most pedophile related crimes that make the local news are committed by sleazy creepy looking Hispanic guys, which makes sense because they come from a nation like Mexico where the legal sexual age of consent is 12.
    , @Svigor
    Man that is some high-level (((logic))) there, my dude.
    , @TheJQ
    Refute it then.
  78. Wow, I only just realised, the black percentage at Harvard is actually higher than black representation in the US population!

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    As already noted, you wouldn't get in trouble for the black rate increasing but there'd be questions asked if it dropped; therefore it only goes one way.

    On the other hand, people do want some (informal) affirmative action. The most qualified black kid is a more interesting fellow student than the 100th most qualified Asian; especially if the other 99 are there anyway. That result is also better for the country.

    Non-autistic types, I think, tend to instantly get that; which is why the stat at the start of this post is such a compelling justification for the current system.

    The issue seems to be when it becomes managerialised or commodified and not simply navigated through social norms.

  79. anon[348] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    For conservatives, only one thing should matter.

    Asians voted 80% Democratic. They are status hogs, and once they graduate from elite schools, they turn into globo-homo pissants like Jerry Kang and Fareed Zakaria. And there's Fukuyama shilling for Soros.

    The real scandal is white people don't sue Ivy League for accepting more Jews than white goyim.

    I agree. Many Asians who went to elite schools came out the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers, singing the praises of AA. There’s even a group of Asians currently at Harvard who marched in support of AA last weekend.

    And look at Sarah Jeong, Derrick Watson, Theodore Chuang, Ted Lieu et al. who went to Harvard/Stanford, biggest libtards. America is better off if elite schools simply exclude all Asians.

    I really don’t care about the Asians, I just want to see the racist hypocrites at Harvard show the world their true colors and eat some humble pie.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Lieu is my ultra liberal Congress critter elected in a very Jewish district. He’s the appointed heir of Waxman

    Asians have always voted against anti affirmative action initiatives and submitted friend of the court briefs in favor of affirmative action in all the affirmative action law suits.

    White HBD and IQ mavens focus on tech and upper level careers for 115 plus Whites and Asians and assume Asians have the same views as Whites.

    The Asians realize that affirmative action helps the average Asian who’s happy to be a mail carrier toll taker city clerk or owner of a small business helped by never pay back SBA loans and tax exemptions for locating in a CRA or ghetto area.

    Affirmative action and racism also benefits Asians from being prosecuted for tax evasion medical and food stamp fraud slum landlording gross violations of zoning health and labor laws such as running a chicken and duck slaughter house in the floor of a garage and even the sex slave brothels.

    Any investigation and enforcement of these violations and crimes brings the scream of racism and the city backs down.

    Those immigrant entrepreneurs the conservatives love so much are in business only because of the multitude of socialist type benefits heaped on minority small businesses and lax enforcement of business regulations such as labor laws, zoning health codes and the rest.

    So some Asian Drs have to go to 3rd tier Chicago medical school instead of University of Chicago Northwestern Loyola or University of Illinois med schools. BFD. They’re still Drs.

    Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of Asians are getting all sorts of decently paid jobs and opening small businesses because of affirmative action

    Affirmative action is good for Asians. They know it. That’s why they vote Democrat and always voted in favor of affirmative action when the initiatives were on the ballot

    I’m all for the anti affirmative action law suit against Harvard. If Harvard wins affirmative action will stay. If Harvard loses, the Asians will get the White goyim places.

    Or an anti affirmative action ruling will just be ignored as anti affirmative action Prop 209 has been ignored in California

    Another thing to consider are the professional Asians. They are the political leaders no different from NAACP BLM LARAZA MALDEF MECHA ADL AJC.

    The professionals speak for their people and their people follow them into the Democrat party
  80. @Spud Boy
    I'll just point out that you don't have to graduate from Harvard to be successful. I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.

    Click here to find out this simple trick!

    • LOL: FO337, Bubba
  81. Harvard’s acceptence rate is more like 4.5%, so this “randomly drawn from the top 10% of applicants” understates the point.

  82. @Ben Kurtz
    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians. Ideally named after some Asian guy. Not an existing public school heavily populated by Asian newcomers, like CUNY was heavily populated by Jews in the early 20th century.

    I'm not aware of any, but I'm willing to take suggestions.

    Suzie Wong U.

  83. @Reg Cæsar
    Pnin?

    Twitter allows users to adopt fictional character names?


    https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/64148/pnin-vladimir-nabokov-first-edition-rare.jpg

    Is that Mr. Magoo?

  84. @Yan Shen
    I know that the regression models they ran suggest otherwise, but I've always been somewhat confused by the assertion that the percentage of Asian Americans at Harvard under a purely meritocratic system of admissions should mirror that of Caltech. Obviously Caltech undergrads are significantly skewed towards STEM, whereas I assume Harvard undergrads have a much more balanced distribution of majors.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/15/local/la-me-caltech-20120615


    When Christina Kondos receives her bachelor's degree at Caltech's commencement Friday, she will represent a tiny and little-known minority at the prestigious science and engineering campus in Pasadena.

    Kondos is the only one in her graduating class of 247 to have majored in humanities or social sciences — economics and history in her case — without double-majoring in science, math or engineering.

    Since 2008, only a dozen Caltech students have done the same, and they received bachelor of science degrees because Caltech doesn't offer a bachelor of arts, campus officials said.

    Science, of course, rules at Caltech, but it doesn't eliminate the likes of James Joyce or Immanuel Kant.
     

    I assume that Asian Americans are also skewed towards STEM and away from social sciences and humanities. Do you know if schools try to maintain a certain balance in terms of what percentage of students major in various subjects? I guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they're roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases?

    ” guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they’re roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases”

    It wouldn’t instantly transform Harvard to CalTech, but its football and basketball and hockey team would go 0-8 in the Ivy League, it would have a lot of math classes with long waitlists and a lot of humanities professors with even less to do. The libraries would also be packed, but somehow at the same time much quieter.

  85. @Steve Sailer
    There were a few Jews at Los Alamos in 1944, right?

    Remember, yet again, that Karabel shows Harvard’s Jewish enrollment at ~30% by 1925.

  86. Jeez, what a group of whiners; you guys should all pool your money and go in on a vineyard:

    “The blaaaaqz do this”

    “The blaazzqz do that”

    The lady’s crochet club is strong around here.

  87. I was going to jump in and comment but decided it would be prudent to first read the comments and I see that My. Ron Unz already made my point, drats.

    Harvard could easily game this new system, simply by mounting an effort to boost White applicants – expand the denominator and the sheer scale of the White population will swamp the Asian gain. This only works for Whites, there simply aren’t enough qualified Blacks in America (only 240 or so Blacks score at the median SAT level of Ivy admitted students, that’s in the entire country.)

    As payback for this lawsuit, they could drive Asian admission rates very low, they simply need to go out and solicit the applications of smart White kids who would never think of going to Harvard, especially after they’ve been told that membership in the 4-H Club or Boy Scouts is the kiss of death for a shot at Harvard.

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    Iowa farmer, Wyoming ranchers, no. The bulk of qualified white students who don't apply to the Ivies come from the UMC suburbs all across America. Their parents know they'll be asked to pay 70k a year for their kid to be taught Marxism and feminism, if they can even get in. It's just not worth it.
    , @anon

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.
     
    You assumed Iowa farm boys and Wyoming cowboys want to go to Harvard so they can be indoctrinated into white hating queers and girly men. That's a big assumption.
  88. @Anonymous
    If allowed to immigrate in large enough numbers Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory.

    CLOSE THE DAMN BORDERS ALREADY.

    “Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory.”

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    You oughta go on YouTube and watch Ryan's ToysReview and EvanTubeHD to get another perspective on Asian-American parents and their offspring. (However, both Ryan and Evan are millionaires several times over, so I'll give them that.)


    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChGJGhZ9SOOHvBB0Y4DOO_w

    https://www.youtube.com/user/EvanTubeHD

    , @Stolen Valor Detective

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    Could you elaborate on why you think this?

    My own impression is rather the opposite. Contrary to the media narrative about Asian-American success coming from the Draconian practices of Asian Tiger Parents, I think the success of Asian-Americans (or specifically the Korean and Chinese ones of the stereotype) is largely the result of their relatively high IQs. (Particularly in the mathematical and visuo-spatial reasoning sub-components.)

    The strict parenting might, or might not, help, but I don't think it's anywhere near as important as mainstream media commentators like Amy Chua and Nick Kristof contend. Generally, I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Furthermore, my own view is that, as economist Bryan Caplan argued persuasively in his recent book The Case Against Education , most education in the US is extremely wasteful. The vast majority of the material that the vast majority of students learn in school is neither useful nor interesting to them. Its function is credential and positional. A high school arms race to take the most APs/get the highest test scores/do the most extra-curricular activities is a negative sum game, because everyone's relative position will ultimately be the same.
    , @bomag

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    The contradiction you express here captures what we're up against: Asian inspired institutions have a kind of success, but it's not something anyone is especially anxious to copy.
  89. Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.

    Since their emphasis (and Yale’s, Princeton’s, Stanford’s etc) is on choosing and training America’s future leaders, I think they are predicting the future in a way that won’t turn out well for Wholesome American Boys and Girls.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Harvard has long had a bias for Wyoming students. Harvard likes to boast that all 50 states are represented in each freshman class, which give applicants from remote small states an advantage.
  90. the Asian share at Harvard would rise from 24.9% to 51.7%

    Which, frankly, is why admission based simply on test scores and GPA is bullshit.

    So Harvard would be 52% Asian. Presumably the other top 10 schools would have roughly similar percentages of Asians.

    But look at the nation’s top entrepeneurs, CEOs, writers, artists, military leaders, political leaders, academics, etc. Asians certainly do quite well compared to their share of the population (though that share would be considerably smaller if you excluded Asian immigrants who came here after college), but are they anywhere even close to 50% of the super elite, or even the merely elite? Not remotely. They aren’t even 20% of it. And, depending on how you define it, it’s debatable whether they are even 10% of the elite – and that’s in a nation where about 5% of the population is Asian.

    There may be many problems with Harvard and its admission policies, but acknowledging that there is more to determining the quality of an applicant than just (test scores + GPA) is not one of them.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    As far as I can tell, Harvard is really good at admitting people who will be good for the Harvard brand (e.g., donating a lot or becoming famous or whatever). I don't see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.
    , @Joe Schmoe

    So Harvard would be 52% Asian. Presumably the other top 10 schools would have roughly similar percentages of Asians.
     
    This is due to the fact that there are 3 billion Asians in the world. So, there are 300 million in the top 10%. That is about the size of the USA. We only import from the small fraction at the top, which is why there are so many smart Asians here. It takes a continent to produce that talent, and when they get here, they want Harvard because they see it as the fast track to ruling elite which is what they want. So, of course it is easy to get to 52% Asian given that the top people are highly incentivized to apply and the freshman class is tiny compared to the number of qualified people. As noted, only 60% of that tiny class is up for meritocratic competition. The rest are legacy, athletes, and other special people who don't have to compete. Natalie Portman didn't have to compete to get in. I am not saying she wasn't reasonably qualified. But she was a special person who did not have to compete.
    , @ATBOTL
    For years, there has been a group of Asian activists complaining that racial discrimination is preventing all upper level niches in society from being as Asian as high SAT scorers are.
    , @Macumazahn
    Is it really so hard to see that the very disparity you note when you compare "the elite" to the population, might well be evidence of an artificially-filtered "elite-education" pipeline?
    Or, in Fauxcahontas-speak, "The facts absolutely suggest the possibility of discrimination against Asians in Harvard admissions." Even the facts you yourself cite.
  91. @Lurker
    Wow, I only just realised, the black percentage at Harvard is actually higher than black representation in the US population!

    As already noted, you wouldn’t get in trouble for the black rate increasing but there’d be questions asked if it dropped; therefore it only goes one way.

    On the other hand, people do want some (informal) affirmative action. The most qualified black kid is a more interesting fellow student than the 100th most qualified Asian; especially if the other 99 are there anyway. That result is also better for the country.

    Non-autistic types, I think, tend to instantly get that; which is why the stat at the start of this post is such a compelling justification for the current system.

    The issue seems to be when it becomes managerialised or commodified and not simply navigated through social norms.

  92. @Tyrion 2
    I know a black guy who went to Harvard and was plenty qualified to get in regardless of his skin colour, but he wasn't American. I wonder what percentage of those remaining black students would be?

    Just knowing someone you can’t assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted. From the graph, about 19 in 20 HC blacks benefited from not having the “pure meritocratic” admissions the Asian lawsuit people are demanding.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is “Oxbridge material” and inferring he’d also be Harvard material, but the US’s ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    Just knowing someone you can’t assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted.
     
    I know him and his academic abilities well enough.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is “Oxbridge material” and inferring he’d also be Harvard material, but the US’s ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).
     
    It was not uncommon at certain English high schools for normal white students to go to Harvard because they didn't get into Oxbridge.

    Even while, at the time, there was a signficant added cost which put people off, nevermind the travel.

    It is true that they may have been favoured for being English at Harvard and disfavoured for other reasons at Oxbridge, we all sort of assumed so, but the case isn't as clear cut as you make out. Distinguishing among the really top students isn't straightforward so applying to both maximized your opportunities but only if the admittance standards aren't substantially higher at one than the other.
  93. @FO337

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.
     
    Since their emphasis (and Yale's, Princeton's, Stanford's etc) is on choosing and training America's future leaders, I think they are predicting the future in a way that won't turn out well for Wholesome American Boys and Girls.

    Harvard has long had a bias for Wyoming students. Harvard likes to boast that all 50 states are represented in each freshman class, which give applicants from remote small states an advantage.

    • Replies: @anon
    Heavens Gate, for example
  94. @Steve Sailer
    There were a few Jews at Los Alamos in 1944, right?

    Besides or including the spies?

  95. @AnonyBot
    the Asian share at Harvard would rise from 24.9% to 51.7%

    Which, frankly, is why admission based simply on test scores and GPA is bullshit.

    So Harvard would be 52% Asian. Presumably the other top 10 schools would have roughly similar percentages of Asians.

    But look at the nation's top entrepeneurs, CEOs, writers, artists, military leaders, political leaders, academics, etc. Asians certainly do quite well compared to their share of the population (though that share would be considerably smaller if you excluded Asian immigrants who came here after college), but are they anywhere even close to 50% of the super elite, or even the merely elite? Not remotely. They aren't even 20% of it. And, depending on how you define it, it's debatable whether they are even 10% of the elite - and that's in a nation where about 5% of the population is Asian.

    There may be many problems with Harvard and its admission policies, but acknowledging that there is more to determining the quality of an applicant than just (test scores + GPA) is not one of them.

    As far as I can tell, Harvard is really good at admitting people who will be good for the Harvard brand (e.g., donating a lot or becoming famous or whatever). I don’t see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    I don’t see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.
     
    The Business School would advise you that it's a waste of time to pick up that $100, because you'd be earning more at your desk for the few seconds it would take to pick it up. (And don't forget the medical risks.)

    https://www.quora.com/If-Bill-Gates-dropped-a-dollar-would-he-pick-it-up
    , @AnonyBot
    You'd certainly know better than I would. My point is just that Asians don't comprise a share of the elite, no matter how it's defined, that suggests they should be 50% of the Ivy League student body. That's especially true if you exclude successful Asians who came to the United States after they graduated from college.
    , @Almost Missouri
    Donations and fame may be metrics for short-term Harvard brand bumps in the media. etc., but are those really also metrics for the long-term health of the Harvard brand?

    After all, Harvard already has more money than it knows what to do with, and global brand recognition outside the remoter parts of Papua New Guinea. Hasn't this unhealthy obsession with donations and fame already gone far into diminishing returns?

    Meanwhile, its only product that actually matters gets ever more mushy and mediocre.

    Former merit/legacy era Harvardians: John Adams, T.S. Eliot, Henry Kissinger, Ralph Bunche, John Updike, Dean Acheson, Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr., Henry James, Cotton Mather, Thomas Sowell, George Santayana, etc.

    Current fame/donor era Harvardians: Matty Yglacias, Jared Kuschner, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Ellen Pao, Franklin Raines, Bill Kristol, Soledad O'Brien, Al Franken, etc.

    The former list are legitimate cultural or national pillars, for better or for worse. The current list is like a Who's Who of the counterfeit elite.

    What profit it a College to pick up every hundred dollar bill if it lose its own soul?
  96. @Reg Cæsar

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.
     
    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today's Harvard makes smart kids dumb.

    There’s nothing wrong with Harvard’s legacy system. Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.

    The values behind the “civil rights” lawsuit against Harvard are the same Marxist values that demand heterosexuals be open to dating trannies.

    • Replies: @FO337

    There’s nothing wrong with Harvard’s legacy system.
     
    Especially now that it's favoring the Chosen People...


    Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.
     
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately.
    , @kaganovitch
    Dude, this is why Alinsky said "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." Harvard and its accomplices have been pissing all over 'live and let live' society for half a century. Fighting with one hand tied behind your back is not a winning strategy. As the Good Book says עם עקש תתפתל
    , @Anon
    It’s not a private institution because it gets hundreds of millions of federal grants every year and the student loans are guaranteed by the federal government

    Once a college accepts federal grants and student loans it ceases to be private. That established by federal law and some court cases.
  97. @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    You’re assuming the top whites want to go to Harvard.

    • Replies: @Altai
    To be fair, Harvard doesn't just offer law or history, humanities and whatnot so one can cobble together something that will make an investment bank hire you.

    They also do some good hard science. (Often through the school of medicine) Though obviously they do punch well below what they could do with that endowment. Maybe somebody should start hounding them about that. Right now all Harvard does is produce graduates who will help set off the next great depression.
  98. @Lot
    "Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory."

    I'm glad I didn't go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a "grind factory" and Asian parents' influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxk5djyAEN1r4wa4bo1_500.jpg

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/0b/10/75/0b10757a0d32e3abff28de0a712a517f--asian-parents-asian-kids.jpg

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    You oughta go on YouTube and watch Ryan’s ToysReview and EvanTubeHD to get another perspective on Asian-American parents and their offspring. (However, both Ryan and Evan are millionaires several times over, so I’ll give them that.)

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChGJGhZ9SOOHvBB0Y4DOO_w

    https://www.youtube.com/user/EvanTubeHD

  99. @Yan Shen
    I know that the regression models they ran suggest otherwise, but I've always been somewhat confused by the assertion that the percentage of Asian Americans at Harvard under a purely meritocratic system of admissions should mirror that of Caltech. Obviously Caltech undergrads are significantly skewed towards STEM, whereas I assume Harvard undergrads have a much more balanced distribution of majors.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/15/local/la-me-caltech-20120615


    When Christina Kondos receives her bachelor's degree at Caltech's commencement Friday, she will represent a tiny and little-known minority at the prestigious science and engineering campus in Pasadena.

    Kondos is the only one in her graduating class of 247 to have majored in humanities or social sciences — economics and history in her case — without double-majoring in science, math or engineering.

    Since 2008, only a dozen Caltech students have done the same, and they received bachelor of science degrees because Caltech doesn't offer a bachelor of arts, campus officials said.

    Science, of course, rules at Caltech, but it doesn't eliminate the likes of James Joyce or Immanuel Kant.
     

    I assume that Asian Americans are also skewed towards STEM and away from social sciences and humanities. Do you know if schools try to maintain a certain balance in terms of what percentage of students major in various subjects? I guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they're roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases?

    “should mirror that of Caltech. ”

    Is there actual data showing Caltech doesn’t have a NAM preference? Berkeley is legally banned from having one, but does anyway, just not as much as it used to or at peer schools.

    Caltech likely does have AA, just not as much as its peers.

    • Replies: @academic gossip
    Caltech's Common Data Set pdfs say that race/ethnicity is "considered" in admission. Caltech openly discriminates in favor of admitted women and minorities by offering them price reductions (scholarships, to use their misleading term).
  100. @Steve Sailer
    As far as I can tell, Harvard is really good at admitting people who will be good for the Harvard brand (e.g., donating a lot or becoming famous or whatever). I don't see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.

    I don’t see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.

    The Business School would advise you that it’s a waste of time to pick up that $100, because you’d be earning more at your desk for the few seconds it would take to pick it up. (And don’t forget the medical risks.)

    https://www.quora.com/If-Bill-Gates-dropped-a-dollar-would-he-pick-it-up

  101. @Stolen Valor Detective

    What was wrong with the legacy system? That made dumb kids smart. Today’s Harvard makes smart kids dumb.
     
    I seriously doubt that either of those statements are correct, given that psychometric research consistently shows that it's basically impossible, at least as far as we know, to substantially increase your IQ by age 18, and, whatever the flaws of elite universities, I don't think they severely physically maltreat students to the point that their IQs noticeably drop.

    You might object that you mean something like "wisdom," or a inculcation in a different ideology that you prefer relative to the offerings of the current paradigm, as opposed to IQ. Whatever the truth of this, I don't see how a legacy system is useful, let alone necessary, for such ends.

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit, when meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit…

    No it doesn’t. It rewards the family’s merit. That’s an important pillar in any civilization.

    …meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.

    Exactly how much “merit” do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It’s just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Well said.
    , @Stolen Valor Detective

    No it doesn’t. It rewards the family’s merit. That’s an important pillar in any civilization
     
    It rewards one individual directly for the merit of another. I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them, but in the US at least such practices have long been viewed as undesirable. Hence the prohibition of hereditary titles written into the Constitution:

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

    Exactly how much “merit” do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It’s just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)
     
    I agree that there is a profoundly important moral sense in which it's "luck all the way down," but I think we're defining "merit" differently here.

    I meant "meritorious" there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society. Not in the sense of being morally superior as the result of "free willed" decisions.

    That is to say, I agree that you ultimately have as little moral responsibility for the fact that you have a high IQ---or are a hard worker----as you do for having well-connected parents. But the former two things allow you to create value, while the latter thing often only allows you to appropriate the value that others have created.
    , @Autochthon
    Well, Hell's Bells, then: why did we ever bother abolishing the monarchy and hereditary peerages for the aristocracy if we're back to believing this kind of shit? Or allowing people to be punished for their ancestors' crimes? Why end it there: the Trumps, Obamas, Kochs, and Gateses are all more meritorious families than yours, so if one of them strikes one if you in the street he should do so with impunity – after all he is an Obama, and you a mere Cæsar (no relation, I assume, to the famously meritorious line, else my logic fails...).

    In the event, eighteen-year-olds are plenty capable of having demonstrated their own merits of demerits. Hell, at nineteen Audie Murphy single-handedly held back an entire company of Germans at Colmar Pocket. He achieved this feat in part because he'd become an excellent marksman by hunting to feed his family while he was yet a boy. There are eighteen-year-olds who spend time helping abused, neglected, and abandoned cats and dogs in shelters; those who donate marrow to strangers; and others who run around shoplifting, raping, and snorting cocaine. Some study dilegently while working shitty jobs at night. Others cut classes and watch porn and sportsball at night. Some know three languages, play a clarinet very well, and are great at calculus. Others have never read a book longer than one hundred pages and don't understand rudimentary algebra. Plenty of the first sorts are from poor, even vicious families, and a lot of the second sort have rich, connected parents (it's how they can afford to piss away their time and skate through life).

    If you cannot find merit in some and a lack in others, you've not been around many teenagers.
    , @Svigor
    What isn't a genetic lotto? My guess is that conscientiousness isn't much less genetically-determined than IQ is.
  102. @Steve Sailer
    As far as I can tell, Harvard is really good at admitting people who will be good for the Harvard brand (e.g., donating a lot or becoming famous or whatever). I don't see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.

    You’d certainly know better than I would. My point is just that Asians don’t comprise a share of the elite, no matter how it’s defined, that suggests they should be 50% of the Ivy League student body. That’s especially true if you exclude successful Asians who came to the United States after they graduated from college.

  103. OT This claims to be an instruction from a Los Angeles private school: if you participate in Meme Day you cannot choose any meme associated with hate, ie Pepe, red pill, NPC or Wojak (no comma between NPC and Wojak, as though they were interchangeable), in other words you cannot do the most famous and consequential ones. I’m guessing East Asian Dad is precluded for “racism.”
    So … kittens?

    http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/189840265

    • Replies: @FO337
    Well yes....and no.....

    https://i.imgur.com/5OJMASb.jpg
  104. @Steve Sailer
    There were a few Jews at Los Alamos in 1944, right?

    Ironically enough, J. Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientist, was a Jewish Harvard man, but most of the other prominent nuclear physicists in the Manhattan Project — Jew and Gentile — had European training. Names like Teller, Rabi and Szilard come to mind (all central European Jews) as well as Stanislaw Ulam and Enrico Fermi (Catholics) — all of them trained more or less entirely in Europe.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    as well as Stanislaw Ulam and Enrico Fermi (Catholics)

    Ulam was Jewish
  105. @black sea

    Incredibly, this Overclass is not grateful, but has a smug sense of entitlement, and disdain for Historic America.
     
