Thursday, January 11, 2007


Liberals love all people...except Asians

I have a theory: Liberals hate Asians.

Okay, maybe they don't "hate" them...but they damn sure strongly resent them.

Now before you dismiss that out-of-hand, think about it. Liberals drone on and on about the need for race-factored admissions - supposedly in pursuit of some yet-undocumented benefits brought on by skin-deep diversity – but what group do such plans hurt most? Well, as once again outlined by the always excellent Thomas Sowell, Asians tend to bear the brunt of race-influenced admissions:

““At 41 percent Asian, Berkeley could be the new face of merit-based admissions. The problem for everybody else: lots less room at elite colleges.” [quoting January 7 New York Times]”

Anybody of any race who takes a place at any college leaves one less place for somebody else. Does an Asian American take up any more space than anybody else? Are they all Sumo wrestlers?” Thomas Sowell on Education & Quotas

I know this probably runs counter-intuitive to most of your thinking but I have an idea as to why this so.

If you’ll remember, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor during FDR’s administration, thus permanently distracting him from his efforts to get the federal government even more involved with our everyday lives. That was followed by the Truman Administration which got us involved on the Korean Peninsula. That effort is credited with helping to lead to eight years of Dwight Eisenhower. Then Kennedy/Johnson + Vietnam = Richard Nixon and a fractured Democratic Party (and yes, I know much of the Left was rooting for the Vietcong but that’s only because they were young & stupid & possibly at Yale...not that I’m questioning their patriotism). After Vietnam, we saw the surge of Japanese imports, followed by their non-UAW staffed American plants. Result: Democratic Party-ally UAW is now almost a third of what it was at its heyday in the late ‘60s. In short, I think liberals blame Asians for many of the woes and disappointments they’ve experienced over the past 70 years.

Feeding off, then, the stereotype of Asian obsession with education, liberals saw their chance to get even. They would deny children of Asian descent the opportunity to go to the school of their choice. Of course, they couldn’t be blatant about such discrimination; even Sandra Day O’Connor wouldn’t sign off on that. But after a few mis-steps (i.e. Bakke), they introduced the vague yet strangely alluring-sounding concept of skin-deep diversity - now better known as just “Diversity” – and those pesky Asians were screwed.

So far this Diversity shtick has to be rated an unqualified success as even liberals had to be surprised at just how readily this was accepted without much comment. Like the townsfolk too afraid to point out the lack of clothes on the Emperor, so too has the Diversity benefit gone unchallenged…as has its application; whereas most schools are chastised should their enrollment of certain minorities not achieve a PC-level of “Diversity”, can anyone realistically imagine a liberal criticizing an Historically Black College or University for their lack of Diversity? How about criticizing Hillary Clinton’s alma mater, Wellesley, for their lack of gender diversity? (On the flip side: would an all-male private college of similar stature avoid such criticism?)…(Yes, that was a rhetorical question.)

Obviously, this is just a rough draft of my theory. I’d like to write it up for some journal but Leftist-written campus speech codes being what they are today, I’d probably just be accused of hate speech. Instead, for the sanest, most common sense reaction to this problem, I’ll just leave you with the inimitable Ronald Reagan:

“It has been said that, when Ronald Reagan was governor of California, someone told him that admitting students to the University of California on individual performance alone could mean that all the students at Berkeley might be Asian Americans.

"So what?" was the Gipper's response.”
Thomas Sowell: For What Purpose

Seriously, could a liberal in good standing have said that?

Sowell is excellent in his discussions of how immigrants and their first generation descendants so often out perform native-born U.S. citizens. I recommend his book "Ethnic America" though I suspect you may have read it already.

Another question that comes to mind is how American education got so slack in the first place. I recall going to Germany and staying with a host family where my counterpart had had 5 years of Latin and 3 years of Greek in a public school environment. Mind you, I had had a Jesuit education with 2 years of Latin. Their school ended earlier than ours daily but they got more done, perhaps because they wasted no time with the cheerleading squad or the prom (sports were a big deal, but organized through rec councils.)

I suggest reading Oliver Willis, a black liberal commentator and activist whose family is from Jamaica. You and he don't see eye to eye on much at all, but his comments about the anti-education attitudes within a section of young native-born Black Americans have brought him severe criticism from much of his readership.
Thanks Bruce. I am a long time fan of Thomas Sowell, one of his latest efforts - "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" is powerful read. He's an education on every page.

My high school was run by Benedictines (the Jesuits run HC) and was all about the liberal arts - 4 years of Latin, 4 years of French and a year of German...and I was on the light side. As I recall, they didn't care too much about my self-estemm, just whether I was doing the work...and as we all know, the more I worked, the better my esteem.

...and I am certainly familiar with Oliver's site - I remember you directing us over there recently to take in a dust-up going on over a similar subject.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Preview on Feedage: maryland-conservatarian
Add to Windows Live iPing-it