Even after decades of affirmative action, black and Hispanic students are more underrepresented at the nation’s top colleges and universities than they were 35 years ago, according to a New York Times analysis.
- It’s almost as if 45 to 50 years of affirmative action haven’t succeeded in making blacks and Hispanics smarter …
Not much is happening other than Asians are scoring higher.
Similarly, here’s Unsilenced Science’s graph of trends on the composite SAT and ACT college admission test scores:
Asians are pulling away from pack, while blacks are lagging. (The number of blacks taking these tests has been going up, so that performance isn’t all that bad.)
- And it’s almost as if the massive increase in Asian-American and foreign Asian enrollment in colleges had to hurt other groups’ numbers due to simple arithmetic.
The share of black freshmen at elite schools is virtually unchanged since 1980.
When, by the way, affirmative action was roaring strong. You may recall the famous Bakke lawsuit over racial quotas at the University of California reached the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978, when Judge Powell’s one-man decision somehow wound up being decisive. Powell’s baby slicing brilliance: racial quotas are illegal if you call then “quotas” but not if you call them “goals.”
Part of what the NYT is doing is playing off their readers’ lack of historical sense. Subscribers are constantly told that America was a racist hell-hole until approximately the day before yesterday, so “1980″ sounds like the Dark Ages to them. In reality of course, it was well past the social revolution of the 1960s, with affirmative action going full blast.
Black students are just 6 percent of freshmen but 15 percent of college-age Americans, as the chart below shows.
The NYT won’t tell us what the actual numbers were in 1980 (which turns out to be a bigger problem below with the Hispanic graph), but it looks like 1980 numbers were something like blacks being 13% of the college-age population and 6% of elite college freshmen.
It would be interesting to see what % blacks made up in the 90th percentile or higher on the SAT and ACT test in 1980 versus 2015. My guess would be it was a small percentage in 1980 and an even smaller percentage in 2015 due to the flood of high scoring Asians.
Blacks make up only 2% of those scoring on the math SAT 650 to 700, 2% of 700 to 750, and 2% of 750 to 800. In contrast Asians make up 27% of 650 to 700, 39% of 700 to 750, and 60% of 750 to 800.
A 650 on math is a good score, but not amazing: it’s at the 86th percentile of those who take the SAT and the 90th percentile of a nationally representative sample (including those who missed out on taking the SAT because they were in Juvy Hall). So blacks make up 6% of elite college freshmen but only 2% among those scoring at the 86th percentile or higher on the Math SAT. Of course, blacks don’t benefit from White Privilege.
Here’s the Brookings article on how test score gaps aren’t closing much.
I don’t know what this graph would have looked like in 1980, but the immense Asian numbers at the high end wouldn’t have been so big, thus increasing the other groups’ representation proportionately.
More Hispanics are attending elite schools, but the increase has not kept up with the huge growth of young Hispanics in the United States, so the gap between students and the college-age population has widened.
Now here’s where the NYT’s methodology becomes intentionally misleading. They won’t tell us what the actual numbers were in 1980, but it looks like back then Hispanics were about 7% of the population and 4% of the elite freshmen, compared to 22% and 13% in 2015. Those proportions are roughly the same, so not much has really happened. For example 4/7 = 0.57 and 13/22 = 0.59, suggesting a slight increase in favor of Hispanics over the years. But of course these are guesstimates from eyeballing the graph.
But the NYT can claim that The Gap has gotten … three … times … larger!
The Times analysis includes 100 schools ranging from public flagship universities to the Ivy League. For both blacks and Hispanics, the trend extends back to at least 1980, the earliest year that fall enrollment data was available from the National Center for Education Statistics.
Blacks and Hispanics have gained ground at less selective colleges and universities but not at the highly selective institutions, said Terry Hartle, a senior vice president at the American Council on Education, which represents more than 1,700 colleges and universities.
The 1985 book Choosing Elites by social scientist Robert Klitgaard, who went on to be president of Claremont McKenna college, reveals much about Harvard’s 1970s internal studies of just how much affirmative action Harvard could afford. This turned out to be some, but not as much as they had hoped when they got started with quotas in the late 1960s. In particular, inner city black males were not a good bet.
Here’s the NYT’s graph of the racial trends at the alpha dog of academia, Harvard:
Although this is just speculation, it sure looks like Harvard decided during the 1990s that allowing the white percentage to continue to fall sharply, as it had in the 1980s, would eventually prove Bad for the Brand.
- One other thing that’s going on is that white parents and students have tended to become much more ambitious and/or fatalistic about attending elite national private colleges since I was in high school. For example, it was standard for my friends from our Catholic school to attend cheap U. of California campuses, but the NYT graphs show whites barely showing up at many UC colleges anymore. For example, here is UC Irvine in Orange County where whites make up only 15% of the freshmen:
Today it seems as if a huge fraction of white parents are just convinced that of course they will have to spend an extra $125k to send their kids to a private college in another state instead of to a public college that they’ve been supporting with their tax dollars their whole lives. That’s what you have to do if you are white.
By the way, if you are wondering why the expensive Claremont colleges in Southern California are having so many hissy fits, as frequently reported here and more recently reported in the NYT (“More Diversity Means More Demands,” here’s a graph of Claremont’s STEM college Harvey Mudd’s trajectory:
Harvey Mudd recently got woke and decided to let in lots of Non-Asian Minorities and girls, because obviously things like test scores must be biased, with the results that you or I would expect:
An elite California college canceled 2 days of classes amid tension over workload and racial issues on campus Inside Higher Ed
Most reactions to the news of Ziad Ahmed getting into Stanford with an application where he answered the question What matters to you (100 word limit) with the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag repeated 100 times have fallen into two camps: admiration from the MSM and charges that Ziad must be stupid or lazy or Marxist from conservatives.
by KATHERINE TIMPF April 4, 2017 4:07 PM @KATTIMPF
Success in activism is not measured by how strongly you believe that you are right, it’s measured by how effectively you can convince others of your views. … Now, Ahmed may call his refusal to explain his answer “unapologetic activism,” but here’s the thing: The entire purpose of “activism” is to enact change. … Success in activism is not measured by how strongly you believe that you are right, it’s measured by how effectively you can convince others of your views. Bringing other people to your side is, after all, the only way to achieve the change that is activism’s goal. Ahmed believes that he is so obviously correct that no explanation should be necessary, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is necessary. A huge segment of the population doesn’t even understand what the goals of #BlackLivesMatter even are; the fact that explanation is necessary is an objective fact. His answer was not a victory for his movement, but a missed opportunity.
Oh, and then there’s this: Not only is Ahmed a lazy activist, but he’s also a lazy question-answerer.
Uh, no, one thing you can definitely say for Ziad Ahmed is the kid is not lazy. Ziad’s goal in this case was to get Ziad into Stanford, not to persuade the Stanford admissions committee of the holiness of the BLM cause, which, he rightly assumed, required no argument from him.
Another thing you can say is that, contrary to some conservative commenters’ assumptions, he’s not stupid.
Nor is he some kind of Marxist anti-capitalist. He started a marketing consultancy as a teenager to help businesses sell more crap to teenagers.
We live in age less beset by collectivism than by elitist ideologies that encourage the most grasping individuals to screw over the poor dumb trusting masses and feel righteous about doing so because those saps had it coming, those racist homophobic haters.
The reason you read iSteve rather than National Review is because you get the joke. The Ziad Ahmed story tells us a hilarious amount about America in 2017, it just happens to be things that few on the left or right want to hear.
After completing his Stanford application, high school senior Ziad Ahmed looked at his answers and realized an important component was missing amid a flurry of standardized test scores and extracurricular activities: his voice and passion.
So Ahmed took a risk. In response to a question asking “What matters to you, and why?” the teen wrote “#BlackLivesMatter” exactly 100 times. …
“It was important to me that the admissions officers literally hear my impatience for justice and the significance of this issue,” Ahmed told NBC News. “The hashtag conveys my frustration with the failure of judicial system to protect the black community from violence, systemic inequity, and political disenfranchisement.”