    Yes, but why would they feel anything else?

    Gratitude is usually tinged with resentment and -- as emotions go -- has only a very brief shelf life. I would imagine that many of them believe that they have been allowed into the US because the native population is too weak/stupid/delusional to manage its own affairs or even to understand the implications of this incapacity.

    It's easy to develop a sense of contempt for people who don't understand or defend their own long-term interests.

    People who find it easy to develop a sense of contempt for entire classes of people lack the character to be effective leaders, especially of those people themselves.

    Harvard and the like may flatter themselves that they are training the nation’s (now world’s) leaders but they’ve never done so and are unlikely to start now.

  106. @Reg Cæsar

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit...
     
    No it doesn't. It rewards the family's merit. That's an important pillar in any civilization.

    ...meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
     
    Exactly how much "merit" do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It's just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    Well said.

  107. @Lot
    "Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory."

    I'm glad I didn't go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a "grind factory" and Asian parents' influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxk5djyAEN1r4wa4bo1_500.jpg

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/0b/10/75/0b10757a0d32e3abff28de0a712a517f--asian-parents-asian-kids.jpg

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    Could you elaborate on why you think this?

    My own impression is rather the opposite. Contrary to the media narrative about Asian-American success coming from the Draconian practices of Asian Tiger Parents, I think the success of Asian-Americans (or specifically the Korean and Chinese ones of the stereotype) is largely the result of their relatively high IQs. (Particularly in the mathematical and visuo-spatial reasoning sub-components.)

    The strict parenting might, or might not, help, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as important as mainstream media commentators like Amy Chua and Nick Kristof contend. Generally, I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Furthermore, my own view is that, as economist Bryan Caplan argued persuasively in his recent book The Case Against Education , most education in the US is extremely wasteful. The vast majority of the material that the vast majority of students learn in school is neither useful nor interesting to them. Its function is credential and positional. A high school arms race to take the most APs/get the highest test scores/do the most extra-curricular activities is a negative sum game, because everyone’s relative position will ultimately be the same.

    • Replies: @Lot
    I agree that NE Asian children are ironically those least in need of High Expectations Asian parenting.

    That education is overrated doesn't mean it isn't still very important.
    , @Dtbb
    Saw a story on NHK news about the rise of blindness in children from too much studying in I think it was Taiwan. The schools were making the kids go outside more so they would focus more at longer distances. They also limited time duration of studying. They made it sound like a big problem but I guess it could have media fear mongering.
    , @anon

    I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.
     
    Per the plaintiff's report, Asian kids are also ranked the highest in extra-curricular activities.

    In my kids' high school, which is roughly 20% Asian, this phenomenon (too much AP homework, extra curricular activities, lack of sleep) is not at all restricted to Asians, many white kids also go through the same grind in HS. I attribute it all to holistic admission, which is why I think HA is evil and must go.

    The US is the only country in the world that uses holistic admission that emphasizes things that have nothing to do with academics like volunteerism(which is 90% not sincere on the kids' part), sports which resulted in over-training and injuries from a young age, flying all over the country to compete in sports, debates, math/science/piano competitions, attending expensive summer camps, doing unpaid internships etc, all are a total waste of time and only affordable to upper middle class and rich kids.

    Instead of making our kids do these ECs we should make them all go back to working part time at fast food places, bagging groceries, mowing the lawn, babysitting etc., jobs that have been taken over by illegal immigrants because our kids are too busy running themselves ragged doing meaningless ECs thanks to holistic fucking admission. HA has single-handedly ruined our kids' youth, nothing else comes close. And it was all started by Harvard.

  108. @Lot
    Unz's Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there's no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.

    We need a “Salty” button…

    • LOL: Svigor
    • Replies: @Lot
    https://quotesnhumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/25-Funny-Salty-meme-2.jpg
  109. @J.Ross
    OT Twitter won't let me have it, but Twitter has confirmed to The Hill that Louis Farrakhan's tweet "I'm not anti-Semite, I'm anti termite" is not dehumanizing language and will not be censored, nor will it get its tweeter suspended.

    “OT Twitter won’t let me have it, but Twitter has confirmed to The Hill that Louis Farrakhan’s tweet “I’m not anti-Semite, I’m anti termite” is not dehumanizing language and will not be censored, nor will it get its tweeter suspended”

    The Left says Louis Farrakhan has a 1st amendment right to be an anti-Semite so he should never be banned from Twitter, the same Left who were glad James Damore, Paula Dean, Hulk Hogan, and Roseanne Barr were fired from their jobs.

    The Left have zero principals which is what makes The Left extremely dangerous.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Follow-up: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has said that Twitter's past assurances of free speech were a "joke."
    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/18/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-our-free-speech-motto-was-a-joke/
  110. @Lot
    There's nothing wrong with Harvard's legacy system. Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.

    The values behind the "civil rights" lawsuit against Harvard are the same Marxist values that demand heterosexuals be open to dating trannies.

    There’s nothing wrong with Harvard’s legacy system.

    Especially now that it’s favoring the Chosen People…

    Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.

    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately.

    • Replies: @Lot
    "Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately."

    Favorite argument of the statest. Pick one: be taxed a third if your income and get nothing back, or take some back and lose your other freedoms, now you're a mere instrument of the state.

    "Especially now that it’s favoring the Chosen People…"

    God chose wisely!
    , @Wilkey
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they've targeted. Shouldn't all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with "anti-discrimination laws" is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.
  111. @Reg Cæsar

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit...
     
    No it doesn't. It rewards the family's merit. That's an important pillar in any civilization.

    ...meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
     
    Exactly how much "merit" do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It's just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    No it doesn’t. It rewards the family’s merit. That’s an important pillar in any civilization

    It rewards one individual directly for the merit of another. I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them, but in the US at least such practices have long been viewed as undesirable. Hence the prohibition of hereditary titles written into the Constitution:

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

    Exactly how much “merit” do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It’s just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    I agree that there is a profoundly important moral sense in which it’s “luck all the way down,” but I think we’re defining “merit” differently here.

    I meant “meritorious” there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society. Not in the sense of being morally superior as the result of “free willed” decisions.

    That is to say, I agree that you ultimately have as little moral responsibility for the fact that you have a high IQ—or are a hard worker—-as you do for having well-connected parents. But the former two things allow you to create value, while the latter thing often only allows you to appropriate the value that others have created.

    • Replies: @FO337
    Ideally, traditionally, worthy parents instilled character in their children.

    Yeah, I'm way out on a limb here.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them...
     
    I'm saying don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. What you describe is not washing the baby at all.

    I meant “meritorious” there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society.
     
    Competence, ability, and/or intelligence (what is it with all this slashese these days?) are only part of the mix. Faith, loyalty, ethics, and others are also critical. Remember, all the Ivies save baby Cornell (younger than its namesake in Iowa) were founded to train ministers, and then branched out to produce leaders in general.

    Leadership is far more than brains. The history of the Vietnam debacle was titled The Best and the Brightest. That comes from a Shelley poem which drew on a contemporary Anglican hymn, "Brightest and Best". Which tells us:

    Vainly we offer each ample oblation,
    Vainly with gifts would His favor secure;
    Richer by far is the heart’s adoration,
    Dearer to God are the prayers of the poor.


    For further reference, cf. the Clinton Adminstration.
  112. @Stolen Valor Detective

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    Could you elaborate on why you think this?

    My own impression is rather the opposite. Contrary to the media narrative about Asian-American success coming from the Draconian practices of Asian Tiger Parents, I think the success of Asian-Americans (or specifically the Korean and Chinese ones of the stereotype) is largely the result of their relatively high IQs. (Particularly in the mathematical and visuo-spatial reasoning sub-components.)

    The strict parenting might, or might not, help, but I don't think it's anywhere near as important as mainstream media commentators like Amy Chua and Nick Kristof contend. Generally, I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Furthermore, my own view is that, as economist Bryan Caplan argued persuasively in his recent book The Case Against Education , most education in the US is extremely wasteful. The vast majority of the material that the vast majority of students learn in school is neither useful nor interesting to them. Its function is credential and positional. A high school arms race to take the most APs/get the highest test scores/do the most extra-curricular activities is a negative sum game, because everyone's relative position will ultimately be the same.

    I agree that NE Asian children are ironically those least in need of High Expectations Asian parenting.

    That education is overrated doesn’t mean it isn’t still very important.

  113. @Lot
    Unz's Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there's no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.

    “Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.”

    Here in The Bay Area most pedophile related crimes that make the local news are committed by sleazy creepy looking Hispanic guys, which makes sense because they come from a nation like Mexico where the legal sexual age of consent is 12.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    When I briefly had Mexican TV there were public service announcements to explain to Mexicans what pedophilia was. A lot of traditional societies are way behind us on awareness of sexual abuse, they never went through that thing in the nineties where it was talked about a lot. As Gary Glitter discovered, once they figured out what was going on, some of them did start to take it seriously. That group doesn't include Mexico, and the usefulness of open borders (and unaccompanied minor "refugees" such as can be seen celebrated in a Becky G music video) to child traffickers is self-explanatory.
    By the way, NXIVM child traffickers have been set free on bail by our utterly useless justice system, even though they're enormous flight and "suicide" risks. If they make it back to trial it will be time to buy a lottery ticket.
  114. @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    You used two different methodologies to create the two data sets you compare – Jews at Harvard and those deserving of admittance. The lady you called a fanatic applied the same methodology to both and found that your work was wrong.

    You responded by failing to address the substance of her point and instead burning a strawman created of her introduction.

    When I pointed this out, you seemingly ignored what really, really is her clear and straightforward rebuttal. It isn’t just convincing, it is utterly defeating.

    I can believe that you thought her introduction was her argument but surely you can review it now?

  115. http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/189861424

    French president Emmanuel Macron’s husband has been arrested.

    Reaulf. F who posed with the president, arrested for possession of narcotics

    Called Sunday for possession of narcotics, he tried to flee and rebelled according to our information. It is presented this morning in immediate appearance. The young man was on the right of the controversial photo with President Emmanuel Macron during his visit to Saint-Martin.

    >source in French

    http://www.lepelican-journal.com/saint-martin/justice/RF-qui-posait-avec-le-president-interpelle-pour-possession-de-stupefiants-16655.html

    >just us google translate

    https://translate.google.com

    Will Macron save him after he called him a good boy who dinduu nuffin on twitter?

    • Replies: @Ed
    This is hilarious. I actually stumbled on what I think was his Instagram page a few days ago. He was bragging that he was so tough and connected that even the president of France knew what was up.
  116. @AndrewR
    We need a "Salty" button...

  117. Well, Harvard occupies (or seems to occupy) a great deal of bogeyman status, whether plus or minus, in the general American consciousness. Just look at this thread. Harvard would appear to play some weird Jungian role that say Columbia or Dartmouth or Stanford or Amherst, all top-notch schools, don’t seem to occupy. (I chose my counter examples for a reason — I went to Harvard, and didn’t even consider those other schools, despite being shit-ass broke when I applied.)

    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.

    What you’re missing is that Harvard does not exist on a continuum which includes Brown and Yale and Penn on one end, and Oxford and the Secret Moon Colonies on another. Harvard is its own weird special monster, with its own weird special (quite possibly monstrous) mission in the American fabric. It’s a lot more complicated than this to be sure, but to be as Crayola as possible for brevity’s sake: There are elites, and there are weirdos. Harvard looks for elite weirdos. Or maybe weirdo elites. Which is why a superabundance of status-seeking Asians and power-seeking Jews embedded in Harvard will always be bad for the country. Weirdo elites serve bizarre subterranean purposes for the nation which can be hard to understand if you don’t know the secret handshake (kidding, for you paranoids).

    I’m pretty sure Steve’s readership contains a fair number of the kinds of people who memorized all the cartoons on (somebody’s) column at Tommy’s Lunch back in the day. It might be enlightening to host a thread of just us weirdos, to talk about what this all might signify, within itself. Recall what Hannibal Lecter quoted Marcus Aurelius as saying.

    Or, it might be equally enlightening to just throw us all into a Venusian Fire-Cavern, and set water to it. Who are we to judge? (Well actually we DO judge, that’s the purpose of the exercise; maybe I’m just running a li’l Hundred Flowers scam on y’all.)

    • Replies: @FO337
    Fun comment, what with its alternately potty mouth and ex cathedra tone.

    We're getting a lot of new visitors lately, not all of them self-important.


    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.
     
    Well I know where I'd want to live :)
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft
     
    The real Lovecraftian stuff goes down at MIT. (#33)
    , @stillCARealist
    Aren't there rules here about posting under the influence?
  118. @Lot
    Just knowing someone you can't assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted. From the graph, about 19 in 20 HC blacks benefited from not having the "pure meritocratic" admissions the Asian lawsuit people are demanding.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is "Oxbridge material" and inferring he'd also be Harvard material, but the US's ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).

    Just knowing someone you can’t assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted.

    I know him and his academic abilities well enough.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is “Oxbridge material” and inferring he’d also be Harvard material, but the US’s ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).

    It was not uncommon at certain English high schools for normal white students to go to Harvard because they didn’t get into Oxbridge.

    Even while, at the time, there was a signficant added cost which put people off, nevermind the travel.

    It is true that they may have been favoured for being English at Harvard and disfavoured for other reasons at Oxbridge, we all sort of assumed so, but the case isn’t as clear cut as you make out. Distinguishing among the really top students isn’t straightforward so applying to both maximized your opportunities but only if the admittance standards aren’t substantially higher at one than the other.

    • Replies: @jim jones
    Oxbridge has zero Black students:

    http://www.theweek.co.uk/94102/why-is-there-such-a-lack-of-diversity-at-oxbridge
  119. @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    Congratulations

    • Agree: FO337
  120. @FO337

    There’s nothing wrong with Harvard’s legacy system.
     
    Especially now that it's favoring the Chosen People...


    Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.
     
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately.

    “Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately.”

    Favorite argument of the statest. Pick one: be taxed a third if your income and get nothing back, or take some back and lose your other freedoms, now you’re a mere instrument of the state.

    “Especially now that it’s favoring the Chosen People…”

    God chose wisely!

    • Replies: @FO337
    This "God" fellow has a Lot to answer for, if you ask me ;)
  121. @Anon
    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself.

    This is why I lost all respect for the law. Law School is really Lie School.

    Now, I don't mind the various AA policies. What bothers me are the lies around them.

    We need a new field of academics called Truth Studies, an attempt to be objectively true as possible about the world we live in. And this calls for integrity.

    AA for blacks should be justified on the fact that blacks are less intelligent.

    If NBA were to allow AA for non-blacks, the only honest justification would be that it's the ONLY way many non-blacks can hope to play.

    All this 'holistic' nonsense is a**holistic. It's total BS.

    Let Harvard and other colleges keep their AA. But let's have some truth as to why.

    Truth Studies Now. Department of Truth. Every college needs it more than ever.

    We could get Winston Smith to head it.

  122. That ACLU tweet just about says it all, in case you still have the slightest scintilla of doubt in your mind.

    Explicitly, Diversity= Anti-Whiteism.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    Both sides of the debate seem to be framing their own points as the one which will do least to help white people at the expense of others.

    Of course, the reality is that they are (I think unknowingly) fighting over who can hurt white people most.

    This is a natural and logical result of most of them really believing that white people possess a hidden and amorphous privilege...even when they are white themselves. Indeed, especially when they are white themselves! As these individuals actually tend to be very privileged. They are just a bit confused as to the cause.
  123. @Dr. X
    Harvard, 15.8% black? Pfffft. Lemme tell it to ya straight:

    I've taught basic, introductory courses at community colleges and low-level public colleges for about 20 years. (This has not been a rewarding career, financially or otherwise.)

    These colleges not only have open admissions, they are cheap, offer financial aid to minorities, and also make substantial advertising pitches to blacks. There are no barriers to black enrollment. I'd guess that maybe 3-5% of my overall student body has been black. Of that cohort, the number of excellent black students I have had is zero. The number of average (meaning B to C) black students has been a handful. Probably 85-90% have either been D or F students or have simply quit halfway through the semester (typically after football ends). Blacks routinely score the lowest on exams, when they bother to take them.

    The best black students I have ever taught were prison inmates. Not only were they incarcerated and had a structured environment with LOTS of time to study, they were all adults instead of college-age kids. A few of them were pretty sharp and it was a pleasure to teach them.

    The only way Harvard has an almost 16% black enrollment is by cherry-picking blacks to serve as multicultural pets for the (((white))) liberals who actually run the place.

    There’s some mostly black community colleges in and around Los Angeles that have their own free bus system that picks them up at various points so they won’t be inconvenienced by having to get there by themselves.

  124. @Stolen Valor Detective

    No it doesn’t. It rewards the family’s merit. That’s an important pillar in any civilization
     
    It rewards one individual directly for the merit of another. I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them, but in the US at least such practices have long been viewed as undesirable. Hence the prohibition of hereditary titles written into the Constitution:

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

    Exactly how much “merit” do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It’s just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)
     
    I agree that there is a profoundly important moral sense in which it's "luck all the way down," but I think we're defining "merit" differently here.

    I meant "meritorious" there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society. Not in the sense of being morally superior as the result of "free willed" decisions.

    That is to say, I agree that you ultimately have as little moral responsibility for the fact that you have a high IQ---or are a hard worker----as you do for having well-connected parents. But the former two things allow you to create value, while the latter thing often only allows you to appropriate the value that others have created.

    Ideally, traditionally, worthy parents instilled character in their children.

    Yeah, I’m way out on a limb here.

  125. @Lot
    "Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately."

    Favorite argument of the statest. Pick one: be taxed a third if your income and get nothing back, or take some back and lose your other freedoms, now you're a mere instrument of the state.

    "Especially now that it’s favoring the Chosen People…"

    God chose wisely!

    This “God” fellow has a Lot to answer for, if you ask me ;)

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Icecapades.

    https://youtu.be/8r-e2NDSTuE

    I would add San Francisco, frivorce, and Danielle Bregoli to the list.
  126. @anon
    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff's report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:
    https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-2-Arcidiacono-Rebuttal-Report.pdf

    Asian-American applicants excel in more than academics. They also have higher extracurricular ratings and overall alumni ratings than any other racial group. Asian-American applicants likewise are stronger than African-American and Hispanic applicants on counselor ratings, teacher 1 ratings, teacher 2 ratings, and alumni personal ratings, and have similar or slightly lower ratings than whites in these categories.
     
    So much for telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth on the witness stand.

    Liberals have no problem lying under oath because:
    a) they are atheists so don't care about swearing on a bible
    b) they believe the end justifies the means

    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff’s report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:

    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I’d have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.

    The question relevant to the trial is not average quality of recommendations, on which Asians did well, but recommendation quality controlled for academic quality on which they did worse. The data tables in the expert reports show that Asians have lower average non-academic ratings (personal qualities / recommendations) than whites at each academic index decile. Whether the dean was talking about the plain or controlled ratings isn’t clear from the news reporting but it’s the controlled ones that matter.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I’d have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.
     
    Their claim is also an anti-white one, rather than only an anti-discrimination one?
  127. @The Grinch
    Well, Harvard occupies (or seems to occupy) a great deal of bogeyman status, whether plus or minus, in the general American consciousness. Just look at this thread. Harvard would appear to play some weird Jungian role that say Columbia or Dartmouth or Stanford or Amherst, all top-notch schools, don't seem to occupy. (I chose my counter examples for a reason -- I went to Harvard, and didn't even consider those other schools, despite being shit-ass broke when I applied.)

    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.

    What you're missing is that Harvard does not exist on a continuum which includes Brown and Yale and Penn on one end, and Oxford and the Secret Moon Colonies on another. Harvard is its own weird special monster, with its own weird special (quite possibly monstrous) mission in the American fabric. It's a lot more complicated than this to be sure, but to be as Crayola as possible for brevity's sake: There are elites, and there are weirdos. Harvard looks for elite weirdos. Or maybe weirdo elites. Which is why a superabundance of status-seeking Asians and power-seeking Jews embedded in Harvard will always be bad for the country. Weirdo elites serve bizarre subterranean purposes for the nation which can be hard to understand if you don't know the secret handshake (kidding, for you paranoids).

    I'm pretty sure Steve's readership contains a fair number of the kinds of people who memorized all the cartoons on (somebody's) column at Tommy's Lunch back in the day. It might be enlightening to host a thread of just us weirdos, to talk about what this all might signify, within itself. Recall what Hannibal Lecter quoted Marcus Aurelius as saying.

    Or, it might be equally enlightening to just throw us all into a Venusian Fire-Cavern, and set water to it. Who are we to judge? (Well actually we DO judge, that's the purpose of the exercise; maybe I'm just running a li'l Hundred Flowers scam on y'all.)

    Fun comment, what with its alternately potty mouth and ex cathedra tone.

    We’re getting a lot of new visitors lately, not all of them self-important.

    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.

    Well I know where I’d want to live :)

  128. @anon

    I don’t wonder if this sort of viable competition is something that pushed Harvard to abandon it’s Jewish quotas — if these upstart schools began to graduate too many top men who gained success and fame in academia, business and the professions, Harvard’s brand would lose its lustre. Perhaps they felt compelled to compete for brains.
     
    I would argue the opposite. Jews didn't start to dominate academia, business, law, and the professions until they started graduating from Harvard(and other Ivies) in large numbers. Their success came because of Harvard, not in spite of it. If the Harvard quota had continued for Jews they wouldn't be nearly as successful as a group today. Graduates of these schools form a cartel and actively hire/promote/do business with their own.

    Whoever controls Harvard controls America -- what Harvard does, all other colleges follow, Jews know this. They know the WASPs made a big mistake by ceding control of Harvard to them, they are not about to make the same mistake by ceding their control of Harvard to Asians, whom they know are the biggest threats to unseat them from the pinnacle of success in America. Blacks and hispanics can be admitted in large numbers because they are not real threats.

    I don’t know if that is true, Jews were already wealthier than non-Jewish whites by 1950, with a much higher rate of college education as well ( 2 1/2 times as likely ). CCNY was called ” The Harvard of the Working Class” and apparently produced more Fortune 500 executives than any university except Yale ( I remember hearing this, don’t know the source ). The Ivies collectively didn’t really didn’t begin accepting a lot of Jews until the 1960′s although some like Penn and Cornell took more than the others did.

    I also don’t think the Ivies discriminated against all Jews, the German Jews who were both more educated and fewer in number than Eastern European Jews, didn’t seem to have any problem getting into the Ivies. German Jews like Robert Oppenheimer and Henry Kissinger had no problem getting into Harvard, well before the Ivies dropped their quotas. However their dominance over certain professions like law, medicine, and finance may not have begun until they started attending Ivies, but they were already doing very well economically before that.

  129. @academic gossip

    The Harvard dean who testified yesterday said that Asians got lower Personal Ratings because they had less enthusiastic recommendation letters from counselors and teachers than black and hispanic students. That appears to not be true per the plaintiff’s report prepared by their expert witness from Duke Univ. who reviewed all the data:
     
    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I'd have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.

    The question relevant to the trial is not average quality of recommendations, on which Asians did well, but recommendation quality controlled for academic quality on which they did worse. The data tables in the expert reports show that Asians have lower average non-academic ratings (personal qualities / recommendations) than whites at each academic index decile. Whether the dean was talking about the plain or controlled ratings isn't clear from the news reporting but it's the controlled ones that matter.

    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I’d have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.

    Their claim is also an anti-white one, rather than only an anti-discrimination one?

    • Replies: @academic gossip
    I don't know what exact wording he used, but the relevant form of his statement is: that at each academic decile, and presumably "controlling for academic quality" in any other fine enough way, Asian applicants have worse personal ratings and letters of recommendation than whites. If Asians have higher ratings or recommendations on average (without controls) that's because relatively more of them are in the higher deciles than other groups, and academic decile correlates with the ratings/recs.
  130. @Reg Cæsar
    Pnin?

    Twitter allows users to adopt fictional character names?


    https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/64148/pnin-vladimir-nabokov-first-edition-rare.jpg

    Ah, the single most snoozational novel of one of the most snoozational writers in human history.

    It is thinly veiled autobiography, btw.

    Remember Nabokov! They guy who managed to make a novel about jailbait pursuit a titanic bore! Truly a write of Herculean…… indifference.

    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    Wrong. A writer of such exquisite prose every sentence is to be treasured. There's something wrong with you.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Ah, the single most snoozational novel of one of the most snoozational writers in human history.
     
    To each his own. But if you were to say that about Evelyn Waugh, Steve might ask you to step outside.

    And our Steve isn't small. He's kind of like Hermann in Missouri-- quite a bit closer to the extreme of St Louis than to the other of Kansas City:


    The old adage that too much height was bad for pitchers, bad for mechanics, bad for arm slots, has given way to the belief that size is essential for power and success. The average height of an American male is 5-foot-10, yet 14 MLB teams don't have a pitcher under 6 feet tall. The Yankees have one pitcher under 6-2 and boast five pitchers at least 6-7. The Cardinals have eight pitchers 6-4 or taller. Kansas City is the only team in baseball with five pitchers 6 feet or under.

    http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/12751620/for-major-league-baseball-pitchers-bigger-better
     

  131. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    I take it that many blacks who get into Harvard are slave-selling blacks than slave-sold blacks.
    And a good number are mixed-raced blacks.

