RSS
As most readers have probably heard, a few days ago we were notified by Harvard University that the alumni signatures on the nomination petitions we had submitted were sufficient in number, and our “Free Harvard/Fair Harvard” slate of candidates would therefore appear on the forthcoming ballot for the Harvard Board of Overseers.
An important public discussion may soon begin, perhaps extending far beyond the narrow confines of a single prestigious college and its alumni: Issues of college tuition and admissions fairness are widely contentious in today’s America. Furthermore, an extended campaign of months allows factual claims to be subjected to far greater scrutiny than the mere he-said-she-said ping-pong-match of a one-off media story, however prominent.
For example, take our original argument that the enormous annual income regularly generated by the Harvard endowment would allow the university to easily abolish undergraduate tuition, a suggestion that surely must have seemed shocking and implausible to many at first mention. Indeed, the initial “纽约时报” 故事 quoted Harvard spokesman Jeff Neal as dismissing that claim as “a common misconception,” one which ignored the fact that endowment funds were “largely restricted” by the contributors. And unsurprisingly, the vast majority of initial media stories deferred to Harvard’s position on such matters, accepting its credibility and treating our position as presumably mistaken; and without a campaign, that would have been the end of the matter.
However, the actual numbers seem decidedly on our side. Over the last few years, the investment income from Harvard’s endowment has averaged some twenty-five times greater than net tuition revenue, meaning that reallocating a mere 4% of that vast ongoing flow of income from mortgage derivative securities and private equity tranches would be sufficient to eliminate tuition. And in subsequent media interviews, Harvard officials specified that roughly 70% of their endowment is currently restricted, which implies that 30% is unrestricted, a figure vastly larger than the 4% in question, even excluding the huge annual total of unrestricted new donations. Thus, it appears that our original claims were entirely correct, and the only lasting impact of Harvard’s initial denial is upon the credibility of the individuals involved.
A somewhat similar situation had developed in late 2012 when I first called attention to Harvard’s transformation into a giant hedge fund and originally suggested that the university should therefore abolish tuition. Harvard quickly huddled with its external strategic communication firm and a top spokesman drafted a letter arguing that my article contained numerous inaccuracies which should be corrected. I immediately responded and I leave it to individual readers to read both sides of the exchange and decide for themselves who seemed to get the better of it.
Most recently, I explored Harvard’s endless claims that its existing system of financial aid is so generous that only the rich are soaked. Plugging a few hypothetical financials into Harvard’s own “净价计算器,” I quickly discovered that a pair of public schoolteachers living in New York City would likely be forced to expend the bulk of their life savings in order to give their son or daughter a Harvard education. So either Harvard considers all NYC public schoolteachers to be “rich” or their statements to the media have been somewhat less than entirely accurate.
These are the facts we should keep in mind as we now consider some of Harvard’s claims regarding its existing admissions policy. Although “Fair Harvard” has always been an equal plank of our Overseer platform, and indeed the primary focus of several of our candidates, Harvard itself has appeared strangely reticent in addressing the issue, seeming to concentrate almost all their public statements on critiquing the “Free Harvard” proposal. Back in late 2012, I had published a piece in the 纽约时报 pointing to the strong statistical evidence for “Asian Quotas” at Harvard, and the rather brief and perfunctory Harvard denial contained absolutely no specifics whatsoever.
However, whenever I raised this issue in my conversations with journalists over the last few weeks, they immediately provided Harvard’s stock response that the large rise in Asian-American enrollments over the last twenty-five years clearly demonstrates the total absence of any anti-Asian bias. And indeed, there are far more Asians at Harvard College today than there were in 1990. The entire trajectory of Harvard’s undergraduate population since 1980 can be found in the public data made conveniently available on my own website, along with that of 5000-odd other colleges, drawn from the website of the quasi-governmental National Center for Educational Statistics.
But this glib argument on Harvard’s part completely ignores the dramatic rise of America’s Asian-American population, which has grown nearly 20-fold from a very low base since 1960. Obviously, the relevant statistic to examine at Harvard College is not the total number of Asians, but their per capita enrollment, as measured relative to their college-age population. Since the Current Population Survey of the U.S. Census provides a good estimate of the latter, the calculation is hardly a difficult one, either for Harvard or for any other elite college, and the changes over the last twenty years in the per capita ethnic enrollments of Asians, along with blacks, Hispanics, and non-Hispanic whites can be plotted in a simple chart:
Now obviously some degree of fluctuation in per capita enrollments at Harvard or any other college would be perfectly understandable, and indeed the figures for whites, Hispanics, and blacks all tend to go up and down a bit over time. But the per capita enrollment for Asian-Americans of college-age has shown an almost continuous decline over the last twenty years, now being 60% lower than in 1995. One would think that an apparent drop in enrollment of some 60% would have at least raised questions at Harvard’s admissions office. Has Asian academic performance collapsed during these two decades? Are Asians no longer applying to Harvard in large numbers? I’d hope we can disregard the possibility of any anti-Asian bias in Harvard’s vaunted “holistic admissions methods,” enshrined as exemplary by the U.S. Supreme Court in its landmark 巴克 决定.
Yet oddly enough, those dramatic changes at Harvard seem quite similar to what happened at most other elite colleges during that same period. Producing similar charts is just as easy, and nearly all of them show exactly the same pattern, sometimes even exhibiting a drop in Asian enrollment significantly greater than that at Harvard (though with Princeton being one of the very few exceptions). For example, here are the charts for Yale and Stanford:
These charts might help to explain the endless complaints and lawsuits from Asian-American activists and organizations over what they perceive as anti-Asian racial discrimination in elite admissions policy. Whether or not that happens to be correct, I’d be very curious to hear Harvard’s own explanation. Or might it even be possible that America’s most elite college never even noticed that per capita Asian-American enrollment had dropped by such a huge amount in just a couple of decades?
