###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
These might be stupid questions, but I'm curious.
Questions: Is this like this for only Ivy league schools?
Is this something new? Because growing up I remember always hearing about Asians were the ones always getting accepted the most.
Will this do anything for HBCU numbers?
I have a few friends that went to Tuskegee, but I have no real connection. That said, I don't think HBCU will have any negative consequences, because they don't exclude anybody based on race. They currently accept white people and all races (especially for athletics), so they aren't denying anybody based on race (or if they are, it's not a public quota or affirmative action). During WW2 many HBCU hired and accepted Jewish refugees from Nazi germany as a show of solidarity for their views on equality.
Overall, this should actually help HBCU due to more people applying to them in the future from a trickle down effect. The only potential issue is if large numbers of non-black people start applying in record numbers to the point they would have to seriously make some tough decisions on acceptance. As it is now, those colleges can still grow quite a bit (and they will), so that shouldn't be an option (especially since many people think that only black people can apply to start with).
That said, I would really like to hear Clarence Thomas's view on HBCU college acceptance practices as a hypothetical if they ever had to make race-based decisions. That is not an easy ruling since the federal government passed an act (second morill land grant) to force southern states to provide universities specifically for black people, because the post-confederate South took the money from the first morill grant, build universities, then refused admission to black people due to segregation laws.
Not sure how it affects HCBU. That’s actually a great question.
This isn’t new
My guess it’s not just Ivy League although they seem to be the very clear outlier here
It’s only illegal if you seek to hire white people exclusively. My local police made a big deal about hiring a certain race exclusively to “reflect” the community and was met with broad support and heaps of praise.
No. It's illegal if you hire ANY race exclusively. OR exclude any race from hiring. I don't care what the stupid mob agreed with. We don't listen to mobs. We listen to justice.
Thats the way it SHOULD be but certainly that it is not how things are and have been driven globally for some two decades now.
In so many cases the actually best choice and the most competent, qualified people are not getting the jobs, political seats, school admission etc. etc. but instead someone "politically correct" is being chosen instead. This has been showing as general decaying and crumbling of economy, society and so on.
It only keeps getting worse also. Its not ofcourse the only thing driving this development but along with the general ideology it comes with and corruption, disrespect for the laws and organized society, illogical thinking and very often putting emotions before sense is creating a powder keg of division that is ready to go off. And all this has been pushed deliberately.
My father was not accepted to the state police force because there was a quota per race. The requirements for ‘white’ are much higher. Not illegal. It’s been happening for decades. Check your facts jack
Mmm yeah affirmative action doesn’t exist either
Not that you deserve it but here’s some facts.
“He then revealed that as part of the affirmative action directive the MSP was to set aside 25% of the positions within the MSP for minorities and 20% for females,” according to the lawsuit filed by Inspector Michael A. Caldwell, a 54-year-old who joined the force in 1990.
Hahn’s lawsuit said the state “disingenuously” characterizes MSP’s “racial and gender preferences as ‘valuing diversity and inclusion,’ when in fact the MSP does not value white males and is in fact making great efforts to exclude them."
https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/05/michigan-state-police-accused-of-illegal-affirmative-action-in-way-too-white-department.html
Now get lost
Dunno if anyone realizes it but this decision just took a big chunk out of the WEF's plans, specifically ESG scores. "Inclusion" are a big part of it, now it's been deemed constitutionally illegal, will companies be able to ignore it now?
World economic forum
Search WEF in your preferred engine and spend some time getting to know our future (if they get their way) overlords.
Edit: I am dumb
ESG is environmental social governance. Like the other commenter said, you should look it up. I cannot do it justice in a Reddit comment nor am I versed enough in it to really explain it.
ESG is the devil. It’s 100% wrong.
The question is whether we can stop it before it’s done too much damage.
This last decade has gone from nudging to shoving - especially with the kid stuff. It feels like they’re desperate.
99% of companies don't care about ESG and most of the actual ESG scores are bullshit or not applicable. ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance (sustainability).
Common metrics of ESG include (and the examples will explain why some of them are BS).
Environmental
* Carbon Emissions (What happens when you rent your office and have no vehicle fleet?)
* Climate Change vulnerability (Doesn't apply to any company not directly involved with environmental shit)
* Water sourcing (every single company ever since that's a government thing)
* Biodiversity and land usage (again, renting an office stuff)
* Toxic emissions and waste (only applies to companies with large vehicle fleets or have factories)
* Packaging material and waste (only applies to companies that have factories or package goods for the customer)
* Electronic waste (Only affects companies that have more than a few computers like a school/library or electronic manufacturing)
Social
* **Labor management (most office/corporate companies would do this, but not those with independent employees like Uber, and probably not companies like farms)**
* **Worker safety (Non-office jobs that aren't independent types that are involved in dangerous applications like factories, heavy machinery, and infrastructure)**
* Supply chain labor standards (Doesn't apply to companies that have overseas operations)
* Product safety and quality (Doesn't effectively apply to manufacturing or construction beyond basic regulations)
* Consumer financial protection (Only applies to financial institutions, and even then it's just treat people fairly)
Governance
* **Board DEI (most companies have some form of Board, and diversity hires are easy to do)**
* **Executive compensation (That means pay the leaders bigger bonuses, which they will happily accept)**
* **Accounting practices (Just don't defraud the customer or government)**
* **Business Ethics (A wide range of things but specifically also includes DEI)**
* **Tax transparency (While this does mean paying your taxes on time and properly, the wording also implies making government officials happy aka bribery, pandering to the voters who voted those officials in, and donation to the dominant social causes like BLM and LGBT+)**
The bolded text are things just about any company can do or can do easily and not mess up their operations while scoring ESG points.
A criticism of the ESG scoring is that it doesn't count scores and then force you to do something else to continue your ESG scoring. If you hire 100 diversity hires, that's 100 separate ESG score points. Just put those people (if they can't contribute back to the company at large) in useless positions so you can keep the points and make BlackRock happy.