At only 18-years-old, Ahmed has amassed an impressive resume.
He got his start in activism as a high school freshman, when he launched an anti-discrimination organization called Redefy, a group composed of 250 students internationally that aimed to break stereotypes using the power of social media.
He also interned for 2016 presidential candidate Martin O’Malley, volunteered with the Hilary Clinton campaign and attended and was recognized by Barack Obama at a 2015 White House dinner.
While standardized test scores do speak to his hard work, Ahmed said his unconventional essay answer was an attempt to express his passion for spurring change.
“I wanted to demonstrate that the essence of what motivates me as a learner, a member of a faith community, and a global citizen is my passion to be a part of change-making,” he said.
They should sign this kid up to deliver the keynote address at the next Davos Conference. His mastery of Master of the Universe buzzphrases is off the charts.
As a Muslim-American, Ahmed described himself as “an unapologetic progressive activist” and ally to the Black Lives Matter movement.
“Islamophobia has certainly been a priority of mine in my advocacy, but it is connected to the legacy of racism and oppression that the black community continues to face,” he said.
Ahmed said he received an outpouring of support after posting a photo of his application, which has garnered more than 3,000 retweets, but he has also been receiving personal attacks. Some have targeted his Muslim faith.
“The power of social media has also provoked significant trolling and personal attacks. It’s certainly been a hard to navigate and the vitriol is sobering,” he said.
Politicians and activists, including O’Malley and Women’s March organizer Linda Sarsour, took to Twitter to congratulate Ahmed on his acceptance to the California school.
Moving forward, the teen said that he plans to channel the recent attention he is receiving into the Black Lives Matter movement and to donate to Stanford’s Black Community Services Center.
“It is my hope that this attention encourages and motivates people to confront the inequity that we see today,” he said. “It is my hope that students, adults and people all around the world will learn about the organizations that will give them a way to be an ally and support the policy changes we need today.”
Family friend Amber Khan described the teen as “extremely passionate about confronting injustice.”
“He’s willing to use his voice and explore the uncomfortable to create the kind of change that needs to happen,” she said.
Stanford University confirmed Ahmed’s acceptance to NBC News but declined to further discuss the student’s application. Notably, 2016 marks the lowest number of people offered admission to the University in its history. …
You say you want a revolution? Well, one teen is proving that with peace, love and the Internet, you can have one.
Ziad Ahmed is a 16-year-old sophomore at Princeton Day School in Princeton, New Jersey. In the summer before his freshman year, he created Redefy — a multi-platform organization, whose mission is “to boldly defy stereotypes, embrace acceptance and tolerance, redefine our perspectives positively, and create an active community.”
My eyes glazed over halfway through Ziad’s mission statement …
Ziad recently explained in a chat with MTV News that his experience as a Bangladeshi-American, practicing Muslim and self-described “non-conformist” largely informed his decision to create Redefy.
“Many people had prejudice and misconceptions about my faith, even when I was little. The media paints a picture of Islam, and many minorities, in a way that’s detrimental to the public’s perception of them,” he told MTV News.
Ziad further described his first-hand experience with bias.
“I deal with prejudice every day and have my entire life,” he said, “from being put on the TSA watch list as a child because of my name and having to go to a separate counter to get my tickets … to being constantly told I am ‘cute for a brown kid.’
“I started Redefy to initiate a positive change in the world and to fight the ignorance which I have been victim to,” Ziad said. “And more importantly, to fight the ignorance which people will fall victim to who may not have the opportunity to properly defend themselves or understand that there are people who accept them and love them for exactly who they are.
Redefy primarily operates as a website where people can share their experiences with prejudice and post reflections about different current events stories where stereotyping and acceptance are part of a national and/or personal conversation. Redefy also shares various stories about social justice issues on its Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Tumblr accounts. Ziad hopes this interconnected network of experiences will unite people through their shared experiences.
“It’s so hard to hate someone when you understand what they’re going through,” the teen explained.
Personally, over the last 24 hourse, I’ve come to understand a lot about what Ziad Ahmed is going through …
Within communities, Redefy holds workshops for younger students to gain insight into what stereotypes are and how to combat them. Ziad described working with people as young as fifth grade as a moving experience. “They don’t necessarily know the terms stereotypes or prejudice,” he told us, “But when you hear them articulate their experiences, they know it all too much.”
In addition to Ziad’s role as founder, he works with a leadership team of four friends and 20 representatives in schools around the world advocating for the organization’s various campaigns. As far as the future of Redefy, Ziad hopes to hold larger conferences and wider-scale programs to educate young people on bias and creating accepting spaces in their communities and ultimately, the world. He hopes the organization will continue to spur teen activism too.
“What a lot of young people don’t realize is that this is our fight. Injustice is our fight,” Ziad added. “Until we all unite in our injustices, ignorance will continue to exist.” …
I bet you are just dying to read Ziad’s Huffington Post endorsement of Hillary from last October:
Me with our next President.
by Ziad Ahmed, Contributor
Teen Activist, Founder of Redefy, CVO of JÜV Consulting, TEDx Speaker, Kid Tryna Change the World
I won’t be at the polls, but my future is on the ballot.
10/28/2016 04:15 pm ET | Updated Oct 30, 2016
This is not an endorsement; this is a reality.
When I think about my experience as an American-Muslim teen, it is characterized by the feeling of constantly being on the defense.
I’m not somebody who is remotely athletic, but I like to think about it in terms of sports. Imagine the American-Muslim community as a sports team ― we are always on the defense. Whether it is the Trump Effect manifesting in classrooms, the increase in Islamophobic hate crimes by 89 percent, or seven-year-old Abdul Aziz who was beaten up for being Muslim, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see how our community must constantly be on guard. I might not be a sports expert, but I understand enough to realize what happens when a team is only on defense. It’s not fun. It’s exhausting. It’s nearly impossible to score.
Don’t get me wrong, we are scoring. Whether it be Ibtihaj Muhammad winning a bronze medal at the Rio Olympics, Huma Abedin campaigning across this country, Rabia Chaudry making a New York Times bestseller list, or the countless Muslim role models that I have in their many forms, we are certainly achieving. Linda Sarsour, Omid Safi, and Sarah Harvard are using their voices for justice. Zaki Barzinji, Rumana Ahmed, and Arsalan Suleman are using public office to advance progress. Haroon Ullah, Laila Alawa, and Donya Nasser are my mentors, and they have showed me time after time through their brilliance what it means to be a proud American-Muslim.
But not Clock Boy Ahmed Mohamed, That little bastard’s Victimization Narrative got him in to meet Obama 18 months younger than mind did. The Other Ahmed is my archrival. It’s not enough that I triumph, but for me to be happy, Clock Boy must also fail.
We are scoring. But, it’s that much harder.
We have to wait for the moment where there is a slight opening in the field. We have to pray for a breakaway. We are not given the space to run freely, and frankly, I’m tired of running against a barrage that doesn’t value my existence enough to let me just be me.
In the era of Trump though, it isn’t so much that we are on the defense ― it is that we are being attacked so acutely that we aren’t even given the space to formulate a defense. And I, for one, will not stand for it. …
See … (To be pedantic, Amy Chua’s comic bestseller is Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother not Mom)
and being shocked at the calculated rigor of her life.
I could never have imagined that I would live under a similar rigor ― the difference though is that the stringency expected of Muslims is not out of choice, but rather, it has been done to us.
Trump has created a United States that asks of me to prove my American identity. The norm for each Muslim student in this country has become being accused of being a “terrorist” at some point in his/her/their life. But more problematically, it has become the assumption that one can somehow not be both authentically Muslim and American simultaneously, and that is what gets me more than anything else.
