Affirmative Action

Harvard's Recruitment Efforts Prioritized White Students Over High-Achieving Asians

What worked to limit Jewish enrollment 100 years ago has also worked to limit Asian enrollment.


Daderot / Public Domain

There are 20 states—mostly in the south and the Great Plains region—considered "sparse country" by Harvard University's admissions department. "Sparse country" sends fewer students to Harvard, and thus the university makes a special effort to recruit from these states.

Recruiters send letters of encouragement to "sparse country" high school students who score well on the PSAT, an SAT practice test. Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed to score an 1100 out of 1600 to attract Harvard's attention. White students received letters if they achieved a 1310. But Asian males did not earn letters unless they scored 1380.

Think about what this means: Everyone from underrepresented states who scored at least a 1310—whites, Hispanics, blacks, Native Americans—got a letter from Harvard. Everyone, except Asians. It looks like Harvard admissions officials didn't just prioritize other racial minority groups over Asians—they also wanted to stop the campus from becoming more Asian and less white.

This is among the revelations that have come to light during the last two weeks of the Harvard trial. Students for Fair Admissions has sued Harvard on behalf of Asian-American applicants who say they were discriminated against because of race. (The lawsuit does not impugn affirmative action itself, though the outcome is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, where the broader question could be revisited.)

The New Yorker's Jeannie Suk Gerson writes that the "sparse country" letters to non-Asian students are reminiscent of Harvard's efforts in the early 20th century to cap the number of Jewish students. A hundred years ago, officials pioneered a holistic admissions process that considered geography, personality, and background in addition to grades. As a result, the proportion of Jewish students shrunk from about a quarter to just 10 percent by 1930. According to Suk, the "sparse country" letters

highlighted a key question of the trial: whether the Harvard admissions process treats white racial identity as an asset, relative to Asian identity (or treats Asian identity as a drawback, relative to white identity). By pointing to the higher numerical cutoff for Asians as a group at the recruitment stage, before any holistic review of individual applicants could have occurred, the plaintiff apparently was suggesting that race is not used as one factor among many but, rather, as the determinative factor, in Harvard's alleged effort to shape its class to be more white and less Asian.

The twentieth-century history of reaching out to regions where Jews were sparse cast something of a pall over the revelation of explicit differential treatment of Asian and white students in Sparse Country.

I tend to think Harvard's admissions officers are smart people who know exactly what they want (a campus with fewer Asian students) and how to get it without resorting to an explicit policy of only X many Asians need apply. They tinkered with their outreach priorities, considered subjective criteria where Asians could be punished without it attracting much scrutiny, and set different academic expectations for the highest-achieving group. What worked to limit Jewish enrollment 100 years ago has also worked to limit Asian enrollment. This scheme is blatantly racist by any reasonable understanding of the term, and should attract moral condemnation, whether or not it was legal.

NEXT: Do Trump's Tariffs Actually Exist? Donald Trump Debates Donald Trump.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. And yet, I won’t hold my breath waiting for a “de-fund all colleges” column coming any time soon.

    1. You’ll see articles calling farmers looters for the subsidies that they receive by the federal government. And articles noting that tariffs meant to bolster manufacturing hurts every consumer. But, you rarely if ever read anything here even hinting at possibly de-funding these institutions that engage in discrimination and whose very subsidy from the federal government makes it possible for them to continue to raise costs faster than the rate of inflation.

      So weird

      1. Well, who knows what you read here of course, but there’s plenty of content from over the years about how college and student loans are a scam. Even Robby has covered it.

        1. Saying the loans are a scam is not the same as saying all aid to them should be ended.

        2. Hey, thanks Reisenowitz. Beyond, Stossel (who you label as “right wing” and therefore nefarious), I don’t think any of them actually call for ending the whole program. But, I didn’t recall the Robby article.


            And it should be noted that for every contributor piece that calls for examining the funding of these colleges, there is one that plays the same tired and transparent game:

            This is a tired and transparent playbook.

            (1) Declare a company or product that is heavily dependent upon government revenue of being “private”

            (2) Attack people who criticize said company or product as being against “private business”

            (3) Pretend as if the actual solution to the problem is theoretical competition, rather than regulation or the elimination of government revenues from supporting said company or product

            (4) Await your cocktail party invites

            1. Yes, Reason and many libertarians often shill for private business under a crony capitalist regime.

              1. That Stoll article was just pure class snobbery. There is no way on earth Stoll would think any other business that recieves the kind of federal support that Harvard does should be able to discriminate based on race. He only thinks so in Harvard’s case because Harvard is a place where respectable people go and different.

              2. We’re talking about institutions whose main bread in butter is federal dollars. In what way is that a private business?

                1. Just a breakdown of how “private” your average college is:

                  – Their tuition is federally subsidized

                  – Their endowment funds (with many dwarfing the largest mutual funds on Wall Street) are tax exempt

                  – They pay no property tax, income tax, and often no sales tax or utility taxes

                  – They are able to issue tax free municipal bonds which allows them to issue debt below market rates

                  But, the woke brand of libertarianism, the same ones who think there is a natural right to Planned Parenthood receiving federal dollars, wants to continue pretending as if these are “private” institutions.