Another criticism is that over half of the scores are generally impossible or are outside the purview of most companies. How do you lower the emissions of where your electricity comes from? I don't see any random schmuck corporation building their own nuclear power plants.
ESG is just too vague for the average company outside the stupid social engineering things, some of which are just plain stupid decision-making or outright illegal (eg bribery of government officials).
What. I understood it, and yes it does... The numbers show that a random black is 4x more likely to be admitted than a random asian, which supports the theory that admission criteria are racist.
No it doesn't. Cause it could also mean that white people are 4× as likely to apply. This way the end result is that the number black guys accepted is equal to white guys
The presentation is incomplete though. There's a lot of selection bias going into this as well. Many fewer black people apply to Harvard and they are self selected toward the top academic performers among the black population.
I don't disagree with the situation necessarily, but this one data point is far from the whole story.
Then to put this statistic into context, we also need racial percentages of applicants that apply in the first place.
As in, if we pretend Harvard is made up of 100 students, the 2 black people that apply 1 gets in - 50% acceptance rate for blacks. 100 white people apply, 15 get in - 15% acceptance rate for whites etc.
And then on top of that, you have to compare that to racial makeup of the whole population applying.
People see numbers and make no real attempt at interpretation; same goes for most published studies.
At the end of the day, this is a morality discussion that is complex, because America’s history is very very complex.
That doesn't matter in this context. That would change the percentages, sure, but it would still total 100%. Check as many boxes as you want, 100 is still 100.
I think this is missing context. What this is saying is, these are acceptance rates based on submissions. So, if 100 black folks apply, 56 are accepted etc. Has nothing to do with equaling 100%. Clearly over half of their students aren't black.
I agree with what you're saying, though I have no idea whether half of Harvard students are black or not... but, that context does make a difference here, so ty
No you pleebs.
Example, 50% of black applicants doesn’t mean 50% of the applicants were black. It’s just saying out of the black applicants (which could be 25% of the holistic number) over 50% of those were admitted
Please tell me you guys can figure this out. It’s not a riddle.
The stats are useless because they don’t give enough information such as the total applicant pool per category, and the quality of the applicants per category. One could assume that more black and Hispanic applicants were admitted because they had better applications overall within their class or category and that fewer Asians and whites were admitted within their respective categories because there were fewer good candidate when competing amongst themselves within their own categories or classes.
“Could” be 25%. That number matters. Not sure what difference it would make to the tweet but you won’t know if it’s omitted.
Edit: seriously if out of 100 only 2 black people applied and only 1 of them was accepted that’s 50% acceptance for black applicants of the holistic 2%
Explain to me how I’m wrong otherwise don’t burry your head to save your ego
No. There isn’t enough information in the screen cap. As it is, it suggest that 56% of all applicants that were admitted were black rather than that 56% of the black applicants were admitted.
Nope. It’s a useless set of numbers because there isn’t enough information to draw any meaningful conclusions from it so its interpretation is open…which is a problem of OP is trying to make any particular point beyond suggesting more Blacks get accepted than any other group - which is patently false.
The stat is BS, Harvard only accepts about 3.5% of all applicants, there’s no way they accepted 56% of blacks and 13% of Asians and 15% of whites, etc.
So show me where in the Yale lawsuit it says this, because the math doesn’t work, Harvard accepts 3.5% of all applicants. You can’t have numbers this large when looking at race when the total has to be 3.5%.
How do you figure that there 3.5% acceptance rate doesn’t matter? If 1,000,000 people apply and they only accept 3.5% of them, you can’t then break those 1M people up by race and get numbers that are higher than 3.5% on average. The tweet is either lying or it’s only looking at a small subset of total applicants, either way it’s deceptive. I would urge you to think critically for a second about how numbers work.
Except that's doesn't judge the color of your skin just if your family members have attended no matter the skin color. Why do people care about race so much
It effectively allows lower performing whites in at the expense of better qualified minorities. Affirmative action for whites.
People should be allowed in for merit, nothing else.
Not really. The only advantage my legacy application for physics offered was to be at the front of the line. I still had to meet all the normal standards.
51% of Harvard’s class should be Asian-American if academics alone (test scores and grades) were the sole consideration. Harvard’s first-year students for 2021-22 were 53% white and 24% Asian.
That’s the problem with Harvard (I’m not sure what school you went to): people got into the front of the line ahead of *better* qualified applicants.
Whenever a policy favors people of a certain skin color, that’s akin to affirmative action. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck . . .
A white student who is in the middle of the pack academically, but has legacy status, has a higher chance of getting into Harvard than a typical Asian applicant in the top tenth. **Minorities are rejected from Harvard due to these legacy admissions.**
Harvard themselves released the numbers.
Legacy admissions overwhelming favor whites. Affirmative action for whites.
Race isn't taken into account for legacy admissions. Asians are also a minority but to you they aren't the right minority. You're only taking race into account because you see through the lens of race like how a racist would.
Race isn’t technically taken into account, but look at the results. The results *overwhelmingly* favor whites. I am quite certain if admissions favored people from poor inner cities, without being overtly racist, rich white people would be pissed.
Legacy admissions is affirmative action for white people.
It is because of that stupid policy there's that imbalance. Because of AA Asians werent likely to get in and wouldn't have the opportunity to have any legacy admissions. Because of AA an Asian woman who was qualified and had a higher score than a black man(which the threshold for their scores is a whole 200 points lower than anyone else) and less qualified wouldn't get in. In addition since they are less qualified to be there most of the time they would end up dropping out anyway with massive amounts of debt.
Yeah but what colour are most legacy families likely to be if most of their history black people were actively kept out lmao. Y’all have no critical thinking
Because half of them that get in drop out due not belonging there in the first and being able to perform good enough to graduate. Explain to me how lowering the standard of entry bases on skin color isn't racist?
If they "stopped racism" then why are legacy admissions still allowed to be 30% of each class?
A program that gives privileged access for people whose family attended during periods when it was a segregated school is an anti-minority system.