Inquiring minds wish to know. Perhaps journalists will as well.
后记：
As I indicated above, Princeton is something of an outlier in this twenty-year trend of very large declines in the per capita enrollment of Asian-Americans at top elite colleges, as may be seen from the corresponding chart:
It may or may not be purely coincidental that a sharp turn-around in declining Asian-American enrollment there began around 2007, just after Daniel Golden of the “华尔街日报” 报道 the anti-Asian discrimination complaint filed by applicant Jian Li, which led to widespread coverage in the American media.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
English
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Given the Asian 1996 drop shown at three different colleges, it won’t surprise me to read about applicants or agencies bringing a RICO or similar action.
As a wise reader mentioned recently, “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action”. Harvard, Yale and Stanford, among others, may have some explaining to do, although there is likely some statute of limitations.
马尔科姆弗雷泽应该因为推动结束白澳政策而被暗杀，他的政策的支持者也是如此。
It is rediculous to see the Ivies as anything more than an apparatus that serves the establishment and the existing social order with elite whites on top.
It makes sense to let in some people from every race since the Elite whites will need to learn how to manage and control other races. And also meet elites from other races they can use to pacify non elites from that race. But if the Ivies existed as a true meritocracy Asians would dominate the Ivies and the Ivies know it.
I doubt the Ivies will change anything since the role of the Ivy leagues from the beginning is to control and vet who gets to control this country, but I do enjoy you making them squirm.
Of course the end result of this will probably be even less places for Whites who built the college in the first place. The Jews will stay, Blacks will be affirmatively actioned in and Asians will take the rest of the spots. Maybe we should just burn it down and let them build their own college.
It’d be interesting to fully investigate how the lack of a free Harvard (which is to say, combined undergraduate tuition, room, board and fees in excess of the U.S. Median household income) impacts the lack of a “fair Harvard.” The exorbitant combined tuition, room, board and fees together with lack of merit based scholarships and Byzantine financial aid system seems tailor made to exclude bright middle class kids.
Additionally, the claims about endowments funds being donor “restricted” to such a degree that the income generated from them can’t be used to offset the income from tuition and fees just seems outright specious to me. Which gifts could be “restricted” to such a degree that the income generated therefrom couldn’t be used for the general support of the college in its core Mission?
I’m not convinced. Consider whether more South Asians have immigrated in the last two decades, making up an increasingly large share of the Asian population. If so, it makes sense that Harvard’s per capita Asian enrollment would decline as South Asians are generally not as strong academically as East Asians. Also, as an East Asian friend who is the child of a math genius once pointed out, the East Asians who immigrate now are usually not as smart as those who immigrated decades ago.
你好罗恩
I gave this post a Sailer search for “immi” and get nothing from the text of it. Before we decide who is getting abused the most here can we run those numbers back to 1965. In addition can we add white from non-coastal states (ME-FLA and WA-CA) with family incomes below $50K in constant 1965 dollars, White form coastal states with family incomes below $50K in constant 1965 dollars, White with family incomes above $50K in constant 1965 dollars.
I suspect there are other groups getting abused by the preference changes over time. I don’t think it negates your asian point, but i think it might give some perspective.
The category of Asian includes too many disparate peoples. It would be better to at least break them into orientals and non-orientals. It could be there has been a large influx of non-oriental Asians into this country.
I enquire again: why does Harvard bother with undergraduates? Why not just become an all-graduate university? Surely undergraduates are more bother than they are worth?
While you’re sleeping in the rabbit holes, Universities in East Asia have been slowly taking up the spots in the World ranking. If we remove the past Nobel Laureate in ranking criteria, the once famous institutions such as Oxford, Cambridge will be put into National Museum display.
Sometimes I wish all those East Asians go back to their homeland and build their nations, instead of building the Western universities reputations.
Asians build up the admission entrance bar. Asians churn out the STEM publications, working as lab slaves, 24 hours 7 days a week.
Black enjoy Affirmative Action. Being proud of admittees in Ivies, and if you ask what they study, they’d say “Black History”. Jesus F Christ.
Latino cherish “Diversity” card while Whites take the credit for being “A Leader” in Elite Institutions.
Asian built Trans-Continental railroad. Whites take credit for “Building this 大 Nation” bappity happity claim.
亚洲人 决不 complain about “Diversity”, they work their assess off, they toil for years, even if it takes generation to build up their livelihood, while other enjoy Food Stamp, Social Welfare and when they come and ask for 展会 Admission from the only venue they deem hopeful for their careers, Whites such as naturalized 德比 pulled out something magical from his a** and relate why Asian should stop complaining.
https://www.unz.com/jderbyshire/whining-asian-americans-and-the-pretty-lies-of-the-ruling-class/
What happened between 1995 and 1996? Looking at the Harvard enrollment data Ron supplied the Asian enrollment dropped about 5% (18.4% to 17.5%) while from the plot above the Asian per capita enrollment at Harvard dropped over 40%. Did the Asian college-age population change that much over that single year?!
I’m intrigued at the choice of 1995 as a starting year for the plots. Asian enrollment at Harvard was 10% higher (20.6%) in 1993 so it looks like the choice was not due to cherry-picking (though the plots above would be much less dramatic with a start year of 1996). The demographic changes from 1980 to 1994 look much more dramatic to me. One thing that is worrisome about this data is the rise and fall of the Unknown category for race (0% in 1988, 15% in 1995, 2.9% in 2014). Any idea what groups are likely to be over/under represented in Unknown?
