If the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action hurts racial minorities, why do Asians not agree?

[bg7]

The socio-economic theory doesn't hold in NYC. The specialized high schools (such as Stuyvesant) have majority Asian demographics (with the smallest minority in the city). The free-lunch percentages and zip codes of the students show that a large percentage of the Asian students come from poor backgrounds (not surprising considering the number of asian immigrants in NYC). The idea that in NYC in the top schools the population is self-selecting highly-educated immigrant parent product does not hold. Its about as bogus as the "culturally-biased tests" mantra that people used to argue until the culture they were apparently biased to starting coming in second (to Asians). That idea died a death.

There are multiple structural and societal problems that non-Asian minorities face. however, the side of success which is under control of the non-Asian minorities (i.e. what behaviors and practices they can adopt, as groups) can be looked at. It isn't, because of a fear of "placing blame" (rather than recognizing it is a multi-faceted approach required). Too often, the knowledge resources aren't there - many minority parents want to help but, having no experience and it and no substantial community-knowledge, are at a loss. Attempts to change this by anyone other than a member of the racial group themselves are seen as condescending and patronizing.

I have two foster children that we took in at 11. They were failing, cutting school, and lost. We gave them a different path (we had the psychological and knowledge tools to do so) and now both are on their way to college (one bachelors, one vocational). They had a challenging start, but it was mostly behavior and stability and adopting certain practices that permitted them to flourish)

[kovert]

Originally Posted by bg7

There are multiple structural and societal problems that non-Asian minorities face.

Don't forget that just because some Americans of color have better outcomes, it doesn't necessarily mean they also don't face structural and societal problems.

If some kids are scrubs, does that mean the league should force all its players to be sissies in order to not hurt anyone's self esteem.

The movement to equalize outcome by dragging everyone down to the lowest of the low denominator is the most ridiculous notion I've ever heard of.

[jade408]

Originally Posted by Natural510

California's Proposition 209 (to much controversy, obviously) did away with affirmative action in its university system almost 20 years ago. Living in Berkeley at the time, I noticed how quickly the universities became very Asian.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the top students from each public high school in California, whether in the suburbs, country or inner-city, are eligible for scholarships to UC schools...which is in effect an economic affirmative-action, something many others (including myself) favor over purely racial affirmative-action. Yet the effect is still that Asians benefit the most, as even in Oakland and inner LA the best students are Asian immigrants who excel due to family/cultural pressure.
At a certain point, it's a "lead a horse to water" proposition. The opportunities are still there, but it begins in the home. Breaking the cycle of mental poverty is more complex than a few AA laws, or telling people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, for that matter.

I started at Cal the last year of prop 209. It was about 33% Asian and 35% white at the time. 10% black and 12% latino if I recall correctly. It wasn't like there was a "lack of asian people" by any means. But what did change a ton in the years since I attended Cal, the black and latino population changed significantly. Now it is about 2% black (and way more "Africans" in that mix) and I do not recall the latino population, but it also dropped significantly. Cal also lost a lot of economic diversity with the shift as well. Whereas when I was a student, the percentage of black kids who had college educated parents or not, was I think roughly 50/50 or similar. Now it is more like 75% of the black kids have college educated parents. There was a similar shift in the Asian population as well, there were more "underrepresented" asians pre-209 than now.

The UC system has become more elitist if you will. It is a sign of the lack of upward mobility and opportunity for those without class advantages. They have started pushing more of the students to the lower tier UCs. And it shifted very quickly. My sister, who would have likely been admitted to Cal for fall semester, wasn't admitted until Spring. Getting into her 2nd choice UCs like Davis and Santa Cruz for the fall. We had similar grades and similar scores, but I was an out of state student. And I'll never know how that shaped my own admittance. (Don't shed any tears for her, she went to a top tier private school instead).