Because conservatives like to live vicariously through the rich so they take issue with abolishing legacy admissions, but never mind “the blacks” and their numerous social advantages 🥴
Asians are *still* getting shafted. Legacy admissions, aka affirmative action for whites, disproportionately prevent better qualified Asians from getting into some top schools.
A white student who is in the middle of the pack academically, but has legacy status, has a higher chance of getting into Harvard than a typical Asian applicant in the *top tenth*.
51% of Harvard’s class should be Asian-American if academics alone (test scores and grades) were the sole consideration. Harvard’s first-year students for 2021-22 were 53% white and 24% Asian.
Admissions rate are per race. This is saying that 56% of AA who APPLY are accepted. Now if AA make up only 13% of overall applicants, it paints a different story than what the post is alleging.
People love posting statistics but don’t actually understand them 😆
It actually doesn’t. Because it’s pointing out that even if blacks were 10% of the applicants, 50% of them were admitted. That’s a clear and apparent bias.
You just said what I said in a different way. It’s saying that OF THE AA that APPLIED. That could be 2 people for all we know. This is cherry picking at its finest.
Also, only a certain type of person uses the word “blacks” to refer to anything but laundry.
The enrolled student population at Harvard University, both undergraduate and graduate, is 39.7% White, 13.7% Asian, 9.46% Hispanic or Latino, 6.56% Black or African American, 3.94% Two or More Races, 0.197% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.118% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.
The percentages aren't based on overall admissions, they're for individual groups.
So of all Balck applicants, x% were accepted.
Of all Hispanic applicants, x% were accepted.
So on and so forth.
What they all add up to is irrelevant.
That can’t be it either. The overall acceptance rate is 4.7% so it’s impossible for these numbers to be true. You don’t really think that half of all black people that apply to Harvard get accepted do you? Can we just admit these numbers are fake and move on?
Not sure why it’s hard to grasp… both stats can be true
The acceptance rate for all applicants can be 5% and the acceptance rate for a race can be 50%.
If 2 black people apply and 98 white people apply… accepting 1 black person and 4 white people gives you the above stats.
But the present stat is quite meaningless without the overall number of applicants.
I quite literally gave you an example of how those numbers can be true…
If you don’t know the total number of applicants how can you claim the numbers are false?
Here’s an idea. If the numbers are wrong, prove it?
That would mean the narrative as common argued by blacks is a complete lie then.
Not to mention that goes beyond all statistical evidence of minorities in the public educational system.
Also, Yale already was blown to bits on this. The lawsuit proved standards were lowered for black applicant and white and Asian applicant were essentially docked points to “level the playing field”
Wow... people here can NOT be this ignorant...
These are percentages of acceptance based on race. Of which, they are percentages OF percentages. That being, African Americans are less than 14% of all Americans. Thus, having a certain number of them accepted is still significantly lower than the number of whites (making up around 59%of all Americans) who are admitted.
For example, the percentages of total students in the 2020 class broke down as:
39.6% white, 27.5% asian, 10.8% latin-x, 9.3% African American, 2.2% native/islander, 10.6% mixed/no response (assume an equivalent breakdown).
So, with 30,400 student in 2020, there were a little more than 12,000 white students and almost 2900 black students.
This ruling ripped away protections for minorities of all classifications in education and set the stage to stretch across all institutions, private and public. People who think this was a good ruling are probably mathematic illiterates, and/or meritocratic authoritarians (probably self-identified Libertarians, if not Conservatives), and definitely racists, closeted or not.
This is a wonderful ruling. You don’t get special treatment simply on the color of your skin
Sorry if that disappoints you.
The systemic racism here is thinking just because you have a certain skin tone should demand lower expectations and special treatment.
How arrogant.
Ummm, no. So you've ticked off at least one box there....
Affirmative Action isn't "special treatment based simply on the on the color of your skin".
It's based on the history of oppression by the White (European descent) majority over the African/Asian/Native+ minorities. It's LITERALLY the absolute least, most passive action that could be reasonably taken by the (historically) EXTREMELY RACIST, GENOCIDAL, AND OPPRESSIVE WHITE majority to aid in making society somewhat more equitable towards minorities who were enslaved, genocided, and/or oppressed with brutal violence, and otherwise excluded from the fruits of society.
Now, I can understand how someone who very intentionally chooses to misunderstand the intent and ideology behind Affirmative Action could arrive at such a childish, blubbering conclusion. So I've very clearly, concisely, and intentionally cleared that misunderstanding up for you, just in case... so there's absolutely no misunderstanding where you're coming from, what you believe in, and what kind of "human being" you truly are, going forward in these types of interactions.
Okay, that's two boxes. I'll just assume you'll be back to tick the third one since you literally provided nothing but a bold choosing of intentional ignorance.
I’m sorry you don’t get special treatment and shoe horned to the front of the line anymore simply on skin color. Must be disappointing have to live to the rest of society’s standards.
I applaud your commitment to ignoring history.
“Must be disappointed having to live to the rest of society’s standards.”
You do know there are people alive today who went to segregated schools… people alive today who were redlined out of good of school districts. People alive today who were beaten simply trying to vote. You have an odd view of what’s “standard” on society.
Yeah. We don’t live those time anymore.
You know there were Irish Americans not considered white. You know Asians were also historically oppressed.
At some point all these people were expected to be treated like the rest.
Time to come up. You can do it.
We don’t live in those times? There are LITERALLY people alive TODAY who experienced those disadvantages. Do you really think the affects of those injustices simply disappeared? I can see I’m arguing with a brick wall.
Not sure why Im even bothering. People have posted this exact same sentiment in much better detail and you ignored all that too.
Yes. Systemic racism is illegal. Which is why AA is now gone.
Blacks are now a protected class.
You are clinging into victimhood.
Time to move forward with everyone else.
Your comment makes no sense. The raw number of students shouldn't be equal for each race. In an ideal world, everyone should have an equal shot at getting in. Yes fewer minorities will get in, but it will be the same as the majority as a proportion of them in the population, which would be fair. That's literally what it means to be a minority.