    Immigrant-invaders since 65 are the most privileged people in America. They just arrive to benefit from a world created by another people.

    They didn’t discover and found the new nation. They didn’t chop down trees and build roads. They didn’t clear the land of Red Savage Braves. They didn’t create new towns and cities. They didn’t raise the cattle. They didn’t run the factories. They didn’t build the universities. They didn’t create new technologies. They didn’t pick cotton and tobacco. They didn’t create the political system and rule of law. Sure, they must have toiled in their own homelands, but they didn’t do anything to build the New World nations.

    Instead, they come to an already built nation(by the blood and sweat of others) and take full advantage. They reap the fruits of another people. They may have felt gratitude in the 60s and 70s but the rise of PC has taught the young ones of immigrant-invaders to berate the whitey. They claim to side with blacky but they replace blackies too.
    Now, some immigrants do come with good attitude and intention to work hard. But there are now so many grasshopper immigrants who just want to leech off the work of past white ants. (Blacks were once forced to be ants but turned into grasshoppers since the 60s).
    It’s truly amusing that someone like Zakaria would accuse white working class of ‘privilege’. White working folks did the heavy lifting, the clearing of forests, building of roads, making of farms, running mines and factories, and etc. In contrast, Zakaria’s ancestors did NONE of that in the US. Instead, they came AFTER the nation was built and take advantage of all the benefits and amenities. So, WHO is the one with privilege? To the extent that immigrant-invaders live off the accomplishments of past white ants, they are the privileged ones, the grasshoppers.

    At least black with slave past in the US can say they picked cotton. Why do African immigrant-invaders whose ancestors sold slaves to whites/Arabs get all this AA favors? Privileged bunnies.

    • Replies: @James N. Kennett

    Immigrant-invaders since 65 are the most privileged people in America. They just arrive to benefit from a world created by another people.
     
    The strangest thing is that many new arrivals can immediately claim membership of an oppressed minority. It beggars belief.
  132. @Anonymous
    That ACLU tweet just about says it all, in case you still have the slightest scintilla of doubt in your mind.

    Explicitly, Diversity= Anti-Whiteism.

    Both sides of the debate seem to be framing their own points as the one which will do least to help white people at the expense of others.

    Of course, the reality is that they are (I think unknowingly) fighting over who can hurt white people most.

    This is a natural and logical result of most of them really believing that white people possess a hidden and amorphous privilege…even when they are white themselves. Indeed, especially when they are white themselves! As these individuals actually tend to be very privileged. They are just a bit confused as to the cause.

    • Agree: Lot
    • Replies: @FO337

    Both sides of the debate seem to be framing their own points as the one which will do least to help white people at the expense of others.

    Of course, the reality is that they are (I think unknowingly) fighting over who can hurt white people most.
     
    Accurate insight, except that we may readily dispense with the 'unknowingly' part--they're not stupid.
  133. @Desiderius
    You’re assuming the top whites want to go to Harvard.

    To be fair, Harvard doesn’t just offer law or history, humanities and whatnot so one can cobble together something that will make an investment bank hire you.

    They also do some good hard science. (Often through the school of medicine) Though obviously they do punch well below what they could do with that endowment. Maybe somebody should start hounding them about that. Right now all Harvard does is produce graduates who will help set off the next great depression.

  134. @anon
    So far Harvard's defense basically contradicts itself. First they said Asians were not discriminated, but then they said they consider race for diversity, so race isn't a factor in the rejection but race is a factor in the admission, which is retarded, admission is a zero sum game, when someone gets admitted it means someone else would have to be rejected. Admitting someone because of race therefore must mean rejecting someone else because of race.

    If liberals understood logic, they wouldn't be liberals.

    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself. First they said Asians were not discriminated, but then they said they consider race for diversity, so race isn’t a factor in the rejection but race is a factor in the admission, which is retarded, admission is a zero sum game,

    They are saying two things, that don’t contradict each other.

    First, that Asians are not harmed in admission, compared to whites, by the consideration of race.

    Second, that the zero sum negative effect on Asian-and-white admission from affirmative action for blacks-and-Hispanics is within the parameters of what is legally permitted, and (according to them this is part of the legal test) is counterbalanced by the (alleged) educational benefit of more diversity for the ones who are admitted.

    • Replies: @bomag

    Asians are not harmed in admission, compared to whites, by the consideration of race.
     
    By implication, Asians are harmed relative to Blacks and Hispanics by the consideration of race.

    the zero sum negative effect on Asian-and-white admission from affirmative action for blacks-and-Hispanics is within the parameters of what is legally permitted
     
    Maybe so, but I get the vibe that Asians are playing the aggrieved minority card so they can be on the receiving end while there's still cargo to be distributed. AA means taking from whites and giving to somebody else, so better get while the gettin's good; you sure don't want to be considered white in these matters.
  135. From a political standpoint there’s simply no way that Harvard could drop black % to 1%. The oldest and most prestigious university in America to only have a black undergrad population of 1% would cause so much consternation among the cultural elite that it would legitimately threaten Harvard’s standing.

    However 14% is simply too high as well based on what we know of black academic preparation. Harvard should target a black % of 5% which roughly mirrors the share of black doctors and lawyers in the country.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.
  136. @Lot
    "should mirror that of Caltech. "

    Is there actual data showing Caltech doesn't have a NAM preference? Berkeley is legally banned from having one, but does anyway, just not as much as it used to or at peer schools.

    Caltech likely does have AA, just not as much as its peers.

    Caltech’s Common Data Set pdfs say that race/ethnicity is “considered” in admission. Caltech openly discriminates in favor of admitted women and minorities by offering them price reductions (scholarships, to use their misleading term).

  137. @Jefferson
    What is the Blackest Non HBCU university in The U.S?

    I’m thinking it’s Georgia State. It’s so black now it’s considered a HBCU even though it’s not. It graduates more black students than any other school in the country.

    https://hechingerreport.org/at-georgia-state-black-students-find-comfort-and-academic-success/

    Over the last five years, Georgia State has turned itself into a leader among U.S. colleges for generating high academic achievement by populations that have often struggled at large, predominantly white institutions: African-American students, lower-income students and first-generation college students.

    With its jumble of slate-gray concrete buildings mixed in with the skyscrapers of downtown Atlanta, Georgia State now graduates more black students with bachelor’s degrees every year than any other nonprofit school in the United States (1,777 in 2015). That stat includes the nation’s historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) like Spelman, Howard and Florida A&M.

  138. Hey Grinch, this is Becca Chen-Cohn (she/her) from the Harvard Admin office. Unfortunately we have decided to revoke your degree based on this comment.

    We were considering the same for Mr. Unz, but the Learned Elders of Cambridge are worried that doing so will generate attention for his stylish, well-researched Holohoax series and other exposes of the crimes of International Jewry, so for time being we will simply politely ask Mr. Unz to refrain from running for our board of overseers again, as well as to stop instigating our many Asian rejects to file civil rights lawsuits against us.

    Please don’t let this stop you however from contributing $250 to our endowment. Yes, we have a lot already, but Harvarding is expensive work.

    Thanks so much! – Becca

    • LOL: James N. Kennett
  139. @Stolen Valor Detective

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    Could you elaborate on why you think this?

    My own impression is rather the opposite. Contrary to the media narrative about Asian-American success coming from the Draconian practices of Asian Tiger Parents, I think the success of Asian-Americans (or specifically the Korean and Chinese ones of the stereotype) is largely the result of their relatively high IQs. (Particularly in the mathematical and visuo-spatial reasoning sub-components.)

    The strict parenting might, or might not, help, but I don't think it's anywhere near as important as mainstream media commentators like Amy Chua and Nick Kristof contend. Generally, I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Furthermore, my own view is that, as economist Bryan Caplan argued persuasively in his recent book The Case Against Education , most education in the US is extremely wasteful. The vast majority of the material that the vast majority of students learn in school is neither useful nor interesting to them. Its function is credential and positional. A high school arms race to take the most APs/get the highest test scores/do the most extra-curricular activities is a negative sum game, because everyone's relative position will ultimately be the same.

    Saw a story on NHK news about the rise of blindness in children from too much studying in I think it was Taiwan. The schools were making the kids go outside more so they would focus more at longer distances. They also limited time duration of studying. They made it sound like a big problem but I guess it could have media fear mongering.

  140. I would be very interested in seeing the graduation rates quantifies by Race, then compared to the Admission rates. Any glaring discrepancies would show up pretty quick.

    Does Harvard have many drop outs ?

    What are the GRE scores for Harvard Grads vs. MIT, Caltech, the Pomona colleges, U of Chicago, the other Ivies, Rice, Emory, Bryn Mawr, well, I could go on for a while here.

    Harvard is more a brand than an education. And frankly, I think it is like many a Bordeaux grand cru – may have been awesome in 1855, but the name is better than the quality now.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.

    The public colleges have lower graduation rates, although in general graduation rates appear higher than a generation ago.

  141. @J.Ross
    http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/189861424
    French president Emmanuel Macron's husband has been arrested.

    Reaulf. F who posed with the president, arrested for possession of narcotics

    Called Sunday for possession of narcotics, he tried to flee and rebelled according to our information. It is presented this morning in immediate appearance. The young man was on the right of the controversial photo with President Emmanuel Macron during his visit to Saint-Martin.

    >source in French
    http://www.lepelican-journal.com/saint-martin/justice/RF-qui-posait-avec-le-president-interpelle-pour-possession-de-stupefiants-16655.html
    >just us google translate
    https://translate.google.com

    Will Macron save him after he called him a good boy who dinduu nuffin on twitter?
    https://twitter.com/ElyseeInfos/status/1046483515301416962

    This is hilarious. I actually stumbled on what I think was his Instagram page a few days ago. He was bragging that he was so tough and connected that even the president of France knew what was up.

  142. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    I agree. Many Asians who went to elite schools came out the biggest Kool-Aid drinkers, singing the praises of AA. There's even a group of Asians currently at Harvard who marched in support of AA last weekend.

    And look at Sarah Jeong, Derrick Watson, Theodore Chuang, Ted Lieu et al. who went to Harvard/Stanford, biggest libtards. America is better off if elite schools simply exclude all Asians.

    I really don't care about the Asians, I just want to see the racist hypocrites at Harvard show the world their true colors and eat some humble pie.

    Lieu is my ultra liberal Congress critter elected in a very Jewish district. He’s the appointed heir of Waxman

    Asians have always voted against anti affirmative action initiatives and submitted friend of the court briefs in favor of affirmative action in all the affirmative action law suits.

    White HBD and IQ mavens focus on tech and upper level careers for 115 plus Whites and Asians and assume Asians have the same views as Whites.

    The Asians realize that affirmative action helps the average Asian who’s happy to be a mail carrier toll taker city clerk or owner of a small business helped by never pay back SBA loans and tax exemptions for locating in a CRA or ghetto area.

    Affirmative action and racism also benefits Asians from being prosecuted for tax evasion medical and food stamp fraud slum landlording gross violations of zoning health and labor laws such as running a chicken and duck slaughter house in the floor of a garage and even the sex slave brothels.

    Any investigation and enforcement of these violations and crimes brings the scream of racism and the city backs down.

    Those immigrant entrepreneurs the conservatives love so much are in business only because of the multitude of socialist type benefits heaped on minority small businesses and lax enforcement of business regulations such as labor laws, zoning health codes and the rest.

    So some Asian Drs have to go to 3rd tier Chicago medical school instead of University of Chicago Northwestern Loyola or University of Illinois med schools. BFD. They’re still Drs.

    Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of Asians are getting all sorts of decently paid jobs and opening small businesses because of affirmative action

    Affirmative action is good for Asians. They know it. That’s why they vote Democrat and always voted in favor of affirmative action when the initiatives were on the ballot

    I’m all for the anti affirmative action law suit against Harvard. If Harvard wins affirmative action will stay. If Harvard loses, the Asians will get the White goyim places.

    Or an anti affirmative action ruling will just be ignored as anti affirmative action Prop 209 has been ignored in California

    Another thing to consider are the professional Asians. They are the political leaders no different from NAACP BLM LARAZA MALDEF MECHA ADL AJC.

    The professionals speak for their people and their people follow them into the Democrat party

    • Replies: @FO337
    Wow you can really bring the pain here. H/T
    , @gunner29
    I've wondered about why asians voted left; now I know. Thanks, I think....
  143. @anon
    Well, as I've said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black, so everyone can quit complaining, let Harvard make all the reparations they can to atone for whites' sins. In fact, make the entire Ivy League plus Stanford and MIT all 100% black, including all the faculty and admin, until such a time when black and white incomes are at parity. It's the least we could do. Whites can go to state colleges. Hispanics and Asians can go back to Latin America and Asia. They have their own universities.

    “Well, as I’ve said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black ….”

    We already have that: It’s called Howard University.

    • Replies: @anon

    We already have that: It’s called Howard University.
     
    Howard is just a regular HBCU, it doesn't have the magic dust of the Ivy League that can turn even a ghetto high school dropout into 'best and brightest' and 'experts in the field'. Blacks need this magic dust more than any other group. Let our top 10 schools go polish as many black stones into diamonds as quickly as possible, the paltry 16% admission a year just ain't gonna cut it, it'll take too long, make these schools 100% black.

    What do we want? Justice!

    When do we want it? Now!

  144. @Ed
    From a political standpoint there’s simply no way that Harvard could drop black % to 1%. The oldest and most prestigious university in America to only have a black undergrad population of 1% would cause so much consternation among the cultural elite that it would legitimately threaten Harvard’s standing.

    However 14% is simply too high as well based on what we know of black academic preparation. Harvard should target a black % of 5% which roughly mirrors the share of black doctors and lawyers in the country.

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    • Replies: @Yak-15
    It does in the sense that many other high end programs bring in Nigerians to fill quotas. I imagine that more than 2/3s Nigerian is a typical number for programs that aren’t Harvard/Stanford.

    As an aside, these Nigerians tend to be of substantially higher quality than the African Americans within the same programs.
    , @Ed
    Don’t know for sure but that’s my guess. Harvard seems to cast a wide net in terms of recruiting black students. According to testimony from its admissions dean they send invitations to apply to black SAT test takers that score as low as 1100.

    Assuming many of them apply, then Harvard would have the pick of the litter. The only time I think a black student would pass on Harvard is if they had offers from other ivies.

    The top HBCUs simply don’t have many students with high SAT scores. The mean scores at top HBCUs are around the national mean. A black student scoring 1300 or above would feel out of place. So there aren’t any real HBCU alternatives to Harvard either.
    , @anon
    That's exactly what's happening. The book Mismatch by Richard Sander did a great job chronicling this phenomenon. The effect trickles down, resulting in blacks in the bottom quartile of every school they attend.

    A black kid who scores 1300 gets accepted to Harvard, if he had gone to University of Alabama, he would've been top of the pack, and could've majored in engineering or medicine. Instead he's at bottom of the pack and ends up majoring in African studies at Harvard. That's another reason why there are so few black STEM majors. In fact, a couple of years back there was a black kid who got into all 8 Ivies plus Stanford and chose to attend Alabama instead, his parents said they made too much money to qualify for need based aid at Harvard and he wanted to be a doctor, they knew Harvard would kill that dream.

    AA is a classic example of well-meaning, misguided liberal policies that end up hurting more than helping blacks.

    , @res

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.
     
    It seems obviously true and I think is at minimum a corollary of mismatch theory.

    From a review essay on mismatch: http://www.oregonscholars.org/wp-content/uploads/MismatchEffects.pdf


    The minority students given preferences at Harvard and Yale law schools, Summers wrote, would meet the normal admissions standards at Illinois, Rutgers, or Texas. Similarly, minority students given preferences at Pennsylvania would meet normal standards at Pittsburgh; those given preference at Duke would meet normal standards at North Carolina; and those given preference at Vanderbilt would meet normal standards at Kentucky, Mississippi and West Virginia….In sum, the policy of preferential admissions have a pervasive shifting effect, causing large numbers of minority students to attend law schools whose normal admissions standards they do not meet, instead of attending other law schools whose normal standards they do meet.2
     
    Where reference 2 is (note the date!)
    Clyde Summers, “Preferential Admissions: An Unreal Solution to a Real Problem,” University of Toledo Law Review 2 (1970): 384.

    But does anyone reputable talk about this in the Current Year? Does Thomas Sowell bring this up? In this 2015 article he focuses on the failure of those admitted over their heads, but not the knock-on effects you describe: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/15/attacking-the-truth

    The empirical question would be how the various racial gaps change along the food chain (say measuring by the SAT) and how that relates to the differences in general and admitted populations for each race in various colleges. Sounds too toxic to address, but has anyone done so?

    I'm not sure my math intuition is right on this, but wouldn't the end result of population proportional admission just be the "standard" gap being reproduced down the food chain? (i.e. not an increasing gap at the bottom) Visualize progressively sampling the right tails of offset Bell curves.

    But it also means that every URM (except the very far right tail which can compete with the best) is mismatched down the food chain. This is admittedly an approximation (individuals can choose to go to colleges more fitting their abilities, but that would just increase the mismatch for others if admission is population proportional), but the effects on morale must be pernicious.

    P.S. I think there are interesting implications concerning gaps down the food chain when admissions are not population proportional (think Whites, Jews, Asians), but I have not thought that through yet. Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people's perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    , @academic gossip
    Sort of, but it's less of an apex predator for black admission and yield is lower for admitted blacks. Boston has the reputation of a racist city with bad weather. Blacks like Stanford, and UCLA , Columbia, Howard U for the big cities. The combination of Harvard and Stanford probably cause food chain effects all the way down.
  145. @Tyrion 2

    The dean is right as far as the comparison to whites is concerned (which is the discrimination claim against Harvard). I’d have to re-read the expert reports to see whether he is also right about blacks and Hispanics.
     
    Their claim is also an anti-white one, rather than only an anti-discrimination one?

    I don’t know what exact wording he used, but the relevant form of his statement is: that at each academic decile, and presumably “controlling for academic quality” in any other fine enough way, Asian applicants have worse personal ratings and letters of recommendation than whites. If Asians have higher ratings or recommendations on average (without controls) that’s because relatively more of them are in the higher deciles than other groups, and academic decile correlates with the ratings/recs.

  146. @theMann
    I would be very interested in seeing the graduation rates quantifies by Race, then compared to the Admission rates. Any glaring discrepancies would show up pretty quick.


    Does Harvard have many drop outs ?


    What are the GRE scores for Harvard Grads vs. MIT, Caltech, the Pomona colleges, U of Chicago, the other Ivies, Rice, Emory, Bryn Mawr, well, I could go on for a while here.


    Harvard is more a brand than an education. And frankly, I think it is like many a Bordeaux grand cru - may have been awesome in 1855, but the name is better than the quality now.

    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.

    The public colleges have lower graduation rates, although in general graduation rates appear higher than a generation ago.

    • Replies: @FO337

    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.
     
    https://www.chronicle.com/article/If-Republicans-Get-Their-Way/241659

    Unsurpassed resources but not on a per-student basis (Harvard has large enrollment) and furthermore it's not (I hope) too nitpicky to note that while its admissions yield is high it's not the highest (the first chart at the following link doesn't include the service academies; the second chart does).

    https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2018-01-23/universities-colleges-where-students-are-eager-to-enroll

    , @Desiderius
    Didn’t get Bill Gates long. The competition for the best won’t be other colleges.
  147. @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using “Jewish sounding” surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis. I mean what is a Jewish surname? Most American Jewish surnames are Germanic in origin and the third most common Jewish surname in the US is Miller(ya really Jewish sounding). I mean that is almost the amateur ((( ))) you see from stormfront clowns.

    • Replies: @Anon
    When I was copying the clerks lists of all the names of attorneys on the anti White side of the affirmative action and school bussing law suits I only counted obviously Jewish names as Jewish.

    I didn’t count names like Kaufman Becker Lowenstein Schwartz and many other could be Jewish could be German names ; even though I doubt many German descent attorneys threw themselves into anti White litigation the way Jewish attorneys have for the last 90 years

    Even so, the list read like a 1950 Brooklyn Erasmus high year book Roth Rothsein Brill Brillstein Abrams Bergs Steins Roses Golds and Silvers in various combinations Fishman Zuckers and Zuckerbergs Eisenbergs and Eisenstein Katz Weiner Weinberger Weinstein

    2 of the most evil Jews of the 20th century have French names, Boudin.
    Father Leonard attorney and activist for the communist party and the porn industry. He convinced a court that live shows of fisting was free speech His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery
    , @Ron Unz

    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using “Jewish sounding” surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis.
     
    No, that's incorrect. If you'll bother reading my long article and some of the associated follow-up columns, you'll find it's *extremely* accurate.

    For example, there are a subset of exceptionally indicative Jewish names such as Goldstein, Silverberg, Cohen, Kaplan, etc., and these can be used to perform Weyl analysis on large datasets in order to validate the results from the looser "Jewish sounding" method. In all cases, the results were virtually identical, confirming my analysis.

    Also, some fanatic Jewish-activist type who ferociously attacked me had previously published a peer-reviewed article on the exact Jewish ethnicity distribution of the International Math Olympiad participants based on weeks of in-depth research and interviews. As it happened, the 5 minutes I'd spent eye-balling those lists for Jewish-sounding names for my own article had produced virtually identical results.
  148. @The Grinch
    Well, Harvard occupies (or seems to occupy) a great deal of bogeyman status, whether plus or minus, in the general American consciousness. Just look at this thread. Harvard would appear to play some weird Jungian role that say Columbia or Dartmouth or Stanford or Amherst, all top-notch schools, don't seem to occupy. (I chose my counter examples for a reason -- I went to Harvard, and didn't even consider those other schools, despite being shit-ass broke when I applied.)

    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.

    What you're missing is that Harvard does not exist on a continuum which includes Brown and Yale and Penn on one end, and Oxford and the Secret Moon Colonies on another. Harvard is its own weird special monster, with its own weird special (quite possibly monstrous) mission in the American fabric. It's a lot more complicated than this to be sure, but to be as Crayola as possible for brevity's sake: There are elites, and there are weirdos. Harvard looks for elite weirdos. Or maybe weirdo elites. Which is why a superabundance of status-seeking Asians and power-seeking Jews embedded in Harvard will always be bad for the country. Weirdo elites serve bizarre subterranean purposes for the nation which can be hard to understand if you don't know the secret handshake (kidding, for you paranoids).

    I'm pretty sure Steve's readership contains a fair number of the kinds of people who memorized all the cartoons on (somebody's) column at Tommy's Lunch back in the day. It might be enlightening to host a thread of just us weirdos, to talk about what this all might signify, within itself. Recall what Hannibal Lecter quoted Marcus Aurelius as saying.

    Or, it might be equally enlightening to just throw us all into a Venusian Fire-Cavern, and set water to it. Who are we to judge? (Well actually we DO judge, that's the purpose of the exercise; maybe I'm just running a li'l Hundred Flowers scam on y'all.)

    two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft

    The real Lovecraftian stuff goes down at MIT. (#33)

  149. @J.Ross
    Aw hell naw. Wayne doesn't show up on this forty item list, of which here are the top ten:

    1. University of Maryland, University College (Adelphi, MD): 11,959
    2. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University (Greensboro, NC): 8,381 [HBC]
    3. Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw, GA): 6,929
    4. Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (Tallahassee, FL): 6,892 [HBC]
    5. Prairie View A&M University (Prairie View, TX): 6,666 [HBC]
    6. University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL): 6,361
    7. University of Memphis (Memphis, TN): 6,191
    8. American Public University System (Charles Town, WV): 6,098
    9. Florida International University (Miami, FL): 6,020
    10. Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA): 5,941

    https://www.collegexpress.com/lists/list/colleges-with-the-largest-enrollment-of-black-non-hispanic-students/376/

    I’m pretty sure Crystal Magnum of Duke Lacrosse team fame was working her way thru North Carolina A&T when she made the accusation

    Like Dr Frau Christine Ford Crystal was a psychology major

  150. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anarcho-Supremacist
    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using "Jewish sounding" surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis. I mean what is a Jewish surname? Most American Jewish surnames are Germanic in origin and the third most common Jewish surname in the US is Miller(ya really Jewish sounding). I mean that is almost the amateur ((( ))) you see from stormfront clowns.

    When I was copying the clerks lists of all the names of attorneys on the anti White side of the affirmative action and school bussing law suits I only counted obviously Jewish names as Jewish.