                  1. If these colleges don’t want to be held to the same standards of equal protection that the government is held, they need to start paying taxes and stop taking federal subsidies.

                  2. Just a minor quibble with this post. Colleges cannot issue tax free municipal bonds of their own accord; a state or municipality will issue the bonds in a quasi-partnership with the college, with certain specific indentures attached to the bonds. It’s complicated, but legal. The university at which I work did precisely this for the purpose of raising money for capital projects, with the requirement that a specified amount of the work on the projects go to in-state concerns.

              3. Cry More Cathy!!! Kivlor busted you out!!!

                1. GOD these people make me sick. Their hypocrisy is mind blowing. When are sane, right-libertarians going to take back the libertarian movement from these left-libertarian wingnuts?

        3. Even Robby has covered it.

          College becomes less affordable with each passing day, and federal intervention is at least partly to blame.

          Really socked it to ’em. To be sure.

      2. Harvard has a 30 billion dollar endowment. They don’t need government money they just can’t help themselves. Of course now they are screwed because if you take it you can’t discriminate.

        1. “Of course now they are screwed because if you take it you can’t discriminate.”

          That’s not entirely true. The Supreme Court has waffled on that topic

        2. They better win this case. Because almost all colleges in the country, AND major companies do this exact same stuff.

          They admit/hire women or NAMs (Non Asian Minorities) with vastly lower qualifications than whites, Asians, or Jews, all in the name of being WOKE. These people then can’t handle their shit, and it fucks up the entire world. Let the chips fall where they will… Otherwise you end up with the world from Atlas Shrugged.

    2. “And yet, I won’t hold my breath waiting for a “de-fund all colleges” column coming any time soon.”

      How about a column to “de-fund all public schools” (K through 12).

    3. Make more profit weekly… This is an awesome side job for anybody… Best part about it is that you can work from comfort of your house and earn 100-2000 dollars every week … Apply for the job now and have your first check at the end of the week.

      linked here…..=====???

    4. Make more profit weekly… This is an awesome side job for anybody… Best part about it is that you can work from comfort of your house and earn 100-2000 dollars every week … Apply for the job now and have your first check at the end of the week.

      linked here…..=====???

  2. Sounds like Harvard is just fine with them laying track from flyover country but won’t let them actually ride the train to the campus with all the round-eyes. I guess you can’t spell Harvard Crimson without racism.

  3. Gotta love how proggie Robbie lumps together the numeric discrepancies as if the 1100 to 1310 difference is meaningless but the 1310 to 1380 difference is the big issue.

    Maybe one of these days he’ll turn on his brain long enough to see that nobody (beyond the hiring committee and faculty’s feelings) is being done any favors by targeting people that are likely underprepared for the challenge Harvard presents.

    The racial discrepancies are a bad but fairly commonly known thing for any university with selective admissions so it’s not like this is a new finding worthy of news.

    1. The answer is obvious. Whites deserve to be held to a higher standard because of how they were born. Asians do not. Simple as that.

      1. Despite Asian Americans earning more money, and hence having more “white privilege” than white people!

        But anything that screws honkies is perfectly justifiable to leftists, or Cosmotarians.

        1. This might actually be the thing that “politicizes” East Asians, they typically keep to themselves or integrate into the West, and don’t seek much in the way of politics. Things like this could change that…

          1. I have very much thought this myself. They tend to be very apolitical. However, so many of the political structures in the western world that are designed to screw white people, or the affluent, also tend to hit Asians disproportionately hard as well.

            I’ve been thinking Asian may end up being the ones who side with conservatives/libertarians in bringing some sanity back. We’ll see!

    2. “… likely underprepared for the challenge Harvard presents.”

      Or maybe Harvard is just a credential mill in which the hardest challenge is just getting in.

      1. ^ BINGO

        1. Diplomas have become nothing more than noble titles meant to convey superiority based upon their possession alone. Your average college graduate earns far less than a welder or machinist, so just as nobles toward the end of feudalism when merchants were far more wealthy than the landed gentry, these pieces of parchment are their claims to being the average person’s better

          1. “…these pieces of parchment are their claims to being the average person’s better”

            Especially from this particular institution!

      2. The thing is, getting a degree from a university USED TO mean something. Especially an Ivy.

        But once they started admitting people based on race, who didn’t meet objective criteria… Well, as one would expect, they flunked out at far higher rates… So they began to lower standards so that the minority students could actually graduate. The interesting thing is I’ve seen stats mentioned, and the average GPA of minority students is STILL far lower than for whites/Asians, even with lower standards. IIRC it was something like a 3.1 or so for blacks/Hispanics, and 3.8 or something for honkies. This data was from some large state school system. Could have even been California, I don’t recall for sure, and too lazy to Google.

        Harvard, in relative terms, is probably still far more grueling than a top state college is today… But it is probably less challenging than a top state college was 40 years ago.

  4. Recruiters send letters of encouragement to “sparse country” high school students who score well on the PSAT, an SAT practice test. Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed to score an 1100 out of 1600 to attract Harvard’s attention.