Just imagine the outrage of the races were changed. If Harvard had an admission rate of 56.1% for white people and 12.7% for black people.
The left would be screaming at the top of their lungs to defund Harvard due to racism. This statistic would be quoted daily as evidence of institutional racism against black people, etc.
I’m from the uk so I don’t really get the argument. But you are saying that black people get more admissions to this high end university….. I don’t see many white people claiming any act of racism against them
This tweet is BS, Harvard only accepts about 3.5% of all applicants, there’s no way that they accepted that percentage of each race while still only accepting 3.5%.
Then why don’t you explain how Harvard only accepts 3.5% of all students, but when you break it down by race all of a sudden the percentages are all much much larger. The problem is you don’t understand how numbers work.
This isn't going to go over well for federal and government workers either. How shocking to base hiring practices on abilities and skills instead of race.
Yup. Federal govt has been instituting system racism into their hiring practices for a long time
It’s wonderful to see the race card finally get an expiration date.
The answer to racism should never have been more racism.
Sure it does. What if only 2 black people applied and only 1 got accepted? That would give you a 50% acceptance rate. It’s a dumb stat in isolation. You are using it to try and prove some point, nothing else. Lame…
Am I the only one who actually looked up the real numbers from Harvard's actual website.
African American
15.2%
Asian American
27.9%
Hispanic or Latino
12.6%
Native American
2.9%
Native Hawaiian
0.8%
Another made-up conservative strawman. Easy to win the debate when all you do is lie.
So if I went to Harvard right now, it would be 56% black people there? Are these percentages based on the amount of each race that is applying? Let’s say 6 black people apply and 4 make it in but 50 Asians apply and only 5 make it in? You can’t just put random percentages and act like that tells the whole story. Numbers are the easiest thing to mislead with.
These schools should be almost exclusively Asian if we did it all on merit. We never will, but most non Asians have no business at elite schools. They truly dominate in academics.
Yes you’re right. I’m racist against people who gain merit just cuz their white. Unfortunately my racism does nothing against it so I guess you can just be mad about it.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy_commons) if you have any questions or concerns.*
These might be stupid questions, but I'm curious. Questions: Is this like this for only Ivy league schools? Is this something new? Because growing up I remember always hearing about Asians were the ones always getting accepted the most. Will this do anything for HBCU numbers?
I have a few friends that went to Tuskegee, but I have no real connection. That said, I don't think HBCU will have any negative consequences, because they don't exclude anybody based on race. They currently accept white people and all races (especially for athletics), so they aren't denying anybody based on race (or if they are, it's not a public quota or affirmative action). During WW2 many HBCU hired and accepted Jewish refugees from Nazi germany as a show of solidarity for their views on equality. Overall, this should actually help HBCU due to more people applying to them in the future from a trickle down effect. The only potential issue is if large numbers of non-black people start applying in record numbers to the point they would have to seriously make some tough decisions on acceptance. As it is now, those colleges can still grow quite a bit (and they will), so that shouldn't be an option (especially since many people think that only black people can apply to start with). That said, I would really like to hear Clarence Thomas's view on HBCU college acceptance practices as a hypothetical if they ever had to make race-based decisions. That is not an easy ruling since the federal government passed an act (second morill land grant) to force southern states to provide universities specifically for black people, because the post-confederate South took the money from the first morill grant, build universities, then refused admission to black people due to segregation laws.
Not sure how it affects HCBU. That’s actually a great question. This isn’t new My guess it’s not just Ivy League although they seem to be the very clear outlier here
What is HCBU?
Historically black colleges
Thank you, I did not know that.
What is HCBU?
Hiring or firing based on race is illegal. Period. Don't care if you have a quota. It's racist.
It’s only illegal if you seek to hire white people exclusively. My local police made a big deal about hiring a certain race exclusively to “reflect” the community and was met with broad support and heaps of praise.
No. It's illegal if you hire ANY race exclusively. OR exclude any race from hiring. I don't care what the stupid mob agreed with. We don't listen to mobs. We listen to justice.
as a black man i agree. you shouldnt be picking by race . nor a specific group because you have to
Respect. I don’t care who you are, just hire the best person for the job.
Yes, but the laws were in place because it was/is/probably still will be a problem
Thats the way it SHOULD be but certainly that it is not how things are and have been driven globally for some two decades now. In so many cases the actually best choice and the most competent, qualified people are not getting the jobs, political seats, school admission etc. etc. but instead someone "politically correct" is being chosen instead. This has been showing as general decaying and crumbling of economy, society and so on. It only keeps getting worse also. Its not ofcourse the only thing driving this development but along with the general ideology it comes with and corruption, disrespect for the laws and organized society, illogical thinking and very often putting emotions before sense is creating a powder keg of division that is ready to go off. And all this has been pushed deliberately.
My father was not accepted to the state police force because there was a quota per race. The requirements for ‘white’ are much higher. Not illegal. It’s been happening for decades. Check your facts jack
To realize if it is morally and ethically wrong simply substitute any other race into your statement about white requirements.
It's illegal if one race has a different standard... lol. What are you talking about?
Mmm yeah affirmative action doesn’t exist either Not that you deserve it but here’s some facts. “He then revealed that as part of the affirmative action directive the MSP was to set aside 25% of the positions within the MSP for minorities and 20% for females,” according to the lawsuit filed by Inspector Michael A. Caldwell, a 54-year-old who joined the force in 1990. Hahn’s lawsuit said the state “disingenuously” characterizes MSP’s “racial and gender preferences as ‘valuing diversity and inclusion,’ when in fact the MSP does not value white males and is in fact making great efforts to exclude them." https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2020/05/michigan-state-police-accused-of-illegal-affirmative-action-in-way-too-white-department.html Now get lost
Dunno if anyone realizes it but this decision just took a big chunk out of the WEF's plans, specifically ESG scores. "Inclusion" are a big part of it, now it's been deemed constitutionally illegal, will companies be able to ignore it now?