    I didn’t count names like Kaufman Becker Lowenstein Schwartz and many other could be Jewish could be German names ; even though I doubt many German descent attorneys threw themselves into anti White litigation the way Jewish attorneys have for the last 90 years

    Even so, the list read like a 1950 Brooklyn Erasmus high year book Roth Rothsein Brill Brillstein Abrams Bergs Steins Roses Golds and Silvers in various combinations Fishman Zuckers and Zuckerbergs Eisenbergs and Eisenstein Katz Weiner Weinberger Weinstein

    2 of the most evil Jews of the 20th century have French names, Boudin.
    Father Leonard attorney and activist for the communist party and the porn industry. He convinced a court that live shows of fisting was free speech His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery
     
    A black police officer, no less. She went to prison. (Though not for murder. She drove the getaway car.)

    She sent her son Chesa to Hyde Park in Chicago to be cared for by friends Bill and Bernardine. It was in Chesa's living room that one Barry Obama announced his entry into political life.
  151. @Tyrion 2

    Just knowing someone you can’t assess if they needed an AA boost to be admitted.
     
    I know him and his academic abilities well enough.

    You also as an Englishman might be thinking this guy is “Oxbridge material” and inferring he’d also be Harvard material, but the US’s ultraselective colleges are more so than Oxbridge, taking in a smaller share of a population that itself also includes more high IQ subgroups (Ashkenazi and NE Asians).
     
    It was not uncommon at certain English high schools for normal white students to go to Harvard because they didn't get into Oxbridge.

    Even while, at the time, there was a signficant added cost which put people off, nevermind the travel.

    It is true that they may have been favoured for being English at Harvard and disfavoured for other reasons at Oxbridge, we all sort of assumed so, but the case isn't as clear cut as you make out. Distinguishing among the really top students isn't straightforward so applying to both maximized your opportunities but only if the admittance standards aren't substantially higher at one than the other.
    • Replies: @FO337
    75 black students admitted to Oxford and Cambridge last year alone.

    If you'd ever been to either place you'd have more of a clue about this.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/lack-of-diversity-black-students-oxford-cambridge-2017-8

    , @Tyrion 2
    Some Oxbridge colleges had no British black students in certain undergraduate admission years.

    St Edmund Hall, Oxford admits about a hundred undergraduates a year. The percentage of the British population who are black is about 3%, so rather than none you'd expect perhaps 2 black students starting each year if places were allocated randomly.

    Given the 70+ colleges, you'd expect there to be certain years where none were admitted into specific colleges whereas 4 might be admitted into another. Again, even if doled out entirely randomly.

    The headline about a lack of diversity at Oxbridge is even more misleading, as those of ethnic minority background are actually overrepresented as regards their proportion of the population.
  152. @Yan Shen
    I know that the regression models they ran suggest otherwise, but I've always been somewhat confused by the assertion that the percentage of Asian Americans at Harvard under a purely meritocratic system of admissions should mirror that of Caltech. Obviously Caltech undergrads are significantly skewed towards STEM, whereas I assume Harvard undergrads have a much more balanced distribution of majors.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/15/local/la-me-caltech-20120615


    When Christina Kondos receives her bachelor's degree at Caltech's commencement Friday, she will represent a tiny and little-known minority at the prestigious science and engineering campus in Pasadena.

    Kondos is the only one in her graduating class of 247 to have majored in humanities or social sciences — economics and history in her case — without double-majoring in science, math or engineering.

    Since 2008, only a dozen Caltech students have done the same, and they received bachelor of science degrees because Caltech doesn't offer a bachelor of arts, campus officials said.

    Science, of course, rules at Caltech, but it doesn't eliminate the likes of James Joyce or Immanuel Kant.
     

    I assume that Asian Americans are also skewed towards STEM and away from social sciences and humanities. Do you know if schools try to maintain a certain balance in terms of what percentage of students major in various subjects? I guess my question is, if Asians became ~40% of undergrads at Harvard, similar to how they're roughly 40% of undergrads at Caltech, would the distribution of majors also be roughly similar in both cases?

    If Caltech’s admission method were adapted to Harvard STEM+humanities, you would not get the Caltech-like demographics listed in the table. Caltech admission is forward looking, trying to predict who will be best in the future. For their prediction they use more data than success rate on the relatively easy (compared to Caltech) tasks the Asian applicants have excelled at. That would filter out a lot more Asians than using an academic index defined by exactly the two parameters that Asians work to maximize.

  153. @Stolen Valor Detective
    By the way, Jared Kushner's admission to Harvard under suspicious circumstances, as recounted in Daniel Golden's 2006 book The Price of Admission, has often been cited as an example of the distorting role that your choice of financial contributions, ethnic identity, familial ties, et cetera, play in elite university admissions. He was likely admitted over more intelligent and/or hard-working competitors.

    Do you think that having President Donald Trump's son-in-law and key surrogate as an alumnus has been good or bad for Harvard, though?

    They’ll claim him in the general statistics,(# of alumni with high level government jobs) but not him specifically.

  154. @Stolen Valor Detective
    So, Harvard would basically become Stuyvesant High School. (Or at least its current incarnation.)

    I might be biased as a Stuyvesant alumnus, but that seems like it would be a positive development to me. It's true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues. (https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management)

    Our friends at Harvard Business School conclude that this shows that companies all across America are all just irrationally cutting into their profit margins by making an already extremely scarce labor supply even smaller by not fully utilizing their Asian employees. (For some reason, companies forget to have this totally irrational and inexplicable bias against Asians during the initial hiring process.)

    I suspect, however, that the administrators above them at Harvard come to a rather different conclusion about why this discrepancy exists, and use that conclusion in determining who is and who isn't admitted to Harvard. Unlike other such conclusions about different ethnic minorities who face employment discrimination, they probably figured that they wouldn't take too much flak from ethnic grievance activists by putting it into practice.

    So, yes, I think it's probably true (though I'm happy to hear countervailing evidence) that a hard-working, high-IQ white guy is more likely to found the proverbial next Microsoft, Facebook or Google than a comparably hard-working and high-IQ Asian guy. This would seem to be a false choice to someone without a stake in the Harvard brand, because surely Harvard could, with its ~$37 billion endowment, afford to admit them both, right? But that would dilute the Harvard brand, which people who currently have a stake in it don't like. Thus, from the standpoint of maximizing the value of the Harvard brand for current Harvard "shareholders" (to use a valuable analogy that Steve often applies), Harvard is probably acting rationally in its admissions process.

    However, personally, I don't think that an institution as important in American national life as Harvard should be guided by a philosophy of maximizing its own value at the expense of everyone else. I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process. In my view, the kind of public-spirited "meritocratic elitism" that many early psychometricians believed in---which is to a considerable extent manifested in New York City's specialized high schools---has much to recommend for it .

    Could someone please just genocide white people off the face of the Earth? As if the others would put up a fight for the ones who resisted. Let’s just get this tedium over with already.

    • Replies: @Joe Schmoe

    "Could someone please just genocide white people off the face of the Earth?"
     
    Heck no! Someone has to create and maintain decent places for all the Asian, black, etc., folks. They obviously can't be doing it themselves. Possible exception maybe Japan, insofar as they neither invite nor invade these days.
  155. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:

    I’d be happier if Harvard admitted NO whites, which means flyover states would quit sending Harvard grads to Congress.

    I know that Harvard’s math and pure science programs are extremely respectable-I know a guy whose son got a physics Ph.D from Harvard recently, and he’s incredibly smart-and harbor no ill will for Harvard graduates in general, but I would not vote for anyone from Harvard. Harvard people most specifically, and Ivy Leaguers in general, have no idea what life is like for ‘the rest of us’. Flyover middle class people should never vote for or support Ivy Leaguers in politics on principle.

    Part of that is not that Harvard and the Ivy League in general do not to a substantial degree represent “the best and the brightest”, but that to a fair extent they do. “The best and the brightest” do not belong in government. They should be curing cancer, writing the software infrastructure we all depend on, giving us new and better music and art and literature…..not writing the myriad of ever expanding laws restricting us in unimaginable ways. Better we should have a legislature of slightly-above-average, imperfect but well intentioned people who run, are elected, serve a while and go back to live under the laws they have made. And better they should hire and appoint people who are not superstars either.

  156. I wonder what percentage of Harvard graduates are black?

  157. But making one-sixth of their admittees black means they are getting deep in declining marginal returns.

    “Black” may include the top black students from Africa, as well as Jews from North and South Africa.

  158. Anonymous[408] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things.

    Should Jews not be categorized under the “Asian” heading, given that they claim their ancestral homeland is in Asia?

    How would such a reclassification alter the basic landscape that is the subject of the lawsuit?

  159. To answer Steve’s question

    … making one-sixth of their admittees black means they are getting deep in declining marginal returns.

    Perhaps Arcidiacono is playing some kind of game with the data?

    To an extent, yes. Race data is for US students only ; Arcidiacono excludes categories like legacy, athlete and donor from the sample in most of his analysis; most numbers refer to admitted students, from which blacks matriculate at a lower rate. I guess blacks are more like 10-12 percent of the student body rather than 15.8 in the study, which is still past your point of declining returns. To that,

    1. a lot (like a third) of blacks would get in without affirmative action under the current admission policy, according to the regression analyses

    2. the majority of “African Americans” in the statistic are legacies, immigrants and Obama-type mixed race children of very high achieving parents and Tiger moms.

  160. @Anon
    The Jewish share would almost certainly fall, bigly, as Unz has explained in his seminal 2012 article on the drop in Jewish achievement. The de facto biggest beneficiaries of Affirmative Action today are Jews among non-black groups. Even Jewish media has written about this. This is part of the reason why there is so much virulent hostility to the idea of adopting meritocracy in the media.

    The Jewish share would almost certainly fall, bigly, as Unz has explained in his seminal 2012 article on the drop in Jewish achievement.

    His explanation was wrong.

    There was little or no drop in achievement for Jews (J) compared to white Gentiles (W) on the measures he looked at. There was a severe displacement of (J + W) by Asians causing both J and W to drop. Ron in his way zoomed in on the J part of the decline but ignored the W part. The number of J did collapse but the rate of J relative to W has been much more stable. I would expect it to decrease slowly due to assimilation and admixture but the data don’t necessarily show that.

    Even Jewish media has written about this.

    Proving that Jewish journalists are as gullible as any other kind. It doesn’t make the nonsense correct.

  161. @J.Ross
    OT This claims to be an instruction from a Los Angeles private school: if you participate in Meme Day you cannot choose any meme associated with hate, ie Pepe, red pill, NPC or Wojak (no comma between NPC and Wojak, as though they were interchangeable), in other words you cannot do the most famous and consequential ones. I'm guessing East Asian Dad is precluded for "racism."
    So ... kittens?
    http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/189840265

    Well yes….and no…..

  162. @jim jones
    Oxbridge has zero Black students:

    http://www.theweek.co.uk/94102/why-is-there-such-a-lack-of-diversity-at-oxbridge

    75 black students admitted to Oxford and Cambridge last year alone.

    If you’d ever been to either place you’d have more of a clue about this.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/lack-of-diversity-black-students-oxford-cambridge-2017-8

  163. @Steve Sailer
    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    It does in the sense that many other high end programs bring in Nigerians to fill quotas. I imagine that more than 2/3s Nigerian is a typical number for programs that aren’t Harvard/Stanford.

    As an aside, these Nigerians tend to be of substantially higher quality than the African Americans within the same programs.

  164. “Perhaps Arcidiacono is playing some kind of game with the data?”

    Since it’s Harvard, they *could* get the number of talented blacks they need to keep up both standards and appearances by skimming a non-representative sample off the top of the talented tenth (there are really orders of magnitude more people in this country, and the world, than we remember sometimes). This is an advantage they hold over less prestigious universities, because the strategy doesn’t scale.

    The question is whether they are *actually* using a smart process, because that would require a more explicit conspiracy among more admissions people. Usually these sorts of conspiracies are communicated in hushed whispers and covert signals, so it’s hard to imagine there’s finely tuned statistical reasoning behind their decisions.

  165. @Anon
    Lieu is my ultra liberal Congress critter elected in a very Jewish district. He’s the appointed heir of Waxman

    Asians have always voted against anti affirmative action initiatives and submitted friend of the court briefs in favor of affirmative action in all the affirmative action law suits.

    White HBD and IQ mavens focus on tech and upper level careers for 115 plus Whites and Asians and assume Asians have the same views as Whites.

    The Asians realize that affirmative action helps the average Asian who’s happy to be a mail carrier toll taker city clerk or owner of a small business helped by never pay back SBA loans and tax exemptions for locating in a CRA or ghetto area.

    Affirmative action and racism also benefits Asians from being prosecuted for tax evasion medical and food stamp fraud slum landlording gross violations of zoning health and labor laws such as running a chicken and duck slaughter house in the floor of a garage and even the sex slave brothels.

    Any investigation and enforcement of these violations and crimes brings the scream of racism and the city backs down.

    Those immigrant entrepreneurs the conservatives love so much are in business only because of the multitude of socialist type benefits heaped on minority small businesses and lax enforcement of business regulations such as labor laws, zoning health codes and the rest.

    So some Asian Drs have to go to 3rd tier Chicago medical school instead of University of Chicago Northwestern Loyola or University of Illinois med schools. BFD. They’re still Drs.

    Meanwhile hundreds of thousands of Asians are getting all sorts of decently paid jobs and opening small businesses because of affirmative action

    Affirmative action is good for Asians. They know it. That’s why they vote Democrat and always voted in favor of affirmative action when the initiatives were on the ballot

    I’m all for the anti affirmative action law suit against Harvard. If Harvard wins affirmative action will stay. If Harvard loses, the Asians will get the White goyim places.

    Or an anti affirmative action ruling will just be ignored as anti affirmative action Prop 209 has been ignored in California

    Another thing to consider are the professional Asians. They are the political leaders no different from NAACP BLM LARAZA MALDEF MECHA ADL AJC.

    The professionals speak for their people and their people follow them into the Democrat party

    Wow you can really bring the pain here. H/T

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Anon
    Truth hurts doesn’t it.
  166. @Tyrion 2
    Both sides of the debate seem to be framing their own points as the one which will do least to help white people at the expense of others.

    Of course, the reality is that they are (I think unknowingly) fighting over who can hurt white people most.

    This is a natural and logical result of most of them really believing that white people possess a hidden and amorphous privilege...even when they are white themselves. Indeed, especially when they are white themselves! As these individuals actually tend to be very privileged. They are just a bit confused as to the cause.

    Both sides of the debate seem to be framing their own points as the one which will do least to help white people at the expense of others.

    Of course, the reality is that they are (I think unknowingly) fighting over who can hurt white people most.

    Accurate insight, except that we may readily dispense with the ‘unknowingly’ part–they’re not stupid.

  167. @Steve Sailer
    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.

    The public colleges have lower graduation rates, although in general graduation rates appear higher than a generation ago.

    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.

    https://www.chronicle.com/article/If-Republicans-Get-Their-Way/241659

    Unsurpassed resources but not on a per-student basis (Harvard has large enrollment) and furthermore it’s not (I hope) too nitpicky to note that while its admissions yield is high it’s not the highest (the first chart at the following link doesn’t include the service academies; the second chart does).

    https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2018-01-23/universities-colleges-where-students-are-eager-to-enroll

  168. @Lot
    "Asians would annihilate education in America and turn the entire premise into a giant grind factory."

    I'm glad I didn't go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a "grind factory" and Asian parents' influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxk5djyAEN1r4wa4bo1_500.jpg

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/0b/10/75/0b10757a0d32e3abff28de0a712a517f--asian-parents-asian-kids.jpg

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.

    The contradiction you express here captures what we’re up against: Asian inspired institutions have a kind of success, but it’s not something anyone is especially anxious to copy.

  169. @J.Ross
    Aw hell naw. Wayne doesn't show up on this forty item list, of which here are the top ten:

    1. University of Maryland, University College (Adelphi, MD): 11,959
    2. North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University (Greensboro, NC): 8,381 [HBC]
    3. Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw, GA): 6,929
    4. Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University (Tallahassee, FL): 6,892 [HBC]
    5. Prairie View A&M University (Prairie View, TX): 6,666 [HBC]
    6. University of Central Florida (Orlando, FL): 6,361
    7. University of Memphis (Memphis, TN): 6,191
    8. American Public University System (Charles Town, WV): 6,098
    9. Florida International University (Miami, FL): 6,020
    10. Old Dominion University (Norfolk, VA): 5,941

    https://www.collegexpress.com/lists/list/colleges-with-the-largest-enrollment-of-black-non-hispanic-students/376/

    Maryland at #1 can be partially (or mostly) attributed to the Baltimore Campus of same, unless someone shows evidence to the contrary. I used to do some contract work there, it was quite White/Yellow/Jewish as are most of the campuses in the DC area clear down to George Mason, UVA, Virginia Tech and of course William and Mary. My kid went to ODU in Norfolk, it was a little more Black and Hispanic, but among the mostly White/Asian/Jewish youngsters, I noticed lots of military officers there punching their Masters tickets, engineering and whatnot, ALL those guys were White. But that’s been going on since I was in the service at Oceana in the 70s and 80s.

    One wonders if they falsify the numbers, fudge as to the numbers? Possible? In addition to the look of things in and around DC, living near Boston now, I pass through Boston College’s campus from time to time, through Cambridge, the Harvard-MIT corridor, adjusted for Asians and Jews, it’s Whiter than 98 brightness printer paper down there. I wonder if they count janitors as students, lots of those are Black and Hispanic.

    Whatever.

  170. @jim jones
    Oxbridge has zero Black students:

    http://www.theweek.co.uk/94102/why-is-there-such-a-lack-of-diversity-at-oxbridge

    Some Oxbridge colleges had no British black students in certain undergraduate admission years.

    St Edmund Hall, Oxford admits about a hundred undergraduates a year. The percentage of the British population who are black is about 3%, so rather than none you’d expect perhaps 2 black students starting each year if places were allocated randomly.

    Given the 70+ colleges, you’d expect there to be certain years where none were admitted into specific colleges whereas 4 might be admitted into another. Again, even if doled out entirely randomly.

    The headline about a lack of diversity at Oxbridge is even more misleading, as those of ethnic minority background are actually overrepresented as regards their proportion of the population.

  171. @Ben Kurtz
    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians. Ideally named after some Asian guy. Not an existing public school heavily populated by Asian newcomers, like CUNY was heavily populated by Jews in the early 20th century.

    I'm not aware of any, but I'm willing to take suggestions.

    I meant private schools founded by Asians for Asians.

    Soka University of America is probably the closest thing to what you’re thinking of. Founded by a huge Buddhist organization from Japan. Tied for 22nd-best liberal arts college in US News & World Report. But still far too small and uninfluential to be called an “elite university” in the same sense as, say, Brandeis.

    From stumbling around on Google & Wikipedia I noticed two other Asian-founded educational institutions (University of the West & Dharma Realm Buddhist University) apparently following the same model of getting funding from a wealthy Buddhist sect in Asia and setting up shop in California where there’s always a steady supply of Asian immigrants.

    Everything else I could find was an ESL school, a vocational college, or a blatant visa mill.

  172. @Steve Sailer
    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    Don’t know for sure but that’s my guess. Harvard seems to cast a wide net in terms of recruiting black students. According to testimony from its admissions dean they send invitations to apply to black SAT test takers that score as low as 1100.

    Assuming many of them apply, then Harvard would have the pick of the litter. The only time I think a black student would pass on Harvard is if they had offers from other ivies.

    The top HBCUs simply don’t have many students with high SAT scores. The mean scores at top HBCUs are around the national mean. A black student scoring 1300 or above would feel out of place. So there aren’t any real HBCU alternatives to Harvard either.

  173. @Spud Boy
    I'll just point out that you don't have to graduate from Harvard to be successful. I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.

    you don’t have to graduate from Harvard to be successful

    I’m interested to hear the claimed damages from the plaintiffs. What have been the diminished life prospects to the passed-over Asian students? And have those admitted in their place achieved things they wouldn’t have otherwise?

    Plenty will testify that Harvard has not been a particular help, and is often counted as a hindrance.

  174. J says: • Website

    All this picking around Jews and Chinese in Harvard, all these malignant Unz lies of Jews taking up 1000 times their fair Harvard share, and the Chinese doing so and so, is going to lead to quotas. Harvard will lose its best students and faculty. Who profits? Not the USA.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Quotas have been the law since 1968. Where have you been for the last 50 years?
  175. @anon
    Well, as I've said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black, so everyone can quit complaining, let Harvard make all the reparations they can to atone for whites' sins. In fact, make the entire Ivy League plus Stanford and MIT all 100% black, including all the faculty and admin, until such a time when black and white incomes are at parity. It's the least we could do. Whites can go to state colleges. Hispanics and Asians can go back to Latin America and Asia. They have their own universities.

    Couldn’t agree more.

    • Replies: @Prester John
    That would put the NBA and NFL out of business.
  176. @Steve Sailer
    Generally, Harvard gets just about everybody it admits through. It has lots of resources.

    The public colleges have lower graduation rates, although in general graduation rates appear higher than a generation ago.

    Didn’t get Bill Gates long. The competition for the best won’t be other colleges.

  177. @Spud Boy
    I'll just point out that you don't have to graduate from Harvard to be successful. I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.

    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”
     
    Depends on prayers of “success.” 500k each sun circle can possible make with persistence of beaver and cleverness of fox. But if dare to be Supreme Court sachem, one must first heap big credential, make bond with establishment Elders. League of Ivy true path on journey.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    I'm not sure your aphorism applies here. Isn't Harvard the Indian and its graduates the arrows?
  178. While more and more Blacks are attending Harvard each year, Henry Louis Gates Jr., the chairman of Harvard’s African-American studies department, pointed out that the majority of them — about two-thirds — were West Indian, African immigrants or their children, or children of biracial couples.

    only 30% of the Blacks at Harvard were from families in which all four grandparents were born in this country, descendants of slaves. This was back 15 years ago. Today I assume just 20% of the Blacks at Harvard are descendants of Blacks from the Jim Crow south. Most are like Obama, with a white parent or foreign born parents.

  179. @Anarcho-Supremacist
    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using "Jewish sounding" surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis. I mean what is a Jewish surname? Most American Jewish surnames are Germanic in origin and the third most common Jewish surname in the US is Miller(ya really Jewish sounding). I mean that is almost the amateur ((( ))) you see from stormfront clowns.

    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using “Jewish sounding” surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis.

    No, that’s incorrect. If you’ll bother reading my long article and some of the associated follow-up columns, you’ll find it’s *extremely* accurate.

    For example, there are a subset of exceptionally indicative Jewish names such as Goldstein, Silverberg, Cohen, Kaplan, etc., and these can be used to perform Weyl analysis on large datasets in order to validate the results from the looser “Jewish sounding” method. In all cases, the results were virtually identical, confirming my analysis.

    Also, some fanatic Jewish-activist type who ferociously attacked me had previously published a peer-reviewed article on the exact Jewish ethnicity distribution of the International Math Olympiad participants based on weeks of in-depth research and interviews. As it happened, the 5 minutes I’d spent eye-balling those lists for Jewish-sounding names for my own article had produced virtually identical results.

    • Replies: @utu
    On Jewish names and literary talents from Now and Forever — A Conversation with Israel Zangwill by Samuel Roth (1925)

    Zangwill--Why this sudden self-conscious modesty? The Jews have certainly contributed their ample share towards the upbuilding of America.

    Roth--Industrially, yes. I am thinking this moment how little we have done in America for the arts--particularly for the art of poetry in which I can judge with more assurance.

    Zangwill--That is strange, for in every European country Jews are foremost among the leaders in all the arts.

    Roth--It is not strange at all. Jewish literary talent in America has been exhausted in the effort to disguise the name Cohen of which you may find in the New York Telephone Directory no less than twenty-four variations: Cohen, Cohn, Cone, Cunn, Curie, Coan, Coon, Cohene, Cane, Kohn, Kohne, Kohen, Kohene, Kuhn, Kuhne, Kun, Kunn, Koen, Konn, Coone, Cahn, Kone, Kann, and Kahn.

     

    , @Anon
    Mr. Unz,

    I had thought for the Harvard admissions estimates (as opposed to National Merit numbers) you relied on the Hillel figures rather than on Weyl analysis?

    I remember some woman named Nurit Baytch claimed to have done Weyl analysis on the list of Harvard underclassmen or freshmen or some such and arrived at some low figure, about 6-8%, which is rather strange because a survey taken the same year found 9.5% (iirc) who self-identified as being of Jewish religion.

    RSDB

    , @Anarcho-Supremacist
    I have read all of them. Admittedly its been a while sense I have.

    You claim Jews are over represented are 1000 percent compared to non jewish whites. If that is the case would that mean only around 2-3 percent of the Harvard student body is non jew white?
  180. @Lot
    Well just assume that Harvard is exactly 25% Jewish then write several 75,000 word articles about your results.

    Will he start the article with his stabdard :
    Im not an expert and I don’t know if any of this is true .

  181. @Reg Cæsar

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit...
     
    No it doesn't. It rewards the family's merit. That's an important pillar in any civilization.

