Jerry Brown longs for the good old days of UC bias against Asian-American students

The San Francisco Chronicle noted Tuesday that Gov. Jerry Brown had joined a challenge to the portion of 1996′s Proposition 209 that prevented state universities from using race in college admission decisions, with his lawyers telling the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the provision of state law “imposes unique political burdens on minorities” and violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection. But what the media almost never point out, and the Chronicle doesn’t, is that the UC admissions status quo before 1996 indisputably punished a minority. This is particularly insane when one realizes that affirmative action is meant to atone for white racism. In California, who paid the price for this historical sin? Asian-American students. Says who? Says The New York Times, quoting UC documents.

This is from the March 31, 1996, N.Y.Times story about UC’s adoption of a plan that even before Prop. 209 was passed would have phased out the use of race as a factor in deciding college admissions by spring 1998:

An internal [UC} report in May 1995, based on a computer simulation, predicted that such a change would result in a 15 to 25 percent overall rise of Asian-Americans at the University of California, and as much as 25 to 35 percent increase at Berkeley and U.C.L.A., where 75 percent of students would be admitted on merit. The number of whites would remain about the same, but Hispanic students would dip 5 to 15 percent and African-Americans would drop somewhere between 40 and 50 percent.

To repeat: Without affirmative action, white student numbers would have been unchanged, but Asian-American student enrollment would have exploded.

Now you can argue, if you’re so inclined, that there’s nothing wrong with asking some high-quality Asian-American students to go to slightly lesser schools so more Latino and black students can go to UC schools. You can argue that for whaever reason, this isn’t a particularly big issue in the Asian-American community, so it shouldn’t be a big issue to other racial groups.

But what you cannot do is look at the old UC policies that Jerry Brown pines for without concluding, to use the language that Brown’s lawyers used with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, that they impose unique burdens on minorities — various Asian-American groups. You can also make a case that this violates Asian-American students’ constitutional guarantee of equal protection.

What’s funny in a disgusting way is that even after Prop. 209 became the law of California, some UC officials still tried to get around it — and still ended up punishing one category of Asian-American students in the name of atoning for white racism.

Here’s what I wrote back in 2007 after a long New York Times magazine article laid out how UCLA covertly tried to evade the plain intent of Prop. 209. The article showed how in Westwood …

1980s-style racial spoils politics are back in business, thanks to administrators and professors who think they have figured out how to evade the plain meaning of 209 to help one group — blacks — at the expense of another group: Asian-Americans.

Specifically, Vietnamese-Americans.

This disturbing fact is part of why political science professor Tim Groseclose recently resigned from UCLA’s committee on undergraduate admissions. For four months, Groseclose has been stonewalled in his efforts to find out what if any objective standards were being used under UCLA’s new “holistic” admissions approach.

Here’s what Groseclose already had confirmed: Black applicants’ admission rates soared by nearly half when UCLA went “holistic,” while Latino and Native American admission rates went down slightly.

When he further parsed what data he could get, the evidence that “holistic” was code for race favoritism became overwhelming.

A “holistic” approach is supposed to be one that factors in the obstacles individual students faced — in particular, family poverty and parents’ education levels. At UCLA, the parents of Vietnamese-American applicants are on average poorer and less educated than the parents of African-American applicants. But instead of seeing their admission rates go up under the holistic system, Vietnamese kids’ rates plunged, from 29 percent to 21 percent.

This is the sort of thing I believe that led Chief Justice John Roberts to make his famous declaration about racially motivated government policies: “It is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

I look forward to a convoluted explanation from the Governor’s Office on why it’s OK to punish Asian-Americans in the name of atoning for white racism. If anyone is capable of such pretzel logic, it is Jerry Brown.

18 thoughts on “Jerry Brown longs for the good old days of UC bias against Asian-American students

  1. Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » RACIAL POLITICS at U.C. Berkeley. “I look forward to a convoluted explanation from the Governor’s…

  2. As a White person I’m tired of trying to atone for some dead persons racism. Can someone explain to me why I am punished for being born with white flesh, as if I had any say in the matter. Of those things to consider, perhaps racists are being made by these policies where none would have existed. I was born in 1970, I went to school with all races, I work with all races and yet due only to my lack of melanin count i’m a racist. Not my behavior, but the color of my skin.

