Study: Whites favor meritocracy (unless it doesn't benefit them, aka Asians).

[Phokus]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans

Least shocking thing ever. White arguments in favor of meritocracy were never about principle, it's because it's viewed as a zero sum game and they simply don't like what they view as blacks and hispanics taking 'their' children's spot in academics. Of course when the tables turn, they do an impressive 180.

NEW YORK -- Critics of affirmative action generally argue that the country would be better off with a meritocracy, typically defined as an admissions system where high school grades and standardized test scores are the key factors, applied in the same way to applicants of all races and ethnicities.

But what if they think they favor meritocracy but at some level actually have a flexible definition, depending on which groups would be helped by certain policies? Frank L. Samson, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Miami, thinks his new research findings suggest that the definition of meritocracy used by white people is far more fluid than many would admit, and that this fluidity results in white people favoring certain policies (and groups) over others.
Specifically, he found, in a survey of white California adults, they generally favor admissions policies that place a high priority on high school grade-point averages and standardized test scores. But when these white people are focused on the success of Asian-American students, their views change.
The white adults in the survey were also divided into two groups. Half were simply asked to assign the importance they thought various criteria should have in the admissions system of the University of California. The other half received a different prompt, one that noted that Asian Americans make up more than twice as many undergraduates proportionally in the UC system as they do in the population of the state.
When informed of that fact, the white adults favor a reduced role for grade and test scores in admissions -- apparently based on high achievement levels by Asian-American applicants. (Nationally, Asian average total scores on the three parts of the SAT best white average scores by 1,641 to 1,578 this year.)
When asked about leadership as an admissions criterion, white ranking of the measure went up in importance when respondents were informed of the Asian success in University of California admissions.
"Sociologists have found that whites refer to 'qualifications' and a meritocratic distribution of opportunities and rewards, and the purported failure of blacks to live up to this meritocratic standard, to bolster the belief that racial inequality in the United States has some legitimacy," Samson writes in the paper. "However, the results here suggest that the importance of meritocratic criteria for whites varies depending upon certain circumstances. To wit, white Californians do not hold a principled commitment to a fixed standard of merit."
Samson raises the idea that white perception of "group threat" from Asians influences ideas about admissions criteria -- suggesting that they are something other than pure in their embrace of meritocratic approaches.
He adds: "While the principle of fairness may be a driving concern in people’s attitudes towards policies such as affirmative action, social welfare, and fair housing, the malleability of white respondents’ attitudes towards the importance of university admissions criteria in response to racial considerations indicates that public opinion about the importance of such criteria is anything but fair, at least if the definition of fairness entails a procedural fairness by which all groups should be subject to the same procedural process, i.e., same weighting of admissions criteria, when determining whether an individual should be admitted to a prestigious public university system, an opportunity that will significantly shape that person’s life outcomes."
And Samson noted in his presentation here that these concerns are not just theoretical. In 2009, the University of California Board of Regents changed the admissions criteria for the system, generally eliminating the requirement of SAT subject tests. Advocates for Asian Americans noted at the time that this shift was taking away a criterion on which Asian-American applicants tended to do better, on average, than other groups.
Further, Samson said that key Supreme Court decisions have been framed as being about meritocracy when -- if different groups had been involved -- they might have been framed differently or not even been brought. For example, one of the most important recent rulings on affirmative action in employment came in 2009, when the Supreme Court ruled that officials in New Haven were wrong to throw out a promotion exam for firefighters after realizing that white candidates had done well and black candidates did not, on average, do as well. Those who sued, and the Supreme Court majority, said that the decision was about applying meritocratic standards.
But would the white firefighters have even sued, Samson said, "if Jews or Asians had taken the test and gotten higher scores?" In that case, he said, would everyone have endorsed the idea that the test was all that mattered?


