• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Harvard accused of bias against Asian-Americans

Have you read any of my posts or not?

Yes, that is why I know you are in favour of race-based selection criteria for university admissions, meaning that you favour racial discrimination.
 
Yes, that is why I know you are in favour of race-based selection criteria for university admissions, meaning that you favour racial discrimination.
There you go again - repeating that false narrative.
 
You do realize you're whining over a 1/10,000 chance at getting into harvard for that poor white/asian kid, if the policy was dropped, right?

He sure as **** won't have perfect grades/SAT, 8+ APs, national/international awards and co-authored research that's needed to get in
You can have those stats and still not get in. That's the point. Harvard and other elite universities have always admitted based on "diversity". They can deny you because they needed some left handed violinists. They can deny you because they needed someone who's an aspiring astronaut. They will definitely deny you if a member of the Bush or Clinton Dynasty is an applicant and they have average grades and no extracurricular activities. As many people have already stated...

Legacy and Politicians are the ones who get the most benefits from "unofficial" affirmative action. But the guys keep on harping and pissing and moaning about race, which has very little to do with why someone does or doesn't get into an Ivy. The race baiters increasingly look foolish as the thread continues.
 
Last edited:
lol ok, keep beating this drum of the poor white man getting screwed out of elite colleges by the rich black man. I'm sure in its class of 2400, you might find 1-2 who fit the mold

So you admit the discrimination of whites is happening at harvard and your only response is to say "not that big a deal".!!! Get help please.
 
Elite private schools having a 1/10,000 acceptance rate makes sense mate. That's why they're called elite private schools.

Anyway:

Things Harder Than Getting To Harvard - Business Insider

For the overall applicant, odds are more like 1/1,000 and for the kids of the 1%, much better. My point is people don't begin life with equal chance at success (genetics etc), wealth inequality only increases that disparity, so it's foolish to think that harvard will take only the hardest working high school grads every year, even without affirmative action.

Your list is interesting but i'd bet my bottom dollar that while harvard "can fill its class twice over with valedictorians," most of those rejected walmart apps have a lousy work and legal record. That's why they're applying to walmart. A lot on the list aren't remotely comparable in terms of literal difficulty either. I mean, top tweet of the day? Some of them even reinforce my point of the impact of income inequality:

"The report analyzes the number of people who were born into the lowest income quintile but ended up in the highest income quintile. The results don't bode well for upward socioeconomic mobility.

The chances were below 5% in Atlanta; Charlotte, North Carolina; Jacksonville, Florida; Columbus, Ohio; Dayton, Ohio; Milwaukee; and Indianapolis."

So i maintain that affirmative action to an extent levels the playing field and almost never deprives poor white/asian applicants, who wouldn't get in anyway.
 
I feel universities should accept students based on their intellectual abilities, not on the basis of the colour of their skin. Too bad you disagree.

I don't agree it should use race, but economic background yes. I'm simply denying that even a race based policy will harm lower-middle class white/asian applicants and i have no sympathy for the spoiled brat upper class kids who get rejected because of it. You are taking up a banner of a group that wouldn't give you the time of day (assuming you are not white/asian and upper class)
 
So i maintain that affirmative action to an extent levels the playing field and almost never deprives poor white/asian applicants, who wouldn't get in anyway.

Stop with the lame excuses. If a school was caught awarding whites extra points on their SAT, no excuse would be acceptable. Anyone who supports what harvard does is a racist and a hater of whites and asians.
 
I don't agree it should use race, but economic background yes. I'm simply denying that even a race based policy will harm lower-middle class white/asian applicants and i have no sympathy for the spoiled brat upper class kids who get rejected because of it. You are taking up a banner of a group that wouldn't give you the time of day (assuming you are not white/asian and upper class)

But affirmative action IS based on race and NOT on economic background.
 
So you admit the discrimination of whites is happening at harvard and your only response is to say "not that big a deal".!!! Get help please.

I am always glad to see the self-anointed members of our moral elite, who constantly pretend to be oh-so-evolved, nuanced, and generally superior, reveal the racial animosity they harbor for all to see. White liberal guilt on parade.
 
Back
Top Bottom