I've seen other threads that are of touchy subjects, so I think this one can be placed here. Hopefully everyone can be respectful.
Obama recently announced hopes to institute a program to help minority males, specifically those that are African-American and Hispanic. The reason is that supposedly these two groups have a higher rate of underachievement and a higher unemployment rates. Asians supposedly have the lowest unemployment rate for males under the age of 20.
Now I think this brings to light something that I find disturbing in the US.
The smallest minority groups are the ones that are discriminated against, whilst those from the largest minority groups (and it's hypothesized that in some areas whites are actually the minority currently and Hispanics are the majority) are actually the ones being helped at the expense of everyone else.
Now I have NOTHING against Hispanics or African Americans, and in fact I think these are good initiatives that they've put in place...HOWEVER...it's an unfair initiative as it STILL discriminates against the other minorities. The ones I specifically have in mind that seem to have the greatest discrimination are Asians and Native Americans. Heck, whilst African Americans point out that they had slavery and are their descendants...less than 80 years ago Asian Americans (specifically Japanese) had just as bad if not worse when they were sent to the US concentration camps.
I still see rampant discrimination against Asians in US popular culture, in movies, and slang and derogatory remarks against them TV. It seems that the Asian culture doesn't really speak out, and because stats show them doing better then many others...it's seems to be accepted that discrimination against Asians is acceptable. I think this discrimination, not just by whites, but African Americans (not so much by Hispanics at all to tell the truth) is absolutely abominable. I am puzzled why the US will speak up for the big minorities...but keep mum in regards to the Asians. It's like it's in vogue to be discriminatory against them.
However, even worse is the discrimination against the Native Americans. I have some personal experiences with this as I normally go and visit the reservations in Spring and Summer. Despite what people think, even with the "government assistance" many of these places they live have very little heating or electricity in some cases, and in some instances are badly in need of improvements with indoor plumbing. Many of the programs geared to help other minorities do not seem to apply to them, and hence we see an even more viscious cycle of some of those that are on the reservation. I would hazard that among native americans that are active in the tribes and start on the reservation...that they have a MUCH HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT RATE than ANY OTHER MINORITY. However, they are not addressed in Obama's initiative. I'm not sure if it's because they simply don't look at the reservation Native Americans and instead simply look at anyone and everyone who claims to be Native American instead.
I have to admit, the nicest people seem to be those on the reservation, at least when I visit there. I am shocked at how they are treated in regards to other minorities however.
So...I suppose the topic isn't just straight discrimination, but discrimination among minorities. I seem to see that there is a bias in the US for African Americans (and one that is slowly also turning for Hispanics, though even they are a far distant second), whereas other minorities are still treated as second class, or even third class citizens in regards to everyone else.
Why is this? And what could be done to improve this?
Is there anyone else who's noticed this?
Or is it that these other minority groups (and we could toss in Pacific Islanders and others in these smaller groups also)are so small that the US feels they can still discriminate against these other minority groups unfairly?
PS: Hopefully this topic is allowed here, I know other topics on discrimination and controversy have been located here which are much hotter I think. Hopefully also people would want to discuss this instead of glossing over it...though if it's glossed over I suppose it reinforces the diagram of how all other minority groups are favored over the small minority groups.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why? It's all about the votes.
That is the end all-be all for politicians (of both parties).
Stopping it? Not gonna happen.
So, your argument is that because Asian-Americans are doing better than African-Americans, the African-American is in an advantageous position?
I will concede that Native Americans are very badly hosed, in general, probably a lot worse than most other groups.
And here we see the discrimination popping up somewhat in this thread even. Statistics say that there are more Asian Americans being employed, but statistically as well, it can be seen that many of those from the Southern portions of Asia actually don't get hired with high wages, and many times are paid much lower than any other ethnic group except for Hispanics. When you talk specifics, certain Asian groups (and it may be due to the culture, work ethic, and what their focus is in regards to hard sciences) do seem to have high employment that skews the data.
However, the discrimination still affects them and when we look at higher management positions, I've seen it personally in the business that I'm in, that ANY minority is sometimes overlooked in regards to others, and Asians particularly are overlooked many times in regards to others.