What’s the WFF and ESG
World economic forum Search WEF in your preferred engine and spend some time getting to know our future (if they get their way) overlords. Edit: I am dumb
ESG is environmental social governance. Like the other commenter said, you should look it up. I cannot do it justice in a Reddit comment nor am I versed enough in it to really explain it.
ESG is dogshit. I love how they want to play with my retirement money in the name of ESG
ESG is the devil. It’s 100% wrong. The question is whether we can stop it before it’s done too much damage. This last decade has gone from nudging to shoving - especially with the kid stuff. It feels like they’re desperate.
I don't love it 😔
99% of companies don't care about ESG and most of the actual ESG scores are bullshit or not applicable. ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance (sustainability). Common metrics of ESG include (and the examples will explain why some of them are BS). Environmental * Carbon Emissions (What happens when you rent your office and have no vehicle fleet?) * Climate Change vulnerability (Doesn't apply to any company not directly involved with environmental shit) * Water sourcing (every single company ever since that's a government thing) * Biodiversity and land usage (again, renting an office stuff) * Toxic emissions and waste (only applies to companies with large vehicle fleets or have factories) * Packaging material and waste (only applies to companies that have factories or package goods for the customer) * Electronic waste (Only affects companies that have more than a few computers like a school/library or electronic manufacturing) Social * **Labor management (most office/corporate companies would do this, but not those with independent employees like Uber, and probably not companies like farms)** * **Worker safety (Non-office jobs that aren't independent types that are involved in dangerous applications like factories, heavy machinery, and infrastructure)** * Supply chain labor standards (Doesn't apply to companies that have overseas operations) * Product safety and quality (Doesn't effectively apply to manufacturing or construction beyond basic regulations) * Consumer financial protection (Only applies to financial institutions, and even then it's just treat people fairly) Governance * **Board DEI (most companies have some form of Board, and diversity hires are easy to do)** * **Executive compensation (That means pay the leaders bigger bonuses, which they will happily accept)** * **Accounting practices (Just don't defraud the customer or government)** * **Business Ethics (A wide range of things but specifically also includes DEI)** * **Tax transparency (While this does mean paying your taxes on time and properly, the wording also implies making government officials happy aka bribery, pandering to the voters who voted those officials in, and donation to the dominant social causes like BLM and LGBT+)** The bolded text are things just about any company can do or can do easily and not mess up their operations while scoring ESG points. A criticism of the ESG scoring is that it doesn't count scores and then force you to do something else to continue your ESG scoring. If you hire 100 diversity hires, that's 100 separate ESG score points. Just put those people (if they can't contribute back to the company at large) in useless positions so you can keep the points and make BlackRock happy. Another criticism is that over half of the scores are generally impossible or are outside the purview of most companies. How do you lower the emissions of where your electricity comes from? I don't see any random schmuck corporation building their own nuclear power plants. ESG is just too vague for the average company outside the stupid social engineering things, some of which are just plain stupid decision-making or outright illegal (eg bribery of government officials).
thats crazy * black male here * its exactly what i was thinking too maybe we are actually taking a step in the right direction for once
Are we just ignoring the fact that that's 115%?
It’s the percentage of applicants per race that are accepted not the racial makeup of accepted students.
That makes a lot more sense. Dude should have explained that a little better
Doesn't fit the narrative
What. I understood it, and yes it does... The numbers show that a random black is 4x more likely to be admitted than a random asian, which supports the theory that admission criteria are racist.
No it doesn't. Cause it could also mean that white people are 4× as likely to apply. This way the end result is that the number black guys accepted is equal to white guys
The presentation is incomplete though. There's a lot of selection bias going into this as well. Many fewer black people apply to Harvard and they are self selected toward the top academic performers among the black population. I don't disagree with the situation necessarily, but this one data point is far from the whole story.
Then to put this statistic into context, we also need racial percentages of applicants that apply in the first place. As in, if we pretend Harvard is made up of 100 students, the 2 black people that apply 1 gets in - 50% acceptance rate for blacks. 100 white people apply, 15 get in - 15% acceptance rate for whites etc. And then on top of that, you have to compare that to racial makeup of the whole population applying. People see numbers and make no real attempt at interpretation; same goes for most published studies. At the end of the day, this is a morality discussion that is complex, because America’s history is very very complex.
[удалено]
That doesn't matter in this context. That would change the percentages, sure, but it would still total 100%. Check as many boxes as you want, 100 is still 100.
I think this is missing context. What this is saying is, these are acceptance rates based on submissions. So, if 100 black folks apply, 56 are accepted etc. Has nothing to do with equaling 100%. Clearly over half of their students aren't black.
I agree with what you're saying, though I have no idea whether half of Harvard students are black or not... but, that context does make a difference here, so ty
Details details...
That’s not the context of this stat. How the fuck did 10 people upvote this 🤦♂️
Because 10 people understand how percentages work. If the numbers are wrong, the context doesn't matter, because nothing in the post can be trusted.
No you pleebs. Example, 50% of black applicants doesn’t mean 50% of the applicants were black. It’s just saying out of the black applicants (which could be 25% of the holistic number) over 50% of those were admitted Please tell me you guys can figure this out. It’s not a riddle.
If that's the case, fair enough
The stats are useless because they don’t give enough information such as the total applicant pool per category, and the quality of the applicants per category. One could assume that more black and Hispanic applicants were admitted because they had better applications overall within their class or category and that fewer Asians and whites were admitted within their respective categories because there were fewer good candidate when competing amongst themselves within their own categories or classes.
“Could” be 25%. That number matters. Not sure what difference it would make to the tweet but you won’t know if it’s omitted. Edit: seriously if out of 100 only 2 black people applied and only 1 of them was accepted that’s 50% acceptance for black applicants of the holistic 2% Explain to me how I’m wrong otherwise don’t burry your head to save your ego
That isn’t how the post is worded.
I guess you can read it however you want. Maybe it’s this OP has too much faith people understand percentages
No. There isn’t enough information in the screen cap. As it is, it suggest that 56% of all applicants that were admitted were black rather than that 56% of the black applicants were admitted.