    ...meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
     
    Exactly how much "merit" do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It's just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    Well, Hell’s Bells, then: why did we ever bother abolishing the monarchy and hereditary peerages for the aristocracy if we’re back to believing this kind of shit? Or allowing people to be punished for their ancestors’ crimes? Why end it there: the Trumps, Obamas, Kochs, and Gateses are all more meritorious families than yours, so if one of them strikes one if you in the street he should do so with impunity – after all he is an Obama, and you a mere Cæsar (no relation, I assume, to the famously meritorious line, else my logic fails…).

    In the event, eighteen-year-olds are plenty capable of having demonstrated their own merits of demerits. Hell, at nineteen Audie Murphy single-handedly held back an entire company of Germans at Colmar Pocket. He achieved this feat in part because he’d become an excellent marksman by hunting to feed his family while he was yet a boy. There are eighteen-year-olds who spend time helping abused, neglected, and abandoned cats and dogs in shelters; those who donate marrow to strangers; and others who run around shoplifting, raping, and snorting cocaine. Some study dilegently while working shitty jobs at night. Others cut classes and watch porn and sportsball at night. Some know three languages, play a clarinet very well, and are great at calculus. Others have never read a book longer than one hundred pages and don’t understand rudimentary algebra. Plenty of the first sorts are from poor, even vicious families, and a lot of the second sort have rich, connected parents (it’s how they can afford to piss away their time and skate through life).

    If you cannot find merit in some and a lack in others, you’ve not been around many teenagers.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Teenage is too soon. Many/most of the great men hadn't matured by then.

    Greatness in men is like fine wine that takes sufficient time to age properly.

  182. Anonymous[549] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Looking at how Asians would be a majority at Harvard under a more objective system, current Harvard president Lawrence S. Bacow must now understand how Harvard president Abbott Lawrence Lowell felt in 1922 when he imposed a quota system to keep the then rising ethnicity’s share down.
     
    Actually, I don't think that's correct. The key factor is that over the last generation or two, it's become *exceptionally* difficult for non-Jewish whites without some huge personal advantage to gain admission to Harvard. Therefore, from what I've heard here and there, fewer and fewer of them even bother applying.

    Asians have almost as difficult a time gaining admission, but since their families are so fanatic, they apply anyway.

    Under a more fair and meritocratic admissions system, I'd think a much larger number of high-ability white Gentiles would apply. Based on my Meritocracy analysis of a few years ago, they'd constitute roughly 65-70% of Harvard admissions, with Asians around 25-30%, and Jews at 6%.

    Relative to white Gentiles of similar ability, Jews are currently over-represented by roughly 1000%, which causes all sorts of ridiculous things. That's actually the central key to understanding the situation at Harvard and the other Ivies, but since almost everyone is just too terrified to discuss that "touchy" factor, lots of people never become aware of it.

    Incidentally, I was very pleased to see that the NYT actually mentioned that my Meritocracy article had been what launched this current Asian Quota lawsuit, and they even linked to it, so I've been getting thousands of pageviews from NYT readers. For those of you new to this complex topic, here's the link, although the article is *very* long:

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

    I have worked at one of Harvard’s flagship organizations in Boston. I noticed a peculiar pattern of Jewish overrepresentation in the student/trainee community, quite disproportionate to their ability.

    I have a high regard for Jewish talent overall, and I consider them the race with the highest per-capita giftedness level, but in my organization the majority of the Jews were strangely mediocre.

    The Indians and Chinese in the organization were definitely better, the Whites were probably too.

    I don’t understand it.

    I have been at some organizations in NYC where the Jews were obviously the elite – their talent shone through, far surpassing those of other groups. Those experiences really opened my eyes to the abilities of the Jewish people. I expected to find the same thing at Harvard, but I was struck by Harvard Jews’ relative incompetence. They weren’t bad, not by a long shot, they just weren’t all Nobel-prize level geniuses (which is what I was expecting).

    • Replies: @anon
    Re: relative mediocrity of Jews at Harvard, Jews are the biggest beneficiaries of legacy admission and 'Director's list' admission at the Ivies these days. Legacies have an admission rate of 33%, and Director's list at nearly 100%, compared to 5% admit rate for everyone else. In every freshman class at Harvard, roughly 40% are legacy admits, 10% are from 'Director's List'.
    , @bomag

    Those experiences really opened my eyes to the abilities of the Jewish people. I expected to find the same thing at Harvard, but I was struck by Harvard Jews’ relative incompetence.
     
    At the end of the day, how much does competence matter in these affairs of which you speak?

    I suspect meritocracy is less important than we have been lead to believe. It's good for the Jews to have their people in these slots, even if their competence level might be below that of a nearby Chinese or Indian.
  183. @anon
    Pretty much all universities in the world outside the US, including all European, Canadian, Australian, NZ universities, admit strictly by test scores.

    Pretty much all universities in the world outside the US, including all European, Canadian, Australian, NZ universities, admit strictly by test scores.

    Officially yes, there are internal metrics which are not made public.

    Except in France where it is all who your parents know.

  184. @FO337
    This "God" fellow has a Lot to answer for, if you ask me ;)

    War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Icecapades.

    I would add San Francisco, frivorce, and Danielle Bregoli to the list.

    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    Might well be, that you just summed up a few of the most important reasons for the - - - - - can I say: creation - our creation of God, or should I rather say: Our need of God?

    (I don't think that any of our thoughts could diminish God - since it is well known that us humble beings are just too unknowing and too little all in all to make him worry about our thoughts).
  185. Affirmative action for all or affirmative action for none. There is no middle ground. Once you start tinkering with the principle of equality under the law it is hard to know where to stop. My preference is that the Harvard student body reflect the racial, ethnic, and geographical diversity of America. We need cultural elites that are representative of the American people as a whole. Right now European-Americans of Protestant descent living in the South and Midwest are the most underrepresented (and largest?) ethnic group in America. How bad it is I don’t know exactly. Maybe somebody can figure it out.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Consider that most of the Presidents judges senators and congressmen who lobbied for and passed the affirmative action law of 1968 and adjudicated just 2 law suits Griggs and Kaiser who created and enforced affirmative action were White Protestants

    Celler Javits Kennedy and the unspeakable Brennan and a few others weren’t Protestants but most were Protestants.

    The single person most responsible for affirmative action was a Protestant, Richard Nixon. He created the affirmative action Hispanic race in 197o by executive order. It was his EEOC that turned don’t discriminate against blacks to shall discriminate against Whites.

    Under Regean, the federal government eliminated the PACE exam for federal job applicants who had college degrees. It wasn’t an aptitude test. It was a simple test of 10th grade literacy reading comprehension and numeracy

    Blacks with BAs MAs and PHDs failed that test in such numbers the test was eliminated by Regean. Result is all those federal blacks making $150,000 a year
    Regean gave amnesty to millions of non White illegals thus setting the precedent for more amnesty

    I don’t know how many Protestants were on the Supreme Court in the Griggs case. I know Brennan, May he burn in hell forever and ever was a catholic. If you’re interested you can look up the religions of the SC justices in 1973.

    Affirmative action was a liberal action against Whites. Given the make up of the senate congress courts and presidents one could also say it was a White Protestant operation against Whites.
  186. 51.7% v. 0.9%? I’ll wager Mr. Pnin made an error in his calculations somewhere.

    • Replies: @anon
    Not if you look at the distribution of SAT scores by race.
  187. Asian-American? The sooner we dump this term, the better. Asia is a big place, and the people we are talking about are almost never Filipinos, afghans, Pakistanis, and so forth.

  188. @Stolen Valor Detective
    So, Harvard would basically become Stuyvesant High School. (Or at least its current incarnation.)

    I might be biased as a Stuyvesant alumnus, but that seems like it would be a positive development to me. It's true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues. (https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management)

    Our friends at Harvard Business School conclude that this shows that companies all across America are all just irrationally cutting into their profit margins by making an already extremely scarce labor supply even smaller by not fully utilizing their Asian employees. (For some reason, companies forget to have this totally irrational and inexplicable bias against Asians during the initial hiring process.)

    I suspect, however, that the administrators above them at Harvard come to a rather different conclusion about why this discrepancy exists, and use that conclusion in determining who is and who isn't admitted to Harvard. Unlike other such conclusions about different ethnic minorities who face employment discrimination, they probably figured that they wouldn't take too much flak from ethnic grievance activists by putting it into practice.

    So, yes, I think it's probably true (though I'm happy to hear countervailing evidence) that a hard-working, high-IQ white guy is more likely to found the proverbial next Microsoft, Facebook or Google than a comparably hard-working and high-IQ Asian guy. This would seem to be a false choice to someone without a stake in the Harvard brand, because surely Harvard could, with its ~$37 billion endowment, afford to admit them both, right? But that would dilute the Harvard brand, which people who currently have a stake in it don't like. Thus, from the standpoint of maximizing the value of the Harvard brand for current Harvard "shareholders" (to use a valuable analogy that Steve often applies), Harvard is probably acting rationally in its admissions process.

    However, personally, I don't think that an institution as important in American national life as Harvard should be guided by a philosophy of maximizing its own value at the expense of everyone else. I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process. In my view, the kind of public-spirited "meritocratic elitism" that many early psychometricians believed in---which is to a considerable extent manifested in New York City's specialized high schools---has much to recommend for it .

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.

    That’s an immensely stupid idea. You are taking the key entry gateway to the Elite (both in terms of wealth and influence) and handing it to an alien population which has already shown itself perfectly willing and eager to join the most virulent anti-white, SJW mind-set.

    A sensible nation would, for starters, not allow any non-citizens into its best colleges, period. Secondly, a sensible nation would not allow any Asians to immigrate to it, because nothing good can come of it. And that includes nerdy white men getting cute little Asian wives (future harridans) and further eliminating the white race.

    Massive Asian immigration — and it’s a lot higher than the numbers state — is a disaster for America.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Well something good. They can keep the baizou from taking over libraries, for instance.
  189. @FO337

    There’s nothing wrong with Harvard’s legacy system.
     
    Especially now that it's favoring the Chosen People...


    Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.
     
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately.

    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they’ve targeted. Shouldn’t all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.
     
    It is the antithesis of Nozick's patterns of justice argument, taken to the absolutely nth degree.

    Your behaviour, no matter how complex the situation from which it derives, must fit their template, no matter how often they change it or how ludicrously abstract its reasoning is.

    It is totalitarian. Everything must bend to fit their ideology, or be broken up completely.

    Or as Thomas Sowell said "Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good."

    Of course what allows this to flourish is that it doesn't quite fit the mould of what came before. The oppression is always done in the name of "fighting oppression" and it is mostly passive aggressive, soft, rather than aggressive and self-acknowledging.

    Whether how the totalitarian impulse has changed is because our society has changed or because the change in the totalitarian impulse has changed our society, I'll leave on the shelf.

    Nonetheless, it is an all encompassing ideology and one that seeks to rewrite our lives regardless of whether it works or we want it or it makes us miserable or not.

    Now the BBC is promoting Hollywood actresses for banning their daughters from watching Snow White. Snow White may be a beautiful, lovely film that speaks to the human condition and is important in our culture and our memories but it does not fit "2018" feminist norms, so it has to go.

    This is the first step. "Look, successful people ban their children from watching this show". Next, "we shouldn't show it in schools". Then "remove it from the TV schedules" and so on and so on. Eventually, it will get rewritten, remade and replaced. Passive aggressive totalitarianism

    Naturally, once remade, it will need to be fixed again as the totalitarian power of the ideology is as much an attraction as the euphemisms it is sold with. Hence Negro - coloured person - black - African American - person of colour. What next? There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.

    What's particularly interesting is that it is all accelerating, even as it becomes ever more incongruent with our lives and our humanity. There are ever more discrete and prescribed identities created. There are ever more areas of life that get administered. These are actually much the same thing. Commodification, to some extent, is too.

    We seem to be at the point where it is pulling itself apart, but we've thought this before and we are also at the point where it seems it is either the ideology which goes, or our entire societies. Perhaps that's why we'll pull back, or perhaps this time we won't. This is why many people feel such an existential despair at the way things are going. So much is lost and for such stupid reasons. But as we pull back, the totalitarians double down and it is clearly straining American society.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45900794

    , @Almost Missouri
    Harvard takes federal money. If you take federal money, you have to agree to abide by federal policies. You may or may not like that, but it is the law. Harvard knew this when they took the money.

    The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money
     
    That may be true, but it was Harvard's decision to go this route, and as a private institution, that was their decision to make.

    Indeed, since Harvardians disproportionately form federal policy, you could argue that Harvard was on both sides of this one.

    , @pyrrhus
    Wrong. Harvard takes vast amounts of Federal money (which it could do without given Harvard's vast wealth) and therefore must abide by anti-discrimination laws....Ironically, Harvard's virtue signaling faculty is in the forefront of imposing such social engineering on the rest of us.
    , @Anon
    Harvard students take out student loans guaranteed by the federal government Harvard gets millions of dollars a year in federal grants for research purposes.

    Because if this federal money, Harvard must discriminate against Whites. That’s the law. Take a dollar of federal money and the laws of affirmative action are enforced.
  190. @Lot
    Unz's Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there's no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.

    Man that is some high-level (((logic))) there, my dude.

  191. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:

    Harvard trained (((lawyers))) have done more damage to America than any other group in history, especially those who worked in politics and Wall Street. If this shit school’s prestige gets knocked down a few pegs for admitting more Asians, America would be better off for it.

    Same goes for Yale and all the rest of the copycat Ivies, all are overrun by (((racist hypocrite champagne socialists))).

    I’m 100% for the plaintiffs in this case, not because I love Asians(I don’t), but because I despise the Ivies for the damage they’ve done to the country. All patriotic Americans should wish for the demise of the Treasonous Eight.

  192. “I’m surprised that Harvard has let the black share get so high”

    Are these black students or “black” students? How many of them are black like Ben Jealous or Rachel Dolezal? If a pasty white applicant such as myself bothered to identify as black would Harvard challege my assertion? *Could* they challenge my assertion? Or would they leave it so they could claim yet another NAM on their rolls? I mean it doesn’t seem that they ever challenged Elizabeth Warren’s assertion that she is Native American.

    • Replies: @Anon
    In my experience neither colleges or employers care. All they want is to be able to satisfy the EEOC and the state city and county affirmative action enforcers

    It’s especially advantageous for a White woman. When HR sees a White woman who checked the black box they are happy to hire her

    It means they can satisfy the affirmative action enforcers. But they aren’t adding another incompetent rude surly aggressive always looking for a fight 2 hours of work 6 hours of trouble making black woman to the work force.
    Win win

    Once black women reach 15 percent a work place becomes like a ghetto high school.
  193. @Reg Cæsar

    The issue with a legacy system is that it privileges familial connections over merit...
     
    No it doesn't. It rewards the family's merit. That's an important pillar in any civilization.

    ...meritorious individuals are more capable of making positive contributions to society than well-connected ones.
     
    Exactly how much "merit" do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It's just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)

    What isn’t a genetic lotto? My guess is that conscientiousness isn’t much less genetically-determined than IQ is.

  194. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:
    @Steve Sailer
    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    That’s exactly what’s happening. The book Mismatch by Richard Sander did a great job chronicling this phenomenon. The effect trickles down, resulting in blacks in the bottom quartile of every school they attend.

    A black kid who scores 1300 gets accepted to Harvard, if he had gone to University of Alabama, he would’ve been top of the pack, and could’ve majored in engineering or medicine. Instead he’s at bottom of the pack and ends up majoring in African studies at Harvard. That’s another reason why there are so few black STEM majors. In fact, a couple of years back there was a black kid who got into all 8 Ivies plus Stanford and chose to attend Alabama instead, his parents said they made too much money to qualify for need based aid at Harvard and he wanted to be a doctor, they knew Harvard would kill that dream.

    AA is a classic example of well-meaning, misguided liberal policies that end up hurting more than helping blacks.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Who cares about blacks that get affirmative action admissions and jobs. Not me
  195. @Art Deco
    51.7% v. 0.9%? I'll wager Mr. Pnin made an error in his calculations somewhere.

    Not if you look at the distribution of SAT scores by race.

  196. Imagine for a moment that the high command of the US Marine Corps was composed of 50 percent students from a private Muslim boarding school for wealthy teenage girls in Dubai who were a) not Marines, b) had never been to the US, and c) had been taught all their lives that US Marines were dirty, smelly, stupid, useless expendable nobodies, who should only be deployed — if evah! — for the sole benefit of Dubai… or, if we really HAVE to stretch it, for the benefit of Sunni Muslims in the Gulf region.

    Would this be good for the USMC? Would it be good for the US? Who, in fact, would it be good for?

    That is exactly what you’re getting by admitting this preposterous level of self-serving Jews and Asians into what is supposed to be the premier elite-leadership manufacturing facility for the United States. Which used to be, allegedly, composed of, ya know, Americans. But I am perfectly sure that Seth, Yakob, Etan, Mohammed, Fareed, Fan-Shen, Shi-Chao, Sanjay, Gupta, Mohammed, Muhammad, and Mehmet, once they receive their gold-plated keys to the Executive Washroom, can be totally trusted to do what’s right for the people of Harrisburg, PA. After all, they just chain-migrated all their third cousins there!

    Muh meritocracy!!

    ANGRY IMMIGRANT CHINESE STUDENT: I high test score! Say so on this paper here! You give me your university! High test score! You give me your children future! You give now!

    SHLOMO ISRAELBERG: The man’s got a point. Look at that IQ score. Better hand him the keys, Brad.

  197. @Steve Sailer
    As far as I can tell, Harvard is really good at admitting people who will be good for the Harvard brand (e.g., donating a lot or becoming famous or whatever). I don't see much evidence that Harvard is leaving a lot of $100 bills on the sidewalk.

    Donations and fame may be metrics for short-term Harvard brand bumps in the media. etc., but are those really also metrics for the long-term health of the Harvard brand?

    After all, Harvard already has more money than it knows what to do with, and global brand recognition outside the remoter parts of Papua New Guinea. Hasn’t this unhealthy obsession with donations and fame already gone far into diminishing returns?

    Meanwhile, its only product that actually matters gets ever more mushy and mediocre.

    Former merit/legacy era Harvardians: John Adams, T.S. Eliot, Henry Kissinger, Ralph Bunche, John Updike, Dean Acheson, Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr., Henry James, Cotton Mather, Thomas Sowell, George Santayana, etc.

    Current fame/donor era Harvardians: Matty Yglacias, Jared Kuschner, Neil de Grasse Tyson, Ellen Pao, Franklin Raines, Bill Kristol, Soledad O’Brien, Al Franken, etc.

    The former list are legitimate cultural or national pillars, for better or for worse. The current list is like a Who’s Who of the counterfeit elite.

    What profit it a College to pick up every hundred dollar bill if it lose its own soul?

    • Agree: Desiderius
  198. @Wilkey
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they've targeted. Shouldn't all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with "anti-discrimination laws" is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    It is the antithesis of Nozick’s patterns of justice argument, taken to the absolutely nth degree.

    Your behaviour, no matter how complex the situation from which it derives, must fit their template, no matter how often they change it or how ludicrously abstract its reasoning is.

    It is totalitarian. Everything must bend to fit their ideology, or be broken up completely.

    Or as Thomas Sowell said “Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good.”

    Of course what allows this to flourish is that it doesn’t quite fit the mould of what came before. The oppression is always done in the name of “fighting oppression” and it is mostly passive aggressive, soft, rather than aggressive and self-acknowledging.

    Whether how the totalitarian impulse has changed is because our society has changed or because the change in the totalitarian impulse has changed our society, I’ll leave on the shelf.

    Nonetheless, it is an all encompassing ideology and one that seeks to rewrite our lives regardless of whether it works or we want it or it makes us miserable or not.

    Now the BBC is promoting Hollywood actresses for banning their daughters from watching Snow White. Snow White may be a beautiful, lovely film that speaks to the human condition and is important in our culture and our memories but it does not fit “2018″ feminist norms, so it has to go.

    This is the first step. “Look, successful people ban their children from watching this show”. Next, “we shouldn’t show it in schools”. Then “remove it from the TV schedules” and so on and so on. Eventually, it will get rewritten, remade and replaced. Passive aggressive totalitarianism

    Naturally, once remade, it will need to be fixed again as the totalitarian power of the ideology is as much an attraction as the euphemisms it is sold with. Hence Negro – coloured person – black – African American – person of colour. What next? There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.

    What’s particularly interesting is that it is all accelerating, even as it becomes ever more incongruent with our lives and our humanity. There are ever more discrete and prescribed identities created. There are ever more areas of life that get administered. These are actually much the same thing. Commodification, to some extent, is too.

    We seem to be at the point where it is pulling itself apart, but we’ve thought this before and we are also at the point where it seems it is either the ideology which goes, or our entire societies. Perhaps that’s why we’ll pull back, or perhaps this time we won’t. This is why many people feel such an existential despair at the way things are going. So much is lost and for such stupid reasons. But as we pull back, the totalitarians double down and it is clearly straining American society.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45900794

    • Replies: @res

    Or as Thomas Sowell said “Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good.”
     
    That is such a good quote it needs a citation: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell#Is_Reality_Optional?_(1993)

    They render it as:

    Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area - crime, education, housing, race relations - the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them.
     
    Devastating.
    , @Jack D

    There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.
     
    It's not for fun. First of all , any word that describes a group with negative characteristics will start out as mere descriptive but eventually becomes an epithet and you will have to invent a new word to describe the group or else people will think that you are calling them by an epithet ( the "n-word" being the most famous example). The original word for someone who was mentally slow was "fool" but it became impolite to call them that so other "more scientific" words were developed (idiot, moron, retard, etc.) but each one in succession became an epithet and they had to come up with a new euphemism. The same thing applies to people of African descent.

    2nd changing the euphemism frequently has the added function of revealing who is Woke and not Woke. If I say " I have a colored lady who cleans my house" that reveals me as being seriously unwoke. But if I say, my personal assistant is a woman of color, then I'm OK.
  199. @Wilkey
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they've targeted. Shouldn't all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with "anti-discrimination laws" is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    Harvard takes federal money. If you take federal money, you have to agree to abide by federal policies. You may or may not like that, but it is the law. Harvard knew this when they took the money.

    The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money

    That may be true, but it was Harvard’s decision to go this route, and as a private institution, that was their decision to make.

    Indeed, since Harvardians disproportionately form federal policy, you could argue that Harvard was on both sides of this one.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Federal policy is to discriminate against Whites and has been for 50 years. It’s calkes affirmative action

    Any college or any entity that takes federal money must discriminate against Whites. That’s the law
    , @bomag

    Harvard takes federal money. If you take federal money, you have to agree to abide by federal policies.
     
    I wouldn't be so quick to embrace this argument. These should be considered self-contained transactions: the fed pays money for defined goods and services, and that's it. Such transactions don't necessarily obligate one to follow a larger set of policies. Even if it is written into federal grants, it doesn't necessarily generate an obligation.

    The local Leftists want me to hire and support a wide "diversity" of people, 'cause that is federal policy, and I use roads funded by federal dollars, so I'm on the hook to follow all fed policies by their logic. I tell them I pay tax money for roads, and that's where the obligation ends. If they want me to hire one each of LGBTXYZ, then they will have to get that written into a separate statute that applies to everyone, regardless of federal money usage.

  200. @TangoMan
    I was going to jump in and comment but decided it would be prudent to first read the comments and I see that My. Ron Unz already made my point, drats.

    Harvard could easily game this new system, simply by mounting an effort to boost White applicants - expand the denominator and the sheer scale of the White population will swamp the Asian gain. This only works for Whites, there simply aren't enough qualified Blacks in America (only 240 or so Blacks score at the median SAT level of Ivy admitted students, that's in the entire country.)

    As payback for this lawsuit, they could drive Asian admission rates very low, they simply need to go out and solicit the applications of smart White kids who would never think of going to Harvard, especially after they've been told that membership in the 4-H Club or Boy Scouts is the kiss of death for a shot at Harvard.

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.

    Iowa farmer, Wyoming ranchers, no. The bulk of qualified white students who don’t apply to the Ivies come from the UMC suburbs all across America. Their parents know they’ll be asked to pay 70k a year for their kid to be taught Marxism and feminism, if they can even get in. It’s just not worth it.

  201. @The Grinch
    Well, Harvard occupies (or seems to occupy) a great deal of bogeyman status, whether plus or minus, in the general American consciousness. Just look at this thread. Harvard would appear to play some weird Jungian role that say Columbia or Dartmouth or Stanford or Amherst, all top-notch schools, don't seem to occupy. (I chose my counter examples for a reason -- I went to Harvard, and didn't even consider those other schools, despite being shit-ass broke when I applied.)

    Some of the comments here have been perceptive; some are downright spot-on, and some live two doors down from H.P. Lovecraft.

    What you're missing is that Harvard does not exist on a continuum which includes Brown and Yale and Penn on one end, and Oxford and the Secret Moon Colonies on another. Harvard is its own weird special monster, with its own weird special (quite possibly monstrous) mission in the American fabric. It's a lot more complicated than this to be sure, but to be as Crayola as possible for brevity's sake: There are elites, and there are weirdos. Harvard looks for elite weirdos. Or maybe weirdo elites. Which is why a superabundance of status-seeking Asians and power-seeking Jews embedded in Harvard will always be bad for the country. Weirdo elites serve bizarre subterranean purposes for the nation which can be hard to understand if you don't know the secret handshake (kidding, for you paranoids).