Ron, would it be possible for you to provide the population numbers you used for your calculations? I know you gave a reference, but I would like to try looking at a broader range of years and want to be certain I am using the same numbers as you.
On another note, was the Harvard male enrollment really 100% in 1980, 91.6% in 1984, and 57.6% in 1986? Those numbers make me question the face validity of this data. Is there an issue with classification of students between Harvard and Radcliffe?
The South Asians that do come here are generally smart South Asians.
And your friends anecdotal story is just that a story. East Asians are much more uniform when it comes to IQ so I doubt your story holds up. Just sounds like white people desperately grasping for straws as they see their people fall apart.
I am surprised that some are even defending this “asian quota”.
when you treat the smartest portion of your population as enemies, they will become your enemy. there will be no loyalty. this was also how the chinese got the atom bomb. a pissed off scientist saying fuck you and left the country.
the asian quota = forcing asians to compete among themselves, they are smart enough to realize this. the only thing I am surprised about is how little the asians are doing about it.
what exactly are they doing? are they just leaving the country to seek better, greener pastures(I am talking about ivy graduates)?
Would the charts not be more instructive with a separate line for Jews who comprise 12 and 27 percent, respectively, of the current undergraduate populations at Yale and Stanford?
But in any case making tuition at Harvard free would be pointless unless the object was to transform the the institution from a school for the elite (with an admixture of the more colorful or intelligent members of the hoi polloi to provide some camouflage) into a school for the intellectual gifted, the latter to be selected strictly on the basis of competitive examinations, IQ tests, etc.
But since America is clearly now a fascistic plutocracy, what would be the point of training people for a non-existent meritocracy? And anyway, if Harvard became strictly meritocratic, the elite would simply find other schools to insure that their children meet, mate with, and establish business and professional connections with members of their own class.
The scheme seems completely, if amusingly, wacky to me.
I”m waiting for the geographical diversity chart, especially in light of discussions over “diversity” in the Supreme Court. Will it remain 100% Harvard/Yale grads?
To begin to answer this question, you would want to know what %age of contributions to Harvard come from former undergrads vs grad students. My guess is that the undergrads contribute more.
That would only begin to answer the question, though. There are also the networking effects. Former undergrads provide a network extending into government, finance, and other industries which confers benefits on the whole institution. Obviously former graduate students also help to form this network, but you would have to try to quantify how much of the value of this network comes from former undergrads and how much from former graduate students.
Personally, I doubt that eliminating undergraduate education would benefit Harvard.
Another group that is seemingly not bothered by not getting into Harvard are the intelligent “flyover” non-Jewish whites who are the most under represented according to Unz. So not bothered that they do not complain even to the degree that Asians are. So all the concern focuses on the Asians and not on these whites.
Asians could just go back to Asia. They have that choice, Asia is not being diversified. Like me, Asians in the West have the luxury of walking among monuments that their ancestors did not build. We should be grateful. Nor are all centuries old monuments tangible. They include social trust, an open and tolerant culture and other socials qualities which we have free ridden on.
So anytime Asians are treated “unfairly” they are going to screw the rest of us over? Yep, that logic is wonderful and inspiring.
The problem whites have with Asians is not that they work hard. It’s that they distort the system through cheating, and focus on academics above all else. There isn’t any balance. They create a rat race society that in the end will implode.
Harvard Univ., founded in 1636, is named in honor of its first great benefactor (and Christian clergyman) John Harvard.
Like Harvard college, the civilization called America was also created (primarily) by white Christians from Europe. These people still constitute the majority of American citizens. Do these facts matter vis-a-vis Harvard’s admissions considerations? Should they?
If so, then we must look at Harvard’s demographics a bit more closely.
Asians are indeed underrepresented at Harvard. Blacks and Hispanics are somewhat over-represented–especially considering their academic aptitude. Jews, too, are also over-represented at Harvard. Greatly so. This glaring fact cannot be ignored.
Jews are to Harvard what the state of Israel is to Washington: the elephant in the room.
Shouldn’t this fact be of interest to those of us who identify with the lower 97%?
Indeed, when we separate Jews from (white) non-Jews attending Harvard, we find that the under-representation of non-Jewish whites at Harvard is downright shocking. In two generations, our student representation at Harvard has declined by some 70%!
Since the Jewish community remains dedicated to retaining its separate identity and with it, a host of ethnic-driven policies, clubs and agendas; then a separate category for non-Jewish whites should included in this data. Yet it’s not there. Why?
Aren’t the interests of (non-Jewish) whites in America as important as the interests of Asians?
Asians do focus on academics over all else.
But cheating? Please. No way Asian Americans are cheating at any higher rate than the other races here. Maybe cheating is a thing back in South Korea. But I know for a fact that my 1680 scores in the SAT1 and GRE were earned the honorable way.
What Asians lack is the bombast and bravado of Whites and Blacks. Asians are naturally quiet (East Asians) or anxiety-ridden cowards (South Asians).
How does voting work? My wife went to Harvard and wants to vote for you.
You did not cheat, but are you sure that a higher proportion of Asians than whites do not cheat?
Do you know if cheating is accepted or not back in China? If so, that social acceptability may not have been completely dropped when coming to the West. Might it not be justified internally by thoughts that whites are “keeping you down”?
And do you think it possible that Asians prep for tests, for fear of their Tiger Moms, and that this preparation results in higher scores which will not be reflected in real life productivity and creativity. Perhaps the reverse “Now I’ve got a prestigious job, I can relax in my sinecure.”