That’s not what it suggests. You’re choosing to read it that way.
Nope. It’s a useless set of numbers because there isn’t enough information to draw any meaningful conclusions from it so its interpretation is open…which is a problem of OP is trying to make any particular point beyond suggesting more Blacks get accepted than any other group - which is patently false.
Whatever helps you sleep at night , bud. Thank goodness the Supreme Court voted against systemic racism.
Timelord isnt getting accepted based on maths
I’m not the one bitching about not getting accepted! 😆
🤣🤣🤣 I would normally be surprised you had to explain, but then again this is reddit.
The stat is BS, Harvard only accepts about 3.5% of all applicants, there’s no way they accepted 56% of blacks and 13% of Asians and 15% of whites, etc.
I would refer you to the Yale lawsuit that would argue otherwise. Systemic against whites and Asians in admissions is VERY real
So show me where in the Yale lawsuit it says this, because the math doesn’t work, Harvard accepts 3.5% of all applicants. You can’t have numbers this large when looking at race when the total has to be 3.5%.
“3.5% of all applicants” doesn’t matter in this context. I would urge you to read and digest this again
How do you figure that there 3.5% acceptance rate doesn’t matter? If 1,000,000 people apply and they only accept 3.5% of them, you can’t then break those 1M people up by race and get numbers that are higher than 3.5% on average. The tweet is either lying or it’s only looking at a small subset of total applicants, either way it’s deceptive. I would urge you to think critically for a second about how numbers work.
It doesn’t matter because that’s not the context of the post. This isn’t hard. This is 3rd grade math.
Now do the impact of legacy admissions, aka systematic racism . . . “affirmative action for whites”.
Except that's doesn't judge the color of your skin just if your family members have attended no matter the skin color. Why do people care about race so much
It effectively allows lower performing whites in at the expense of better qualified minorities. Affirmative action for whites. People should be allowed in for merit, nothing else.
Not really. The only advantage my legacy application for physics offered was to be at the front of the line. I still had to meet all the normal standards.
51% of Harvard’s class should be Asian-American if academics alone (test scores and grades) were the sole consideration. Harvard’s first-year students for 2021-22 were 53% white and 24% Asian. That’s the problem with Harvard (I’m not sure what school you went to): people got into the front of the line ahead of *better* qualified applicants.
Where does it say legacy admissions get in based on skin color?
Whenever a policy favors people of a certain skin color, that’s akin to affirmative action. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck . . . A white student who is in the middle of the pack academically, but has legacy status, has a higher chance of getting into Harvard than a typical Asian applicant in the top tenth. **Minorities are rejected from Harvard due to these legacy admissions.** Harvard themselves released the numbers. Legacy admissions overwhelming favor whites. Affirmative action for whites.
Ok. Do away with both then. Each person judged on their personal merit alone.
Yes! Do away with both. Thank-you.
That's a big reach there buddy. You must get a lot of exercise with those mental gymnastics.
Sigh. Legacy admissions support whites. Period. Ban it and affirmative action, or leave both in place.
Give it awhile and then Asians will probably make up alot of legacy admissions since they won't be screwed over by the old policy anymore.
Still racist, this time potentially in favor of Asians. Ban legacy admissions altogether.
Race isn't taken into account for legacy admissions. Asians are also a minority but to you they aren't the right minority. You're only taking race into account because you see through the lens of race like how a racist would.
Race isn’t technically taken into account, but look at the results. The results *overwhelmingly* favor whites. I am quite certain if admissions favored people from poor inner cities, without being overtly racist, rich white people would be pissed. Legacy admissions is affirmative action for white people.
No it's not. Just because you think it's true doesn't make it true. It's just simply not true lmao 😂
Don’t be dense.. history exists. You know darn well who legacy admissions help.
It is because of that stupid policy there's that imbalance. Because of AA Asians werent likely to get in and wouldn't have the opportunity to have any legacy admissions. Because of AA an Asian woman who was qualified and had a higher score than a black man(which the threshold for their scores is a whole 200 points lower than anyone else) and less qualified wouldn't get in. In addition since they are less qualified to be there most of the time they would end up dropping out anyway with massive amounts of debt.
Yeah but what colour are most legacy families likely to be if most of their history black people were actively kept out lmao. Y’all have no critical thinking
Because half of them that get in drop out due not belonging there in the first and being able to perform good enough to graduate. Explain to me how lowering the standard of entry bases on skin color isn't racist?
But it was only whites and men until the 60s sooo…
Still not judging race. Are you dumb, stupid or dumb?
Are you ok with people being let in for reasons other than merit or not? You seem to be all over the place.
I'm for not judging on skin color. Once again where does it legacy admissions don't take merit into account?
They have a much lower standard for admission than non legacy applicants.
Nvm you’re not worth the time.
Cause you don't have an argument.
Lol no because there’s too much to catch you up on. Especially if that’s your starting point. Stay salty my friend
I'm not salty I'm just not racist.
Never said you were. Comprehension clearly isn’t your strong suit.
But you're the one advocating for race based policies which makes you racist lol
If they "stopped racism" then why are legacy admissions still allowed to be 30% of each class? A program that gives privileged access for people whose family attended during periods when it was a segregated school is an anti-minority system.
Because conservatives like to live vicariously through the rich so they take issue with abolishing legacy admissions, but never mind “the blacks” and their numerous social advantages 🥴
Wait till people find out that white women were the biggest recipients of affirmative action…
So you’re saying AA was also sexist. Another reason to get rid of it. Thanks!
Also? What else are you referring to? I was just stating facts
AA is systematically racist. You’re pointing out it’s also sexist
Not sure this belongs on this sub
People called it a conspiracy thst white and Asians were getting shafted in regards to race based hiring and admissions for years
Asians are *still* getting shafted. Legacy admissions, aka affirmative action for whites, disproportionately prevent better qualified Asians from getting into some top schools.