It’s the moment on the train when new passengers board, and I feel the need to turn my backpack the other way in order to hide my “#MyMuslimVote” pin courtesy of MPower Change. It’s the constant conversations where people ask leading questions to evaluate my patriotism ― “Do you even celebrate Fourth of July?” It’s the flurry of haters that conjure bizarre insults every time one of my tweets gets more than five retweets. It’s the multiple pairs of American-flag socks that I wear often as a statement that say ― I am American, as if it is somehow defiant.
Just last weekend, I was in a video/photoshoot for David Yi’s Very Good Light. It was a project featuring American-Muslims, and I was posed the question,“what does it mean to you to be American?” And, it occurred to me ― being American, to me, simply just means being me.
I do not need to qualify, evaluate, or prove myself to anyone ― ever. My American-ness exists within my freedom to exist freely as myself, and I need not any more proof than that of my identity.
My existence is now constantly measured in terms of my reaction to you, Mr. Trump, and I have a simple response; I do not exist for you or in terms of you, and I never will.
To beg of me to prove my American-ness is to negate the very fundamental core of this country. We were never meant to be a sea of sameness, but rather, we were always an amalgamation of individuals believing in the promise that we can be great, not that we have been great or somehow inevitably will be, but that we can be. We can be great when we allow each individual to exist freely, when we give our children the space to grow and to trailblaze their own future paths of brilliance.
I was born and raised in this country, and I’ve sought to make this country, my home, as beautiful as it can be. Throughout my high school career, I have advocated tirelessly for equality. I founded an international teen organization for social justice, redefy, when I was in eighth grade. I’ve been fortunate to have had exposure to outstanding American-Muslim role models that have made me proud to be me. I’ve even had the honor to meet leaders including the President to speak my truth, and I am still tired.
Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson.
My existence is now constantly measured in terms of my reaction to you, Mr. Trump, and I have a simple response; I do not exist for you or in terms of you, and I never will.
I don’t write this for me though. I write this for a world that expects American-Muslim children to be on the defense constantly, to be able to learn as fully when constantly under attack, and to be lesser. I write this for a world that has created a gross dichotomy between “Good Muslims” and “Bad Muslims,” and the ensuing expectation that all American-Muslims must complete a never-ending arbitrary checklist to achieve the coveted title of “Good Muslim.”
I write this because I believe in a future that is great. I write this because I imagine a world where the children I hope to one day have can be proud American-Muslims ― proud in however they identify. I write this because that tomorrow is possible, under the leadership of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I’m seventeen, and I cannot vote, so I write this to implore every person who reads this to vote for me.
I won’t be at the polls, but my future is on the ballot ― my ability to score is on the ballot.
Seriously, an awful lot of Social Justice Jihadism is an outlet for anger over not being at the top of the sexual attractiveness pyramid. Everybody feels the world is unfair to them in the looks department. Jennifer Aniston and Angelina Jolie probably both feel deeply that they were unjustly shortchanged by our society’s socially constructed standards of beauty. All they want out of life is to be the fairest of them all. Is that too much to ask?
It’s that bitch, Charlize, isn’t it?
Charlize is insecure too? Good! … But … that just makes her seem more human and appealing …
Well, at least we can all be sure it’s not Kristen Stewart.
Anyway, these kids like Ziad talk about Social Justice but what they actually want is Sexual Justice, by which they would mean Sexual Supremacy. They want to be thought the fairest of them all, not just “cute for a brown kid.”
Michelle Obama gave a breathtaking speech in New Hampshire a few weeks back where she stated, “We cannot afford to be tired.” And, as always, she is right. I’m tired ― physically, emotionally, in every capacity.
I’m exhausted just contemplating this kid’s Energizer Bunny-like relentless self-promotion.
For example, I work pretty hard on this blog, but I only included a handful of the links that this tireless prodigy of networking included in his post.
But out of fear for the future of our country, I find strength.
I find strength because “Hillary knows that Muslim Americans contribute to our country every day, and believes that America is stronger together – when we lift each other up instead of tearing each other down, and when we work together to solve our biggest challenges.” Hillary Clinton has a vision for my future, and it’s one I believe in. She’s investing in my future, and whether it’s through her Muslim Outreach Director or her standing by our community, she has a plan to stand up for my tomorrow.
So, I’m asking you now. I need you to vote ― not because this is some endorsement, but because my reality is at stake.
No matter what happens, Trump can have carved on his tombstone:
RUINED ZIAD AHMED’S DAY
Here’s a 2014 article about Little Ziad from Mercer Space:
Redefy leaders Lara Strassberg, Ziad Ahmed and Ziyad Khan during a program the group held at the Princeton Public Library on April 5, 2014.
Local teens start Redefy to alter thinking about stereotypes
By Scott Morgan
All too often, some people make assumptions about others based on what they see — on mannerisms, physical characteristics or spiritual beliefs that they use as markers to decide who or what someone really is.
Those kinds of assumptions are often not valid, said Ziad Ahmed, a 14-year-old rising sophomore at Princeton Day School who has made it his mission to try and change those perceptions.
For example, just because a young man cries at movies doesn’t mean he’s effeminate, Ahmed said.
You know, this particular topic sure seems to come up a lot in Ziad’s pronouncements …
More importantly, even if an assumption is correct and he really is effeminate, that word itself is an outdated social construct; one tiny aspect of a much more complex human being.
Maybe Ziad’s dad has been hinting that unless his son butches up his act a little, he won’t leave the family hedge fund to him?
A big part of running a hedge fund is insinuating into billionaires’ heads the worry that if they don’t risk a hundred million with you, they aren’t real men like you are.
Here’s the masculinity level you want in a hedge fund salesman:
But here’s what the Ahmed family has to work with in their scion:
I can imagine Ziad making a lot of money in life off various scams, but running a hedge fund is the most lucrative one of all. And his dad may be worried that his otherwise energetic, articulate, and ambitious son may not quite have what it takes in the masculinity department to pull off convincing billionaires that they are wimps unless they pay him 2/20 to take their money off their hands.
Ahmed said he believes he has figured out what matters and what doesn’t about people, and may have found the roots of why so many problems exist between people. In no uncertain terms, Ahmed wants to erase as much of the intolerance, stereotypes and assumptions as he can.
To that end, Ahmed founded an organization called Redefy in 2013, the mission of which is to “boldly defy stereotypes, embrace acceptance and tolerance, redefine our perspectives positively, and create an active community.”
On the surface, Redefy may look like a simple online repository of personal stories about overcoming ignorance, hate and insensitivity, but the stories collected at Redefy.org are not idealistic musings, they are stunningly philosophical essays about the meaning of identity and how people see themselves and others.
The difference between Redefy and many of the other anti-stereotype organizations out there is that this one is operated by and for kids. …
Most people can understand overt slurs and epithets, but Redefy’s mission isn’t about bullying, it’s about fixing the way people perceive others, Ahmed said. Particularly the perceptions they don’t even realize they have.
Consider, for example, what the word equality means, he said. Until a few decades ago, the connotation had to do with civil and legal rights that would make everyone equal in all ways to straight white men.
But are straight white males really equal to other people, Ahmed asks. For example, women can wear skirts, slacks, jeans, blouses, jewelry, or pretty much anything else and it’s seen as OK, but men don’t get the same leeway.
The point, Ahmed said, is that males often fear expressing their individuality because the perception of a guy who wears, say, something pink or who doesn’t like football or who doesn’t feel the need to prove manliness by putting himself in harm’s way is usually derogatory.
Boys, he said, are afraid of standing out among other boys, and as they age, they turn into men who feel they can’t express themselves without someone mocking them or drawing conclusions about aspects of their personalities that don’t really matter. Ultimately, it’s the boys themselves who perpetuate these issues because they have bought into some social construct of gender roles and identity.
But will black people put up with nonblacks horning in on the benefits, such as getting into Stanford, just because they claim membership in the Coalition of Fringes? Or is that a little too much cultural appropriation?