I can tell you that when I went to a highly selective technical school in the 60’s, that was the farthest thing from our minds.
Nationalism, racialism, and Christianity aren’t fashionable ideologies among most Harvard faculty, students, alumni, and administrators. The exact opposite ideologies of globalism, liberalism, and secularism dominate there. Harvard sees itself as a global institution that represents and speaks for the entire world. That’s why it doesn’t care much about, say, WASP representation at Harvard.
If nationalism, racialism, or Christianity became fashionable again, then Harvard might care about American or white Christian or WASP representation again like it used to.
你是对的。
Trans-continental railroad, just forget them. They don’t matter since it’s all flights nowadays.
When you walk into JFK terminal, Library, you’d better remember I.M Pei.
Or When you’re touring Louvre Museum,
Or when you’re in Cornell, those futuristic looking building, they all fall from the sky as if Asian ancestor did not build them.
The very first dog fight in IBM history to take up the market share is against Wang laboratory that specialized in DOS and magnetic core memories. It’s not some dubious Asian ancestor that IBM has to fight.
I can go on and on. It’s all matter of how you look at it.
It’s also possible that non-Jewish Whites also give up their spots in elite institutions. Drop in percentage, in my opinion, is not reflective of non-Jewish Whites quota, rather it’s moving from the past sexism, racism into this 21st century liberal diversity student population.
In 60’s, people went on to further study out of their pure curiosity and interest.
But you can’t compare what happened in 60’s and throw that old passion into 2016 Tiger moms and hyper Asian test scores, and finally claim Asians are pursuing education just for the sake of their 老虎妈妈?
Although this has been misinterpreted oftentimes, and several rebuttals have been published, I would try again here. Battle Hymn of Tiger Moms by Amy Chua, is basically showing that Asian moms, in general push their children until they achieve something worth instead of wasting their energy and time.
No Asian moms is asking their children to study PhD, to become a Professor. What Tiger moms means is if your kid tries to learn something, judge as a parents if they have potential to achieve what they’re pursuing, if they have, push harder.
For eg., if your kid is learning how to play Piano, most kids give up because it’s not overnight skill. You as a parent have to push them when their learning skills and perseverance is still 塑料 as younger age.
In my knowledge, no Asian parents push their kids to come to graduate schools.
Graduate schools are only for those who want to further pursue their interest at the deepest level.
看着
杰里杨 founder of Yahoo
史蒂芬陈 co-founder of Youtube
Steven ChuNobel Laureate, former Secretory of Energy under Obama administration
钱学森, Nobel Laureate, long history of family achievement in Science,
我可以继续。
The bottom line is, it’s not 60’s anymore. These days, it’s not only Asians in higher institutions to pursue their interest. It’s affecting everyone in higher ed.
The Publish or Perish, the impact factor calculation, your entire career depends on how much funding you can bring to your institutions. Your first 6-8 years is basically trial period where you show your funding ability.
Your passion, your curiosity, your interest, they all fly out of the window. It’s not 60’s. Grant writing, teaching, admin jobs, so on and so forth.
It’s not 1900’s when scientists toyed with their curious idea in their basement.
I know I would, someone fuck me over? I would do the exact same shit right back at them when the opportunity arises.
why the hell would anyone stand to be fucked over?
focusing on academics above all else is cheating? you sound like a guy who couldn’t compete and trying to level the playing field by defending the quota.
and why the hell are you angry at the asians? you should be angry at the jews and the affirmative action blacks/hispanics. the spots normal whites and asians deserved are being taken up by these 2 undeserved groups. why in the flaming hell would you hate asians, who are victims of the current system just like the normal whites?
can’t you see the answer right in front of you? or you just have a blind hatred for asians?
Let the Asians have the Ivies along with the Blacks, dim witted feminazis and Hispanics.
他们值得彼此。
Those schools merely exist as credentialing organs and gateway to what amounts to a dying establishment. This is why people want to attend them so badly. Nothing more. They are a anachronism otherwise and more of a indoctrination center for various toxic ideologies promoted by the academic elites.
As far as learning goes, it can be done at home. There is no reason why we don’t video the best teachers of every subject in higher ed and make them into study-at-home courses for young people who want to learn. No sitting in a auditorium with 300 bored punks and hygiene challenged nerds.
There’s a few subjects that need labs but they’re few.
Fred Reed touched on this and so did historian Carroll Quigley who admitted kids were better off not going to Harvard and just study at home if they wanted to actually learn something as opposed to getting a degree.
The good thing is this won’t appeal to status obsessed elites or the affirmative action crowd. Let them have the past.
Insignificant compared to 其他的一切。
Why doesnt mr unz advocate for the immigration of 10 million hindus into Israel? It would stop being a jewish state but then you would have perfect sat test scores. Or maybe unz is a self-hating jew and advocates for the elimination of Israel as a jewish state just so he can get perfect sat test scores?
Cheating is rampant in China and other Asian countries. Not surprising that some bring that over here, along with their good attributes.
haha… got that one. I’m expecting to get a similar comment sooner or later if we go down this rabbit hole.
Here’s the thing. You can claim who’s who’s the most contributor to the world civilization or achievement. Even if you’re in the land of inbreeding, Iceland, you can still claim how the White people have contributed to the world Or else if you’re from a rural poor Hungarian, you can still claim how White men achieved so much in the world. The pride you can have in this 20th century is not because of you work your ass off, but because of having a “White” Bronze skin. (I’ve seen even Koreans have Whiter skin than Europeans’.)