    I’ve seen conservatives pounce on this fact as if it’s damaging to the idea of affirmative action. “A-ha,” they proclaim, “1100 out of 1600 isn’t even that far above average for general college-bound white students. Yet for non-Asian minorities it means you’re Ivy League material?”

    But this simplistic analysis ignores the reality of systemic racism. Of course it’s appropriate to have a substantially lower PSAT / SAT cutoff for black and brown students. It’s a widely understood fact that standardized tests have an inherent racist bias. So an African American high school student ? even a middle or upper class one ? should feel extremely proud of an 1150 score, in a way that a white or Asian American student should not.


    1. That last hashtag? GENIUS. I laughed through a mouthful of waffle.

      1. Mouthful of Waffle would make an excellent song name.

      2. It is true that the black white gap is larger in math than verbal.

      3. His best one ever.

    2. Good work, OBL!

    3. “So an African American high school student ? even a middle or upper class one ? should feel extremely proud of an 1150 score, in a way that a white or Asian American student should not.”

      I can almost taste the condescending racism, blech, nice job

    4. Well, as I said below, the ethnic IQ gaps explain it all.

      You can believe it’s 100% environmental effects that cause it if you want… But if that is the case then the silver bullet for solving ALL differences in outcomes is to find those environmental factors, and eliminate them, hence equaling IQs. Until that happens low IQ groups will always do less well than high IQ groups, because they aren’t as smart on average.

      Period. For those that believe in the environmental hypothesis and want racial equality, that should be THEIR ONLY GOAL, because it’s the only way to fix it.

    5. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian: “It’s a widely understood fact that standardized tests have an inherent racist bias.”

      One more fact that everyone “understands” that just ain’t so. (and I don’t care if you’re dealing /sarc)

  5. >>>This is among the revelations that have come to light during the last two weeks

    sure, if you ignore hundreds of years of Euro-Elitist snobbery

  6. >>>But Asian males did not earn letters unless they scored 1380


    1. the yoke half of that post didn’t post.

  7. I love Robby’s rampant conflation of Asians-Americans, a racial minority, with Asians, a worldwide racial majority arguably relatively higher than the white majority in the United States. I’d love to say that Robby’s just parroting other people’s slopping thinking, but he goes on to draw parallels to the Jews, who haven’t exactly been an racial/ethnic majority anywhere outside Israel ever. Which means he’s aware of racial and national history and is just choosing to ignore it.

    I assume it makes it easier to wrap your head around the fact that these Asian-Americans would happen to be advocating the nationalist/closed borders position. It probably also helps walk the stupid tightrope where some minorities need protecting in some cases but not other minorities in others. If the pickings are slim for black, white, and hispanic folk, you’ve gotta take what you can get but if you’ve got 4 billion Asians to choose from and you don’t particularly care if they came from the Georgia in N. America (that’s mostly black) or the one in Asia (the one full of literal Caucasians) then you can be choosy and raise the standards on all of them equally.

    1. the Georgia in N. America (that’s mostly black)

      It’s not mostly black. Damned edit button!

        1. I thought you lived in Arkansas.

        2. I was thinking it was the ‘most black state’ in America but it’s really ‘the state with the most black people’. Apparently, proportional makeup switches across several of the racist southern redneck states.

          1. Progressive Yankees fear and hate Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi for the disproportional Blackness.

          2. According to this, it’s New York. Georgia is 4th both in total and percentage.

            1. Projected vs. Actual numbers.

              And again, I was (mis-)recalling ‘most black state’. NY will have more black people, as will TX but neither will approach GA proportionally.

              And fuck this is a lot of obsessing over a mis-remembered stat that I voluntarily redacted/edited.

              1. Math is racist.

    2. I assume it makes it easier to wrap your head around the fact that these Asian-Americans would happen to be advocating the nationalist/closed borders position.

      lol what the fuck are you talking about

      1. What makes Asian-Americans different from Asians attending school in America? Since when did Robby give two shits about anything that happens in flyover sparse country? It’s like he whimsically drew a line and chose to care about only one race inside that line.

        1. When your woke, you never have to make sense.

    3. Yup. All this stuff about minorities, and how whites have to do stuff against their own interests to help them, is kind of ridiculous in the global context.

      White people are THE major minority group globally. Jews too. We just happen to have our shit together, and hence aren’t good for playing the victim card.

      But as the 21st century wears on, and European nations start really getting shit on by an ascendant Asia, I strongly suspect white people are going to get tired of slitting their own throats in the name of helping “minorities” that in fact greatly out number them. There are more Indians alone than there are proper Europeans in the entire world. Same for Chinese obviously.

      I don’t want to push for affirmative action for whites, because that’s BS… But we could certainly get rid of all the laws/policies that knee cap ourselves since the era of the honky is basically over anyway…

      1. Whites are the Kulaks of the world.

  8. That’s the problem with these feel-good mandates. They are too damned easy to work around, ad any fool can see that. Most people knew it before hand, including the legislators. But no matter, got to do what looks good on paper, regardless of reality, and when it shows it predicted flaws, the next legislation has been ready since the beginning t layer more bandaids on top.