Things aren’t much better for the girls. Ahmed said he recently spoke to a girl at his school who said she wanted a boyfriend who was at least six feet tall.
He asked her why, and she said she wanted to be able to look up into his eyes. Which sounds sweet on the surface, but the conversation led Ahmed to believe that the girl basically wanted to be looked down on. Made smaller. Made the one to be protected, not be herself. In other words, she willingly is looking to be, in some measure, less than her (eventual) boyfriend, said Ahmed.
He added that the overall point he is trying to make is that males and females buy into prescribed roles that make it hard for anyone who doesn’t fit into them to feel comfortable about who they are. And that we’re defining ourselves in all the wrong ways.
“People are so much more multi-dimensional than one thing,” he said. “It’s OK to be whoever you are.” …
Ahmed’s urge to help and break through preconceived notions is the most fundamental part of him. Being Muslim, he has had to deal with the knee-jerk sentiments Americans have about “Arabs,” although he isn’t Arab, but of Bangladeshi descent.
Ahmed’s father, Shikil, is a former investment banker and now runs his own hedge fund called Princeton Alpha, and his mother, Faria, studied electrical engineering but left her job to be a stay at home mom. She is active in the community, including volunteering as a docent at Princeton University Art Museum.
Faria Abedin (Executive Committee-Co-President) earned a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the University of Maryland and a Master of Science in Computer Science from Johns Hopkins University. Most recently, Faria has started a property management business. She currently serves on the board of the Trenton Area Soup Kitchen, Meals on Wheels, Habitat for Humanity, Princeton Girlchoir, Stuart Parent Association, Advisory board of Muslim Advocates and as a docent at the Princeton University Art Museum.
Faria is very interested in engaging in efforts that promote an American Muslim identity for our youth, which for her includes interfaith dialogue.
That got me wondering whether Ziad might be related through his mother Faria Abedin to Hillary’s right hand gal Huma Abedin.
But Faria Abedin is not the name of any of Huma’s siblings, so a familial relationship (if any) wouldn’t be all that close. But Huma is said to have 54 first cousins, so I wouldn’t rule out Faria Abedin being related to Huma in some fashion. But there’s no evidence for it beyond surname, and Islamic surnames tend to be repetitious.
Or no evidence other than this picture of Ziad and Huma that Ziad tweeted.
But like I said, there aren’t a lot of unique names in Islamic cultures, so this could just be a coincidence.
… Ahmed said that being Bangladeshi, even though he was born in Princeton, people sometimes assume that he either doesn’t speak English or pelt him with perceptions that his familial homeland is a gaping slum. He visits Bangladesh every few years and assures people that the whole country isn’t mired in abject destitution.
Of course, if any familial homeland could be described as a Gaping Slum, it’s Bangladesh. But as T.S. Eliot would ask, “After such knowledge, what forgiveness?”
One person who assumed he would not speak English was a young lady he met on a July trip to Costa Rica, where he helped build a recreation center in a poor area. The girl’s surprise gave him the opportunity to convert one more young mind to his lesson that making assumptions of any kind is not a good approach.
As for the future, Ahmed said that whatever his major in college, he’ll minor in social justice. From third grade he wanted to be an architect and even went to Oxford University in eighth grade to do an architecture program. Part of his reason for going to Costa Rica was to get some practical building knowledge. But lately Ahmed is thinking other thoughts than architecture. Maybe business.
“After I get my business degree, the world’s mine,” he said. But he also knows he’ll change his mind again before he gets to college.
Whatever he becomes as an adult, he’s sure of two things — he wants a better world for his children so that they can grow up comfortable and safe in who they are, and he is going to do something great.
One trend we’ve been tracking at iSteve recently is Tiger Children taking over the social justice jihadi racket. You might think that just because you are poor and black that you’d get a leg up in the struggle for, say, a leftist NGO job, but … look out! The hardest-charging immigrants are coming from 10,000 miles away to outhustle you for your black privilege. These well-fed scions of Asia’s upper classes just want it all more than some poor African-American kid from the slums and they’re willing to be the most insufferable brown-nosers ever to get their hands on some juicy black privilege.
Is your activism performative or substantive? One New Jersey teen knew exactly how to show his answer to that question when filling out his application to Stanford University. Asked “What matters to you, and why?” the teen could think of only one thing: #BlackLivesMatter.
Ziad Ahmed wrote the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter 100 times, and that one act of activism paid off. According to a Mic profile of Ahmed, he received his letter of acceptance from Stanford on Friday.
Ahmed, who is a senior at Princeton (N.J.) Day School, said in an email to Mic: “I was actually stunned when I opened the update and saw that I was admitted. I didn’t think I would get admitted to Stanford at all, but it’s quite refreshing to see that they view my unapologetic activism as an asset rather than a liability.” …
Ahmed told Mic that his “unapologetic progressivism” is a central part of his identity, and he wanted that represented in his application.
He said that his Islamic faith and his commitment to justice are intertwined, and he would not be a good Muslim if he turned a blind eye to the injustices the black community faces on a daily basis. …
Stanford will be lucky to get Ahmed, who has already built a reputation in the activist community. The 18-year-old has been invited to the White House Iftar dinner, led Martin O’Malley’s youth presidential campaign, and interned and worked for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
He’s also founded two youth organizations and delivered a TEDxTalk about the dangers and impact of stereotypes from his perspective as a Muslim teen.
In addition to Stanford, Ahmed was admitted to Princeton and Yale.
He is an American-Muslim, Bangladeshi, and passionate social justice activist. Ziad founded a teen organization, redefy (www.redefy.org), committed to furthering equality. Redefy has grown immensely with over 250 students internationally on the team, over 3,000 likes on facebook, and over 60,000 hits on redefy.org.
His work has been commended by President Barack Obama personally, PBS, CCTV, and other notable sources.
Ziad has also worked for the Martin O’Malley 2016 Presidential Campaign, holding the role of Co-Head of YouthForOMalley. As he hopes to further his political engagement, he has also interned with Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman in her district office. He has also interned for the US State Department as a VSFS intern. Furthermore, he also volunteered for the Hillary Clinton 2016 Presidential Campaign, focusing on Muslim Outreach efforts.
As an aspiring entrepeneuer, Ziad has co-founded JÜV Consulting Inc. (www.juvconsulting.com), which is a youth consulting confirm.
Slogan: “Current, Curated, Creative: Meet Generation Z, the generation after Millennials, the seemingly unidentifiable generation of current teenagers: sought after as customers and misunderstood as people. Understanding teens is posing a growing challenge to companies, non-profits, and brands everywhere.
“JÜV Consulting provides current, curated, and creative solutions to that challenge.”
He serves as the CVO of the company,
What’s a CVO?
Oh, no, just as I feared: “Chief Visionary Officer.”
and is excited to further the platform that seeks to empower teens with the opportunity to communicate directly with businesses about what exactly appeals to youth. Additionally, he was invited to give a TEDxTalk in Panama City, Panama that can be viewed here:
When Ziad Ahmed founded the organization Redefy to help teenagers recognize and remove cultural stereotypes, he never imagined that just two years later he would be dining with President Obama at the White House. But on June 22, that is exactly where the 16-year-old Princeton Day School (PDS) student found himself — and not just at any table. At the annual White House Iftar, which marks the traditional breaking of the fast observed by Muslims during Ramadan, the president chose to sit with Ziad and seven other young people and engage them in conversation. As if that wasn’t enough, Mr. Obama singled Ziad out in his speech.
“They’re Muslim Americans like Ziad Ahmed,” he said. “As a Bangladeshi-American growing up in New Jersey, he saw early on that there was not enough understanding in the world. So two years ago, he founded Redefy, a website to push back against harmful stereotypes by encouraging teens like him — he’s only 16; I think our youngest guest tonight — to share their stories. Because, in Ziad’s words, ‘ignorance can be defeated through education.’ He wants to do his part to make sure that ‘Muslims can be equal members of society and still hold onto their faith and identity.’ So we’re very proud of you, Ziad.”