Anyway, my opinion on this is different parts of the world have contributed to the evolution of human achievement throughout history. If you look at the past 200 – 300 years, yes, indeed White people have made it to the top of the list. If you go back 300-1000 years back, we’d see different scenarios. If we go back 2000-3000 years back, you’d see White people with different lens.
But since we’re living in 21st century, I can’t go back and claim my ancestral huge contribution to this 21st century world. Some contributions are still applicable, but some become lower rung in this evolutionary achievement.
No one will appreciate the “Wheel” invention in this 21st century. No one will cheer Indian for invention of Zero “0”.
Coming up with an idea of White invention, and everything you’d see around automatically become “White men achievement” in this 21st century.
If you look closely, you’d see 步伐 of old inventions in what we use today.
But since you used to look through “White” lens, you’d only see as “White invention” and every other contributions become 微不足道.
It might be cliché, but I’d go anyway,
The currency you use, the paper you write, the ink you used to describe, the enormous achievement of human in history will go to “纸” invention. Even in this 21st century, people still use “paper” in variety of forms, be it A4, US letter, currency, and guess what toilet paper.
Without paper, your forefather folklore will be passed down through hearsay. The greatest equation of Newton will become fuzzy over generation after generation.
Guess what, even when you wake up, do your morning dump, and wipe your ass, you need Toilet paper invented by Chinese.
Now when you read this, it becomes ridiculous because I did not invent Paper. I did not participate in this invention. I’m just a mere product of Asian genetic stock.
But claiming those inventions are as great as I’m now achieving in this 2016 would be ridiculous because I’m just merely claiming Just because of my genetics.
But if you want to go on, show me your “P” value first, then we can consider if it’s significant or insignificant in terms of contribution.
1. The meritocratic system that allows a lower class person to become a member in upper echelon within your life time began from China – Imperial Exam. British copied it, and France and Germany followed suit, and the US inherited from the British. Otherwise, your lowly life will be held in somewhere back in Victorian age.
2. Paper, Gunpowder, Toilet paper
I’d stop here with ancient invention. You can learn yourself if you’re smart enough.
This is all very true but countries were created by people for their posterity. If you live in the West then you are not 其 posterity and therefore are getting a free ride.
When I walk past St Paul’s Cathedral I know my ancestors did not build that and so I am grateful to the British for allowing me to share in their patrimony. All non-Euros in Euro nations would do well to the same.
Otherwise, let’s be honest: it would be entirely right to kick all out for gross ingratitude.
it’s like the rest of us are talking about the issue at hand and you are talking about the moon.
PS: sometimes I can kinda understand why some writers hates the comment section, there is always some extremely stupid comments.
Were the chinese the ones who invented the concept of fiat money, which made Zimbabwe style hyperinflation possible?
As good as the jews and italians were in things related to money, if just writting endless zeros on a paper to make it reprezent Something of value is a good idea without it causing hyperinflation would they not have thought it first?
[Using multiple handles really isn’t acceptable on these comment-threads. Pick a single handle and stick to it, or else use “Anonymous”.]
Based on what I read on reddit a lot of Asian parents can definitely be guilty of psychological and physical abuse of their children and should be in jail. I would not be surprised if their children wind up throwing themselves in front of a train. Anyone want to check up suicide rates in Korea and Japan, and about high East Asian IQ, what caused Ito to fuck up so bad that he allowed TV cameras into the OJ trial, would a Jewish judge have made such a low IQ decision? Or what caused the Japanese high command to think that they can beat the Americans into a peace treaty on Japanese terms despite the Americans outproducing them ten to one? At least the Germans made their Barbarrossa planning mistake based on logical decisions that were made on wrong intel.
Or remember how Korean Air had an air crash every 6 months in the 80s and 90s because Korean Air pilots had a habit of hitting their copilots if they disagreed with them, and this was acceptable practice in Korean culture? And they had to hire a Western company to sort out their internal corporate culture? Malcom Gladwell even mentioned this in his book. And how many Korean politicians have been jailed or jumped off tall buildings because of corruption allegations?
“Guess what, even when you wake up, do your morning dump, and wipe your ass, you need Toilet paper invented by Chinese.”
Add a flush toilet and you have a match made in heaven. Various models have come down from Crete, Rome, and the Tudors (Elizabeth I thought it too embarrassing to use — everyone would hear the Royal Flush). But the invention and mass introduction of this wondrous vessel, plus the modern sewage system, in the 1800s, is likely responsible for more incremental population increase, including no doubt, Asia, than any vaccination.
Speaking of heaven, an American missionary living in China circa 1880 enjoyed entertaining Chinese ladies in the afternoon. They also thoroughly enjoyed the visits, and used to call her house “heaven.” Maybe they had a flush toilet to go with the paper.
oh, and btw, the Chinese were important workers on the Transcontinental Railroad in the western states. They didn’t “build” it single-handedly. There were whole towns full of Irish railroad builders who settled in Montana. I’m sort of proud of that, but the Americans could have done it without the Irish. Or the Chinese.
[Spewing forth a very long list of mostly short and mediocre comments under a variety of different names is a recipe for getting them summarily trashed, and that’s exactly what happened. Pick a single handle, stick to it, and limit your future comments to one or two longer and more substantial ones, or all of them will get trashed.]
I’m just a dumb white guy who couldn’t get into harvard, but your platform is that harvard should admit more asians, and they shouldn’t have to pay for college?
…??
why the fuck should i support this?
1. The meritocratic system that allows a lower class person to become a member in upper echelon within your life time began in China – the Imperial Exam.