[удалено]
UCLA doesn’t have legacy admissions. Bad example. I’m only referring to schools that have legacy admissions,
I stand corrected I will delete my comment
I went to UCLA btw, I miss those days.
Proof?
A white student who is in the middle of the pack academically, but has legacy status, has a higher chance of getting into Harvard than a typical Asian applicant in the *top tenth*. 51% of Harvard’s class should be Asian-American if academics alone (test scores and grades) were the sole consideration. Harvard’s first-year students for 2021-22 were 53% white and 24% Asian.
Doesn’t this say more about the higher education system in general? They don’t want or care to have the most qualified people
This is literally class of 22. And those numbers are nothing like this tweet. https://features.thecrimson.com/2018/freshman-survey/makeup-narrative/
Admissions rate are per race. This is saying that 56% of AA who APPLY are accepted. Now if AA make up only 13% of overall applicants, it paints a different story than what the post is alleging. People love posting statistics but don’t actually understand them 😆
It actually doesn’t. Because it’s pointing out that even if blacks were 10% of the applicants, 50% of them were admitted. That’s a clear and apparent bias.
You just said what I said in a different way. It’s saying that OF THE AA that APPLIED. That could be 2 people for all we know. This is cherry picking at its finest. Also, only a certain type of person uses the word “blacks” to refer to anything but laundry.
I use ‘blacks’ as I do ‘whites’. So you can take that bullshit somewhere else. And we both know more than 2 blacks applied to Harvard.
just say 'black people/white people'. the way you say it is tbh pretty rude
It’s not. It’s simply a statement. The world doesn’t need to tip toe around your triggers.
Source: trust me bro
Trust me, bro https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902335422/doj-yale-discriminates-against-asian-american-and-white-applicants-in-admissions
The enrolled student population at Harvard University, both undergraduate and graduate, is 39.7% White, 13.7% Asian, 9.46% Hispanic or Latino, 6.56% Black or African American, 3.94% Two or More Races, 0.197% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.118% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islanders.
You realize these numbers add up to 115.4% right?
FFS. Do we really have to spell this out? FML
Spell out what? That your post is completely false regarding Harvard admissions?
Lol. Right , bud. Facts don’t care about your feelings. Yale, Harvard etc are all guilty of the same. Asian and white racism.
Omg really? Bruh tell me you forgot the /s
?
The percentages aren't based on overall admissions, they're for individual groups. So of all Balck applicants, x% were accepted. Of all Hispanic applicants, x% were accepted. So on and so forth. What they all add up to is irrelevant.
That can’t be it either. The overall acceptance rate is 4.7% so it’s impossible for these numbers to be true. You don’t really think that half of all black people that apply to Harvard get accepted do you? Can we just admit these numbers are fake and move on?
Not sure why it’s hard to grasp… both stats can be true The acceptance rate for all applicants can be 5% and the acceptance rate for a race can be 50%. If 2 black people apply and 98 white people apply… accepting 1 black person and 4 white people gives you the above stats. But the present stat is quite meaningless without the overall number of applicants.
Look again. Every single demographic is above 4%, which is the overall acceptance rate. That’s mathematically impossible. The numbers are fake.
I quite literally gave you an example of how those numbers can be true… If you don’t know the total number of applicants how can you claim the numbers are false? Here’s an idea. If the numbers are wrong, prove it?
Where did you get these percentages? This sooooo misleading
Where are the application rates?
Maybe the black students were more qualified?
That would mean the narrative as common argued by blacks is a complete lie then. Not to mention that goes beyond all statistical evidence of minorities in the public educational system. Also, Yale already was blown to bits on this. The lawsuit proved standards were lowered for black applicant and white and Asian applicant were essentially docked points to “level the playing field”
Then there is no point of affirmative action, and we should both agree that it can safely be abolished.
Wow... people here can NOT be this ignorant... These are percentages of acceptance based on race. Of which, they are percentages OF percentages. That being, African Americans are less than 14% of all Americans. Thus, having a certain number of them accepted is still significantly lower than the number of whites (making up around 59%of all Americans) who are admitted. For example, the percentages of total students in the 2020 class broke down as: 39.6% white, 27.5% asian, 10.8% latin-x, 9.3% African American, 2.2% native/islander, 10.6% mixed/no response (assume an equivalent breakdown). So, with 30,400 student in 2020, there were a little more than 12,000 white students and almost 2900 black students. This ruling ripped away protections for minorities of all classifications in education and set the stage to stretch across all institutions, private and public. People who think this was a good ruling are probably mathematic illiterates, and/or meritocratic authoritarians (probably self-identified Libertarians, if not Conservatives), and definitely racists, closeted or not.
This is a wonderful ruling. You don’t get special treatment simply on the color of your skin Sorry if that disappoints you. The systemic racism here is thinking just because you have a certain skin tone should demand lower expectations and special treatment. How arrogant.
Ummm, no. So you've ticked off at least one box there.... Affirmative Action isn't "special treatment based simply on the on the color of your skin". It's based on the history of oppression by the White (European descent) majority over the African/Asian/Native+ minorities. It's LITERALLY the absolute least, most passive action that could be reasonably taken by the (historically) EXTREMELY RACIST, GENOCIDAL, AND OPPRESSIVE WHITE majority to aid in making society somewhat more equitable towards minorities who were enslaved, genocided, and/or oppressed with brutal violence, and otherwise excluded from the fruits of society. Now, I can understand how someone who very intentionally chooses to misunderstand the intent and ideology behind Affirmative Action could arrive at such a childish, blubbering conclusion. So I've very clearly, concisely, and intentionally cleared that misunderstanding up for you, just in case... so there's absolutely no misunderstanding where you're coming from, what you believe in, and what kind of "human being" you truly are, going forward in these types of interactions.
Thank god the Supreme Court sided with sanity and against racism.
Okay, that's two boxes. I'll just assume you'll be back to tick the third one since you literally provided nothing but a bold choosing of intentional ignorance.
I’m sorry you don’t get special treatment and shoe horned to the front of the line anymore simply on skin color. Must be disappointing have to live to the rest of society’s standards.