Sometimes it works in their favor, but many times it does not. There are still a lot of things out there that work against the Asian Americans...that they persevere in spite of this I suppose makes it more promising...but I would say the discrimination is actually WORSE against the Asian American than it is against African Americans.
If you include ALL Asian Americans (and not just East Asians) the discrimination against Asian Americans has NEVER been greater in the US. How many of you can miss how biased people are against those of Arabian or the southeast Asian descents in the past decade?
I don't know of any ethnic group which has had a greater degree of persecution and stereotyping than the Southeast Asians over the past decade. If they just happen to be Muslim as well (which a great number are) the stereotyping gets even worse, to the point that I think most minorities in the US have a hand over them in regards to job prospects, job promotions, and having others be civil to them.
You can even see it on these boards occasionally where you see slurs against Islam or Muslims or Middle Easterners.
That doesn't discount what I stated about Native Americans either, as they have a major uphill battle...
But both instances I think highlight JUST how little is being done in regards to battling discrimination and the obstacles in their path, when those who have been given the golden spoon (African Americans for example) as far as minorities go...are being focused on over and above other minorities.
I think it's great that African Americans are getting aid in battling discrimination as well...but I think there is a gigantic bias in regards to helping certain groups while ignoring other groups...which in my opinion sometimes have it far more blatant and obvious in regards to discrimination against them.
This was one of the reasons why affirmative action in university application processes was struck down by the SCOTUS recently, IIRC. A new such program might well end up in the same place.
|
Or the reality that helping based on race is inherently racist. A government that would tell the child of a rich black family that went to private schools that he deserves a leg up and the poor asian or white from an uneducated immigrant family can get bent because his people have it "too good" is worse than one that does NOTHING about "inequality"
As someone who doesn't watch the regular news, could I request that someone link these speeches and/or proposals of Obama's?
No?
Fine.
Obama Plan Aims to Improve Odds for Minority Boys
I don't know. Sounds to me like a bunch of vague bullshiznit at best. More pull yourself up by bootstraps at worst.
"'Nothing will be given to you,' Obama said. 'The world is tough out there. There's a lot of competition for jobs and college positions and everybody has to work hard. But I know you guys can succeed.'"
Is there prejudice specifically against Cambodians or Laotians as distinct from say Japanese or Chinese?
Not making an argument, just throwing in (anecdotal) stuff:
My hipster friends in Lowell, MA have all kinds of fun stories about the discrimination against the large Cambodian immigrant population there. All kinds of local ordinances against raising chickens and what not that the Southeast Asians keep getting tickets for but seem to pass over the hipster urban farmers.
In fact, I remember as far back as high school psychology class reading (so, 20 years ago) about friction between the Cambodian population and the Lowell authorities.
Why? It's all about the votes.
I really don't think they need MORE of the black vote.
That is the end all-be all for politicians (of both parties).
Stopping it?
You say that like its a bad thing. The entire POINT of democracy is to encourage politicians to do things that we want them to do and avoid screwing up too badly.
Why? It's all about the votes.I really don't think they need MORE of the black vote.
They do need more of the Hispanic vote, though. I don't remember where I found it, I think through one of the links that Spanky provided in another thread (don't recall which one at the moment), but it was a whole article about how Texas Democrats were launching a campaign to win back the Republican Hispanic vote. Hmm, let's see if I can find it...
Oh no.. they have your .. PHONE NUMBER dun dun duuuuuun....
Yeah, I don't really care one way or the other about that part, but it does talk a lot about the Dems efforts to win back the Hispanic vote.
Democrats Want to Get Wendy Davis Elected So Badly, They're Breaking the Law to Do It
My favorite part is this:
There's no reason why Republicans can't be employing these same analytical tactics and data-mining
After implying that the Dem's are evil for having done these things, the conclusion of the article is "we should do them too."
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to contribute to a useless "Your capitalist party is worse than my capitalist party" derail. It was just an article that I read about the Dems trying to get back the Hispanic vote.
So, anyone think Obama's speech doesn't promise much, or is it just me?