“The whole thing was just mind-blowing,” Ziad said this week. “It’s the most prestigious event Muslim Americans get invited to. I just thought I’d be at some table, but Obama sat with us for an hour.”
The invitation to the White House came after MTV News profiled Ziad’s work with Redefy, as well as later efforts to inspire teen forums on racial profiling. Last April, the organization launched #PrincetonAgainstRacism, a social media campaign in which 125 portraits of people were taken at PDS and the Communiversity street fair, asking them to finish the prompt “I stand against racism because …” …
The son of a hedge fund manager
I’m guessing Ziad Ahmed’s dad is Shakil Ahmed. Here’s a 2011 profile of this “secret genius” during his days at Citi before he started his own hedge fund.
and a stay-at-home mom who does property management, Ziad was first inspired to take action the summer before ninth grade. “That summer, when I was 14, I noticed that in the community, people needed a platform by which they could be educated about minority experience,” he said. “I found a lot of ignorance — not malicious hate, just innocent ignorance. I wanted to initiate positive change at school, so I decided to create Redefy.”
The organization was officially launched that September. Today the leadership team has six people and representatives as far as Brazil and Pakistan, whom Ziad met through summer programs he has attended. …
The idea is to produce “measurable change,” Ziad said. “Our mission in 2014 was to promote integration. For this year, it is to reduce racial prejudice and hate.” … “It’s hard to hate somebody you know.”
But I could imagine making an exception in Ziad’s case.
Key to Redefy’s mission is equality for everyone. “All any of us want is a world that’s safe and accepting for our children,” Ziad said. …
Ziad and his team do workshops at local schools and hold bi-monthly conversations about current events. Media coverage led to the story by MTV News, “the most exciting thing that ever happened to me,” he said. “To get that coverage on national news was mind-blowing.” …
Among Ziad’s table-mates were Samantha Elauf, who won a Supreme Court case against the Abercrombie company after she was denied employment because she wore a traditional head scarf; Munir Khalif, the child of Somali immigrants who was accepted into all eight Ivy League schools and created an organization to help children in East Africa get an education; …
“[Obama] had read about me, and he told me to keep doing the work I’m doing. I was thrilled. A lot of people wanted to speak with him about different things, and he was so articulate, kind, and witty.”
Not surprisingly, the experience was an inspiration for Ziad to expand his work with Redefy….
“I was up till 4 a.m. thinking about this,” he said. “I want all kids in Princeton to get involved. Because one of my biggest obstacles has been trying to engage kids who aren’t particularly passionate about social justice. …”
And here are excerpts from the collected poems of Ziad Ahmed:
… a sliver of white light beamed through the purgatory
I winced not thinking anything of it …
My parents told me later
that they too were once blinded
by that same intense pasty flash .
My baby brother cried for the warmth of the sun
but we gave him the warmth of white milk
to drown out his sobs.
It took me a lifetime to realize that
that light was the whitewashing of our reality
and even in that word
we claim that oppression
is somehow clean.
I pull back the blinds
but I see nothing
in a world
that doesn’t see me.
Okay, I get it, you don’t like white people.
The Mythology of Reality
We dare not question the legitimacy of fact,
the thought of rebellion far too abstract.
The earth is flat. Pluto is a planet. Guns make us safer. English is the official language of this great nation. Women are more emotional. Black people are more dangerous. Muslims are terrorists. The axis of evil is our greatest threat. Homosexuality is a sin. Native-American genocide did not occur. Andrew Jackson is a hero. Blame the victim. #AllLivesMatter.
The lies are everywhere,
so much so that I begin to question if I am aware.
In the summer of 2015, at a Cornell University camp for high school students, a teenager from California named Melinda Guo met a boy from New Jersey named Ziad Ahmed. They shared an interest in business, marketing, and philanthropy. “You’re probably going to be the only person I keep in touch with after this,” Ahmed told Guo.
… Ahmed was devoted to a diversity nonprofit he’d started, which had gotten him invited to the White House’s annual iftar dinner—held after sundown during Ramadan—the previous June. Guo and Ahmed hoped to work on something together, and that October, Ahmed called Guo with a pitch. He wanted to create a consulting firm focused on people like themselves: members of Generation Z. Those born after 1996 make up almost a quarter of the U.S. population and wield $44 billion in buying power.
… “One day I was like, ‘Wait, what about Jüv,’ ” Guo says. It brought to mind juvenile or rejuvenate. Plus, the umlaut looked cool.
Commenter Sid observes
This is a key reason why I find myself more and more opposed to legal immigration altogether each year.
His dad worked at Citi and has his own hedgefund… Great, model immigrant, right? His son is still stealing slots from our “top” schools and Affirmative Action rights from blacks, all the while bashing the United States, our history, and our culture.
The boy has no original thoughts, has done nothing but pad his resume, but is still showered with praise and support from Hillary, Obama, and the other loser. Oh, dear, and he’s still oppressed!
It’s also sickening how our culture actively pushes ethnic minorities to despise the US. It’s just madness. Many immigrants come relieved and grateful to be in America, but then their children find new ways to feel oppressed, largely because they’re urged to in school.
In summary, I don’t see the benefit in accepting immigrants if their children will take our spots and hate us while doing it. If you’re able to work on STEM projects, maybe, but if you’re just here to enrich yourself in fields like finance or law, then stay home and fix your own country.
You can read more hilarious Ziad-generated content in my subsequent post:
Earlier today, Mary Spellman resigned from her position as Assistant Vice President and Dean of Students at Claremont McKenna College. The resignation occurred in response to a protest that occurred yesterday, which was centered on the idea that Dean Spellman had not done enough to create a safe space on campus for students from marginalized backgrounds. The protests were catalyzed by an email Spellman sent to a student in response to an article that student had written for The Student Life earlier this week.
What happened was that student Lisette Espinosa sent Dean Spellman an article Espinosa had written. Here’s a representative sample:
Within the first weeks of school, I told an upperclassman Latino that I felt like I was admitted to fill a racial quota. Why would they want me here? Impostor syndrome is prevalent among first-generation students. These feelings caught me by surprise as I had never known what it felt like to be the “minority” in my predominantly immigrant, low-income Latinx hometown.
“Latinx” is a new one for me.
The week after classes started, I cried at the Chicanx/Latinx New Student Retreat, where I felt comfortable enough to voice my concerns about the school. Feelings of inadequacy have haunted me throughout my time at CMC, and my struggles with anxiety and depression first arose at the end of my second year.
Students of color often report feeling unwelcome at predominantly-white institutions, and CMC is far from an exception. Our campus climate and institutional culture are primarily grounded in western, white, cisheteronormative upper to upper-middle class values. Last school year, approximately 60 percent of undergraduate students did not qualify for financial aid based on ability to pay. And it was homophobia and transphobia on campus that encouraged me to complete a gender studies sequence. My second year on campus, the LGBTQ-related posters in the Stark elevator were consistently being ripped, written on, and literally clawed at.
The CMC administration knows the college needs a lot of work. As mentioned in their most recent Campus Climate Task Force (CCTF) report: “By some, CMC is perceived as an institution that fails to prioritize diversity and lacks sensitivity to diversity issues.” In a formal report released by CMC in 2013, the Climate Task Force, which was composed of students, faculty, and staff, agreed that the college needs to do considerably more to support its students of marginalized identities and backgrounds. In fact, the report outlines CMC’s long history of resisting this type of change.
Here’s the fatal email the Dean sent in reply:
Obviously, the administrator was agreeing with the aggrieved minority, but reading comprehension isn’t a strong suit among the campus mob.
If you are a white grownup employed on a college campus, it seems like the safest tactic in 2015 is to have zero individual dealings with members of the neo-privileged classes. Just give them all As, but otherwise insulate yourself from any interaction with them beyond the blandest, most pro-forma.