    Government is how we lie to each other in the name of political correctness.

  9. Affirmative Action is all about using race as a means of enforcing class barriers. The proportion of students whose parents are wealthy to those whose parents are not at Harvard is something like 23 to 1. Think about that, Harvard has all of these programs that are supposed to create a diverse student body by admitting disadvantaged groups and they still end up with it being 23 to 1 rich to everyone else.

    The reason Harvard and all of these schools do not want merit based admissions has nothing to do with race, despite their claims to the contrart. If they had true merit based admissions, a lot of very hard working smart middle and lower class students would get in. The fact that most of them are Asian is besides the point. The problem Harvard has is that most of them would not be rich. So what Harvard does is use affirmative action and the desire to create a diverse student body as a way to ensure that only those of the right class get in. They admit rich black kids in the name of helping disadvantaged groups at the expense of middle class and poor Asian kids thus keeping the wrong classes of people out of the school.

    1. winner

    2. Excellent.

      Where do you get the “23 to 1” stat? I am not disputing it, just curious.

    3. The theory is fine enough applied to Harvard. But why does every other college do it?

    4. Once again, we see another example of progressivism being discriminatory along class lines. It’s why they came up with minimum wage – to stop the icky immigrants from under cutting white Anglo wages.

      They truly are the ideology of racism on so many levels.

    5. I can explain why that is John…

      It’s because IQ is strongly heritable from your parents. And IQ is the number 1 determining factor for people becoming wealthy.

      So one would expect that most people who score in the top fraction of a percent in the USA would come from parents who also have high IQs, and are likely to be wealthy and successful. The mainstream estimates range from 50-80% of IQ being heritable, with 60-70% being the most common findings in studies.

      The genetic lottery kicks out enough randomness that not every smart person has smart parents, and vice versa. But statistically it is usually the case. Science has already answered this question, it’s just not a PC ultra egalitarian result…

      Also, when a high IQ child is born to low IQ parents, they tend to do well, and marry up with a mate who also has an above average IQ. When a smart person has a low IQ child, they tend to marry down. Not always, but more than often enough to keep things fairly segregated by intelligence. They’ve actually been finding that this is trending UPWARDS in recent years, and assortive mating was at far lower rates a few decades ago. So this problem will only be exacerbated in the future most likely…

      1. You’re right about the issues of IQ and heritability vek, but John hits the nail on the head. instead of 1 in 23 not coming from the very wealthy class, it would be much higher poor and middle class. To the point of expecting ~5-10% to come from the poor, and another 15-20% from the middle class.

        All of these schools have been about separating the wealthy elect from the poor damned for a couple of centuries. Same goes for the elite boarding schools. If you take the time to study them, there’s a strong connection between Calvinism and their policies too. Particularly the Calvinist ideas of Unconditional Election and Perseverence of the Saints, which they apply directly to the wealthy and the poor.

        1. Yeah, I mean it is possible your figures may be correct, although I’m assuming those are just off the cuff guesses?

          One thing is that one would still expect the “cognitive elite” effect to get higher and higher the further up you set the bar. So while a picky state school trying to skim the top 5% of people might end up with 30-40% from poor or middle class backgrounds, simply raising that bar to trying to get only the top 1% of students could change that dramatically. Keep in mind it is a bell curve, so the figures drop off dramatically towards the tails of the distribution.

          One could crunch the numbers, but I ain’t doin’ it! Either way it’s slanted towards the sub standard smarts wealthy via legacies if nothing else.

    6. True dat. Never forget that the real purpose of Harvard — indeed of any Ivy League school — is maintaining existing and establishing new connections. That’s it.

  10. Asians are 5.6 percent of the population therefore they should be 5.6 percent of the Harvard population.

    1. The Google Who Knows All tells me that…

      “Down syndrome continues to be the most common chromosomal disorder. Each year, about 6,000 babies are born with Down syndrome, which is about 1 in every 700 babies born.”

      1 in every 700 students at Harvard should have Down Syndrome! It’s only fair!!!

      1. 3.7 million people or about one percent of the population believe they have been abducted by aliens. So one out of every hundred students at Harvard should be alien abuduction survivors.

        This is kind of fun.

        1. I agree!!! If not 1 out of 100 will self-ID as alien abductees, let’s bring in the space aliens and abduct some of them until the numbers are right!!!! Anal probing and all! Bring it ON!!!!

          (If too many of them self-ID, they need to be expelled, I guess).

        2. They might be.

      2. If they score an 1100 on the SAT sure.

    2. Asians are 5.6 percent of the population therefore they should be 5.6 percent of the Harvard population.

      I find your opinion bigoted and nationalistic. Asians account for 60% of the world population and, therefore, they should represent 60% of the Harvard population. Borders are a fascist illusion!

      1. Bigot means intolerant of the opinions of others. I bigot you.

      2. I have to admit that your post is clever…

        What percent of the galaxy’s intelligent inhabitants aren’t human? Shouldn’t they be counted and included as well?