I notice that they only gave the exam to other Chinese. It is not like they scoured the world and used the exam to import foreigners with higher test scores. They implicitly knew the exams should be used for the benefit of the Chinese people, not as an excuse to import foreigners and extinguish their posterity.
As you note, the Chinese and Indians are accomplished people. We can adopt their creations, purchase, buy, or use and pay royalties on those creations. Because we admire and use their creations, that does not mean we should import their people and give over our institutions to them.
My instinct here is that Ron Unz’s efforts will aid in the decline of the Ivies.
If you want something trashed, make it free.
If you want something taken care of, make it expensive.
“East Asians are much more uniform when it comes to IQ” Cite?
也许哈佛意识到亚洲人是出色的备考骑师，但在“现实生活”中表现不佳？ 标准化测试是达到目的的手段，而不是目的本身。 大学应该重视这些测试，因为它们旨在代表申请人的内在智力能力。
对于亚洲人，这种关系破裂了。 他们在 SAT 上的表现仅与……他们在 SAT 上的表现相关。 一旦到了走出现实世界并进行创新或从事企业的时候，他们就会失败。 谁想要这样的失败者？ 将有限的资源（例如进入美国名牌大学）授予一群人，他们一生中最大的成就最终是……被那些名牌大学录取，这对社会有什么好处？
If we want to foster the successors to Benz, Newton, Carnegie, or Gates, we must select the candidates who have the most potential to fill those shoes and give 他们 the limited spots in the Ivy League/Stanford etc. The Asian experiment has failed. Evaluating kids based on who has spent more hours and more dollars grinding out marginal improvements on the SAT has unsurprisingly not been effective at screening for the next titans of innovation and industry. And it’s not like Asians have proven any great capacity to innovate for the better part of a millennium. It is time that the Asian invasion of our elite institutions be stemmed, for the sake not only of Americans, but of human progress.
@费利克斯
Your entire diatribe (and that of the various anti-Asian rants that dot this comment section) relies on this premise – that “Asians are amazing test-prep jockeys but severely under-perform in “real life.”
What data do you have to buttress any part of that multi-factorial premise?
Do “Asians” (I assume you meant to say Americans who happen to be of Asian heritage?) prepare more for standardized tests than, say, the typical east coast graduate of Andover, Exeter, Groton, The Cathedral School, The Latin School, etc.? Your data?
Do “Asians” “severely” “under-perform” in “‘real life’”? Your data? Americans of Asian heritage make up a tiny fraction of the U.S. electorate and typically are first or second generation immigrants who arrive with their human capital and little else. How many Microsofts do you expect them to have founded? (Never mind that the current CEO of Microsoft is an Asian-American, as well as the founder of Yahoo.)
Do you have even anecdotal evidence? Did you, for example, ever attend an actual Ivy League institution or an equivalent school? Didn’t think so.
It’s amazing how self-proclaimed intellectuals like yourself will mistake their ill-formed opinions – formed entirely of insularity-driven prejudice – for “analysis.”
Lol. What a way to point out the intellectual shackles in your mind. It must be very hard for you to think since you need 8 words to mean what 1 will do for.
8 times the code equals 8 times slower and results in a very buggy and unstable build.
再试一次。
所以你想让澳大利亚永远愚蠢吗？让我们列出澳大利亚为世界带来的所有伟大进步；鲨鱼网。更多的鲨鱼网，还有一些福斯特。
Is it even plausible that the “natural aristocracy” can only come from kids who have their shit together at age 17?
It’s a backdoor hereditary system where helicopter parents psychologically colonize their children and turn them into shallow and incompetent elites (to say nothing of the widespread cheating at all levels of academia).
@这是我们的家
There is no distinction in your mind between Asians who live, for example, in India, Siberia, Turkmenistan, Vietnam, and other parts of the continent that we refer to as Asia and Americans who happen to be Asian?
Is there a difference between a Swede born and raised in Stockholm and a third generation American who is born and raised in Minneapolis? Or are they both just Scandinavians to you?
I’ll “try again” when you attempt a response to the questions raised in my post.
Are you @Felix by another name or do you just feel compelled to “defend” @Felix by “arguing” that all who are descended from someone who once resided on the continent of Asia – no matter their citizenship, ethnicity, nationality, language, history and actual cultural heritage – are the same?
Raise a Fosters to Margot Robbie, one of the prettiest to grace the screen from Down Under.
huh? you are one unhappy camper f16d. I use only one handle here. Have no idea about those odd letters. Alas, I am not so clever.
I have been to all those places, except Turkemistan. I know the differences duh. Your post is irrelevant to mine. It might work on the rubes that you know but I can promise you I am a thousand times more worldly than you.
Harvard will mail a ballot to the address that your wife has on file with the Harvard Alumni Office. That’s the same address where she receives her Harvard magazine.
Make sure the address is up to date. It can easily be changed online by clicking through the appropriate tabs on harvard.edu.
I haven’t received a ballot yet.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/perfect-sat-scorer-got-rejected-130557875.html
一个有抱负的学生，从他贫穷的移民父母那里工作。
– He became a valedictorian.
– He was White House Presidential scholars (only 2 students per state), and what’s more?
– He built start-up software for SAT.
– He himself got the perfect score.
你猜怎么着？ 他被所有常春藤大学和斯坦福大学拒绝。
他的皮肤将类似于黑人。
His parents’ motel would be sleazy and dingy as hell.
唯一能在所有其他人中脱颖而出的是他的名字和他的教养文化。
肖恩·帕特尔。
Change that to Tyrone Marvell, or Derrick White, we all know what’s going to happen. NYT, WSJ, BI, will pick up a story and plaster across the continent, shower him as if God given talent finally arrives in America.