I first wrote about Claremont McKenna’s troubles providing the Diverse with a Comfortable Climate eleven years ago in “Hate Hoax.”
By the way, the student body at Claremont McKenna is currently only 42% white American, with white Canadians and white Europeans accounting for a few more percent.
RICHMOND, Va. (AP) — The fraternity that was the focus of a debunked Rolling Stone article about a gang rape filed a $25 million lawsuit against the magazine Monday, saying the piece made the frat and its members “the object of an avalanche of condemnation worldwide.”
The complaint, filed in Charlottesville Circuit Court, also names Sabrina Rubin Erdely as a defendant. It is the third filed in response to the November 2014 article entitled “A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA.” Three individual fraternity members and recent graduates are suing for at least $225,000 each, and a university associate dean who claims she was portrayed as the “chief villain” is suing the magazine for more than $7.5 million. …
However, details in the lengthy narrative did not hold up under scrutiny by other media organizations. For example, Phi Kappa Psi did not host any social event at its house on the day of the alleged gang rape as the article claimed. Additional discrepancies led Rolling Stone to commission an examination by the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, which said in a blistering report that Rolling Stone failed at virtually every step, from the reporting by Erdely to an editing process that included high-ranking staffers.
You can always tell whether the fix is in — are the media trying to CYA on this by making it sound as technical and tedious as possible? — by whether or not they mention the two words “Haven Monahan.” Without the words “Haven Monahan,” this is just a boring story about proper procedures not being followed. With the words “Haven Monahan,” however, it’s hilarious.
According to Google News, the words “Haven Monahan” do not appear in any articles about this lawsuit anywhere in the news media today.
NEW HAVEN, CONN. — A crowd of hundreds stopped traffic on city streets surrounding the Yale University campus Monday in a march to show solidarity with minority students who say they are barred from full participation at the Ivy League school. …
The university’s president, Peter Salovey, who last Thursday told minority students in a closed-door meeting that the university had “failed” them, greeted students after the march on Monday. Salovey said he welcomes students’ efforts to improve the university and clarified his view that Yale has failed its minority students.
“What I said on Thursday is if there are students who don’t feel welcome here, we need to accept that as an area where we can do better,” Salovey said in a brief interview. “And we must do better.”
Salovey pledged at the end of last week to unveil a series next steps before Thanksgiving in a university-wide effort to improve the experiences of students of color. He said that might come through “formal committee processes” but also extensive “informal interactions.”
“People really have to feel like they can express themselves, whatever their views are, in an environment that is open to them,” he said.
That question — of the right to free expression — has come into sharp focus in Silliman College, one of Yale’s 12 residential communities, which has been a focus of the racial tensions here. Nicholas Christakis, the Silliman master at the center of a campus debate over speech and sensitivity, spoke with students on Sunday in the living room of his home at the college.
Christakis apologized for his role in a controversy that erupted the day before Halloween when his wife, Erika Christakis, the associate master at Silliman, challenged a campus-wide request that students be sensitive when considering costumes that could be offensive. An early childhood educator, she advised Silliman students either to “look away” or to voice their discomfort, counsel that drew a sharp rebuke from minority students. The pair defended the e-mail on social media last week, suggesting that the uproar was emblematic of “campus censorship culture.”
“I have disappointed you and I’m really sorry,” Nicholas Christakis told about 100 students gathered in his living room on Sunday for a meeting also attended by Jonathan Holloway, the dean of Yale College, and other university administrators. Christakis said his encounter on Thursday with students in the college’s courtyard, in which numerous black women upbraided him for being inattentive to them, broke his heart, according to a voice recording of the conversation provided to The Washington Post.
“I mean it just broke my heart,” Christakis said. “I thought that I had some credibility with you, you know? I care so much about the same issues you care about. I’ve spent my life taking care of these issues of injustice, of poverty, of racism. I have the same beliefs that you do … I’m genuinely sorry, and to have disappointed you. I’ve disappointed myself.”
Hasn’t anybody learned anything from Donald Trump? When you are in the right, never apologize.
Christiakis, by the way, is a superstar with tenure, an endowed chair, and is a professor in two separate departments. From Wikipedia:
Nicholas A. Christakis (born May 7, 1962) is an American sociologist and physician known for his research on social networks and on the socioeconomic and biosocial determinants of behavior, health, and longevity. He is the Sol Goldman Family Professor of Social and Natural Science at Yale University. He directs the Human Nature Lab, and he is the Co-Director of the Yale Institute for Network Science. Until July 2013, he was Professor of Medical Sociology in the Department of Health Care Policy and a Professor of Medicine in the Department of Medicine at Harvard Medical School; a Professor of Sociology in the Department of Sociology in the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences; and an Attending Physician at the Harvard-affiliated Mt. Auburn Hospital.
From 2009 to 2013, Christakis and his wife, Erika Christakis, were Co-Masters of Pforzheimer House, one of Harvard’s twelve residential houses. In February 2015, it was announced that Christakis would become the new master of Silliman College at Yale University, perhaps the first person to serve in this role at both Yale and Harvard.
In 2009, he was named to the Time 100, Time magazine’s list of the 100 most influential people in the world. In 2009 and again in 2010, Christakis was named by Foreign Policy magazine to its list of top global thinkers.
He was elected to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences in 2006, and he was named a Fellow at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 2010. …
Upon graduating in 1995, he was recruited by the University of Chicago, where he started as an Assistant Professor with joint appointments in Departments of Sociology and Medicine. Six years after arriving at Chicago, Christakis was awarded tenure in both Sociology and Medicine. However, in 2001, Christakis left the University of Chicago to take up a position at Harvard. In 2013, Christakis moved his lab to Yale University, where he is appointed as a Professor of Sociology and a Professor of Medicine, with additional appointments in Evolutionary Biology and Biomedical Engineering. …
Christakis has practiced as a home hospice physician, taking care of home-bound, dying patients. In Boston, from 2002 to 2006, Christakis worked as an attending physician on the Palliative Medicine Consult Service at Massachusetts General Hospital. In 2006, he moved to Mount Auburn Hospital, and in 2013, he moved to the Department of Medicine at Yale University.
If you are wondering what “master of Silliman College” means, I can explain because Rice U. has the same set-up. A “college” at Rice or Yale, or a “house” at Harvard, is a dormitory that is more of a long-lasting community than the typical dormitory that students shuffle in and out of. It’s like a randomly chosen fraternity house. At Rice, I spent all four years living in Sid Richardson College, one of eight dorms with its own dining hall. The food was pretty awful (Rice back then had a central kitchen and trucked the meals around to the eight dining halls), but eating all your meals with the same 250 people builds a sense of esprit de corps (perhaps especially if the food is as bad as it was at Rice).
A professor is hired to be the “master” of the college and moves into an adjoining house, with his or her spouse being the associate master. At Sid Rich, our master was Bill Martin, Rice’s superstar professor (he was always being interviewed on 60 Minutes and the like). Professor Martin is just about the world’s greatest guy, so he was always dreaming up favors to do for me, like getting me invited to dinner with visiting big shots.
I’ve often wondered why this “college” system hasn’t spread to more universities, since it’s a nice blend between dorm and frat living. But maybe one reason is that rare individuals of the caliber of a Christiakis or a Martin have a lot better things to do with their lives than getting screeched at by overgrown adolescents.
One of the older American collegiate jokes is a college president promising to build a university worthy of its football team (this may go back to the U. of Maryland in the early 1950s).
With the U. of Missouri football team firing the president and chairman of the board, it looks like Mizzou will get an administration worthy of its football team, which is 1-5 in conference play and has wracked up quite a record in recent years for sexual assault and domestic violence charges.
A recurrent theme here at iSteve is how conservative millionaires give a lot more to college football than to advancing their ideas. For example, Mizzou is notoriously bad at fundraising compared to powerhouses like the U. of Alabama:
The Missouri athletic department ranks near the bottom of SEC schools in private donations, raising $22 million in the 2013-2014 fiscal year.
