Once again, minorities get the short end of the stick.

[Yukaphile]

I've met a hardcore leftist who unironically thinks like Alixus from DS9. We should all just go back to the pre-industrial society because modern civilization has "failed," cites the way we exploit black people for factory work (he is pure collectivist), and then doesn't acknowledge when I told him flat-out how that attitude is not only elitist to most black Americans who, big shock, do NOT wanna go back to the jungle the way the stereotype says they are, but it's downright racist, because he's thinking he, a white person, can understand what's best for them rather than them.

[AllanO]

Note its implausible that Harvard having non-academic admissions criterion hurts its elite status. Harvard did not let any women in (there standard undergraduate programs) until 1977. They still have a legacy component boosting the chances of kids of alumni but it is far reduced from what it used to be. Large donors can boost their kids chances significantly to this day. Famously they had a quota limiting the number of Jews in the 30s and so on.

I see no historical evidence that Harvard ever admitted solely on the basis of narrow academic merit and indeed they were still elite when their admissions were far less about academics then they are now. So it is not a question of what they need to do rather what it would be nice of them to do.

While the most egregious and harmful policies are now abandoned if not illegal, it seem to me there is an argument for those that continue in terms of trade off in concerns. Like favouring donors gets them money which gets them the best profs (or at least the ones with the most things like Nobel prizes etc.) and that does a lot to secure their elite status and benefits all their students. Also there is the argument from freedom of association, Harvard is a private institution shouldn't they be able to set their own criterion for entry to some extent, in terms of things like legacy admissions, athletics etc.

[Yukaphile]

Well, for a school that is about "law" I've seen Harvard students or officials cite "collective guilt" bullshit to insist ordinary civilians are "perpetrators of crimes against humanity." Really. Just because of what the government is doing even if they support it.

That's just utterly ignorant. You're not a criminal until you engage in criminal acts, or immoral acts, period.

[Darth Wedgius]

The thing about Harvard, Yale, and those other "ivy league" schools is that there's supposed to be a certain level of elitism to them. This is just fine, because that is part of what makes graduates from those schools have a bit more value to them than people who go to normal state universities and colleges. By lowering standards for some people, this has the effect of devaluing being a graduate from one of these schools, because standards have been lowered.

So close, and yet so far.

As you say, the purpose of the Ivy League is not to reward individual achievement but rather to nurture the next generation of American elite. And Harvard knows it can only do that if it's student population at least somewhat resembles the American population. If Harvard admits a class that is 80% Asian, it's prestige doesn't rise...it collapses, regardless of how accomplished that freshman class is. Overnight, Harvard ceases to be the center of education for the American elite, and it suddenly becomes just another tech school.

Harvard administrators are well aware of this fact, which is why they will fight tooth and nail to protect their admissions standards. So far, the Courts have wisely agreed with them.

Bleargh. I'd rather Harvard had lost its reputation and have classes 99% asian than have it allowed to discriminate on the basis of race.

[Riedquat]

I've met a hardcore leftist who unironically thinks like Alixus from DS9. We should all just go back to the pre-industrial society because modern civilization has "failed," cites the way we exploit black people for factory work (he is pure collectivist), and then doesn't acknowledge when I told him flat-out how that attitude is not only elitist to most black Americans who, big shock, do NOT wanna go back to the jungle the way the stereotype says they are, but it's downright racist, because he's thinking he, a white person, can understand what's best for them rather than them.

The problem there is that you're painting a one extreme or the other case (modern civilisation has failed anyway, and although I've had more than enough of the technology obsession, other than for entertainment, lurching off to the opposite extreme isn't the answer either). But that's a bit beside the point, did he mention jungles or was that you?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Yeah srs Yuka I don't see you coming up with any great ideas instead.

[jadenova]

I've met a hardcore leftist who unironically thinks like Alixus from DS9. We should all just go back to the pre-industrial society because modern civilization has "failed," cites the way we exploit black people for factory work (he is pure collectivist), and then doesn't acknowledge when I told him flat-out how that attitude is not only elitist to most black Americans who, big shock, do NOT wanna go back to the jungle the way the stereotype says they are, but it's downright racist, because he's thinking he, a white person, can understand what's best for them rather than them.

Well said.