In the last two weeks, there are quite a few articles in the news papers disclosing discriminatory practices against Asian Americans for admission into Ivy League Colleges. David Brooks of NYT writes:
“At the start of the 1980s, about 5 percent of Harvard students were Asian-American. But the number of qualified Asian-American applicants rose so that by 1993 roughly 20 percent of Harvard students had Asian heritage.
But, according to Ron Unz, a funny thing then happened. The number of qualified Asian-Americans continued to rise, but the number of Asian-Americans admitted to Harvard fell so that the student body was about 16 percent Asian. Between 1995 and 2011, Harvard’s Asian-American population has varied by less than a percentage point around that 16.5 percent average. Not only that, the percentage of Asian-Americans at other Ivy League schools has also settled at a remarkably stable 16 percent, year after year.
This smells like a quota system, or at least that was the implication left by Unz’s searing, sprawling, frustrating and highly debatable piece, “The Myth of the American Meritocracy,” in The American Conservative. It wins the first of the 2012 Sidney Awards, which go to the best magazine essays of the year.
You’re going to want to argue with Unz’s article all the way along, especially for its narrow, math-test-driven view of merit. But it’s potentially ground-shifting. Unz’s other big point is that Jews are vastly overrepresented at elite universities and that Jewish achievement has collapsed. In the 1970s, for example, 40 percent of top scorers in the Math Olympiad had Jewish names. Now 2.5 percent do. The fanatical generations of immigrant strivers have been replaced by a more comfortable generation of preprofessionals, he implies.”
Unz writes in his article “The Myth of The American Meritocracy”
Comparing Jews with Asians
In fact, Harvard reported that 45.0 percent of its undergraduates in 2011 were white Americans, but since Jews were 25 percent of the student body, the enrollment of non-Jewish whites might have been as low as 20 percent, though the true figure was probably somewhat higher.51 The Jewish levels for Yale and Columbia were also around 25 percent, while white Gentiles were 22 percent at the former and just 15 percent at the latter. The remainder of the Ivy League followed this same general pattern.
This overrepresentation of Jews is really quite extraordinary, since the group currently constitutes just 2.1 percent of the general population and about 1.8 percent of college-age Americans.52 Thus, although Asian-American high school graduates each year outnumber their Jewish classmates nearly three-to-one, American Jews are far more numerous at Harvard and throughout the Ivy League. Both groups are highly urbanized, generally affluent, and geographically concentrated within a few states, so the “diversity” factors considered above would hardly seem to apply; yet Jews seem to fare much better at the admissions office.
Click on the liink to read full report ” The Myth of The American Meritocracy”
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/
Posted by F. Sheikh
According to several skeptics, Jewish are the Brahmins of American Society. They are the FIRST among equals. The Jewish domination in the Ivy League schools admission seems to support that cynical view. So much for American Meritocracy.
Meritocracy in US academic circles is a cudgel that has been used by successive generations to serve their purpose. Ivy league institutions have been transformed from serving the WASPs to the new brahmins of American social order, wherein the Jews are playing an inordinately disproportionate role. The situation was changed through constant pressures to break down the barriers and it is a given for Asian Americans to demand the same. The quota system has a place in academic admissions to seek a form of social balance but it is a privilege that should be constantly reviewed to maintain an inherent sense of fairness that does not allow one group to dominate.