        Inquiring minds want to KNOW, dammit!!!!

        (At the very least, some cetaceans should be included).

      3. Somin? Is that you?

      4. This is incredibly racist.

        Obviously 100% of the people at Harvard should be black children with Down syndrome, because they’re the most oppressed people of all!

        1. No. 100% black Downs transgender gays. Keep your homophobic cis-normative opinions to yourself.

  11. This is why we need to know what everyone’s race is, so we know who to prioritize.

    1. If someone is one quarter Indian, one quarter white, one quarter Asian and one quarter black, which box do they check? What if I send off for a DNA test and it comes back 1% east Asian? Is my attending Harvard make it “too Asian”?

      1. Confucius say: “Man who date Shanghai tranny need to check box.”

      2. You check ’em all baby, and get four times the bennies, broheim.

      3. Whatever you do, don’t check the white or Asian box. Unless daddy is knee deep in hundred dollar bills.

      4. Sounds like Tiger Woods. He refers to himself as Cablinasian but the media consistently refers to him as a black golfer. Yet Vijay Singh, who is black as any African, is a white golfer.

          1. Golf is a disease. 🙂

        1. Yet Vijay Singh, who is black as any African,

          This is chemjeff-tier stupid.

      5. We laugh but on the Adam Carolla and Dr. Drew Pinski podcast the other night their was a half-Korean, half-Mexican guy who has a daughter with his Chinese wife talking about whether he should have the kid identify as Hispanic for college admissions purposes. People are going to try and game the system.

        1. The obvious answer is they should claim Hispanic. Gaming the system worked for Warren!

          This is the madness of all this shit. I’m Native enough to actually legit claim it, but I never have… Yet if I did, it could theoretically make stuff easier on me… Despite that I have grown up as white a life as anybody.

        2. Just start giving your kids ethnic first names. Sure it’s cultural appropriation, but no one at the admissions office is going to dare to check.

      6. Cablinasian. And they make the golf team.

    2. It seemed to work well for Harvard’s “first woman of color”, Fauxcahantas.

  12. The brother of the actress in the sitcom The Mindy Chronicles is an east Indian who claimed that he was black in order to get into med school. With the advent of DNA tests and the rise of interracial marriages, especially among Asians and other races, I don’t see how this system can go on. At this point any Asian who doens’t self identify as some other race on these admissions tests has almost failed an intelligence test for admission.

    1. The Mindy Project.

      1. I never watched the show. I knew it was the Mindy something.

        1. Google is your friend…well not really. Duckduckgo is your friend.

          1. It wasn’t worth looking up. You saw my point.

            1. Plus, you gave him a good opportunity to engage in pedantry. He should be thankful.

      2. I never understood how with there being hundreds of gorgous Bollywood stars dying to crossover to Hollywood, some homely fat girl is the first Indian actress to get her own sitcom.

        1. Fat girls are funny.

          1. But when Indian women are hot, they are spectacular.

        2. I wonder who those producers are trying to appeal to, JOHN?

          1. I never watched the show, so clearly not me.

          2. White women who virtue signal by watching minorities on TV

            They’d watch a fat, meh looking Indian lady, but not a hot one.

        3. She’s also a writer and producer

          1. Pretty girls never have to do that.

          2. Are we talking about Lena Dunham here?

            1. no. not ever.

            2. I was thinking of her too, coincidentally. Though I wouldn’t say they are the secrets of her success. I’m not sure what is

              1. Pedophilia, mostly.

        4. denigrated skinny white kid for laughs on The Office, gets show.

    2. When you stop and think about it, it’s a system of discrimination set up by a bunch of racists. Between Rachel Dolezal and Elizabeth Warren, it should be clear that the system is patently bankrupt and the only honest people are the ones not playing the game.

      1. When Democrats/progs scream ‘the system is rigged’ (like the fake Indian did) it’s PROJECTION in full action.

    3. >>>With the advent of DNA tests and the rise of interracial marriages, especially among Asians and other races

      are no races, only people?

      1. But there ARE races. That’s actually too broad a term, scientifically. But it’s good enough for government work.

        The genetic differences between people create massive differences in outcomes in terms of physiology, prevalence of diseases, mental health issues (blacks are less likely to have severe mental health issues, interestingly enough), and so on.

        Did you know that mixed race people often have problems rejecting organ transplants from people of EITHER races they descended from, and it is best to get a transplant from another mixed person? Yeah, don’t here that fact talked about much, since everybody wants to pretend there are no differences between people… But it’s true.

        So don’t give me that bullshit that we’re all the same. We’re not. We all evolved specific traits that gave us strengths and weaknesses for surviving in the environments we evolved in. That’s why white people die from malaria easier than blacks, and blacks get heart disease like WHOA eating the same diet as a white person, etc.

        1. Race is an inexact approximation for genetic relatedness. DNA testing can give us much better matches.

          There is a real problem approaching, as DNA mapping to talent starts up.

          1. In addition, studies relying on “academic achievement” have been conducted with decades of market distortions in academic achievement.

            The metric has been gamed, and the GWAS tracking it have this noise in them.