Read more: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/...hey-think-about-asian-americans#ixzz2c6rUbVPj
Inside Higher Ed

Edit:

After reading up on this more, there is a lot more shocking racism that Asians suffer from, not only in Academia, but also in work, further destroying the notion that the market punishes racism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling

Of Asian Americans, 52.4% are college graduates, while the national average is 29.9%.[6] The Asian American population accounts for about 4.8% of the U.S. population,[7] but only 0.3% of corporate office populations.[8] In New York, Asian Americans have the highest number of associates at top New York law firms, yet the lowest conversion rate to partner.[9] Even in fields where Asian Americans are highly represented, such as the Silicon Valley software industry, they comprise a disproportionately small percentage of upper management and board positions.[2] Statistics show that 1 out of 3 or one-third of all software engineers in the Silicon Valley being Asian, they make up only 6% of board members and 10% of corporate officers of the Bay Area's 25 largest companies and at the National Institutes of Health, where 21.5% of scientists are Asians, they make up only 4.7% of the lab and branch directors.[10] According to a study of the 25 largest Bay Area companies 12 had no Asian board members, and five had no Asian corporate officers.[11]

Why might Asians not hold management positions or higher positions in academia? Because non-Asians (mostly white, no doubt) don't like them when they're assertive:

http://www.theledger.com/article/20110724/NEWS/110729729/1021/sitemaps?p=2&tc=pg&tc=ar

RESULTS: The dominant East Asian employee was more disliked than the non-dominant East Asian employee, the non-dominant White employee, and the dominant White employee. A separate trial showed that participants held descriptive stereotypes of East Asians as being competent, cold, and non-dominant, while another showed that the most valued expectation of East Asians was that they "stay in their place."

CONCLUSION: East Asians who don't conform to racial stereotypes are less likely to be popular in the workplace. "In general, people don't want dominant co-workers," says Berdahl, "but they really don't want to work with a dominant East-Asian co-worker."

IMPLICATION: Berdahl says managers and coworkers should be wary of this tendency against East Asian employees that exhibit leader-like behavior. She says, "The bias lies within observers and it's ultimately their responsibility."

Most Asians also feel excluded and discriminated in the workplace (gee, i wonder why):

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/25/us-work-asians-idUSTRE76O4YX20110725

Also, elite universities, like harvard, are using some of the same methodologies to exclude Asians from entrance that they used to exclude Jewish students back in the 20's.:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

But i heard white privilege and racism went out the window with a black president! It's no surprise Asian Americans voted for Obama by more than 70% this past election.

 

[Brigandier]

Starts at the parents.

No one favors a merit based system if it means working hard, except Asians.

 

[OCGuy]

I live 15 minutes from UC Irvine (UCI, University of Civics and Integras), and an hour away from UCLA. I sure don't see white people lining up to protest the proportionally high Asian population.

Sorry.

Also, what a trash source. Laughable at best. On their homepage they are inferring that allowing (black) men to play football could be another Tuskegee.




"A New Tuskegee Experiment?

August 15, 2013


Lewis Margolis and Gregory Margolis ask whether encouraging young people to play football violates basic ethical standards, given both what is known and not known about the risks of concussions"



How do you even find this crap? How about someone just links to Stormfront as a source to counter?

Jeezus

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Not surprising at all in a country where white people regularly lament a reduction in their unsustainably-high standard of living at the benefit of Asians and Indians willing to perform more work for their wage, or in a country where people still cling to their domestic automobile industry of inferior quality. Does the study above see how blacks or Hispanics react when asked the same questions? I think this transcends race and is more a matter of the entitled first world not wanting to give any edge to competition.

 

[Phokus]

I live 15 minutes from UC Irvine (UCI, University of Civics and Integras), and an hour away from UCLA. I sure don't see white people lining up to protest the proportionally high Asian population.

Sorry.

That's because whites still have a very big advantage in the overwhelming majority of elite schools that discriminate against Asians, see the Americanconservative link i posted (is that a good enough source for you?). If those go away, you are going to be damn sure that whites will be screaming for affirmative action... for themselves. It's going to be 'gubmint better not touch my medicare' tea party bullshit all over again.

Also, what a trash source. Laughable at best. On their homepage they are inferring that allowing (black) men to play football could be another Tuskegee.




"A New Tuskegee Experiment?

August 15, 2013


Lewis Margolis and Gregory Margolis ask whether encouraging young people to play football violates basic ethical standards, given both what is known and not known about the risks of concussions"



How do you even find this crap? How about someone just links to Stormfront as a source to counter?