千达·奇萨拉（Chanda Chisala） 将选择他作为海报男孩并写一篇关于为什么智商差距不再是黑白问题的冗长论文。
巨魔喜欢 费利克斯 会做什么？ 高中毕业后？
吸大麻？ 更不用说构建启动软件了。
创意，创意，什么？ 购买stormfront域名？ 让 KKK 派对开始吧。
Esteemed Rdm:
It looks like we had already had a discussion on unz.com.
I googled this name, Shaan Patel，以前不为我所知。
Apparently he is a very capable young gentleman.
His own success in studying for SAT test is very impressive:
perfect 2400 on his SAT in high school.
But what has he applied his talents to ?
It turns out that he started a company,
that will train other young students. Train
不能 to better understand science or mathematics,
不能 to know history or philosophy better.
No, his company trains students to better pass the SAT tests:
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-shaan-patel-founded-a-business-that-makes-millions-2015-6
His contribution to his own wealth is evident.
Make the judgement yourself about his contribution to USA’s society.
I think I’m not idolizing this young man and rendering his achievement as if some kind of benchmark in college admission.
What I found is, with his strong academic background when he’s applying to undergraduate study, he could have gotten into one of the Top elite schools. Why wasn’t he accepted? The strange thing is all Ivy rejected his application. Then all other Ivies acceptees must be some kind of Olympians, Math Genius, Guinness world record holders? let alone considering they all must have perfect 2400 scores. He’s also a valedictorian.
Of course, Shaan Patel is not make or break case with Ivy admission. He’s only the tip of the iceberg for Asian Americans dealing with Elite Institutions admission.
Regarding his start-up for 2400 expert, whether or not he’s contributing to the American society at large, I think we’re expecting too much from a young man who just graduated and was about to go to Medical School.
马克扎克伯格开始 面糊, not because he wanted to make America great again. Or make society become more aware of Science or philosophy. The only idea was just to compare which chicks are hot in college campus. That’s it. It then took off, and became Facebook and he dropped out of the college.
Here’s another one. I almost forgot this existed, and have to google it.
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/news/coladvice/reallife/rl990803.htm
A Harvard dropout (after 3 years of study), Geoff Cook, started his company collegegate dot com where he offered to write and check college essays for monetary purposes. The website was still active the last time I checked (maybe 10 years ago, if my memory serves me right). The website no longer exists. Where did he go? What’s happening to Geoff Cook?
My opinion is not all start-up company has a noble idea of making a society great again or making general populace aware of STEM fields. They all start from somewhere down the food chain. Some made it, and some just went poof-poof.
Of course, we’re not talking about Harvard droputs, we just want to know what’s going on with Ivy admission when it comes to Asian American applications.
亲爱的雷姆：
Once again, I am glad that your word in the argument is the final one.
Best wishes, I.f.f.U.
罗恩
斯坦福图表对我来说毫无意义。 从 1995 年到 2014 年，四个（我认为是详尽无遗的？）类别中的每一个都出现了下降。这怎么可能？ 至少一组应该显示人均增长。
伦斯托格
the chart doesn’t show all of the student body, just those 4. so the ones making huge gains isn’t part of the chart.
PretendGuru，我假设（也许是错误的）所有群体的人均水平可能会随着人口（和申请率）的增长而下降，而新班级规模保持不变（因此所有人均入学率都会下降）。
但是，出于这些目的，您实际上想知道的是针对所有美国人的人均利率调整后的人均利率。
大概没有在所有亚裔美国人人口普查类别中发现的奇怪的 1996 年颠簸，并且来自计数方法的变化，这种影响在其他群体中不存在。
也许罗恩想给我们一个表格中的原始数据，而不是单独给我们图表......？
I use this opportunity to share my very positive feelings from reading
the draft of the collection of published works by Mr. Unz.
Without hard copy it would be very difficult for me —
to concentrate on reading his works in sequence.
The works are collected by large sections:
Race, Ethnicity, and Social Policy.
经济学和金融学。
Media and Reality.
Ideology and Politics.
Foreign Policy and National Security.
Classical History,
and one paper of 1984, on
Theoretical Physics.
Altogether 665 pages.
Inside each section the works are chronologically ordered.
I am through the reading of 1/3 of the collection.
Thank you, Mr. Unz, for your great work !
May I humbly suggest that you remind to the readers of Unz Review
about the opportunity to request the copy of that book from you.
尊敬的神父
好的，正如我所看到的，罗恩实际上已经将他用于注册百分比的数字联系起来了 https://www.unz.com/enrollments/ 我试图看看我是否可以复制 Ron 的图表，并尝试可视化 1995-1996 年人口普查中记录的亚洲人口规模变化的确切影响。
首先，我采用了以下人口普查数据 http://www.census.gov/hhes/school/data/cps/historical/ – CPS 关于入学的历史时间序列表 – 表 A-1。 3 年 1955 月至 2014 年按学校、种族和西班牙裔血统的级别和控制划分的 XNUMX 岁及以上人口的入学率。
（我没有 Ron 使用的 PUMS 数据，但我认为这 *应该* 同意）。
这有高中人口的数量，按种族——包括从 1993 年起的亚洲人。 由此我得到以下人口规模：
高中总人口规模（种族） –
图示——
图示（占总数的百分比）–
（我要澄清一下，我还认为学校人数实际上应该是符合条件的亚洲总人口规模的最佳代表，因为这是有资格进入大学轨道的年轻亚洲高中生的滚动年份或年份的明确信号）
看看数字本身，你会发现 1996 年亚洲高中入学人数出现了相当不和谐的变化。（我也不打算复制它，但如果你查看人口普查的原始数据表，这完全是复制的年龄水平）。
更清楚的是，您可以在图表中看到这一点，该图表显示了每年的人口占 1993 年人口的百分比—— http://i.imgur.com/oHxp7tp.png.