            A huge indicator of ‘academic achievement’ has been to be an NPC who swallows global warming and other consensus beliefs.

            The process has been selecting on the INABILITY to think for yourself, and the noise moves it away from IQ.

          2. In addition, studies relying on “academic achievement” have been conducted with decades of market distortions in academic achievement.

            The metric has been gamed, and the GWAS tracking it have this noise in them.

            A huge indicator of ‘academic achievement’ has been to be an NPC who swallows global warming and other consensus beliefs.

            The process has been selecting on the INABILITY to think for yourself, and the noise moves it away from IQ.

          3. Yup. Race is a rough proxy at best, but DNA testing can nail these things down far better. The data sets are getting pretty impressive now actually.

            And you’re correct that they’re looking for genes related to specific positive traits now… Like intelligence! They’ve already discovered several hundred, which can apparently account for a couple IQ points difference between having those variants or not. When they’ve mapped another several hundred, or thousand, or whatever… Well, they’ll be able to look at your DNA and probably get your IQ within a small range with a pretty small error factor. Test your baby at birth, so you know you should start teaching them to read at a young age, or maybe not bother… :/

            It’s gonna be some creepy ass Gattica shit in another 10-20 years probably.

    4. And he was successful. He got into Med school (Washington University, I think) despite middling under grad grades.

      Fun fact: he did not finish med school.

    5. Yeah, it’s thoroughly retarded. I can legitimately check off Native and Hispanic anytime I want… Despite comfortably being overwhelmingly white genetically and culturally.

  13. “Sparse country” sends fewer students to Harvard, and thus the university makes a special effort to recruit from these states.

    ‘Cause them flyover bumpkins shore ’nuff increase *diversity*!

    1. My parents were teachers and they managed to get a poor black kid from Mason TN into Yale. He did very well and has a Phd in sociology from Stanford.

      1. Oh Dear Jesus, a Phd in sociology from Stanford, you say?!?!

        Does he, then, know how to change a light-bulb, or run a mop or a broom? And if so, is he advocating that in order to perform these jobs (and be paid for it), one MUST have a Phd in sociology from Stanford, or better?

        1. Seriously, sociology is but one infinitesimally small step above “communications.”

  14. Harvard shouldn’t discriminate against Asian-Americans.
    They should only enroll the best and the brightest who contribute millions of dollars to Harvard on an annual basis.
    Oh, wait…

  15. Harvard’s Recruitment Efforts Prioritized White Students Over High-Achieving Asians

    Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed to score an 1100 out of 1600 to attract Harvard’s attention. White students received letters if they achieved a 1310.

    LMFAO at the headline

    1. Yeah. Like where’s the elephant?

  16. At what point do Asians learn to “decline to state”?

    What is the psat threshold for that class?

    1. It’s kind of hard for “Hyong Lee” to pull that off.

      1. Many Chinese Americans have an European “official” name and Chinese name. This did not help my friend Wright Nee a great deal.

        1. Chinese and Korean nationals also do this. I always wondered where the names came from. Did they pick it themselves or was it given to them by their first English language teacher?

  17. Harvard has 30 billion dollars and it still can’t keep ivy from climbing on its walls? Sad!

  18. Where you went hardly matters two years out.

    Michigan State or Yale.

    1. Ish.

      A competent guy that went to a state school may do better than an idiot who went to Yale… But a competent guy that went to Yale will likely do better, just because of the getting in the door factor.

    2. Except every time you apply for a new job.

    3. It matters if you want to go to a top grad school. If you did not go to a top undergrad school, you have no chance of getting into a top grad school, no matter how good your GPA and standardized test scores are.

      Unless of course, you are of a preferred minority.

      1. 2 years community college, 2 years to finish degree at state school,

        then Masters Degree at a top state school in your field,

        then top grad school is a matter the quality of your Masters Thesis

        at least in the hard sciences.

  19. The biggest reason more Asians can’t get into Harvard (vs whites) is because they prioritize “legacy” admissions. The Asian legacies are a small percentage of total legacies because they just haven’t had as much time to build up legacies. It’s a practical thing to give children and relatives of prior graduates an advantage. Those people donate even more than first gen graduates. Of course with such a big endowment and such huge tax breaks, one would think the % increase in donations from somewhat less qualified legacy admissions wouldn’t be such a huge influence.

    1. They need more Flounders is what you’re saying?

    2. Look at the overall numbers. Legacies are a big chunk, but most of the legacies ALSO meet objective criteria that warrant entry. It’s the NAMs soaking up nearly 30% of the student body without meeting the requirements that is screwing Asians AND non legacy whites.

  20. Merit based high-achieving citizens of all races should be the priority. Otherwise don’t prioritize anyone based on race

  21. Well, Harvard *is* a private organization. They are free to do what they like, even if we don’t approve. But if they get tax money, they of course have to obey the strings that come attached to that tax money.

    The ideal situation of course would be to end all subsidies and tax preferences to higher education, but private institutions in particular.