Jeezus

Tell me what part of that is 'racist'.

Also, the article refers to a study at the University of Miami, this isn't the ONLY news source that talks about this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J66rri8cGE8

 

[Phokus]

Not surprising at all in a country where white people regularly lament a reduction in their unsustainably-high standard of living at the benefit of Asians and Indians willing to perform more work for their wage, or in a country where people still cling to their domestic automobile industry of inferior quality. Does the study above see how blacks or Hispanics react when asked the same questions? I think this transcends race and is more a matter of the entitled first world not wanting to give any edge to competition.

OTOH, if you ask blacks and hispanic people about affirmative action, i would imagine they would be far less likely to change their minds about it, especially if they're FOR affirmative action, which, i would guess most are for.

This is what makes this study so jarring, it's hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[OCGuy]

OTOH, if you ask blacks and hispanic people about affirmative action, i would imagine they would be far less likely to change their minds about it, especially if they're FOR affirmative action, which, i would guess most are for.

Are you saying that people tend to favor policies which benefit their self-interests? Shocking.

I promise you that the % of whites who are for affirmative action far outnumbers the % of the beneficiaries of such race-based policies who oppose it.

What does that say? Nothing. But numbers are funny like that.


You can always filter out the true racists in this issue by proposing Affirmative Action based on economics, not skin color. Trailer Park kids are no better off than Project Kids. Poor is poor, and that is a reason to get a helping hand. Not because of your physical characteristics.

 

[openwheel]

study is very true, unfortunately. I see it regularly at work. It seems more difficult for the dominant Asian to get promoted even though he/she is the obvious choice. People really like the more reserved, quiet, competent Asian co-worker.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

OTOH, if you ask blacks and hispanic people about affirmative action, i would imagine they would be far less likely to change their minds about it, especially if they're FOR affirmative action, which, i would guess most are for.

This is what makes this study so jarring, it's hypocrisy at it's finest.

Your imagination doesn't mean much. I could just as easily imagine asking one group of Hispanics how they felt about affirmative action vs another after telling them that blacks make up twice as many people in the UC system due to affirmative action.

Quickly perusing the study, it appears it focused only on whites and Asians, but there might be similar studies referenced on other ethnic groups elsewhere. Anyone that's curious...

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/670664

 

[Brigandier]

OTOH, if you ask blacks and hispanic people about affirmative action, i would imagine they would be far less likely to change their minds about it, especially if they're FOR affirmative action, which, i would guess most are for.

This is what makes this study so jarring, it's hypocrisy at it's finest.

Everyone is racist in the sense that they wear rose colored glasses according to the group they belong to. The problem is in the 20th and especially the 21st century groups can no longer be clearly defined by easily recginsable attributes.

This change causes a lot of fiction. People that had a place, don't know it, have resentment and people that have a place, cannot recognize their own place.

Enter the emo.

 

[Phokus]

Are you saying that people tend to favor policies which benefit their self-interests? Shocking.

I promise you that the % of whites who are for affirmative action far outnumbers the % of the beneficiaries of such race-based policies who oppose it.

What does that say? Nothing. But numbers are funny like that.


You can always filter out the true racists in this issue by proposing Affirmative Action based on economics, not skin color. Trailer Park kids are no better off than Project Kids. Poor is poor, and that is a reason to get a helping hand. Not because of your physical characteristics.

Yes, it's almost like whites are the majority or something.

 

[OCGuy]

Yes, it's almost like whites are the majority or something.

Oh, I get it. The white trailer park kid should lose out to an otherwise equally qualified project kid, because there are more "white" people in the same country.

Riiiight...

 

[Phokus]

Oh, I get it. The white trailer park kid should lose out to an otherwise equally qualified project kid, because there are more "white" people in the same country.

Riiiight...

I forgot to add, 'and also hold the disproportionate amount of economic and political power' to the end of that sentence.

 

[Phokus]

Everyone is racist in the sense that they wear rose colored glasses according to the group they belong to.

Which is why conservatives should be laughed out of the room when they say 'racism is over'.