But $22 million isn’t insignificant.
On the other hand, the U. of Alabama is swimming in donations. Americans love a winner.
On the other other hand, Manhattan-born Paul Singer uses his giving on Presidential candidates (it was front-page news when he endorsed Marco Rubio), for the Manhattan Institute, and to push for gay marriage, Israel, and more immigration (for America, not Israel). But I can’t find any word of Singer donating to an American college football program. You can buy a lot of think tank staffers for the cost of first rate offensive coordinator.
March was quite a month for college craziness. Besides the annual contest to see who can be most hypocritical over college athletes, theUniversity of California Board of Regents denounced their own Chairman for telling the truth about the system’s efforts to violate the Constitution of the State of California, and the Claremont Colleges were pranked by one of their leftist professors committing a hate crime against herself in order to frame white male conservative students.
Like the crocuses emerging from snow, complaints about what a small percentage of black players in the National Collegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament actually, well, graduate from college are an annual March tradition.
This year, New Republic blogger Gregg Easterbrook began the complaints by noting that graduation rates for African-American malehoopsters run between 28% and 38%. He seems to feel it’s shameful evidence that taskmaster basketball coaches are preventing theirplayers from getting the degrees in microbiology or whatever that would rightfully be their’s if they didn’t have to practice so much. The New York Times soon followed up with a thumbsucker on thisperennial crisis.
My concern is the opposite: How exactly can otherwise rigorous state flagship universities like Illinois or Michigan provide “meaningful educations” and bachelors’ degrees to the majority of their basketball players … without corrupting the university?
After all, the median IQ of college graduates is around 115, while the average IQ of African-Americans is 85.
There’s no reason to assume the typical basketball player has morebook smarts than is the average for his race. In contrast, pro football prospects (black and white) score about 5-10 points higher than their race’s average on the NFL’s mandatory Wonderlic IQ test.
Football, however, is an increasingly complex game. But basketball has been dumbed down strategically, especially on offense (as Easterbrook himself recently noted). Players who grew up idolizing egomaniacal gangsta rappers don’t like to subordinate themselves for good of the team. So the game increasingly emphasizes simply isolating one playerwith the ball and hoping he uses his superior athleticism to improvise a way to get the rock in the hole.
So what do colleges do? Mostly, they corrupt themselves by winkingat cheating and by creating pushover classes, such as Rocks for Jocks(geology) and Clapping for Credit (music), as that hilarious University of Georgia final exam for basketball players recently illustrated. (Sample question: “How many quarters are in a high school basketball game?”)
Sometimes, though, the universities do get righteous, and crack down on recruiting dim bulbs. This is admirable for individual colleges. But what if every college refused to admit gifted athletes just because they were born dumb as a box of rocks? A kid who inherits a 36″ vertical leap and a 72 IQ didn’t ask for that combination. That’s just what he was handed in the genetic lottery. Playing college basketball would probably be the best thing he ever does in his life. It would be cruel to deny him all opportunity to play.
Colleges choosing the former would live out the amateur scholar-athlete ideal. Players would have to carry a full class load and even pass a national exam annually.
In the Open Division, in contrast, colleges would simply license their famous names to profit-seeking team operators. Any athlete under 24 could freely negotiate for the most lucrative contract available, without fear of having to set foot in a classroom. And some portion of payments to athletes under 21 could go into the players’ trust funds until they reached a more mature age.
Reference the above piece using this permanent URL:
Yet, much as they abuse their personal staffs, real billionaires in their pursuit of respectability generally present a disappointingly craven face to the world.
Thus it is particularly surprising that John Moores, the software magnate, owner of the San Diego Padres, and lifelong Democrat who was appointed Chairman of the UC Border of Regents by former California governor Gray Davis, has decided to rock the boat. He bravely wrote in the March 24th Forbes:
“The California electorate voted to stop racial preference in college admission in 1996. Since then UCadministrators have been manipulating the admissionssystem and, I believe, thwarting the law. (Although Ihave been the board’s chairman since 2002, I’m just one vote.) UC, Berkeley, the top school in the UC system, is admitting ‘underrepresented minorities’ with very lowSAT scores while rejecting many applicants with high SATscores.”
A statistical study he personally sponsored led him to conclude:“Sadly, today’s UC admissions policies are victimizing students–not just those unfairly denied admission but also many with low college entrance exam scores who were admitted and can’t compete.”
The San Diego Union Tribune reported: “In an unusual move, the regents censured Moores by voting 8-6 to pass a resolution stating that the views he expressed in a Forbes magazine opinion piece aren’t the views of the board.”
UC officials, however, were forced to admit, in the words of Stuart Silverstein of the Los Angeles Times:
You should note that the UC apparatchiks found discrimination even though their study was cleverly designed to minimize it by comparingthe admission rates of students with not just their peers with same high school grades and test scores, but also the same family income and parental educational background. The latter two items reflect the end-run that the system tried to make around Proposition 209 bygiving lower class students a big break in admissions. (Incredibly,having been shot now helps you get into UCLA!) Yet, even that isn’t good enough. So UC is still putting its thumb on the scales to benefit blacks and Latinos at the expense of whites and Asians.
Affirmative action in freshman admissions at UC is a particularly stupid policy because UC schools traditionally flunk out a lot of freshmen andsophomores, and then replace them with transfers from second tier Cal State colleges and third tier community colleges. This means that a lot of the more promising black and brown high school seniors get admitted due to racial preferences—then get tossed out within a couple of years in favor of less-talented students from community colleges.
That the UC schools are cheating is made clear by the experience of Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. This is the finest college in the second-tier Cal State system, with test score averages above several of the nine UC campuses. The LA Times sniffed:
“Only 12.9% of Cal Poly’s undergraduates belong tothose traditionally underrepresented minority groups …That is the lowest rate among the 30 California publicuniversities with comprehensive undergraduate programs. Even with a state ban on affirmative action, enrollment of underrepresented groups has risen at other Cal State and UC campuses in recent years. At Cal Poly, the numbers started tumbling from a high of 18.9% in thelate 1990s and have never rebounded.”
Being an underfunded Cal State school, Cal Poly SLO admits students by GPA and test scores—the way the UC schools did before Prop. 209encouraged them to implement expensive “holistic” admissions in order to make the criteria so fuzzy that they could get away with violating the law against racial preferences.
Paradoxically, Cal Poly’s law-abidingness has gotten it into legal trouble:
“In January, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund sued Cal Poly for discrimination,contending that the campus’ heavy reliance on the SAT penalizes Latinos because they generally score lower than whites on the exam… Victor Viramontes, a defense fund lawyer handling the case, said the university compounds the problem by trumpeting the high average scores its students earn—a factor that could turn off potential Latino and black applicants.”
UC Regents Chairman Moores also doesn’t think much of the sacredcow of minority outreach. According to an insightful LA Times article by Alan Zarembo, “Putting Them to the Test: The head of the UC Board of Regents wants low SAT scorers—even his own sons—kept out of thesystem. Hardship doesn’t matter, he says,” Moores
“…accuses university outreach programs of unfairlyplanting dreams of Berkeley in the minds of poor minority students at underachieving high schools. He’d rather spend the money on improving their elementaryeducation.”
Many pundits simply assume that outreach programs, such as flying black and Hispanic high school seniors from LA to the Berkeley campus for the weekend at taxpayer expense, somehow creates moretalented minority students. Instead, it simply shuffles the existing ones around. A 2003 LA Times article by Carol Pogash makes clear that the chief goal of the “Fly to Berkeley” program is to lure minorities away from the UC system’s other flagship school, UCLA. How this expensive zero sum game benefits the taxpayers is not explained.