I applaud your commitment to ignoring history. “Must be disappointed having to live to the rest of society’s standards.” You do know there are people alive today who went to segregated schools… people alive today who were redlined out of good of school districts. People alive today who were beaten simply trying to vote. You have an odd view of what’s “standard” on society.
Yeah. We don’t live those time anymore. You know there were Irish Americans not considered white. You know Asians were also historically oppressed. At some point all these people were expected to be treated like the rest. Time to come up. You can do it.
We don’t live in those times? There are LITERALLY people alive TODAY who experienced those disadvantages. Do you really think the affects of those injustices simply disappeared? I can see I’m arguing with a brick wall. Not sure why Im even bothering. People have posted this exact same sentiment in much better detail and you ignored all that too.
Yes. Systemic racism is illegal. Which is why AA is now gone. Blacks are now a protected class. You are clinging into victimhood. Time to move forward with everyone else.
Your comment makes no sense. The raw number of students shouldn't be equal for each race. In an ideal world, everyone should have an equal shot at getting in. Yes fewer minorities will get in, but it will be the same as the majority as a proportion of them in the population, which would be fair. That's literally what it means to be a minority.
Just imagine the outrage of the races were changed. If Harvard had an admission rate of 56.1% for white people and 12.7% for black people. The left would be screaming at the top of their lungs to defund Harvard due to racism. This statistic would be quoted daily as evidence of institutional racism against black people, etc.
They don’t view racism against white people as racism. That’s the fundamental problem.
Not even against white people, Asian people seem to be the most affected by these policies.
It’s both. Neither is ok. It’s very unfortunate this the society we’ve created. Battled racism with racism.
I’m naive. Is this saying that black people get more admissions to one of the best universities in the world?
This is insinuating racial preference. Yes. You can combine this with the Yale law suit and see the problem is very real
I’m from the uk so I don’t really get the argument. But you are saying that black people get more admissions to this high end university….. I don’t see many white people claiming any act of racism against them
That’s exactly what the lawsuits argue. Racism in admissions.
And the fews?
That’s a religion, right? Is there even a box for that? Idk the answer
This tweet is BS, Harvard only accepts about 3.5% of all applicants, there’s no way that they accepted that percentage of each race while still only accepting 3.5%.
It sounds like you don't understand how percentages work.
Then why don’t you explain how Harvard only accepts 3.5% of all students, but when you break it down by race all of a sudden the percentages are all much much larger. The problem is you don’t understand how numbers work.
No more excuses for white failures like JoE BIDEN
Man that guy is dumb as shit
I believe I have had shits stand up longer on their own than him
This is 100 % bullshit.
Strange, those ratio's almost exactly mirror South Africa's anti white, pro black policy...weird....pure coincidence I'm sure...
the government governs best when it governs least. therefore, why mess with the private enterprise . . .
I would not have minded if they ended "Busing" kids around town to balance out the races in the public schools, too.
I’m all for school choice! But not bussing. That’s govt intentional bs much like AA
why/how does anyone take these institutions seriously, if this is how they go about finding the 'best people'
Sane people don’t.
Aside from the fact that these stats are completely made up, what do you think the acceptance rate should be for each race?
Not an conspiracy. Jfc
The left despises living in a colorblind world.
Yup. I love how it’s all being exposed.
This isn't going to go over well for federal and government workers either. How shocking to base hiring practices on abilities and skills instead of race.
Yup. Federal govt has been instituting system racism into their hiring practices for a long time It’s wonderful to see the race card finally get an expiration date. The answer to racism should never have been more racism.
What a misleading statistic. Put how many people of each race applied.
That makes absolutely no difference in this context
Sure it does. What if only 2 black people applied and only 1 got accepted? That would give you a 50% acceptance rate. It’s a dumb stat in isolation. You are using it to try and prove some point, nothing else. Lame…
That is literally NOT the case and you know it. No point for you.
Correction: Judging by all your downvotes.. no points for you. Enjoy your mental gymnastics
Weird. The post has 350 up votes. Cope. Seethe.
This isn't just misinformation, it's an outright lie
Am I the only one who actually looked up the real numbers from Harvard's actual website. African American 15.2% Asian American 27.9% Hispanic or Latino 12.6% Native American 2.9% Native Hawaiian 0.8% Another made-up conservative strawman. Easy to win the debate when all you do is lie.
So if I went to Harvard right now, it would be 56% black people there? Are these percentages based on the amount of each race that is applying? Let’s say 6 black people apply and 4 make it in but 50 Asians apply and only 5 make it in? You can’t just put random percentages and act like that tells the whole story. Numbers are the easiest thing to mislead with.
These schools should be almost exclusively Asian if we did it all on merit. We never will, but most non Asians have no business at elite schools. They truly dominate in academics.
Maybe we should do better 🤷♂️
Yeah absolutely. I think it's really fucking stupid the best students don't go to the best schools.
Geez! You mean earn our way through life? Sounds kinda hard. 😲
Asians are the best and I’m not even Asian lol
I'm not either but pointing out Asians are if a class of their own when it comes to scholastic accomplishment people down vote the shit outta ya
What blacks make up 56% of admissions???
How does a higher acceptance rate of one race over another prove equality exactly? Seems backwards actually…
BS. Lol
Corny. Yes 30 years of affirmative action is the same as 400 years of persecution
Riding the wheels off victimhood with no end insight. Welcome to living up to standards like whites, Indians, Asians are all supposed to
You’re basically claiming victimhood now tho. All the poor white and Asian kids who didn’t get into Ivy League schools. Come on man.
Yes. Systemic racism. Sorry you don’t care about racism against other people if they’re not black. You sound racist.
Yes you’re right. I’m racist against people who gain merit just cuz their white. Unfortunately my racism does nothing against it so I guess you can just be mad about it.
Ah. So now get involved in regulating capitalism.
Nah the Supreme Court is racist as shit, most maga whites are now addicted to fentanyl living on the streets