 

[OCGuy]

I forgot to add, 'and also hold the disproportionate amount of economic and political power' to the end of that sentence.

Oh, that makes it perfectly fine.

Because when little Tucker was listening to his meth addicted mother bang her third customer of the day in the next room in their double-wide to support her habit, he took solace in the fact that people thousands of miles away, who looked similar to him, were "in power". When he wasn't allowed to go to school for a year because he smelled like cat-urine from all the dope, it didn't really give him a disadvantage, because the most recent census said there were enough successful people with his skin color already.

Gotcha.

 

[Phokus]

Oh, that makes it perfectly fine.

Because when little Tucker was listening to his meth addicted mother bang her third customer of the day in the next room in their double-wide to support her habit, he took solace in the fact that people thousands of miles away, who looked similar to him, were "in power". When he wasn't allowed to go to school for a year because he smelled like cat-urine from all the dope, it didn't really give him a disadvantage, because the most recent census said there were enough successful people with his skin color already.

Gotcha.

No, because when you have money and power, you can afford to be a 'white guilt liberal' as you conservatives describe it.

 

[Geosurface]

How DARE white people feel any sense of discomfort or trepidation about not one, but ALL nations and regions they have traditionally held (some for upwards of 50,000 years and it could be argued more like nearly 1 million years) getting more and more "diverse" all the time? (And "diverse" really just means fewer whites, and more people with higher birth rates from other parts of the globe.)

Meanwhile, in Africa, South America, India, Asia, and Arabia you won't go there and find a whole lot of white enclaves or affirmative action for whites, or whites with double, triple, or quadruple the birth rates of the natives - nor will you find tumbleweeds and empty streets. Japan's birth rate is in the tank, and they really need to address that... but other than them? China, India, Africa is positively booming in birth rates, and ironically whites are bending over backwards to send water purifiers, Plumpy'nut, Golden Rice, and Malaria vaccine to Africa and elsewhere to help the already crazy birth rates observed there become even crazier, while the death rate drops.

Where will the resulting extra human beings be looking to for jobs and living space? Well, let's just say that not all of them will be content to stay put in their homelands.

I think it is completely and absolutely natural for any group of people to be interested in their own continued survival, and in continuing to hold the lands they've traditionally held. Particularly the lands which literally gave birth to them (Europe in this case.) I don't think there's anything "racist" about what I'm saying. And with regard to this article, this thread? I think it's also completely natural to favor your own offspring over other peoples' and to want to retain your "privilege" within your own nations. I'm amazed that even needs to be noted.

This is literally the situation, and I find it head-explodingly absurd:

You've got one group on the planet who were a third of the world population about 100 years ago, they're now closing in on being 5% - they are the only group which has a birth rate absolutely vanquished by feminism (and admittedly selfishness and luxury, too.) They are currently very busy about the projects of simultaneously opening their borders in nearly every country they hold, while they also deploy all the most advanced technologies they wield to increase the numbers of other groups in the world, making their market share of the global gene pool smaller still. They are also the only group which has implemented programs to give preference to everyone except themselves for jobs, school admissions, grants, you name it. So they're effectively doing the following things all at the same time:

1.) Failing to reproduce at levels which replace their numbers
2.) Helping to create more of every other group
3.) Placing massive incentives to immigrate to their nations (affirmative action, social welfare programs, higher standard of living) in front of the resulting increased numbers of other people...
4.) And finally, opening their borders to let the inevitable play out.

I don't believe there is any way any other group would be this suicidal. Head on over to China, Africa, Arabia, India, or South America (which I realize has plenty of whites too, but I'm referring to the areas still largely populated by Amerindians) and see how much traction you get with notions like "race is a social construct" and "you should feel bad for your Asian privilege" or "open your borders to less successful nations!" - look into how rigorously Mexico, ironically, controls their southern border for one example.

So yea, I do think there is a growing uneasiness among a lot of white people in the US, in the EU, and in Oceania about all of this... and I can't imagine why anyone would feel that was unreasonable on those peoples' part.