这似乎意味着要么有大规模的亚洲移民在那时生效，要么与测量差异有关，而不是人口数量的真正变化。 如果我们真的相信 1996 年亚洲人大规模迁移，我们是否有任何证据表明发生了这种情况？
在此之后，我将仅采用 1996 年以后的数字与入学人数进行比较。
我上述评论的第 2 部分：我将首先采用哈佛数字，因为它是最有争议的一组：
哈佛按种族招生：
丢弃（实质性的）未知种族，我们得到：
结合人口普查的高中数据，作为高中生申请人口规模的代表：
哈佛按种族划分的人均入学人数 -
占 1996 年的百分比 –
按种族划分的哈佛三四年人均入学率（调整后的白人比例 = 1）–
1996 年的三四年平均百分比 -
所以哈佛的人均变化可能非常小。
让我们看看它是否在所有精英学校中复制——
按种族划分的精英大学的人均入学率 -
占 1996 年的百分比 –
按种族划分的哈佛三四年人均入学率（调整后的白人比例 = 1）–
1996 年的三四年平均百分比 -
总体而言，这些并不支持精英大学的亚洲人均入学人数自 1996 年以来一直在下降的观点。 反而
可能与 Ron 的结果不同的主要部分，因为我使用与 Ron 相同的大学入学数据，人口普查的高中入学人数似乎没有显示潜在亚洲候选人的“翻倍”，从Ron 从 PUMS 获得的数据，Ron 的人均数据基于这些数据。 相反，它显示几乎 *不* 亚洲学生人数增加，西班牙裔学生人数稳步增加。
这很好奇，因为我很难理解为什么人口普查的高中招生与 PUMS 不一致。 在高中入学数据中，亚洲人占学龄人口的百分比似乎增长非常缓慢（如果有的话）（2014 年亚洲人的人数仅增加了 28% 到 1996 年，在总体人口增长 5% 的背景下，其他组以及西班牙裔特别增加了 82%）。
如果这里有不一致的地方，对于 Unz & Hsu 来说，现在解决这个问题似乎很重要，好像他们有可能从狡猾的亚裔美国学生人口增长数据中得到人均代表不足的风险，然后是精英学院的统计学家最终可能会带着自由和公平的哈佛的整个想法度过一天（即“谁说公平？不是这些狡猾的统计数据”等）
同时，这似乎也表明，与亚洲人相比，白人的高中入学率：精英大学的入学率是 *很多* 比白人与黑人、白人和西班牙裔之间更不平衡。
这也很奇怪，因为白人和亚洲人之间的 SAT 差距比白人和黑人或白人和西班牙裔人之间的差距要小得多……这可能主要反映了 *非常* 雄心勃勃的亚洲移民和白人多数之间的不同申请意愿水平，低于不同水平的潜在能力（当然是不同的）。
我是一个小伙子的教父，他在申请哈佛时取得了完美的 SAT 成绩，但只被列入了候补名单。 他是白人，是一名业余高尔夫球手（他的一个祖母在巡回赛中是一名高尔夫球手，几十年来一直是大学高尔夫教练），他是高中报纸的编辑（一个有竞争力的职位）。 每个人都认为他是进入哈佛的扣篮。 他的父母因为一些黑人进入而感到愤怒，尽管他的 SAT 考试也被拒绝了。
他进入了另一个常春藤大学（我 1963 年去了那里，1973 年底离开了），但转而就读于高露洁。 他将于 2017 年春季从医学院毕业，并且已经获得了 MBA 和公共卫生硕士学位（达特茅斯）。
家人仍然对哈佛的冷落感到恼火，但这位年轻人认为这是现实中的一个很好的教训，也是一个性格塑造者，我同意这一点。
丹·库特（Dan Kurt）
One big thing missing from the Free Harvard Business Insider article today was. (hope the math is right). Going by population density by country, the US needs to free up education of the masses to defend against the US’s only 370 million populous disadvantage. Against Asia and India’s populations over over 1.5 billion each, or they will overtake the US.
With a 5 to 1 disadvantage in population, we need to be 6 to 1 smarter than the rest of the world to stay on top. Anything else, and we will be passed as the current dominant economy.
From the vicinity of the San Fran Bay Area, it looks like South Asian kids are leading the Asian pack hands down in academic achievement, including winners of the Intel competition. Furthermore, it appears as though South Asians have successfully transitioned into the mainstream in multiple avenues, including TV and movies, and politics, and the law, among others. Other Asians, including the Japanese and Chinese seem to be on a slower trajectory in this regard.
However, I am more interested in the consequence of the elite universities culling Asian talent. This will mean that the ones who get in are truly the exceptional Asians, who will then likely be among the best in their class, and possibly thereafter in finance or industry or government or whatever professional doors that the elite education may open. If evolutionary selection works in a similar manner for undergraduate education, then Harvard and Stanford are inadvertently creating super Asians. And in the same token, by relaxing the standards for Blacks and Latinos, they are setting them up to fail in class and the real world; especially when they will be competing with the super Asians. Will there next be quotas for medical school or for neurosurgeons, consequently?
Below-average Hedgevard ping
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-01/harvard-blew-1-billion-in-bet-on-tomatoes-sugar-and-eucalyptus