Original. Student reported. Your daily dose of Right-minded news and commentary from across the nation
UPenn student op-ed: Ivy League admissions designed to ‘perpetuate white domination’

There may be no better example of the inherent contradictions espoused by progressive racial bean counters than Lucy Hu’s Tuesday op-ed in the University of Pennsylvania’s Daily Pennsylvanian.

A sophomore from New Zealand studying political science, Hu believes there’s a “serious issue” in elite college admissions which “flies under the radar”: machinations to maintain “white domination.”

Really? The most progressive institutions in America want to preserve white hegemony? Hmm …

Hu glosses over the efforts of the Asian American Coalition for Education — supported by (predominantly white) conservatives — which is endeavoring to halt admissions discrimination against Asians and Asian-Americans; in fact, she says (some of) its measures are “misguided and out of touch.”

And it gets “better”:

It is perfectly justifiable that these Asian American students are discriminated against in order to promote the ideals of affirmative action, such as for diversity and leveling the playing field for disadvantaged minorities. However, what is not justifiable — and in fact unconstitutional — is that they are held to a higher standard than white students, which achieves none of the goals of affirmative action.

So, as long as Asians are held to a higher standard than every other racial demographic sans Caucasians, everything is cool. Check.

From the piece:

When it comes to the Asian-American issue, Ivy League institutions actively work to keep Asians as a minority out of fear of losing a white majority. There is no dearth of evidence that an “Asian quota” exists inside the admissions chambers of schools like Penn.

Firstly, while America’s college-age Asian population doubled between 1992 and 2011, Harvard University’s Asian-American enrollment actually halved. Asian Americans make up over 27 percent of applicants at the three most selective Ivy League colleges from 2008 to 2012, but only consist of 17 to 20 percent of admits. …

[…]  class profiles of the Ivy League show that racial groups gravitate around the same percentage points among these schools. White students always make up the majority, with around 20 percent Asian students, and 10 percent Black and Latino each. The case of California shows that we should expect Asian students to be admitted at the same rate as their population growth. Yet this clearly is not the case in the Ivy League as the percentage of Asians per class has mysteriously stagnated in spite of Asian-American population growth.

Hu cites a 2015 Princeton study as supposed proof of Ivies’ efforts to keep a white majority student population. Except that … the study says Asians’ “admissions disadvantage” is caused by colleges’ efforts to racially diversify — discrimination for which Hu already has said is justifiable.

Not to mention, progressive bean counters always clamor about racial “proportionate representation”; with this in mind, the 20% figure noted by Hu already is way out proportion to US Census figures: Asians make up only 5.7% of the US population.

But even if college figures aren’t proportionate — say, with a greater number of Asians and a lower number of whites compared to the general population — Hu argues this is insufficient because … diversity:

“Replacing Asian students with white does not increase diversity — 50 percent white plus 20 percent Asian is not in fact more diverse than 35 percent each.”

 

She concludes:

“It’s perfectly admirable to have mechanisms that improve diversity and counteract disadvantage, like holding back white and Asian students (equally), but it’s completely unjust to hold back Asian students to allow for the perpetuation of a white majority.”

What a miasma of discrepancy.

MORE: Asian-American groups blast Democrats for ‘bigoted intervention’ in Harvard admission inquiry

MORE: Using its Harvard playbook, anti-affirmative action group targets UT for Asian discrimination

IMAGE: pathdoc/Shutterstock.com

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

About the Author
Assistant Editor
Dave Huber is assistant editor of The College Fix. He has been writing about education, politics, and entertainment for over a decade, including a stint at the popular media bias site Newsbusters. Dave is a retired educator with over 25 years of service who holds a B.A. and M.Ed. from the University of Delaware, as well as graduate student membership in the National Association of Scholars.

Add to the Discussion

  • Dogbert1

    Ah so, Grasshoppah!

  • ronwf

    Compare that to MIT, which has 26% of it’s undergraduate student body of Asian heritage and 35% is white. I doubt that the Ivy League’s schools are more highly selective than MIT. Meanwhile, blacks make up 6% of the undergraduate student body despite MIT’s policy of admitting every qualified applicant that is a member of an underrepresented minority (e.g., those minorities whose percentage of the MIT student body is lower than their percentage of the U.S. population as a whole).

    • Dr. Donny

      Being somewhat naïve, I would then expect that the whites who are admitted to MIT and make up only half of their 70% of the population are the super smart ones. This, along with the hyper-qualified Asians would provide an incredibly difficult environment for those who are much less qualified and admitted under the guise of diversity. It would be interesting to know what percentage of the latter manage to survive their first year. Cheers.

  • QuantumZ

    The presumption in all these accounts is that whites should not work on behalf of their own benefit, but rather should instead work for the benefit of other groups. Yet no other group is held to an equal presumption. They in fact work on behalf of their own self-interest, or ally together for the same purpose. As the proportion of whites continues to decline given demographics will this presumption shift? Or will whites always be held to a different standard?

  • chris_zzz

    Another clueless millennial. Jews and Asians are basically seen as part of the white oppressor class by progressives. Thus, you WILL be discriminated against in order to make the quotas. You want to split hairs and say that Harvard prefers privileged whites to privileged Asians? Fair point but who will listen? Once we say that racial discrimination is ok for the sake of engineering the class demographics, everything else is in the mud.