It's very easy to just say "You are teh racist!" but again, I don't see how that's the case. If someone thinks what I'm saying in this post is "racist" I would really appreciate you laying out for me why you believe that. If what I'm saying is "racist" to you, then almost everyone on the planet is an enormous racist by that definition. Is anyone naive enough to think that in-group preference has somehow been extinguished from the planet? The only place any effort has really even been made to reduce it is in those traditionally white nations I mentioned. I'm not saying anything about one group of people being better or worse than another, I'm merely saying all groups have the right to homelands and continued existence. Isn't that "diversity" after all?

 

[DCal430]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/...-change-when-they-think-about-asian-americans

Least shocking thing ever. White arguments in favor of meritocracy were never about principle, it's because it's viewed as a zero sum game and they simply don't like what they view as blacks and hispanics taking 'their' children's spot in academics. Of course when the tables turn, they do an impressive 180.




Edit:

After reading up on this more, there is a lot more shocking racism that Asians suffer from, not only in Academia, but also in work, further destroying the notion that the market punishes racism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_ceiling




Why might Asians not hold management positions or higher positions in academia? Because non-Asians (mostly white, no doubt) don't like them when they're assertive:

http://www.theledger.com/article/20110724/NEWS/110729729/1021/sitemaps?p=2&tc=pg&tc=ar





Most Asians also feel excluded and discriminated in the workplace (gee, i wonder why):

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/25/us-work-asians-idUSTRE76O4YX20110725

Also, elite universities, like harvard, are using some of the same methodologies to exclude Asians from entrance that they used to exclude Jewish students back in the 20's.:

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

But i heard white privilege and racism went out the window with a black president! It's no surprise Asian Americans voted for Obama by more than 70% this past election.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[DCal430]

That's because whites still have a very big advantage in the overwhelming majority of elite schools that discriminate against Asians, see the Americanconservative link i posted (is that a good enough source for you?). If those go away, you are going to be damn sure that whites will be screaming for affirmative action... for themselves. It's going to be 'gubmint better not touch my medicare' tea party bullshit all over again.



Tell me what part of that is 'racist'.

Also, the article refers to a study at the University of Miami, this isn't the ONLY news source that talks about this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J66rri8cGE8

You are clueless, these schools are doing this because of Affirmative Action, this is what Affirmative Action results in, since Asians are so grossly over represented. People like you are the ones who pushed for this. This has absolutely nothing to do with the white elite. You would know this if you actually read the sh*t you post.

 

[DominionSeraph]

OTOH, if you ask blacks and hispanic people about affirmative action, i would imagine they would be far less likely to change their minds about it, especially if they're FOR affirmative action, which, i would guess most are for.

Meh, I'd question that. Just as the unwashed masses of whites are conservatards unable to see their victimization of minorities, I'd question your average minority's ability to place themselves in the shoes of a race guilty of perpetrating systematic racism, with the attainment of the liberal realization that a system of counters is needed to remedy the disparity. You'd probably find a lot who'd think of AA as their entitlement instead of understanding its real function in a society.
Your average person is a self-absorbed moron. While being the victims of racism might give blacks and hispanics enough data to construct a full picture of racism, I'd bet more on "self absorbed" and say you're likely to see a picture that concentrates on them being the victims and others being the perpetrators -- a la "Christian persecution", only real.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

My step daughter is starting college this month and she received financial aid that my daughter couldn't. The difference is my step daughter is an Asian permanent resident alien. Funny thing is my salary is 55% more than what it was when my daughter was in college.

That you AA, you're helping me enjoy my white priviledge even more.

 

[Smoblikat]

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/SCOTUS/story?id=7393908&page=1

The real least shocking thing ever, whites denied the recognition they deserve, because they were white.

 

[PokerGuy]

hahaha, I love the faux rage by the OP about drivel articles full of pseudo science and assumptions. All written by left wing idiots of course.

Good stuff 🙂

 

[Pr0d1gy]

*sigh*

 

[SheHateMe]

I think my company is pretty diverse. I think our staff roster would make Geosurface cry.

Really awesome mixture of blacks, whites, Hispanics and asians working in higher level positions internationally.

Fortune 500 company, great benes, great people, great atmosphere, and wonderful support for new grads.