    1. Jeff, are you okay buddy? Have you suffered a head trauma or something recently? You’re actually talking sense, so I just wanna make sure you’re okay… 🙂

      1. I was thinking the same thing. Apparently, he’s back on his meds for the time being.

    2. Ok serious question: Can McDonalds (an eminently private organization, receiving money only from citizens) ~legally~ discriminate (in regards to hiring, promotion, ownership) without government using force (legal or physical) to change such practices? Because if discrimination is ok for one private organization then, per the 14th amendment, it is ok for ALL. Just asking for a friend. Your post seemed to imply that you actually believe what you typed.

  22. This is not NEW news. People have known this is exactly how it works for a long time… But where you’re wrong is by saying they’re propping up whites… This entire scheme is because they would get VERY FEW blacks and Hispanics with objective academic criteria only. This policy as a whole screws whites overall, just as it does Asians… It just screws Asians a little more than whites.

    Note the massive gaps between non Asian minorities, and where the white cutoff is, and the small gap between whites and Asians.

    From stuff I read a few months back while this case was brewing, there would be more Asians AND whites overall if there were not differing objective criteria by race.

    So trying to reframe this as affirmative action for whites is ridiculous, and false.

    Try again Prog-Reason!

  23. IN OTHER NEWS: I hope they win this case. Affirmative action is BS, no matter who it benefits or not. We should no more be having affirmative action to get into Harvard, screwing whites, Asians, and Jews in the process, than we should have affirmative action getting MORE whites, Asians, and Jews into the NFL.

    Let people succeed or fail on their actual merit, no matter the outcome.

    The fact is that differing IQ scores between these ethnic groups explains 100% of the differences you see. Most evidence points to there being a large genetic difference behind that… BUT even if you want to stick to the environmental hypothesis explaining the entire gap (to be PC and non racist and all), it STILL explains the entire gap. If it’s environmental, all we need to do is figure out what causes the IQ gap in the environment, and fix it… Then all this nonsense will go away on its own.

    Until then it’s just fucking up the world by sending sub par people into schools where they don’t belong, and depriving the world of giving the best educations to the people most capable of using them.

  24. I visited Harvard recently, and it wasn’t remotely a secret that they first tried to keep the number of Jews down, and then later Asians. Followed by, of course, by Asians trying to get in by some other category — international student, mixed race student, etc.

    This is what happens when a campus decides diversity (of appearance, not ideology) should be the goal — and how you get leftists arguing in favor of explicitly racist programs.

  25. The biggest surprise out of this Harvard lawsuit isn’t that legacy students or certain minorities get preferential treatment while others don’t, it’s that Harvard gives special consideration to athletes in admissions. Is Harvard noted for their sports teams? I thought they didn’t even give athletic scholarships? Has all the standard lowering helped with their sporting reputation? Or is it anything goes, as long as they can beat Yale at various upper crust sporting events?

  26. This is such a blatant lie. Harvard is prioritizing low achieving Blacks, and to lesser extent Latinos over highly qualified, Asians, and slightly less qualified Whites. How can reason keep this fucking liar on staff?

    1. Because Reason is a propaganda outlet nowadays, not an outlet that tries to get to the truth.

      As the old saying goes any organization that does not start out being explicitly right wing, will eventually be taken over by the left wing. It seems to be quite a truism IMO, especially since most libertarians I have met in my life are very much right-libertarians… Yet somehow the left-libertarian minority has managed to take over almost every libertarian publication, think tank, etc. Funny that.

      1. I have a friend who’s a “Libertarian” and a BernieBro through-and-through, though I don’t think he understands the difference between a Libertarian and a libertine who hates cops.

    2. I’m not sure how Robby stays on. Maybe its AA for retards

  27. The Headline
    “Harvard’s Recruitment Efforts Prioritized White Students Over High-Achieving Asians”

    The Facts
    “Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed to score an 1100 out of 1600 to attract Harvard’s attention. White students received letters if they achieved a 1310. But Asian males did not earn letters unless they scored 1380.”

    Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed 280 points less than Asians.
    Whites needed 70 points less than Asians.

    Yet the headline is about White Privilege over Asians. Guess that fits The Narrative better.

  28. Down with the Baizuo!

  29. vek,

    Nobody wants to hear your rad new ideas about race and IQ.

    1. Sorry, but they’re true… And relevant to the discussion.

      As I always say, you can feel free to believe in the environmental hypothesis. This means there are no inherent differences, but some groups have some environmental reasons they end up with higher IQs. This is a non racist belief. This is what most of the scientific community publicly says they believe in, for obvious reasons.

      However you cannot deny that massive, persistent IQ gaps exist. And you also cannot argue that IQ means nothing, since it is the best predictor of life success ever found.

      So you can believe it is because white/Asian kids eat a better diet, or read to their kids, or whatever random shit and that’s why they have higher IQs… But you cannot deny that the reason for differences in outcomes IN THE HERE AND NOW is not driven entirely by lower IQs for some ethnic groups.

      It’s called logic Tony, use it sometime!

  30. Robby’s only problem with this seems to be that it allows more whites. Although, it’s not clear what “more” means. Or what to make of “to attract Harvard’s attention“.

