[KirinDave]

Show us where graduation criterion is skewed.

An effort is being made to provide opportunity to those with less access to it, but painting affirmative action as a free ride is a malicious category error that needs no debunking, it's simply a garbage argument that involves talking as fast as possible and hoping no one notices.

[guessthejuice]

> Show us where graduation criterion is skewed.

What? Who is talking about graduation criteria?

> An effort is being made to provide opportunity to those with less access to it

That's fine, as long as the criteria is the same.

> but painting affirmative action as a free ride is a malicious category error that needs no debunking

That's called straw man. I said it is discrimination. This is called fact.

> simply a garbage argument that involves talking as fast as possible and hoping no one notices.

As far as I can tell, you are the one talking as fast as possible and hoping no one notices. This is something called projection.

I'm making fairly straightforward assertions. Discrimination is wrong. Simple as that. The japanese shouldn't discriminate against women. We shouldn't discriminate against asians and whites.

[KirinDave]

> Discrimination is wrong. Simple as that. The japanese shouldn't discriminate against women. We shouldn't discriminate against asians and whites.

Then why is it okay to have admisisons standards at all? Don't they inherently discriminate amongst people in such a way as to favor rich people who can afford to give their child the necessary nutrition, time and stability to perform all the rituals that college campuses look for?

> We shouldn't discriminate against asians and whites.

We also have to undo the generation's of economic and social harm principle perpetrated by white people against other ethnic minorities in the US. You can't simply wave away the US's obligations.

I do agree that Asian Americans face a lot of issues in the US and it's unfair how they're treated as a managed ethnic minority that schools like Harvard can keep in a separate managed bucket.

[guessthejuice]

> Then why is it okay to have admisisons standards at all?

Because we want the best and brightest attending these universities? People most capable of actually performing and graduating? Is this a serious question?

> Don't they inherently discriminate amongst people in such a way as to favor rich people who can afford to give their child the necessary nutrition, time and stability to perform all the rituals that college campuses look for?

No. No more than the NBA discriminates.

> We also have to undo the generation's of economic and social harm principle perpetrated by white people against other ethnic minorities in the US.

We have. It's called evening the playing field by ending discrimination. Punishing asians ( who haven't done anything ) or young white students ( who haven't done anything ) is the definition of evil.

> You can't simply wave away the US's obligations.

Once again, we have. It's called ending discrimination.

> I do agree that Asian Americans face a lot of issues in the US and it's unfair how they're treated as a managed ethnic minority that schools like Harvard can keep in a separate managed bucket.

Yes. Discrimination is evil. I'm glad we are agreed. Using your logic, in 20 years, are we going to have to discriminate against blacks to make up for the discrimination against asians/whites today? The neverending cycle of discrimination?

The condescending affirmative action ideology is a new form of "supremacy". The idea that minorities are incapable of overcoming and need "help" is another form of white supremacy. Only this time, it's leftist faction looking down on minorities for social cred.

Discrimination is wrong. Simple as that. You don't achieve equality by removing hurdles from one group of people and putting them in front of another group of people. That's illogical and it's wrong. No amount of rationalization is going to make it right.