    I'm pretty sure Steve's readership contains a fair number of the kinds of people who memorized all the cartoons on (somebody's) column at Tommy's Lunch back in the day. It might be enlightening to host a thread of just us weirdos, to talk about what this all might signify, within itself. Recall what Hannibal Lecter quoted Marcus Aurelius as saying.

    Or, it might be equally enlightening to just throw us all into a Venusian Fire-Cavern, and set water to it. Who are we to judge? (Well actually we DO judge, that's the purpose of the exercise; maybe I'm just running a li'l Hundred Flowers scam on y'all.)

    Aren’t there rules here about posting under the influence?

  202. @Lot
    Unz's Meritocracy article is sloppy trash, so there's no way to answer your question about when a non-existant state of affairs will end.

    Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust.

    Refute it then.

    • Replies: @Lot
    It's been done, Google it if you care.
  203. @Steve Sailer
    Harvard has long had a bias for Wyoming students. Harvard likes to boast that all 50 states are represented in each freshman class, which give applicants from remote small states an advantage.

    Heavens Gate, for example

  204. @Steve Sailer
    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.

    It seems obviously true and I think is at minimum a corollary of mismatch theory.

    From a review essay on mismatch: http://www.oregonscholars.org/wp-content/uploads/MismatchEffects.pdf

    The minority students given preferences at Harvard and Yale law schools, Summers wrote, would meet the normal admissions standards at Illinois, Rutgers, or Texas. Similarly, minority students given preferences at Pennsylvania would meet normal standards at Pittsburgh; those given preference at Duke would meet normal standards at North Carolina; and those given preference at Vanderbilt would meet normal standards at Kentucky, Mississippi and West Virginia….In sum, the policy of preferential admissions have a pervasive shifting effect, causing large numbers of minority students to attend law schools whose normal admissions standards they do not meet, instead of attending other law schools whose normal standards they do meet.2

    Where reference 2 is (note the date!)
    Clyde Summers, “Preferential Admissions: An Unreal Solution to a Real Problem,” University of Toledo Law Review 2 (1970): 384.

    But does anyone reputable talk about this in the Current Year? Does Thomas Sowell bring this up? In this 2015 article he focuses on the failure of those admitted over their heads, but not the knock-on effects you describe: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/15/attacking-the-truth

    The empirical question would be how the various racial gaps change along the food chain (say measuring by the SAT) and how that relates to the differences in general and admitted populations for each race in various colleges. Sounds too toxic to address, but has anyone done so?

    I’m not sure my math intuition is right on this, but wouldn’t the end result of population proportional admission just be the “standard” gap being reproduced down the food chain? (i.e. not an increasing gap at the bottom) Visualize progressively sampling the right tails of offset Bell curves.

    But it also means that every URM (except the very far right tail which can compete with the best) is mismatched down the food chain. This is admittedly an approximation (individuals can choose to go to colleges more fitting their abilities, but that would just increase the mismatch for others if admission is population proportional), but the effects on morale must be pernicious.

    P.S. I think there are interesting implications concerning gaps down the food chain when admissions are not population proportional (think Whites, Jews, Asians), but I have not thought that through yet. Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people’s perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The way this plays out in law schools is that by the time you get to the lower end law schools, most of the blacks who are admitted are manifestly unqualified and some huge % never finish law school or if they do finish, never pass the bar exam.

    It's not really that tragic that the black law students at Harvard really should have gone to Rutgers. Yes this means that they are going to end up at the bottom of the class at Harvard but most are bright enough to actually get through and pass the bar exam. It's very wounding to their egos but at the end they have a Harvard diploma which (especially for someone black) is a lifetime ticket to all sorts of opportunities and a better credential than a Rutgers degree.

    But, at the other end it IS tragic - there are law students who are wasting 3 years of their life and taking on student loan debt and it's a total waste of time and money for them.
    , @Desiderius
    Yet another Progressive (sic) policy that if analyzed by the proverbial visitor from Mars sure looks like it was designed to hose blacks.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people’s perceptions of relative racial abilities.
     
    Not to mention closer scrutiny of the motives of the "smart groups" at the top schools.
  205. I think we need to look at both who is being admitted and who isn’t at the same time. Harvard is obviously curtailing Asian admissions as much as they dare.

    At the same time, they’re all for admitting various minorities that aren’t intellectually threatening — Hispanics, and more definitely, blacks. There’s a definite hypocrisy here. Blacks and Hispanics are being admitted precisely because the (largely Jewish) elite doesn’t fear their competition. When it comes to a truly deserving population of applicants, who would almost certainly put being let into the ranks of privilege to very good use, they’re not about to do it.

    Looking at it all functionally, there’s definitely an established elite here that is manipulating the admissions so that as much of their potential competition as possible is excluded. They’ve got their slots — and they fill the rest with mediocrities who will never challenge their dominance.

    Sometimes, it’s illuminating to look past the rhetoric to see what is actually happening. After all, if I can arrange the fish and game laws so that nobody but me is allowed to catch salmon on the Umpqua, well, that’s good for the salmon — but it’s also pretty handy for me. One can suspect my motives.

    • Replies: @anon
    Even in terms of Asian admission, I would like to see the male/female breakdown. I suspect far greater number of Asian females are accepted compared to the males, for several reasons:
    1) they are more interested in humanities than asian males thereby debunking the Asian STEM nerd stereotype
    2) the Jewish males on campus need someone to date since the Jewish females on campus are probably too busy dating black males
    3) they are less of a threat academically than asian males, so Jewish males can keep their GPAs high enough for law, medical or MBA schools

    My kid tells me in every math class he's ever been in since middle school, the top student is always an (East) Asian male. The same with every piano competition he's ever been to, the best players are always the Asian males. So net-net they are probably the most discriminated group, on par with unhooked middle class white males who don't excel in sports. I count being Jewish as a hook.

  206. Harvard has almost 40 billion dollars in its endowment loot pile.

    Harvard Hates America.

    White Core American Patriots must tax the Hell out of Harvard’s hedge fund and take the loot to provision the troops in the White Core American Army.

    Plenty of New England people of English ancestry who are not members of the WASP/JEW ruling class would love to join combat arms with the military that liquidates Harvard. Of course, they are going to want to get some of the loot for their troubles. That seems reasonable and profitable.

    Harvard is now an Organized Criminal Syndicate with a hedge fund attached that is dedicated to destroying the Unites States as a sovereign nation. Harvard is pushing nation-wrecking mass immigration and sovereignty-sapping globalization.

    Unz says The Review is far left and far right? Unz Review is radical, but so were the Founding Fathers of the United States!

    • Replies: @anon
    Hear hear! Harvard is the world's foremost producer of shysters, thieves and swindlers who will shamelessly tell you they deserve to take all your money and rule over you because they are your betters. As Alan Dershowitz tells us, it's called chutzpah.
  207. @Almost Missouri
    Harvard takes federal money. If you take federal money, you have to agree to abide by federal policies. You may or may not like that, but it is the law. Harvard knew this when they took the money.

    The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money
     
    That may be true, but it was Harvard's decision to go this route, and as a private institution, that was their decision to make.

    Indeed, since Harvardians disproportionately form federal policy, you could argue that Harvard was on both sides of this one.

    Federal policy is to discriminate against Whites and has been for 50 years. It’s calkes affirmative action

    Any college or any entity that takes federal money must discriminate against Whites. That’s the law

  208. @Tyrion 2

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.
     
    It is the antithesis of Nozick's patterns of justice argument, taken to the absolutely nth degree.

    Your behaviour, no matter how complex the situation from which it derives, must fit their template, no matter how often they change it or how ludicrously abstract its reasoning is.

    It is totalitarian. Everything must bend to fit their ideology, or be broken up completely.

    Or as Thomas Sowell said "Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good."

    Of course what allows this to flourish is that it doesn't quite fit the mould of what came before. The oppression is always done in the name of "fighting oppression" and it is mostly passive aggressive, soft, rather than aggressive and self-acknowledging.

    Whether how the totalitarian impulse has changed is because our society has changed or because the change in the totalitarian impulse has changed our society, I'll leave on the shelf.

    Nonetheless, it is an all encompassing ideology and one that seeks to rewrite our lives regardless of whether it works or we want it or it makes us miserable or not.

    Now the BBC is promoting Hollywood actresses for banning their daughters from watching Snow White. Snow White may be a beautiful, lovely film that speaks to the human condition and is important in our culture and our memories but it does not fit "2018" feminist norms, so it has to go.

    This is the first step. "Look, successful people ban their children from watching this show". Next, "we shouldn't show it in schools". Then "remove it from the TV schedules" and so on and so on. Eventually, it will get rewritten, remade and replaced. Passive aggressive totalitarianism

    Naturally, once remade, it will need to be fixed again as the totalitarian power of the ideology is as much an attraction as the euphemisms it is sold with. Hence Negro - coloured person - black - African American - person of colour. What next? There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.

    What's particularly interesting is that it is all accelerating, even as it becomes ever more incongruent with our lives and our humanity. There are ever more discrete and prescribed identities created. There are ever more areas of life that get administered. These are actually much the same thing. Commodification, to some extent, is too.

    We seem to be at the point where it is pulling itself apart, but we've thought this before and we are also at the point where it seems it is either the ideology which goes, or our entire societies. Perhaps that's why we'll pull back, or perhaps this time we won't. This is why many people feel such an existential despair at the way things are going. So much is lost and for such stupid reasons. But as we pull back, the totalitarians double down and it is clearly straining American society.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45900794

    Or as Thomas Sowell said “Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good.”

    That is such a good quote it needs a citation: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell#Is_Reality_Optional?_(1993)

    They render it as:

    Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area – crime, education, housing, race relations – the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them.

    Devastating.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    That is such a good quote it needs a citation:
     
    Is Reality Optional? may be the greatest book title of the 20th century, at least in its field. Or fields-- Sowell had quite a range.
  209. @res

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.
     
    It seems obviously true and I think is at minimum a corollary of mismatch theory.

    From a review essay on mismatch: http://www.oregonscholars.org/wp-content/uploads/MismatchEffects.pdf


    The minority students given preferences at Harvard and Yale law schools, Summers wrote, would meet the normal admissions standards at Illinois, Rutgers, or Texas. Similarly, minority students given preferences at Pennsylvania would meet normal standards at Pittsburgh; those given preference at Duke would meet normal standards at North Carolina; and those given preference at Vanderbilt would meet normal standards at Kentucky, Mississippi and West Virginia….In sum, the policy of preferential admissions have a pervasive shifting effect, causing large numbers of minority students to attend law schools whose normal admissions standards they do not meet, instead of attending other law schools whose normal standards they do meet.2
     
    Where reference 2 is (note the date!)
    Clyde Summers, “Preferential Admissions: An Unreal Solution to a Real Problem,” University of Toledo Law Review 2 (1970): 384.

    But does anyone reputable talk about this in the Current Year? Does Thomas Sowell bring this up? In this 2015 article he focuses on the failure of those admitted over their heads, but not the knock-on effects you describe: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/15/attacking-the-truth

    The empirical question would be how the various racial gaps change along the food chain (say measuring by the SAT) and how that relates to the differences in general and admitted populations for each race in various colleges. Sounds too toxic to address, but has anyone done so?

    I'm not sure my math intuition is right on this, but wouldn't the end result of population proportional admission just be the "standard" gap being reproduced down the food chain? (i.e. not an increasing gap at the bottom) Visualize progressively sampling the right tails of offset Bell curves.

    But it also means that every URM (except the very far right tail which can compete with the best) is mismatched down the food chain. This is admittedly an approximation (individuals can choose to go to colleges more fitting their abilities, but that would just increase the mismatch for others if admission is population proportional), but the effects on morale must be pernicious.

    P.S. I think there are interesting implications concerning gaps down the food chain when admissions are not population proportional (think Whites, Jews, Asians), but I have not thought that through yet. Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people's perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    The way this plays out in law schools is that by the time you get to the lower end law schools, most of the blacks who are admitted are manifestly unqualified and some huge % never finish law school or if they do finish, never pass the bar exam.

    It’s not really that tragic that the black law students at Harvard really should have gone to Rutgers. Yes this means that they are going to end up at the bottom of the class at Harvard but most are bright enough to actually get through and pass the bar exam. It’s very wounding to their egos but at the end they have a Harvard diploma which (especially for someone black) is a lifetime ticket to all sorts of opportunities and a better credential than a Rutgers degree.

    But, at the other end it IS tragic – there are law students who are wasting 3 years of their life and taking on student loan debt and it’s a total waste of time and money for them.

  210. @res

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.
     
    It seems obviously true and I think is at minimum a corollary of mismatch theory.

    From a review essay on mismatch: http://www.oregonscholars.org/wp-content/uploads/MismatchEffects.pdf


    The minority students given preferences at Harvard and Yale law schools, Summers wrote, would meet the normal admissions standards at Illinois, Rutgers, or Texas. Similarly, minority students given preferences at Pennsylvania would meet normal standards at Pittsburgh; those given preference at Duke would meet normal standards at North Carolina; and those given preference at Vanderbilt would meet normal standards at Kentucky, Mississippi and West Virginia….In sum, the policy of preferential admissions have a pervasive shifting effect, causing large numbers of minority students to attend law schools whose normal admissions standards they do not meet, instead of attending other law schools whose normal standards they do meet.2
     
    Where reference 2 is (note the date!)
    Clyde Summers, “Preferential Admissions: An Unreal Solution to a Real Problem,” University of Toledo Law Review 2 (1970): 384.

    But does anyone reputable talk about this in the Current Year? Does Thomas Sowell bring this up? In this 2015 article he focuses on the failure of those admitted over their heads, but not the knock-on effects you describe: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/15/attacking-the-truth

    The empirical question would be how the various racial gaps change along the food chain (say measuring by the SAT) and how that relates to the differences in general and admitted populations for each race in various colleges. Sounds too toxic to address, but has anyone done so?

    I'm not sure my math intuition is right on this, but wouldn't the end result of population proportional admission just be the "standard" gap being reproduced down the food chain? (i.e. not an increasing gap at the bottom) Visualize progressively sampling the right tails of offset Bell curves.

    But it also means that every URM (except the very far right tail which can compete with the best) is mismatched down the food chain. This is admittedly an approximation (individuals can choose to go to colleges more fitting their abilities, but that would just increase the mismatch for others if admission is population proportional), but the effects on morale must be pernicious.

    P.S. I think there are interesting implications concerning gaps down the food chain when admissions are not population proportional (think Whites, Jews, Asians), but I have not thought that through yet. Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people's perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    Yet another Progressive (sic) policy that if analyzed by the proverbial visitor from Mars sure looks like it was designed to hose blacks.

  211. @D. K.
    I would love to see the figures recalculated, after disaggregating that formerly rising ethnicity from the White category (and any other category in which its members might fall).

    Exactly…And since GPAs are meaningless at Harvard’s level, and can be manipulated, how about looking only at SAT scores?

    • Replies: @anon
    GPA is not entirely meaningless if you combine it with difficulty of classes like AP classes. Getting an A in an AP class still means something, especially if you also score a 5 on the test.
  212. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wilkey
    "I’m surprised that Harvard has let the black share get so high"

    Are these black students or "black" students? How many of them are black like Ben Jealous or Rachel Dolezal? If a pasty white applicant such as myself bothered to identify as black would Harvard challege my assertion? *Could* they challenge my assertion? Or would they leave it so they could claim yet another NAM on their rolls? I mean it doesn't seem that they ever challenged Elizabeth Warren's assertion that she is Native American.

    In my experience neither colleges or employers care. All they want is to be able to satisfy the EEOC and the state city and county affirmative action enforcers

    It’s especially advantageous for a White woman. When HR sees a White woman who checked the black box they are happy to hire her

    It means they can satisfy the affirmative action enforcers. But they aren’t adding another incompetent rude surly aggressive always looking for a fight 2 hours of work 6 hours of trouble making black woman to the work force.
    Win win

    Once black women reach 15 percent a work place becomes like a ghetto high school.

  213. @theMann
    Ah, the single most snoozational novel of one of the most snoozational writers in human history.


    It is thinly veiled autobiography, btw.

    Remember Nabokov! They guy who managed to make a novel about jailbait pursuit a titanic bore! Truly a write of Herculean...... indifference.

    Wrong. A writer of such exquisite prose every sentence is to be treasured. There’s something wrong with you.

  214. @Wilkey
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they've targeted. Shouldn't all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with "anti-discrimination laws" is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    Wrong. Harvard takes vast amounts of Federal money (which it could do without given Harvard’s vast wealth) and therefore must abide by anti-discrimination laws….Ironically, Harvard’s virtue signaling faculty is in the forefront of imposing such social engineering on the rest of us.

  215. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wilkey
    Which subsists to some extent on public money, unfortunately

    Harvard is a non-profit and perhaps technically a charity. Charities discriminate all the time. There are plenty of charities devoted to helping specific groups of people (United Negro College Fund, etc) and there is many a *non-charity* publicly-traded corporation which contribute money to these discriminatory charities. Some charities (e.g., the Susan G Komen Foundation) may not openly discriminate but do so simply because of the issue they've targeted. Shouldn't all those foundations and charities be sued for discrimination?

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with "anti-discrimination laws" is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.

    Harvard students take out student loans guaranteed by the federal government Harvard gets millions of dollars a year in federal grants for research purposes.

    Because if this federal money, Harvard must discriminate against Whites. That’s the law. Take a dollar of federal money and the laws of affirmative action are enforced.

    • Replies: @anon
    It's beyond the loans. Harvard takes close to $1 billion in direct federal funding each year for various research projects.
  216. @Tyrion 2

    Harvard is not a public good. It is a private entity that can help who it wants. The problem with “anti-discrimination laws” is that they essentially turn private money into public money, and allow the government to question or punish almost every decision made by a private person or entity.
     
    It is the antithesis of Nozick's patterns of justice argument, taken to the absolutely nth degree.

    Your behaviour, no matter how complex the situation from which it derives, must fit their template, no matter how often they change it or how ludicrously abstract its reasoning is.

    It is totalitarian. Everything must bend to fit their ideology, or be broken up completely.

    Or as Thomas Sowell said "Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good."

    Of course what allows this to flourish is that it doesn't quite fit the mould of what came before. The oppression is always done in the name of "fighting oppression" and it is mostly passive aggressive, soft, rather than aggressive and self-acknowledging.

    Whether how the totalitarian impulse has changed is because our society has changed or because the change in the totalitarian impulse has changed our society, I'll leave on the shelf.

    Nonetheless, it is an all encompassing ideology and one that seeks to rewrite our lives regardless of whether it works or we want it or it makes us miserable or not.

    Now the BBC is promoting Hollywood actresses for banning their daughters from watching Snow White. Snow White may be a beautiful, lovely film that speaks to the human condition and is important in our culture and our memories but it does not fit "2018" feminist norms, so it has to go.

    This is the first step. "Look, successful people ban their children from watching this show". Next, "we shouldn't show it in schools". Then "remove it from the TV schedules" and so on and so on. Eventually, it will get rewritten, remade and replaced. Passive aggressive totalitarianism

    Naturally, once remade, it will need to be fixed again as the totalitarian power of the ideology is as much an attraction as the euphemisms it is sold with. Hence Negro - coloured person - black - African American - person of colour. What next? There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.

    What's particularly interesting is that it is all accelerating, even as it becomes ever more incongruent with our lives and our humanity. There are ever more discrete and prescribed identities created. There are ever more areas of life that get administered. These are actually much the same thing. Commodification, to some extent, is too.

    We seem to be at the point where it is pulling itself apart, but we've thought this before and we are also at the point where it seems it is either the ideology which goes, or our entire societies. Perhaps that's why we'll pull back, or perhaps this time we won't. This is why many people feel such an existential despair at the way things are going. So much is lost and for such stupid reasons. But as we pull back, the totalitarians double down and it is clearly straining American society.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45900794

    There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.

    It’s not for fun. First of all , any word that describes a group with negative characteristics will start out as mere descriptive but eventually becomes an epithet and you will have to invent a new word to describe the group or else people will think that you are calling them by an epithet ( the “n-word” being the most famous example). The original word for someone who was mentally slow was “fool” but it became impolite to call them that so other “more scientific” words were developed (idiot, moron, retard, etc.) but each one in succession became an epithet and they had to come up with a new euphemism. The same thing applies to people of African descent.

    2nd changing the euphemism frequently has the added function of revealing who is Woke and not Woke. If I say ” I have a colored lady who cleans my house” that reveals me as being seriously unwoke. But if I say, my personal assistant is a woman of color, then I’m OK.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Gay is interesting. They decided homo and queer were pejoratives. Gay became the preferred term. Then they decided gay was also derogatory. For years there were TV ads informing grade school children that gay is a hurtful derogatory term.

    Lesbians have stuck with the same term for thousands of years. Good for them
    , @James N. Kennett

    each one in succession became an epithet and they had to come up with a new euphemism
     
    A.k.a. the "euphemism treadmill".
  217. @Jefferson
    What is the Blackest Non HBCU university in The U.S?

    Chicago State University

  218. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Luke Lea
    Affirmative action for all or affirmative action for none. There is no middle ground. Once you start tinkering with the principle of equality under the law it is hard to know where to stop. My preference is that the Harvard student body reflect the racial, ethnic, and geographical diversity of America. We need cultural elites that are representative of the American people as a whole. Right now European-Americans of Protestant descent living in the South and Midwest are the most underrepresented (and largest?) ethnic group in America. How bad it is I don't know exactly. Maybe somebody can figure it out.

    Consider that most of the Presidents judges senators and congressmen who lobbied for and passed the affirmative action law of 1968 and adjudicated just 2 law suits Griggs and Kaiser who created and enforced affirmative action were White Protestants

    Celler Javits Kennedy and the unspeakable Brennan and a few others weren’t Protestants but most were Protestants.

    The single person most responsible for affirmative action was a Protestant, Richard Nixon. He created the affirmative action Hispanic race in 197o by executive order. It was his EEOC that turned don’t discriminate against blacks to shall discriminate against Whites.

    Under Regean, the federal government eliminated the PACE exam for federal job applicants who had college degrees. It wasn’t an aptitude test. It was a simple test of 10th grade literacy reading comprehension and numeracy

    Blacks with BAs MAs and PHDs failed that test in such numbers the test was eliminated by Regean. Result is all those federal blacks making $150,000 a year
    Regean gave amnesty to millions of non White illegals thus setting the precedent for more amnesty

    I don’t know how many Protestants were on the Supreme Court in the Griggs case. I know Brennan, May he burn in hell forever and ever was a catholic. If you’re interested you can look up the religions of the SC justices in 1973.

    Affirmative action was a liberal action against Whites. Given the make up of the senate congress courts and presidents one could also say it was a White Protestant operation against Whites.

    • Replies: @Andrew
    Disclaimer:

    "Affirmative action was a liberal action against Whites. Given the make up of the senate congress courts and presidents one could also say it was a White Protestant operation against Whites."
     
    Well of course. Get an Ivy League directory and count the number of surnames of German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Ukrainian, Hungarian, etc. origin - i.e. Central European Catholics. 25% of the US population over 35% of the white population. Probably less than 10% of the white population at the Ivies, which means well under 5% of the total admitted class.
  219. @Ben Kurtz
    Ironically enough, J. Robert Oppenheimer, the lead scientist, was a Jewish Harvard man, but most of the other prominent nuclear physicists in the Manhattan Project -- Jew and Gentile -- had European training. Names like Teller, Rabi and Szilard come to mind (all central European Jews) as well as Stanislaw Ulam and Enrico Fermi (Catholics) -- all of them trained more or less entirely in Europe.

    as well as Stanislaw Ulam and Enrico Fermi (Catholics)

    Ulam was Jewish

  220. It’s hardly surprising that this sort of comment-thread attracts so many die-hard “Leo Frank partisans”…

    • LOL: Tyrion 2
  221. @Lot
    There's nothing wrong with Harvard's legacy system. Even if there were, it is a private institution in a free country.

    The values behind the "civil rights" lawsuit against Harvard are the same Marxist values that demand heterosexuals be open to dating trannies.

    Dude, this is why Alinsky said “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Harvard and its accomplices have been pissing all over ‘live and let live’ society for half a century. Fighting with one hand tied behind your back is not a winning strategy. As the Good Book says עם עקש תתפתל

    • Replies: @Fred Boynton
    Lot and Alinsky and most of Harvard are members of the same tribe.
    , @Lot
    I don't agree Harvard is "the enemy" the way Oberlin is. More like "disputed grounds." They employ Pinker. James Lee studied there under Pinker and is now doing IQ GWAS stuff. Scalia sent his kids there. Is Harvard Business School and Mass General "the enemy" too?

    There is still a large apolitical, centrist, and conservative minority there, and they still uphold many traditional values, from athletic competition between smart young people to admission by g-loaded exam.