    Ahh, the soft racism of low expectations. “Black, Hispanic, and Native American students needed to score an 1100 out of 1600 to attract Harvard’s attention.”

    1. I thought Robby was pretty clear in this article that it is yet another example of affirmative action, and that he opposes it. (see his Supreme Court sentence)

      The twist is that it is positively impacting white people, and so it will be interesting to see if the conservatives who usually are opposed to affirmative action will equally be opposed to this form of it as well. Or if they will consider it a victory because in this case the white team won.

      1. But that’s not actually what would happen… MORE whites overall would get in going purely on merit.

        There would be far more Asians, but all the other minorities would lose a ton of spots, which whites would get a good chunk of too.

        Either way going on merit is going on merit. Going on merit is NOT affirmative action in any way.

        1. Do you have data or reasoning to support this assertion? If the proportion of asians who are being turned away is sizable enough, then all non-asians would lose numbers.

          The other thing to consider is that EVERY university limits international students (there are various reasons for doing this), many of which are asians. If going strictly by merit, you have yet another group to consider.

          1. I’ve read that was the case in other places that were discussing this when the case was first coming up. Basically it goes like this:

            Right now Non Asian Minorities account for like 30ish+ percent at basically all universities, or higher in some areas. They’ve tried to go for them being their approximate percentages of the population more or less it seems.

            BUT when you go strictly on merit, especially at a high standards school like Harvard, there would literally only be a couple percent that would make the grade. So it might end up being like 1-2% each of black/Hispanic/others. So there’s something like 30% of the student body freed up.

            White test scores are only SLIGHTLY below Asians, versus the giant gaps between them and everybody else. So maybe Asians pick up 20% of that gain, but another 10% might go to whites. Keep in mind there are a TON more whites than Asians in the USA too, which helps there.

            That was roughly the stuff I read before, but is not the exact numbers or anything.

  31. Robby is retarded

  32. Megyn Kelly is in the process of being railroaded. Not for shitty ratings but for saying this:

    “You do get in trouble if you are a white person who puts on blackface on Halloween, or a black person who puts on whiteface for Halloween,” Ms. Kelly said. “Back when I was a kid, that was O.K., as long as you were dressing up as a character.”

    She added that she was perplexed by the criticism of Luann de Lesseps, a cast member of “The Real Housewives of New York” who was criticized for dressing up as Diana Ross, complete with an outsize Afro wig. “People said that that was racist, and I don’t know, I felt like, who doesn’t love Diana Ross?” Ms. Kelly said, adding: “I can’t keep up with the number of people that we’re offending just by being normal people.”


    1. Megyn Kelly didn’t dress up in blackface on The Today Show. She isn’t being kicked to the curb for using a slur. It’s her ideas. Her idea was offensive.

      She’s basically getting the axe because she made a certain argument. She is not allowed to make that argument in public and remain employed in the mainstream media.

      Have you ever made an unacceptable argument on social media? The left wants you to be permanently ineligible for management positions and maybe even unemployed. We can’t have people thinking that believing such things–regardless of whether you act on them–is in any way acceptable.

      Now they’re basically giving her a struggle session. Apologize, apologize, apologize for your fake ideas–not that it will do any good.

      This is why people support Donald Trump. This might be a good reason for a libertarian to support Donald Trump. His presence in the White House suggests Americans will only be dragged into a conformist, SJW society hell kicking and screaming. I certainly don’t want to live in a society where making arguments becomes unacceptable.

      1. Wrong thread!

        It had to happen to me eventually.

  33. The NEA runs the public schools in our state and our local students don’t report until noon on Wednesday because of some special teacher training (school is out by 2:30) and students leave school early (noon) on Fridays so that the teachers can conference with each other. Most of these teachers this year in our state are topping out over $90K for nine months work and starting at $60K.

    Graduates of our local high schools are graduating with wonderful GPA’s. My 3.25 of 55 years ago would be pitiful today. Straight 4.0’s are common and now we are seeing numbers like 4.1 and 4.25 showing up. Ask one of these geniuses the square root of 144, or how to pronounce pseudo, or to name the U.S. senators for their state and their party.

    Back in the early 20th century achievement tests were created to give high ability lower and middle social class students a chance at college entrance. I aced those and reaped scholarships Today rigorous standardized tests that confirm actual mastery of a domain of knowledge are being bad-mouthed and down-played for college entrance purposes.

    What is replacing all that are personal recommendations and glowing P.R. stories about how involved the applicant has been in fashionable community causes. But that is nothing but how the upper classes used economic clout to promote their gilded prodigies a century ago.

  34. Just a thought.

    Make your own Harvard MIT.

    The talent is there. The resources are there.

    Jews were brought up here. So there was discrimination. Jewish hospitals were created. Yeshiva University and Montefiore created a medical scientific institute. Schools were established in other fields.

    Asians can do that.

    Affirmative action is wrong and counter productive. Defeat it. Beat them at their own game.

  35. So…what are Jews considered now?

    1. I believe they still get their own special magical category… They get to be white when it suits them, and Jews when it suits them. For what Harvard is doing, they’re probably considered white I would imagine.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.