Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by siosonel 2926 days ago
We must.

Asians have not been systematically denied entry to the NBA for hundreds of years. I do not deny that there are ethnic differences or cultural priorities. But if a group of people has been systematically told for a very long time that they cannot achieve anything beyond being a slave, then that oppressed group would probably not bother to engage in technical or scientific pursuits, nor would they have time to pursue higher education because they were not allowed to do so.

Think about that: a group of people have been systematically given a chance to prove themselves, while another group was systematically prevented from doing the same. It's a systemic issue that requires a comprehensive solution. It must start with assuming the very assumption that you are questioning, since how else could start from a clean slate?

(1. And no, race blindness is not starting from a clean slate, it's denying the systematically-imposed disadvantages that already exists. 2. Your examples posing asians against blacks and asians rub me the wrong way, a bit like race baiting although I don't know you enough or the tone of your explanations to say for sure.)

2 comments

The Asians are now systematically denied entry to the Academy and you are supporting it now.
No one from my high school in a southern capital city went to the ivy league as far as I know. I was a top student there, ended up getting my phd in cs from a top 20 research university, but not the ivy league. I have been on the west cost for 25 years working in top tech companies as a dev and leader (faangs etc) and I have never met a single person from my undergrad school - I have met people from my grad school. Should I have had a chance to go to an ivy league school or mit etc? Perhaps, I did apply but was rejected. I felt like because I was a white kid it didn't help me out there. Today I have so many people from mit, harvard, cmu etc working for me.

But I did just fine, there was plenty of opportunity to succeed in other ways. But would the schools have benefited with a single person from my state or city, instead of more people from a big city prep school on the west coast? My family was much poorer than the typical white rich legacy at an ivy league. But i was white. Maybe it wouldn't have made a difference and I'm fortunate, I doubt it hurt me.

I don't feel like I had a bad experience, but I'm just throwing this out there for the people complaining about prejudice because they are asian. My current company is full of successful, well educated asians, yet there were almost no black devs at google. Same for women. It was partly because there weren't any to interview or hire.

I am an Asian. I am against systematic denial of anyone. I say let anyone attend the school of their choice, using online access to overcome space constraints.

As an Asian who've experienced discrimination first hand, I am saddened that necessary differences in the gravity of error correction, as applied to group discrimination, is not obvious to everyone. Correcting the effects of slavery is much more important because its effects are much more pervasive. Getting rejected by a top school is not as dire for a group as a while, especially for someone in a group that is not even a minority at those schools. But I could see how someone could say what you said (but hopefully with at least a bit of explanation to back it up?).

Although the "denial of opportunity" seem systematic in both cases - Asians applying to Ivy League schools and enslaved African Americans in my examples - the latter is not due to space constraints. In contrast, Asians have not been or are under-represented. To me, that fact justifies a top school's effort to make access fairer to historically under-represented groups, whose cultural tendencies have been shaped long-term by outright denial.

>Correcting the effects of slavery is much more important because its effects are much more pervasive.

Uh, source?

You're just making an arbitrary value judgement. Who are you to compare the effects of racism-against-blacks against the effects of racism-against-asians? You're making an arbitrary value judgement and then using that value judgement to justify systematic discriminations against Asians.

You're also ignoring the fact that Asians were enslaved too in Japanese internment camps -- and what's more that slavery was more recent than African-American slavery.

Weird to see you throw your own ethnicity under the bus in your haste to agree with the racist value judgements of elite bureaucrats tbh.

And someone who insists on absolute racial blindness is not making a value judgement? Isn't the issue mostly about which group to feel sorry for, why, and how? And you want a literary or published source for that empathy? Or are you saying that it is not self evident that a group, one that has been enslaved for hundreds of years, is not disproportionately poorer, grow up in single-parent households, or experience incarceration? Is that pattern even possible without a history of systematic, long-term oppression?

The way I see it, one group is arguing from a place of historical hardship, and the other is arguing from a place of privilege. I don't mean someone growing up poor in Appalachia as being privileged simply because s/he is white; to me, that historical background definitely counts towards raising diversity. I'm just trying to put myself in other people's shoes. It's not necessarily about race or ethnicity or recentness of oppression, it's the compounded interest of those oppressions and inability to rise out of that enforced debt. Our institutions have to factor that historical indebtedness.

Unless you really put yourself in another person's shoes, I honestly don't think this discussion will go anywhere. I mean, imagine growing up poor in a single household family, going to lowly ranked high schools, being disproportionately more likely to be stopped over and imprisoned for minor offenses, and getting questioned about academic abilities constantly.

> Asians have not been systematically denied entry to the NBA for hundreds of years.

I find this comment goes deeper when I followed Jeremy Lin's progression into the NBA. I suggest anyone who is interested in your comment should read too. Lin wasn't systematically denied entry, but the kind of stuff he faced and endured based on his race - which was admitted to by a coach, was pretty bad.

And I feel this type of behavior that he faced - when your race is in the minority of the place you're trying to get to/be at - can be applied elsewhere. Like Black people thinking that others might think that they got there based on affirmative action and not by merit, or Asian Americans thinking that others think there are "too many Asians" here or the likes.

In some situations, minorities aren't being outright denied by law/whathaveyou but they are put in potentially "hostile" environments where they might feel like they don't belong, which can be akin to being denied socially.

I agree Jeremy Lin's experience in the NBA was not smooth with regards to acceptance, maybe even now. I'm an Asian, and I've experienced social questioning/shocks that you mention.

Having said that, I still hope that the difference in priority and importance is obvious between: (a) correcting the impacts of hundreds of years of systematic outright denial of opportunity in all aspects of life, and (b) a top school's rejection of an applicant who do not belong to an under-represented group and who will likely get admitted in another top school or another very good school.

Yes, I do agree righting wrongs due to system racism with: (a): why do this at the expense of other minorities? It looks like on paper, the majority want to uplift (certain) minorities while keeping themselves safe which seems to be going the other direction when righting their wrongs - they aren't giving up anything, they are still taking opportunities from other minorities.

(b): under-represented because of the monolithic term Asian given to them. A lot of which are in poverty but seem to be overlooked based on being Asian. Someone else also mentioned the supposed under-represented group of Jewish people who stand at 1% but account for 40% of the cohort. Whoever gave those numbers was on this thread too - although I do believe a ratio similar to that is the real figure anyhow.