Perhaps even more heretically, Moores thinks the academic-industrialcomplex should keep its mitts off the less bright half of the population. As the LA Times‘ Zarembo reports:
“When it came time for college last year, John J. Moores encouraged his twin sons to aim low.’I’m fairlyindifferent about college for a lot of kids,’ said Moores, chairman of the University of California Board of Regents. ‘I don’t think it’s all that important.’ The boys were more suited to the football field than the classroom, Moores said. They would have no place at UC. Neither would thousands of other students already there, if he had his way.”
Fascinatingly, Moores has in effect been conducting his own personal nature and nurture study: his identical twins are adopted. A venture capitalist friend who worked for Moores told me:
“This LA Times article came out this past Tuesday, and I learned of it at lunch that day with its subject (John J. Moores). He had actually missed our Board of Directors meeting because he was off helping his twin wards negotiate the process of becoming construction union apprentices that day. Basically, I hold John to be a saint,because he did something I would never even think ofdoing, taking guardianship of (identical) twin boys whose parents, upon divorcing, decided neither wanted custody of their children. He and his wife raised them as their own and in-person, rather than farming them out to staffers.”
Although Moores’ twins are not mental giants (both scored under 900 on the SAT), they are physical giants. My friend said, “Interestingly, the [LA Times] account under-describes the twins. They are more like 380 pounds [each ], and an absolutely terrifyingamount of that bulk is lean muscle mass.”
Moores has guided his boys to playing at football factory colleges and then into blue-collar trades. He’s not just courageous, but wise.
Reference the above piece using this permanent URL:
The Claremont University Consortium consists of seven linked private colleges east of Los Angeles. They are best known for some venerable scholars, such as the greatest management guru, Peter F. Drucker and the famed political philosopher Harry V. Jaffa, at the Claremont McKenna campus. In recent years, however, the administrations of thecampuses have been trying to shed the conservative reputation that Drucker and Jaffa brought.
Many students appear to have responded to these administration cues by developing a politically-correct paranoia about purported racist white students secretly infesting the idyllic campus. On March 9, Kerri Dunn, a white female visiting professor of psychology at Claremont McKenna, dramatically announced at anti-“hate” forum that she had just become the victim of a hate crime: her car was covered withracist and anti-Semitic graffiti.
The administrations canceled classes the next day, at a cost of approaching one million dollars in wasted tuition, and staged a huge rally where students shouted out how much they hated hate. Dunn gave a rapturously received rabble-rousing speech in which she claimed:
“This was a well planned out act of terrorism. (Applause)And I don’t believe for one second it was one person. I think that there’s a group here, a small group, but I do believe that there is a group here that perpetuates this in all different kinds of ways.”
The college presidents expressed hope that students wouldn’t be disillusioned. Nancy Y. Bekavac of Scripps proclaimed: “Above all, we must focus on this: even if the vandalized car and slogans were a hoax, our responses last week were right and appropriate…”
In the aftermath, I exchanged emails with the presidents of three of the seven campuses. Here is a typical dialogue:
Sailer: “Here is my concern. I have two adolescent sons, both fine students, and I had been casually considering the Claremont colleges for them when the time comes, but the events of March have left me shaken. Not just the exposure of that criminal professor — after all, that was hardly unexpected. You and I both know from the long chain of collegiate hate hoaxes that when the timing and details of a college hate crime are almost too good to be true, it typically is too good to be true.
“But reading in the Pomona student newspaper about the cancellation of classes on March 10th, and the details of the Red Guard-style rally was enough to leave me deeply fearful of exposing my two white male children to such an atmosphere of anti-white male hysteria. Reading about chanting mobs ofBlackshirts protesting this obvious Reichstag fire incident also left me feeling sorry for poor Professor Drucker. He probably had a flashback to his days in Europe in the 1930s.
“Reading the student message boards as well, I am struck by overall atmosphere of emotion triumphing over reason, of hate over logic, on your campus. A remarkable fraction of your students appear to see themselves (even before the hoax) as victims, oppressed by white males like my sons. I guess college students shouldn’t be blamed too much for childish emotions, but I haven’t seen anyone in a position of authority telling them to grow up, that they are among the most privileged youngpeople in America. The various administrations seem intent on coddling the whiners and validating their anti-white male hysterias. In summary, what do you and your colleagues intend to do to make the Claremont Colleges less of a hostile environment for white males like my sons?”
President: “I really do not think that there is in any sense ‘anti white male hysteria’ here at XXX or the other Claremont Colleges, nor are your allusions to the Red Guard or the Reichstag in the least bit appropriate. The activities on the day when classes were cancelled were fully inclusive (and many white males played particularly active roles) and the full campus community felt that this was a very positive day for everyone involved. If you had been here you would have felt the positive energy in the student body, as well as a commitment to change that I share. Building a stronger college community is an important job for all of us.”
I fired back.
Sailer: “As a potential paying customer, I can’t say I’mreassured by your stating that having your entireuniversity jerked around by a criminal was a ‘verypositive day for everyone involved.’ I don’t know whatthis ‘commitment to change that I share’ entails, but Ihaven’t heard anything that suggests it would bepositive for my sons, especially since the basic agendawas driven by a criminal identity politics warrior. What I saw was a professor at the Claremont Consortium tryingto frame the white male conservative students in her own classes (such as my sons might be in a few years time) for her own crime … with the FBI! (Look at her statements implying it was probably somebody in one of her classes.) Yet all I’m hearing from you college presidents is that this turned out to be a very positive day for everyone involved.
What if there had been no witnesses to prove Professor Dunn a liar? You all at the top certainly didn’t show anyreasonable form of skepticism considering the hugenumber of campus hate crime frauds very similar to thisthat have been perpetrated over the years. You’re luckysome obnoxious rightwing kid in one of her classes didn’tget beaten up by a mob or sent to prison in her place.
I’ve read lots of your student online discussions and thetheme that keeps coming up is that lots of your studentsclaim to be scared of physical violence by white male conservative students (e.g., my boys). Obviously, this is absurd. You’ve got a major problem on your campus with hysteria driven by identity politicians, and you need to clean house. Your colleges are already the laughingstock of America, and your reputation will only get worse if you don’t take strong steps.
I haven’t gotten a reply to that. Funny thing.
[email Paula Gann, president of the seven-college system]
Reference the above piece using this permanent URL:
Email me at SteveSlr *at* aol*dot*com (make the obvious substitutions between the asterisks; you don’t have to capitalize an email address, I just included the capitals to make clear the logic — it’s my name without a space and without the vowels in “Sailer” that give so many people, especially irate commenters, trouble.)
I always appreciate my readers’ help, especially monetary. Here’s how you can help:
First: You can use PayPal (non-tax deductible) by going to the page on my old blog here. PayPal accepts most credit cards. Contributions can be either one-time only, monthly, or annual.
P.O Box 4142
Valley Village, CA 91617-0142
Third: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring “subscription” donations.) Note: the VDARE site goes up and down on its own schedule, so if this link stops working, please let me know.
I’m using Coinbase as a sort of PayPal for Bitcoins.
The IRS has issued instructions regarding Bitcoins. I’m having Coinbase immediately turn all Bitcoins I receive into U.S. dollars and deposit them in my bank account. At the end of the year, Coinbase will presumably send me a 1099 form for filing my taxes.
Payments are not tax deductible.
Below are links to two Coinbase pages of mine. This first is if you want to enter a U.S. dollar-denominated amount to pay me.
Fifth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrAT aol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.
Sixth: if you have a Chase bank account (or even other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com — replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it’s StevenSailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.) There is no 2.9% fee like with PayPal or Google Wallet, so this is good for large contributions.
Seventh: send money via the Paypal-like Google Wallet to my Gmail address(that’s isteveslrATgmail .com — replace the AT with a @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Here’s the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: “You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps.” You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.
You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.
Or you can send money via credit card (Visa, MasterCard, AmEx, Discover) with the industry-standard 2.9% fee. (You don’t need to put money into your Google Wallet Balance to do this.)
Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone — the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).
Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google’s free Gmail email service. Here’s how to do it.