  3. How can this possibly surprise anyone. Racism is the Democrat historical calling card. Democrats love to tell their friends in the media how Conservatives want to go back to the days of Jim Crowe laws, but what they conveniently forget is that the Democrats are the ones the implemented Jim Crowe and ALL other racist institutions in the first place and BTW fought a Civil War for. This is how Democrats operate and why anyone with a tiny bit of common sense is NOT a democrat. The modern democrat is an America hating racists. Only now they despise white successful people.

    What we are seeing is the end of America. Democrats we will never forget the tyrannical insanity you have foisted upon all of our heads. You will pay a huge price for your failed ideology.

  4. Pingback: Transterrestrial Musings - Longing For The Good Old Days Of Racial Discrimination

  5. I think the solution to all this is easy – since Asians always and everywhere outperform other ethnicities when it comes to academics, our state universities should always admit Asians, since they’re the most likely to use our educational and taxpayer resources effectively and efficiently. As for other ethnicities, admit them only under the strict condition that, in the event that their academic performance at any time during their university years shows any sign of lagging, they agree to convert to Asianism, and assimilate themselves wholly and wholeheartedly to their new Asian identity.
    If in the extreme case that all students converted to Asianism, we would produce much better graduates, and avoid most ethnic strife.

    • This would be a much better country if more people behaved with the Asian values of hard work and deferred gratification.

  6. California’s record of injustice against Asian immigrants and Asian Americans dates at least far back as the Gold Rush.

    Such inconvenient truths are one reason why, almost fifty years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the race-quota shysters are fabricating pretexts like “diversity” and “white privilege”.

  7. “This is particularly insane when one realizes that affirmative action is meant to atone for white racism. ”

    Af Action was meant to help blacks to remove whatever bad effects slavery had on some of their predecessors.

    Virtually all predecessors of Asians living in US today were in Asia at the time of slavery.

    What whites living in US today who have never owned any slaves, majority of
    their predecessors have never owned any slaves and have not lived in the US at the time of slavery owe to Asians living in the USA?

    The same applies to Mexicans nd other assorted non-black minorities, living legally or not in the USA today.

    Racial blackmail and extortion, pure and simple.

  8. Affirmative Action only has success because it’s trading the spots of 1 minority for another. Do you really think that if it affected whites that this system would be in place in like 45 states? Asian-Americans, it’s ok to discriminate against them because they’re “model minorities” and should just sit and take it from society when you want to get the votes… I mean “help” other minority groups. They don’t vote, of course, so why do we care?

  9. The white people being punished for their race did not commit the offense.

    The black people being rewarded for their race were not the ones who were hurt.

    The reason black students can’t get accepted at the UC is that they are trapped in ghetto schools run by the teachers unions. The democrat party is more loyal to ghetto schools run by the teachers unions than they are to the equal opportunity of black students.

    Most of the Asian students being punished for their race are the children of political refugees from Communism. They came to America seeking Liberty.

    Only a democrat thinks this makes sense. That is how Obama and Jerry Brown got elected.

  10. It is bad enough to punish white students for discrimination they and usually even their parents never engaged in. But now Jerry Brown wants to punish asians as well, even though they not only never benefited from discriminaztion, but were themselves victims of past discrimination. It illustrates the complete moral bankruptcy of leftist thought.

    Asians made a big mistake though, they actually overcame their discrimination, and succeeded on their own merits. We cant have that. They might end up no longer depending on the dem party for racial setaside and welfare handouts, and might even end up becomming successful capitalists. And if we let those nasty asians succeed in CA by studying hard, we will have to let those horrible jews in the east go to school at higher than allowed rates as well.

  11. “This is particularly insane when one realizes that affirmative action is meant to atone for white racism.”

    Wrong. The Supreme ruled that immorality unconstitutional. Affirmative action was ruled constitutional based on the value of ‘diversity’ – whatever that is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>