    I fear in the off chance the suit is successful that elite colleges start moving away from universal standardized testing. They sure aren't going to do want the plaintiffs demand and have a 60-1 Asian/black ratio.
  222. @Ron Unz

    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using “Jewish sounding” surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis.
     
    No, that's incorrect. If you'll bother reading my long article and some of the associated follow-up columns, you'll find it's *extremely* accurate.

    For example, there are a subset of exceptionally indicative Jewish names such as Goldstein, Silverberg, Cohen, Kaplan, etc., and these can be used to perform Weyl analysis on large datasets in order to validate the results from the looser "Jewish sounding" method. In all cases, the results were virtually identical, confirming my analysis.

    Also, some fanatic Jewish-activist type who ferociously attacked me had previously published a peer-reviewed article on the exact Jewish ethnicity distribution of the International Math Olympiad participants based on weeks of in-depth research and interviews. As it happened, the 5 minutes I'd spent eye-balling those lists for Jewish-sounding names for my own article had produced virtually identical results.

    On Jewish names and literary talents from Now and Forever — A Conversation with Israel Zangwill by Samuel Roth (1925)

    Zangwill–Why this sudden self-conscious modesty? The Jews have certainly contributed their ample share towards the upbuilding of America.

    Roth–Industrially, yes. I am thinking this moment how little we have done in America for the arts–particularly for the art of poetry in which I can judge with more assurance.

    Zangwill–That is strange, for in every European country Jews are foremost among the leaders in all the arts.

    Roth–It is not strange at all. Jewish literary talent in America has been exhausted in the effort to disguise the name Cohen of which you may find in the New York Telephone Directory no less than twenty-four variations: Cohen, Cohn, Cone, Cunn, Curie, Coan, Coon, Cohene, Cane, Kohn, Kohne, Kohen, Kohene, Kuhn, Kuhne, Kun, Kunn, Koen, Konn, Coone, Cahn, Kone, Kann, and Kahn.

  223. @Anon
    Into which majors are most blacks admitted to?

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it's all about power, not justice or truth.

    The law, once a noble WASP profession, has been severely injured by the foreign influence of the [special people], and to a lesser extent big city political machine Irish, beginning in the early 20gh century.

    But law is still important, and there really are lots of WASPs (and others) fighting the good fight against the shysters. The right needs lawyers.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Other than the Rutherford legal foundation and Pacific legal Foundation there are no pro White legal organizations around. They’re not really pro White, just conservative pro capitalist.

    Lawyers are products of college and law school 7 years of liberal brainwashing. As civil plaintiff and defendant I’be hired attorneys all my life. They’re all liberals. I only hire White male lawyers. Everyone has been a liberal.

    I told my current guy that of the 20 or so who responded to my Findlaw query I picked him because he’s a White man. I didn’t tell him that till we’d worjed together for 6 years and made a lot of money.
    When I did tell him he was somewhat upset by my racism. He went to UCLA all the way. His wife went to Berkeley. His 4 kids ended up at Fresno state the low level one in LA.

    But like all other liberal Whites, he doesn’t connect affirmative action with the discrimination his kids suffered

    I’m sure there are a few conservative attorneys around and organizations like the federalist society. But are they pro White? I don’t know.

    The ABA, the big professional organization to which most attorneys belong was taken over by left wing anti White radicals a long time ago when the first women cohort joined. Most of the women who went to law school. 1950 to 1970 were anti White ultra liberals
    They became active in the ABA and soon imposed a leftist agenda. ABA is now so left republican presidents don’t accept ABA recommendations for judicial appointments

    At one time an ABA recommendation ensured a judicial appointment.

    ABA is like most organizations. Most members are passive. Others want to run it and spend the time and do the work. That’s why the teachers organizations are so liberal. Liberals became active and took over.

    The legal profession is very necessary. But like the teachers Silicon Valley tech industry colleges and everything else it’s been taken over by anti White liberals



    Where do you think all those radical anti White judges come from? They come from the law schools and the ranks of lawyers. The profession is full of radicals and the rest have to make a living and don’t rock the boat
  224. @Stolen Valor Detective

    No it doesn’t. It rewards the family’s merit. That’s an important pillar in any civilization
     
    It rewards one individual directly for the merit of another. I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them, but in the US at least such practices have long been viewed as undesirable. Hence the prohibition of hereditary titles written into the Constitution:

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

    Exactly how much “merit” do 18-year-olds merit? There is no merit at all in passing the Mensa entrance test. It’s just genetic Lotto. (This is an HBD site, you know.)
     
    I agree that there is a profoundly important moral sense in which it's "luck all the way down," but I think we're defining "merit" differently here.

    I meant "meritorious" there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society. Not in the sense of being morally superior as the result of "free willed" decisions.

    That is to say, I agree that you ultimately have as little moral responsibility for the fact that you have a high IQ---or are a hard worker----as you do for having well-connected parents. But the former two things allow you to create value, while the latter thing often only allows you to appropriate the value that others have created.

    I suppose insofar as most civilizations contain a great deal of parasitism, corruption and nepotism, such rewards are indeed an important pillar of them…

    I’m saying don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. What you describe is not washing the baby at all.

    I meant “meritorious” there in the sense of possessing competence/ability/intelligence that allows you to accomplish difficult things that benefit society.

    Competence, ability, and/or intelligence (what is it with all this slashese these days?) are only part of the mix. Faith, loyalty, ethics, and others are also critical. Remember, all the Ivies save baby Cornell (younger than its namesake in Iowa) were founded to train ministers, and then branched out to produce leaders in general.

    Leadership is far more than brains. The history of the Vietnam debacle was titled The Best and the Brightest. That comes from a Shelley poem which drew on a contemporary Anglican hymn, “Brightest and Best”. Which tells us:

    Vainly we offer each ample oblation,
    Vainly with gifts would His favor secure;
    Richer by far is the heart’s adoration,
    Dearer to God are the prayers of the poor.

    For further reference, cf. the Clinton Adminstration.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  225. @Reg Cæsar
    Pnin?

    Twitter allows users to adopt fictional character names?


    https://www.raptisrarebooks.com/images/64148/pnin-vladimir-nabokov-first-edition-rare.jpg

    Ahhh, it all makes sense now, I bet Nabokov’s novel Pnin is where Anfernee Hardaway‘s no doubt well-read mother got the inspiration for Anfernee’s name.

  226. @Anon
    When I was copying the clerks lists of all the names of attorneys on the anti White side of the affirmative action and school bussing law suits I only counted obviously Jewish names as Jewish.

    I didn’t count names like Kaufman Becker Lowenstein Schwartz and many other could be Jewish could be German names ; even though I doubt many German descent attorneys threw themselves into anti White litigation the way Jewish attorneys have for the last 90 years

    Even so, the list read like a 1950 Brooklyn Erasmus high year book Roth Rothsein Brill Brillstein Abrams Bergs Steins Roses Golds and Silvers in various combinations Fishman Zuckers and Zuckerbergs Eisenbergs and Eisenstein Katz Weiner Weinberger Weinstein

    2 of the most evil Jews of the 20th century have French names, Boudin.
    Father Leonard attorney and activist for the communist party and the porn industry. He convinced a court that live shows of fisting was free speech His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery

    His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery

    A black police officer, no less. She went to prison. (Though not for murder. She drove the getaway car.)

    She sent her son Chesa to Hyde Park in Chicago to be cared for by friends Bill and Bernardine. It was in Chesa’s living room that one Barry Obama announced his entry into political life.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Didn’t know he was black. That son of hers got a Rhodes scholarship because he was the son of weather underground mom and black panther dad

    That demonstrates who the elite favors.

    All the old radicals have resurrected the movement . Sometimes it feels like 1968 again. Someone wanted me to read an article about how horrible the schools are in some towns in Wisconsin. I remember bringing the newspaper in when I was 10. There were often headlines about black schools.

    What the article didn’t say was that those towns in Wisconsin with the 75 IQ violent kids and aggressive bullying mothers are the towns that were colonized by Chicago ghetto blacks to take advantage of Wisconsin’s more generous welfare.

    Those were the same arguments used to ram thru school de segregation and bussing 60 years ago.

    It’s like the year seasons and holidays It’s an endless repeating cycle of the same old thing.
  227. Whites make up 70% of national Merit Scholars, but only 20% at Harvard and the elites.

    Jews should not be counted as white as they are the most over-represented group of all, far beyond what their test scores merit.

    • Replies: @res

    Whites make up 70% of national Merit Scholars, but only 20% at Harvard and the elites.
     
    Do you have a reference for that? AFAICT the National Merit Scholarship program does not publish racial breakdowns. For example, from https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/education/edlife/guidancecounselor22.html

    The National Merit Scholarship Corporation does not provide the racial breakdown of scholars...
     
    One problem with using National Merit Semifinalists as a metric is that the cutoff scores vary by state (top 0.5% by state) (Commended, ~96% or top 50,000 nationally) might be a better metric because of a uniform national threshold). An additional problem with Finalists and Scholars is they also use non-test criteria--who knows how heavy the thumbs on the scale are there?

    More details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program
  228. @Anon
    Into which majors are most blacks admitted to?

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter. Yes, law matters a lot, but legal minds are either such crooks, charlatans, or ideologues that it's all about power, not justice or truth.

    In the end, only hard sciences, math, medicine, and finance matter.

    You under estimate the power of politics to determine the success of hard science talent. At best, political power considers competent real world talent to be tax mules.

    • Replies: @Anon
    I agree. In the end in this country only politics the law and judges matter.
  229. @res

    Is Harvard vacuuming up a high percentage of all the black high achievers in the country? That would have knock-on effects down the food chain.
     
    It seems obviously true and I think is at minimum a corollary of mismatch theory.

    From a review essay on mismatch: http://www.oregonscholars.org/wp-content/uploads/MismatchEffects.pdf


    The minority students given preferences at Harvard and Yale law schools, Summers wrote, would meet the normal admissions standards at Illinois, Rutgers, or Texas. Similarly, minority students given preferences at Pennsylvania would meet normal standards at Pittsburgh; those given preference at Duke would meet normal standards at North Carolina; and those given preference at Vanderbilt would meet normal standards at Kentucky, Mississippi and West Virginia….In sum, the policy of preferential admissions have a pervasive shifting effect, causing large numbers of minority students to attend law schools whose normal admissions standards they do not meet, instead of attending other law schools whose normal standards they do meet.2
     
    Where reference 2 is (note the date!)
    Clyde Summers, “Preferential Admissions: An Unreal Solution to a Real Problem,” University of Toledo Law Review 2 (1970): 384.

    But does anyone reputable talk about this in the Current Year? Does Thomas Sowell bring this up? In this 2015 article he focuses on the failure of those admitted over their heads, but not the knock-on effects you describe: https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/12/15/attacking-the-truth

    The empirical question would be how the various racial gaps change along the food chain (say measuring by the SAT) and how that relates to the differences in general and admitted populations for each race in various colleges. Sounds too toxic to address, but has anyone done so?

    I'm not sure my math intuition is right on this, but wouldn't the end result of population proportional admission just be the "standard" gap being reproduced down the food chain? (i.e. not an increasing gap at the bottom) Visualize progressively sampling the right tails of offset Bell curves.

    But it also means that every URM (except the very far right tail which can compete with the best) is mismatched down the food chain. This is admittedly an approximation (individuals can choose to go to colleges more fitting their abilities, but that would just increase the mismatch for others if admission is population proportional), but the effects on morale must be pernicious.

    P.S. I think there are interesting implications concerning gaps down the food chain when admissions are not population proportional (think Whites, Jews, Asians), but I have not thought that through yet. Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people's perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    Seems to me the lower level gaps should decrease when top colleges are admitting smart groups above their proportion in the population. Which might have interesting effects on people’s perceptions of relative racial abilities.

    Not to mention closer scrutiny of the motives of the “smart groups” at the top schools.

  230. @Anon
    So far Harvard’s defense basically contradicts itself.

    This is why I lost all respect for the law. Law School is really Lie School.

    Now, I don't mind the various AA policies. What bothers me are the lies around them.

    We need a new field of academics called Truth Studies, an attempt to be objectively true as possible about the world we live in. And this calls for integrity.

    AA for blacks should be justified on the fact that blacks are less intelligent.

    If NBA were to allow AA for non-blacks, the only honest justification would be that it's the ONLY way many non-blacks can hope to play.

    All this 'holistic' nonsense is a**holistic. It's total BS.

    Let Harvard and other colleges keep their AA. But let's have some truth as to why.

    Truth Studies Now. Department of Truth. Every college needs it more than ever.

    It’s not the lawyers or the judge lying in that case though, it’s one of the litigants. Lose respect for Harvard and its expert witness.

  231. @res

    Or as Thomas Sowell said “Social Engineering – The art of replacing what works with what sounds good.”
     
    That is such a good quote it needs a citation: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell#Is_Reality_Optional?_(1993)

    They render it as:

    Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good. In area after area - crime, education, housing, race relations - the situation has gotten worse after the bright new theories were put into operation. The amazing thing is that this history of failure and disaster has neither discouraged the social engineers nor discredited them.
     
    Devastating.

    That is such a good quote it needs a citation:

    Is Reality Optional? may be the greatest book title of the 20th century, at least in its field. Or fields– Sowell had quite a range.

  232. Anon[216] • Disclaimer says:

    If Harvard Had Colorblind Admissions, Its Black Share Would Fall from 15.8% to 0.9%

    Now, show me a person (of any color) who does not know that. Not the exact numbers, but the fact that blacks and Hispanics are represented in the student body of Ivies way above what the merits would warrant. Now, show me a person in MSM bold enough to simply admit this fact. What does this tell us about the society we live in? Nothing good. Do we do anything about it? Nothing comes to mind. What does this tell about us, then?

    • Replies: @Anon
    I wonder about Hispanic numbers being so low.

    A good number of Hispanics are white. Why would they need AA to enter top colleges?


    Is Hispanic culture less intellectual even for white Latinos?

    As for non-white 'Hispanics', they shouldn't be called such. And why should they get AA when they freely moved to the US? At least blacks and Indians have historical gripes.
    , @anonymous
    First off, these numbers vindicate La Griffe du Lion.

    Do POCs really know this hate fact? Seriously asking.

    If the elite colleges and universities are lowering the bar that low for blacks and hispanics then it should be lowered for whites and asians as well. After all, they have considered that lower bar sufficient to be successful at Harvard. The point is to stick it to the elites. They need to eliminate legacies, recruited athletes, director's list. Harvard should be forced to represent the socioeconomic distribution of the US. 1% are 1%, the middle class should be the largest share.
  233. “If Harvard Had Colorblind Admissions, Its Black Share Would Fall from 15.8% to 0.9%” Then blacks and the media will complain that Harvard is racist. and around and around it will go. The more diverse we become, the more and more it will be like this.

  234. People who teach Freshman Comp at Harvard will teach you that Harvard Freshman are just as stupid as the Freshman at your local Community College.

    And little black girls in England are proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be smarter than you.

  235. @Reg Cæsar
    "University of Maryland, University College"? Certainly not Terrapins. That huge number of blacks is only 25% of the school, so its campus (if it has one) wouldn't be all that black.


    "American Public University System"? That's "proprietary", i.e., not public at all, and is mail-order. Its administrative offices are in Charles Town, WV. That is not the state's capital! And its students would rarely if ever meet in person.

    Charles Town is only 13% black. But it is the birthplace of Hamilton Hatter, the founder of West Virginia's HBCU, Bluefield State.

    University College is a subsidiary non-selective (100% accepted) branch of the University of Maryland:

    https://www.collegexpress.com/college/university-of-maryland-university-college/3000133/details/

    It is similar to a community college.

    College Park is the flagship campus (with the Terrapins). It is more selective – only 44% acceptance rate. And its tuition is accordingly 43% higher.

    https://www.collegexpress.com/college/university-of-maryland-college-park/2400206/details/

  236. @Steve Sailer
    Harvard has gotten much better at basketball ever since they increased their financial aid dramatically, which allows them to get around the Ivy League ban on athletic scholarships.

    Yep, Amaker figured out how to game the Academic Index – get the best player you can find who admissions will let in and pair him with the 4.5 GPA kid who will never play a minute but is the son of a major donor. The average GPA of the recruiting class looks great, but only one or two kids in the class ever see the court.

  237. @Jefferson
    "OT Twitter won’t let me have it, but Twitter has confirmed to The Hill that Louis Farrakhan’s tweet “I’m not anti-Semite, I’m anti termite” is not dehumanizing language and will not be censored, nor will it get its tweeter suspended"



    The Left says Louis Farrakhan has a 1st amendment right to be an anti-Semite so he should never be banned from Twitter, the same Left who were glad James Damore, Paula Dean, Hulk Hogan, and Roseanne Barr were fired from their jobs.


    The Left have zero principals which is what makes The Left extremely dangerous.

    Follow-up: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey has said that Twitter’s past assurances of free speech were a “joke.”

    https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/10/18/twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-our-free-speech-motto-was-a-joke/

  238. @Stolen Valor Detective
    So, Harvard would basically become Stuyvesant High School. (Or at least its current incarnation.)

    I might be biased as a Stuyvesant alumnus, but that seems like it would be a positive development to me. It's true that research shows that Asian-Americans, while considerably over-represented relative to their population share in prestigious, well-compensated fields like finance, information technology and medicine, are significantly less likely to be promoted to managerial or executive positions within at least some of those fields than their white colleagues. (https://hbr.org/2018/05/asian-americans-are-the-least-likely-group-in-the-u-s-to-be-promoted-to-management)

    Our friends at Harvard Business School conclude that this shows that companies all across America are all just irrationally cutting into their profit margins by making an already extremely scarce labor supply even smaller by not fully utilizing their Asian employees. (For some reason, companies forget to have this totally irrational and inexplicable bias against Asians during the initial hiring process.)

    I suspect, however, that the administrators above them at Harvard come to a rather different conclusion about why this discrepancy exists, and use that conclusion in determining who is and who isn't admitted to Harvard. Unlike other such conclusions about different ethnic minorities who face employment discrimination, they probably figured that they wouldn't take too much flak from ethnic grievance activists by putting it into practice.

    So, yes, I think it's probably true (though I'm happy to hear countervailing evidence) that a hard-working, high-IQ white guy is more likely to found the proverbial next Microsoft, Facebook or Google than a comparably hard-working and high-IQ Asian guy. This would seem to be a false choice to someone without a stake in the Harvard brand, because surely Harvard could, with its ~$37 billion endowment, afford to admit them both, right? But that would dilute the Harvard brand, which people who currently have a stake in it don't like. Thus, from the standpoint of maximizing the value of the Harvard brand for current Harvard "shareholders" (to use a valuable analogy that Steve often applies), Harvard is probably acting rationally in its admissions process.

    However, personally, I don't think that an institution as important in American national life as Harvard should be guided by a philosophy of maximizing its own value at the expense of everyone else. I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process. In my view, the kind of public-spirited "meritocratic elitism" that many early psychometricians believed in---which is to a considerable extent manifested in New York City's specialized high schools---has much to recommend for it .

    You’d have to be a fool to believe an unaccomplished 5% of the US population deserves 50% of the seats at Harvard or even their current 25%.

    Harvard matriculates the American managerial, political, scientific and legal elite.

    If American born Asians really merit 50% of Ivy League seats, they should show that by producing at least some semblance of accomplishment in these fields, like the Jews did when they were excluded. Being excluded from an educational institution does not exclude you from showing your talent in work and in the economy and academia. Nor did it prevent you from doing so academically in a slightly lower tier university.

    We have had no Asians ever as important cabinet secretaries or Senators. There is just a single American born Asian Nobel winner. There are no important Asian founded banks or law firms. No Asian jurists or economists of any note. Asians are not 50% of top C-suite managers in American corporations or even 25% or even 10%. American born Asians have not founded a plethora of manufacturing and wholesaling firms. They have not founded any important media companies or journals. There are no important Asian publishers. The most accomplished Asian group in all these regards are actually Indians, not the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese.

    Anyone who has been to an elite university with Asians will not recall them being leaders on campus or the classroom.

    Can someone please explain why Asians deserve even 10% of the seats in any university? The measurement by test score or inflated grades is obviously not sufficient to find Asian Americans of actual merit.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Have disloyal WASPs, openly treasonous Jews, white ethnic grifters, mestizo Reconquistadors, Satan-worshipping Mormons, and, under Obama, literal open Muslim Brotherhood members really been doing such a bang-up job lately that a few math wizards would hurt?
    , @Lot
    I'd try to say all this more diplomatically...... but all true.
  239. A couple nights ago I was watching the local KABC Channel 7 news. They did a short piece on a workshop that was being held down in Leimert Park or someplace near there.

    The theme? How to help black high-schoolers break down barriers and roadblocks to attend college.

    I swear I am not making this up. I laughed, cried, and screamed all at the same time.

    To these people, James Meredith was just a week ago.

    Un-f***ing believable.

    • Replies: @Anon
    That community college in Culver City takes anyone over 18, no high school diploma required no tuition for welfare students and the school sends free buses to pick them up to spare the expense and trouble of getting there by themselves It’s close to Liemert Park

    Free baby sitting for their babies too. Plus brochures about getting on welfare disability food stamps scattered about

    Obstacles to getting into college. It’s hard for blacks to avoid being recruited.

    It’s almost like a pilgrimage, reliving some important historical event.
  240. @Anon
    Consider that most of the Presidents judges senators and congressmen who lobbied for and passed the affirmative action law of 1968 and adjudicated just 2 law suits Griggs and Kaiser who created and enforced affirmative action were White Protestants

    Celler Javits Kennedy and the unspeakable Brennan and a few others weren’t Protestants but most were Protestants.

    The single person most responsible for affirmative action was a Protestant, Richard Nixon. He created the affirmative action Hispanic race in 197o by executive order. It was his EEOC that turned don’t discriminate against blacks to shall discriminate against Whites.

    Under Regean, the federal government eliminated the PACE exam for federal job applicants who had college degrees. It wasn’t an aptitude test. It was a simple test of 10th grade literacy reading comprehension and numeracy

    Blacks with BAs MAs and PHDs failed that test in such numbers the test was eliminated by Regean. Result is all those federal blacks making $150,000 a year
    Regean gave amnesty to millions of non White illegals thus setting the precedent for more amnesty

    I don’t know how many Protestants were on the Supreme Court in the Griggs case. I know Brennan, May he burn in hell forever and ever was a catholic. If you’re interested you can look up the religions of the SC justices in 1973.

    Affirmative action was a liberal action against Whites. Given the make up of the senate congress courts and presidents one could also say it was a White Protestant operation against Whites.

    Disclaimer:

    “Affirmative action was a liberal action against Whites. Given the make up of the senate congress courts and presidents one could also say it was a White Protestant operation against Whites.”

    Well of course. Get an Ivy League directory and count the number of surnames of German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Ukrainian, Hungarian, etc. origin – i.e. Central European Catholics. 25% of the US population over 35% of the white population. Probably less than 10% of the white population at the Ivies, which means well under 5% of the total admitted class.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    Watch the movie Harvard Beats Yale 29-29 and note the contrast between the two teams. There was a window there where Harvard really was getting the best white ethnics.

    It closed long ago.

  241. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D

    There are reasons why each word was found to be unsuitable, but much of the drive for forcing their replacement was simply for the fun of it.
     
    It's not for fun. First of all , any word that describes a group with negative characteristics will start out as mere descriptive but eventually becomes an epithet and you will have to invent a new word to describe the group or else people will think that you are calling them by an epithet ( the "n-word" being the most famous example). The original word for someone who was mentally slow was "fool" but it became impolite to call them that so other "more scientific" words were developed (idiot, moron, retard, etc.) but each one in succession became an epithet and they had to come up with a new euphemism. The same thing applies to people of African descent.

    2nd changing the euphemism frequently has the added function of revealing who is Woke and not Woke. If I say " I have a colored lady who cleans my house" that reveals me as being seriously unwoke. But if I say, my personal assistant is a woman of color, then I'm OK.

    Gay is interesting. They decided homo and queer were pejoratives. Gay became the preferred term. Then they decided gay was also derogatory. For years there were TV ads informing grade school children that gay is a hurtful derogatory term.

    Lesbians have stuck with the same term for thousands of years. Good for them

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Lesbians have stuck with the same term for thousands of years"

    In Victorian England they were "Sapphics" - more accurate really as I presume there were plenty of straight women on Lesbos in those days.
  242. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist

    "Well, as I’ve said a number of times, the best solution here is to make Harvard 100% black ...."
     
    We already have that: It's called Howard University.

    We already have that: It’s called Howard University.

    Howard is just a regular HBCU, it doesn’t have the magic dust of the Ivy League that can turn even a ghetto high school dropout into ‘best and brightest’ and ‘experts in the field’. Blacks need this magic dust more than any other group. Let our top 10 schools go polish as many black stones into diamonds as quickly as possible, the paltry 16% admission a year just ain’t gonna cut it, it’ll take too long, make these schools 100% black.

    What do we want? Justice!

