Affirmative action has a dark side of its force, mainly its propping up those who don’t do as well (if they’re a certain, approved minority) and punishes those who excel (if they’re not a minority). More simply: smart kid is okay, but right kind of minority kid is better, regardless of skills. Hey, I don’t think it’s right, that’s just how affirmative action works. Kind of like our tax system: do well, get punished. In this case, Asian-Americans are having their hands light-sabered off because they’re doing too gosh darn well in comparison with everyone else, including white students. Take this example:
MICHAEL WANG, a young Californian, came second in his class of 1,002 students; his ACT score was 36, the maximum possible; he sang at Barack Obama’s inauguration; he got third place in a national piano contest; he was in the top 150 of a national maths competition; he was in several national debating-competition finals. But when it came to his university application he faced a serious disappointment for the first time in his glittering career. He was rejected by six of the seven Ivy League colleges to which he applied.
“I saw people less qualified than me get better offers,” says Mr Wang. “At first I was just angry. Then I decided to turn that anger to productive use.” He wrote to the universities concerned. “I asked: what more could I have done to get into your college? Was it based on race, or what was it based on?” He got vague responses—or none. So he complained to the Department of Education. Nothing came of it. “The department said they needed a smoking gun.”
Not to get all preachy about this, but what did we expect would happen when we value “diversity” of race (and only race) over merit and aptitude? The article goes on to explain why Asian-Americans excel more than every other race (hint: hard work plays a key role), and yet I still have to ask, so what? The issue at hand here isn’t why Asian-Americans do better in school and business than every other race, the question should be why are they being punished and passed over in favor of someone of a different race who doesn’t rock the world as much?
Answer: racism. Real, actual racism. Colleges are interested in having a mixed bag of skin colors, not necessarily the best students. Also the liberal idea of “fairness.” Rather than people being judged on the quality of their character or their talents (someone said something about that once, a while back…someone famous…hmmm), accomplishments or smarts, they’re being judged on their race. Treated like playing cards in a racial game of Go-Fish. Yes, do you have any Mexicans? Go fish. Do you have any Polynesians? Yes, but just one! USE IT WISELY.
Harvard defends the use of race as a criterion in admission—“a class that is diverse on multiple dimensions, including on race, transforms the educational experience of students from every background and prepares our graduates for an increasingly pluralistic world”—and describes its admissions process as “holistic”, meaning it takes into account considerations wider than mere test scores.
Read: According to affirmative action policies, all Black-Americans are the same. All Asian-Americans are the same. All White-Americans are the same. They’re all ingredients that can be tossed in and baked and thirty minutes later, out comes the perfect pie.