    When do we want it? Now!

  243. Anon[276] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Unz I do not mean to be rude here but you using “Jewish sounding” surnames to determine Harvard admissions sounds like amateur level analysis.
     
    No, that's incorrect. If you'll bother reading my long article and some of the associated follow-up columns, you'll find it's *extremely* accurate.

    For example, there are a subset of exceptionally indicative Jewish names such as Goldstein, Silverberg, Cohen, Kaplan, etc., and these can be used to perform Weyl analysis on large datasets in order to validate the results from the looser "Jewish sounding" method. In all cases, the results were virtually identical, confirming my analysis.

    Also, some fanatic Jewish-activist type who ferociously attacked me had previously published a peer-reviewed article on the exact Jewish ethnicity distribution of the International Math Olympiad participants based on weeks of in-depth research and interviews. As it happened, the 5 minutes I'd spent eye-balling those lists for Jewish-sounding names for my own article had produced virtually identical results.

    Mr. Unz,

    I had thought for the Harvard admissions estimates (as opposed to National Merit numbers) you relied on the Hillel figures rather than on Weyl analysis?

    I remember some woman named Nurit Baytch claimed to have done Weyl analysis on the list of Harvard underclassmen or freshmen or some such and arrived at some low figure, about 6-8%, which is rather strange because a survey taken the same year found 9.5% (iirc) who self-identified as being of Jewish religion.

    RSDB

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    I had thought for the Harvard admissions estimates (as opposed to National Merit numbers) you relied on the Hillel figures rather than on Weyl analysis?
     
    Exactly, that's what I used.

    I remember some woman named Nurit Baytch claimed to have done Weyl analysis on the list of Harvard underclassmen or freshmen or some such and arrived at some low figure, about 6-8%, which is rather strange because a survey taken the same year found 9.5% (iirc) who self-identified as being of Jewish religion.
     
    Yes, she spouted off all sorts of nonsense. Being extremely "excitable", she even cited that Harvard *religious* survey that precisely matched the Hillel numbers, which were based on ethnicity.
  244. the percent DON’T add up to 100… they are missing some ~10% category?!
    Something Fishy

  245. @Spud Boy
    I'll just point out that you don't have to graduate from Harvard to be successful. I went to a state university, and I make close to $500K/year.

    No, no, no, you can work and produce something of value to other people and become rich. You do not even need a degree to do that.

    What Harvard, Yale or Princeton gets you is access to the positions that exert power over your fellow citizens: the Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve, POTUS, Attorney General, Director of the CIA, top law firms, top investment banks, head of NGO’s like the World Bank, the Urban League, etc. There you do not work and make a lot of money, you direct and dispose of the efforts of those who do work.

    Direction of the power of the State, which is the one legitimate use of brute force in our society, is almost exclusively in the hands of graduates of a few schools.

  246. @Bennis Mardens
    Whites make up 70% of national Merit Scholars, but only 20% at Harvard and the elites.

    Jews should not be counted as white as they are the most over-represented group of all, far beyond what their test scores merit.

    Whites make up 70% of national Merit Scholars, but only 20% at Harvard and the elites.

    Do you have a reference for that? AFAICT the National Merit Scholarship program does not publish racial breakdowns. For example, from https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/22/education/edlife/guidancecounselor22.html

    The National Merit Scholarship Corporation does not provide the racial breakdown of scholars…

    One problem with using National Merit Semifinalists as a metric is that the cutoff scores vary by state (top 0.5% by state) (Commended, ~96% or top 50,000 nationally) might be a better metric because of a uniform national threshold). An additional problem with Finalists and Scholars is they also use non-test criteria–who knows how heavy the thumbs on the scale are there?

    More details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Merit_Scholarship_Program

  247. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:

    Harvard’s former Dean of Admissions Fitzsimmons testified yesterday that 10% of the admitted class of 2019 were on the ‘Director’s List’, which includes a large number of children of rich donors. The plaintiffs read off emails between adcoms that discussed “rolling out the red carpet”(sic) for their visits.

    Apparently a $32 billion endowment still isn’t enough. This trial puts the hypocrisy of the left on full display.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
    If I run a soup kitchen and some rich bloke want to pay my org $5 million to eat there for a few years I wouldn't be wrong to accept, in fact I'd surely be wrong to reject the offer.
  248. @Andrew
    You'd have to be a fool to believe an unaccomplished 5% of the US population deserves 50% of the seats at Harvard or even their current 25%.

    Harvard matriculates the American managerial, political, scientific and legal elite.

    If American born Asians really merit 50% of Ivy League seats, they should show that by producing at least some semblance of accomplishment in these fields, like the Jews did when they were excluded. Being excluded from an educational institution does not exclude you from showing your talent in work and in the economy and academia. Nor did it prevent you from doing so academically in a slightly lower tier university.

    We have had no Asians ever as important cabinet secretaries or Senators. There is just a single American born Asian Nobel winner. There are no important Asian founded banks or law firms. No Asian jurists or economists of any note. Asians are not 50% of top C-suite managers in American corporations or even 25% or even 10%. American born Asians have not founded a plethora of manufacturing and wholesaling firms. They have not founded any important media companies or journals. There are no important Asian publishers. The most accomplished Asian group in all these regards are actually Indians, not the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese.

    Anyone who has been to an elite university with Asians will not recall them being leaders on campus or the classroom.

    Can someone please explain why Asians deserve even 10% of the seats in any university? The measurement by test score or inflated grades is obviously not sufficient to find Asian Americans of actual merit.

    Have disloyal WASPs, openly treasonous Jews, white ethnic grifters, mestizo Reconquistadors, Satan-worshipping Mormons, and, under Obama, literal open Muslim Brotherhood members really been doing such a bang-up job lately that a few math wizards would hurt?

  249. Let the Asians go defeat AA at Harvard for us. Then end all immigration from Asia before they take over all our universities.

  250. So the Asians make do with a goy named Peter Arcidiacono who went to Willamette University for undergrad and Wisconsin for graduate school while Harvard has David Card (almost certainly Jewish) who went to Queens University for undergrad and Princeton for grad school. I’m amazed and astonished that Jews wouldn’t be fighting for the opportunity to expand educational opportunity to persecuted minorities. What happened to ‘Tikkun Olam’? Don’t tell me it’s dependent on whose ox is being gored; I might lose faith in the eternal righteousness of Jews if that’s the case.

    Here’s a breakdown on the case including judges, defendant lawyers and plaintiff lawyers. It’s what you would expect I think; just looking at the names, the defendant lawyers are Jewish with other aggrieved minorities represented and the plaintiff lawyers look like maybe one Jew and maybe one Asian. The judges look like two white women, one white man with a last name (Kayatta) that I wouldn’t associate with being white and a white man with a name that could easily be Jewish (Jeffrey Howard).

    In any case, good luck going against Harvard in MA. The judges and plaintiff lawyers will immediately be persona non grata in MA and really in the entire Acela corridor if this goes through.

  251. @Paleo Liberal
    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”

    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”

    Depends on prayers of “success.” 500k each sun circle can possible make with persistence of beaver and cleverness of fox. But if dare to be Supreme Court sachem, one must first heap big credential, make bond with establishment Elders. League of Ivy true path on journey.

  252. @kaganovitch
    Dude, this is why Alinsky said "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." Harvard and its accomplices have been pissing all over 'live and let live' society for half a century. Fighting with one hand tied behind your back is not a winning strategy. As the Good Book says עם עקש תתפתל

    Lot and Alinsky and most of Harvard are members of the same tribe.

  253. @Jefferson
    "Keep in mind Ron also thinks Hispanic crime rates are the same as non-Hispanic white rates, and also that Adolf Hitler gets a really bad rap about that whole fake holocaust."

    Here in The Bay Area most pedophile related crimes that make the local news are committed by sleazy creepy looking Hispanic guys, which makes sense because they come from a nation like Mexico where the legal sexual age of consent is 12.

    When I briefly had Mexican TV there were public service announcements to explain to Mexicans what pedophilia was. A lot of traditional societies are way behind us on awareness of sexual abuse, they never went through that thing in the nineties where it was talked about a lot. As Gary Glitter discovered, once they figured out what was going on, some of them did start to take it seriously. That group doesn’t include Mexico, and the usefulness of open borders (and unaccompanied minor “refugees” such as can be seen celebrated in a Becky G music video) to child traffickers is self-explanatory.
    By the way, NXIVM child traffickers have been set free on bail by our utterly useless justice system, even though they’re enormous flight and “suicide” risks. If they make it back to trial it will be time to buy a lottery ticket.

  254. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    I have worked at one of Harvard's flagship organizations in Boston. I noticed a peculiar pattern of Jewish overrepresentation in the student/trainee community, quite disproportionate to their ability.

    I have a high regard for Jewish talent overall, and I consider them the race with the highest per-capita giftedness level, but in my organization the majority of the Jews were strangely mediocre.

    The Indians and Chinese in the organization were definitely better, the Whites were probably too.

    I don't understand it.

    I have been at some organizations in NYC where the Jews were obviously the elite - their talent shone through, far surpassing those of other groups. Those experiences really opened my eyes to the abilities of the Jewish people. I expected to find the same thing at Harvard, but I was struck by Harvard Jews' relative incompetence. They weren't bad, not by a long shot, they just weren't all Nobel-prize level geniuses (which is what I was expecting).

    Re: relative mediocrity of Jews at Harvard, Jews are the biggest beneficiaries of legacy admission and ‘Director’s list’ admission at the Ivies these days. Legacies have an admission rate of 33%, and Director’s list at nearly 100%, compared to 5% admit rate for everyone else. In every freshman class at Harvard, roughly 40% are legacy admits, 10% are from ‘Director’s List’.

  255. @Andrew
    You'd have to be a fool to believe an unaccomplished 5% of the US population deserves 50% of the seats at Harvard or even their current 25%.

    Harvard matriculates the American managerial, political, scientific and legal elite.

    If American born Asians really merit 50% of Ivy League seats, they should show that by producing at least some semblance of accomplishment in these fields, like the Jews did when they were excluded. Being excluded from an educational institution does not exclude you from showing your talent in work and in the economy and academia. Nor did it prevent you from doing so academically in a slightly lower tier university.

    We have had no Asians ever as important cabinet secretaries or Senators. There is just a single American born Asian Nobel winner. There are no important Asian founded banks or law firms. No Asian jurists or economists of any note. Asians are not 50% of top C-suite managers in American corporations or even 25% or even 10%. American born Asians have not founded a plethora of manufacturing and wholesaling firms. They have not founded any important media companies or journals. There are no important Asian publishers. The most accomplished Asian group in all these regards are actually Indians, not the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese.

    Anyone who has been to an elite university with Asians will not recall them being leaders on campus or the classroom.

    Can someone please explain why Asians deserve even 10% of the seats in any university? The measurement by test score or inflated grades is obviously not sufficient to find Asian Americans of actual merit.

    I’d try to say all this more diplomatically…… but all true.

  256. @TangoMan
    I was going to jump in and comment but decided it would be prudent to first read the comments and I see that My. Ron Unz already made my point, drats.

    Harvard could easily game this new system, simply by mounting an effort to boost White applicants - expand the denominator and the sheer scale of the White population will swamp the Asian gain. This only works for Whites, there simply aren't enough qualified Blacks in America (only 240 or so Blacks score at the median SAT level of Ivy admitted students, that's in the entire country.)

    As payback for this lawsuit, they could drive Asian admission rates very low, they simply need to go out and solicit the applications of smart White kids who would never think of going to Harvard, especially after they've been told that membership in the 4-H Club or Boy Scouts is the kiss of death for a shot at Harvard.

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.

    Harvard simply has to choose, admit more Iowa farmboys and Wyoming ranchers or more Asian grinds.

    You assumed Iowa farm boys and Wyoming cowboys want to go to Harvard so they can be indoctrinated into white hating queers and girly men. That’s a big assumption.

  257. @Paleo Liberal
    What college you go to has little effect on your success.

    As the saying goes: “It’s the Indian, not the arrow”

    I’m not sure your aphorism applies here. Isn’t Harvard the Indian and its graduates the arrows?

    • Replies: @Paleo Liberal
    No, the other way around.

    The students are the Indians, the college the tool, the arrows.

    Studies have shown that, for the most part, students accepted at elite colleges who attend OTHER schools do just as well as students who are accepted at elite colleges and attend the elite colleges.

    There are some exceptions.

    I think many Wall Street firms tend to get graduates from the top half of the class of Ivies and other such schools.

    For some professions, the school one attends matters quite a bit. For example, law firms care very much about what law school the graduate went to. The #1 graduate of Podunk Law School will never be quite as employable as the bottom graduate of Harvard Law.

    Generally, for those people who go on to graduate school, the grad school matters MUCH more than the undergraduate school. (Such as the law school example above). I have read that for MDs, the place one does one's residency matter more than the med school, which matters more than the undergraduate school.

    One of my kids is attending a highly ranked school that has a really good co-op program. The co-ops often lead to jobs, so this particular school has a higher job placement rate than do the Ivies, even though it is not as prestigious as the Ivies.

    But the exceptional person will often excel no matter what. Bill Gates did not become rich due to Harvard. (His father's connections with IBM helped him tremendously, though). I have a cousin who is extremely rich, and he attended a state university.
  258. @kaganovitch
    Dude, this is why Alinsky said "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." Harvard and its accomplices have been pissing all over 'live and let live' society for half a century. Fighting with one hand tied behind your back is not a winning strategy. As the Good Book says עם עקש תתפתל

    I don’t agree Harvard is “the enemy” the way Oberlin is. More like “disputed grounds.” They employ Pinker. James Lee studied there under Pinker and is now doing IQ GWAS stuff. Scalia sent his kids there. Is Harvard Business School and Mass General “the enemy” too?

    There is still a large apolitical, centrist, and conservative minority there, and they still uphold many traditional values, from athletic competition between smart young people to admission by g-loaded exam.

    I fear in the off chance the suit is successful that elite colleges start moving away from universal standardized testing. They sure aren’t going to do want the plaintiffs demand and have a 60-1 Asian/black ratio.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Harvard is plainly the enemy amd your argument otherwise is pointing out that the enemy has their hands around our neck.
    , @Desiderius
    I keep hoping for the emergence of post-progressivism - it should have been here by now with Taylor Swift and Miss West Virginia hopping on the SJW bandwagon - but so far no dice.

    Until Harvard can man up and give us that, they should be slated for Henry VIII and the monasteries treatment.
    , @kaganovitch
    I would agree that Harvard is not the enemy in the same way that Oberlin is. It's worth remembering though that Oberlin wasn't always the enemy that it has become either. By now the footsteps of the Left's Gramscian long march through the elite institutions of the American nation should be familiar. While the firebrand leftists are enablers, the heavy lifting is being done by the administrative arm of the university. The endless proliferation of Assistants to the Dean of Diverse Safe Spaces and the like. When a critical infectious load is reached, no further conspiracy is necessary. Public Choice theory does the rest. What is true of the University, is true of other institutions as well. Acceptable opinion in the corporate world is circumscribed not by the Board of Directors, but by the faceless harridans of HR. The Deep State devotion to National Replacement Theology is pursued by administrative fiat more than by law making. etc. It is true though that Harvard's immune system, so to speak, is more robust than that of any Liberal Arts school let alone a basket case like Oberlin, nevertheless, her "Mene Mene Tekel U'pharsin" has been written ,I fear.
    , @Anon
    Some of the elite colleges including University of Chicago are considering getting rid of admission tests.

    Buy your kid 2 shabby little tract houses 50 miles east of San Jose Ca instead of sending them to college Rent them out. Silicon Valley will soon stretch 200 miles from the ocean to the Nevada border. Kid and his family can live comfortably on the rents.

    I saw something that the no money down no asset no job mortgages are coming back. Once you get the house you’ll have to find a rough tough management company to deal with the tenants and find a good attorney before you need him
  259. @TheJQ
    Refute it then.

    It’s been done, Google it if you care.

  260. @Lot
    I don't agree Harvard is "the enemy" the way Oberlin is. More like "disputed grounds." They employ Pinker. James Lee studied there under Pinker and is now doing IQ GWAS stuff. Scalia sent his kids there. Is Harvard Business School and Mass General "the enemy" too?

    There is still a large apolitical, centrist, and conservative minority there, and they still uphold many traditional values, from athletic competition between smart young people to admission by g-loaded exam.

    I fear in the off chance the suit is successful that elite colleges start moving away from universal standardized testing. They sure aren't going to do want the plaintiffs demand and have a 60-1 Asian/black ratio.

    Harvard is plainly the enemy amd your argument otherwise is pointing out that the enemy has their hands around our neck.

  261. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @GU
    The law, once a noble WASP profession, has been severely injured by the foreign influence of the [special people], and to a lesser extent big city political machine Irish, beginning in the early 20gh century.

    But law is still important, and there really are lots of WASPs (and others) fighting the good fight against the shysters. The right needs lawyers.

    Other than the Rutherford legal foundation and Pacific legal Foundation there are no pro White legal organizations around. They’re not really pro White, just conservative pro capitalist.

    Lawyers are products of college and law school 7 years of liberal brainwashing. As civil plaintiff and defendant I’be hired attorneys all my life. They’re all liberals. I only hire White male lawyers. Everyone has been a liberal.

    I told my current guy that of the 20 or so who responded to my Findlaw query I picked him because he’s a White man. I didn’t tell him that till we’d worjed together for 6 years and made a lot of money.
    When I did tell him he was somewhat upset by my racism. He went to UCLA all the way. His wife went to Berkeley. His 4 kids ended up at Fresno state the low level one in LA.

    But like all other liberal Whites, he doesn’t connect affirmative action with the discrimination his kids suffered

    I’m sure there are a few conservative attorneys around and organizations like the federalist society. But are they pro White? I don’t know.

    The ABA, the big professional organization to which most attorneys belong was taken over by left wing anti White radicals a long time ago when the first women cohort joined. Most of the women who went to law school. 1950 to 1970 were anti White ultra liberals
    They became active in the ABA and soon imposed a leftist agenda. ABA is now so left republican presidents don’t accept ABA recommendations for judicial appointments

    At one time an ABA recommendation ensured a judicial appointment.

    ABA is like most organizations. Most members are passive. Others want to run it and spend the time and do the work. That’s why the teachers organizations are so liberal. Liberals became active and took over.

    The legal profession is very necessary. But like the teachers Silicon Valley tech industry colleges and everything else it’s been taken over by anti White liberals

    Where do you think all those radical anti White judges come from? They come from the law schools and the ranks of lawyers. The profession is full of radicals and the rest have to make a living and don’t rock the boat

  262. Anon[216] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    If Harvard Had Colorblind Admissions, Its Black Share Would Fall from 15.8% to 0.9%
     
    Now, show me a person (of any color) who does not know that. Not the exact numbers, but the fact that blacks and Hispanics are represented in the student body of Ivies way above what the merits would warrant. Now, show me a person in MSM bold enough to simply admit this fact. What does this tell us about the society we live in? Nothing good. Do we do anything about it? Nothing comes to mind. What does this tell about us, then?

    I wonder about Hispanic numbers being so low.

    A good number of Hispanics are white. Why would they need AA to enter top colleges?

    Is Hispanic culture less intellectual even for white Latinos?

    As for non-white ‘Hispanics’, they shouldn’t be called such. And why should they get AA when they freely moved to the US? At least blacks and Indians have historical gripes.

    • Replies: @Desiderius

    A good number of Hispanics are white. Why would they need AA to enter top colleges?
     
    Because top colleges discriminate fiercely against fellow whites.
    , @AnonFromTN
    I don’t think the color matters, I think that the possibility of getting something unearned corrupts regardless of color. I’ve seen it in the USSR: free handouts corrupted perfectly white people, making them lazy morons (brains, like muscles, need exercise to develop). Look at the Caribbean or African blacks: they are just as smart and successful as whites in the US. I think that AA achieves exactly opposite of what it was meant to achieve: it conserves backwardness of the people who get something they don’t deserve due to their color. I strongly suspect that w/o AA they would achieve much more by competing on the level playing field.
    , @Jefferson
    "I wonder about Hispanic numbers being so low.

    A good number of Hispanics are white. Why would they need AA to enter top colleges?

    Is Hispanic culture less intellectual even for white Latinos?"


    Yes Hispanics are less intellectual. There is reason why cities like Los Angeles and Miami have some of the worst performing K-12 public schools in the country.
  263. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    His red diaper daughter Kathy was a Weather underground member who murdered a police officer during a bank robbery
     
    A black police officer, no less. She went to prison. (Though not for murder. She drove the getaway car.)

    She sent her son Chesa to Hyde Park in Chicago to be cared for by friends Bill and Bernardine. It was in Chesa's living room that one Barry Obama announced his entry into political life.

    Didn’t know he was black. That son of hers got a Rhodes scholarship because he was the son of weather underground mom and black panther dad

    That demonstrates who the elite favors.

    All the old radicals have resurrected the movement . Sometimes it feels like 1968 again. Someone wanted me to read an article about how horrible the schools are in some towns in Wisconsin. I remember bringing the newspaper in when I was 10. There were often headlines about black schools.

    What the article didn’t say was that those towns in Wisconsin with the 75 IQ violent kids and aggressive bullying mothers are the towns that were colonized by Chicago ghetto blacks to take advantage of Wisconsin’s more generous welfare.

    Those were the same arguments used to ram thru school de segregation and bussing 60 years ago.

    It’s like the year seasons and holidays It’s an endless repeating cycle of the same old thing.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Didn’t know he was black. That son of hers got a Rhodes scholarship because he was the son of weather underground mom and black panther dad
     
    One murdered cop was black, the other Irish.

    David Gilbert was a Black Panther? I didn't know they accepted Jews. Might be of help, as Gilbert isn't eligible for parole until he's 112. (He bounces between various NY state prisons. I wonder if he knows Berkowitz or Chapman.)

    Kathy Boudin, somehow, is already paroled and teaches at Columbia. It's different for girls.
  264. @peterike

    I think America as a whole would benefit from allowing supremely intelligent and hard-working Asian-American students to compete fairly in the college admissions process.

     

    That's an immensely stupid idea. You are taking the key entry gateway to the Elite (both in terms of wealth and influence) and handing it to an alien population which has already shown itself perfectly willing and eager to join the most virulent anti-white, SJW mind-set.

    A sensible nation would, for starters, not allow any non-citizens into its best colleges, period. Secondly, a sensible nation would not allow any Asians to immigrate to it, because nothing good can come of it. And that includes nerdy white men getting cute little Asian wives (future harridans) and further eliminating the white race.

    Massive Asian immigration -- and it's a lot higher than the numbers state -- is a disaster for America.

    Well something good. They can keep the baizou from taking over libraries, for instance.

  265. @Lot
    I don't agree Harvard is "the enemy" the way Oberlin is. More like "disputed grounds." They employ Pinker. James Lee studied there under Pinker and is now doing IQ GWAS stuff. Scalia sent his kids there. Is Harvard Business School and Mass General "the enemy" too?

    There is still a large apolitical, centrist, and conservative minority there, and they still uphold many traditional values, from athletic competition between smart young people to admission by g-loaded exam.

    I fear in the off chance the suit is successful that elite colleges start moving away from universal standardized testing. They sure aren't going to do want the plaintiffs demand and have a 60-1 Asian/black ratio.

    I keep hoping for the emergence of post-progressivism – it should have been here by now with Taylor Swift and Miss West Virginia hopping on the SJW bandwagon – but so far no dice.

    Until Harvard can man up and give us that, they should be slated for Henry VIII and the monasteries treatment.

    • Replies: @Anon
    Great minds think alike.
  266. anon[179] • Disclaimer says:
    @Stolen Valor Detective

    I’m glad I didn’t go to Cupertino HS, but for the most part US education should be much more of a “grind factory” and Asian parents’ influence on public schools is extremely positive.
     
    Could you elaborate on why you think this?

    My own impression is rather the opposite. Contrary to the media narrative about Asian-American success coming from the Draconian practices of Asian Tiger Parents, I think the success of Asian-Americans (or specifically the Korean and Chinese ones of the stereotype) is largely the result of their relatively high IQs. (Particularly in the mathematical and visuo-spatial reasoning sub-components.)

    The strict parenting might, or might not, help, but I don't think it's anywhere near as important as mainstream media commentators like Amy Chua and Nick Kristof contend. Generally, I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Furthermore, my own view is that, as economist Bryan Caplan argued persuasively in his recent book The Case Against Education , most education in the US is extremely wasteful. The vast majority of the material that the vast majority of students learn in school is neither useful nor interesting to them. Its function is credential and positional. A high school arms race to take the most APs/get the highest test scores/do the most extra-curricular activities is a negative sum game, because everyone's relative position will ultimately be the same.

    I think that Asian parents over estimate the marginal returns to extra studying for their children. I think they also tend to undervalue the opportunity cost of constant studying in terms of socialization, adequate sleep, positive mental health, extra-curricular activities, hobbies, et cetera.

    Per the plaintiff’s report, Asian kids are