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to contribute to a useless "Your capitalist party is worse than my capitalist party" derail. It was just an article that I read about the Dems trying to get back the Hispanic vote.
So, anyone think Obama's speech doesn't promise much, or is it just me?
I was flashbacking to every highschool and college graduation speech I'd ever heard that I fell asleep
I think it's great that African Americans are getting aid in battling discrimination as well...but I think there is a gigantic bias in regards to helping certain groups while ignoring other groups...which in my opinion sometimes have it far more blatant and obvious in regards to discrimination against them.
Also, I find your premise that by helping one group we are necessarily doing so at the expense of another troubling. It goes off the assumption that everything is a zero-sum game, which isn't true. For somethings it is, but for most it isn't.
I agree, focusing on one group over another is troubling when taken as a whole, but in your refutation of the problem, you're doing the same thing. I think the idea that African-Americans have some sort of golden spoon is ridiculous to suggest. The only group with a higher poverty rate are Native Americans.
African-Americans also have a lower life expectancy.
I think a shower would be a better analogy than a spoon.
No, what it's showing how uneven acting in regards to discrimination is. Higher poverty is DOCUMENTED among African Americans at a high rate...however...do you realize that poverty among Asian Americans is actually rather high as well.
Furthermore, even in this thread we have people trying to discount Southeast Asians as Asian (which is horrid in and of itself) and disregarding that Southwest Asians actually have a pretty horrid poverty rate in and of themselves.
Furthermore, the obvious discrimination is FAR worse in slurs, treatment, and reactions towards most Asians with NOTHING combating these things...all in the name of a statistic that says that Asians are doing well (a questionable statistic at that).
As far as Hispanics, I don't think there are reliable items in regards to if there are more or less Hispanics that are in or above poverty as there are so many undocumented in the US...I'd find any stat hard to verify.
However, the discrimination against Asians is probably at an all time high, higher than it's been in the US for the past 50 years.
However, people always want to discount other races as being discriminated against...especially if they aren't African American.
It's also interesting that you bring up the Native Americans again, as a lot of these so called "minority" programs basically exclude them...as well as any minority who isn't African American or Hispanic (and in many instances if they aren't simply just African American as many of the forms don't count Hispanics as a minority).
When I say Golden spoon, it's not that they are favored against the majority, but simply to state that in regards to the aid other races get, the ones with the Golden spoon are the golden children, or favored FAR more than any other minority. They get the most help, aid, benefits, and more importantly, PUSHBACK AGAINST discrimination...whereas the other races, in some cases, the discrimination against them is even promoted by the US government (for example, Asians actually have government codes discriminating against them in some states. Native Americans ALSO have actual laws that still discriminate against them that are actually ENFORCED, much like the Jim Crow laws).
How can you even say this is not troubling. The African Americans got many of the Jim Crow laws done away with in the previous years...but many of those same laws when applied towards Asians and Native Americans are still enforced. How is this okay?
At all?
Furthermore, when discussing Asian discrimination, some of these laws have no differentiation between Southeast Asians, and other Asians...and in worse case scenarios, some of the MORE RECENT LAWS actually created in the past decade specifically target those from South East Asia due to a bias and fear against Arabians and those of an Islamic leaning.
No, what it's showing how uneven acting in regards to discrimination is. Higher poverty is DOCUMENTED among African Americans at a high rate...however...do you realize that poverty among Asian Americans is actually rather high as well.
Furthermore, even in this thread we have people trying to discount Southeast Asians as Asian (which is horrid in and of itself) and disregarding that Southwest Asians actually have a pretty horrid poverty rate in and of themselves.
Furthermore, the obvious discrimination is FAR worse in slurs, treatment, and reactions towards most Asians with NOTHING combating these things...all in the name of a statistic that says that Asians are doing well (a questionable statistic at that).
As far as Hispanics, I don't think there are reliable items in regards to if there are more or less Hispanics that are in or above poverty as there are so many undocumented in the US...I'd find any stat hard to verify.
However, the discrimination against Asians is probably at an all time high, higher than it's been in the US for the past 50 years.
However, people always want to discount other races as being discriminated against...especially if they aren't African American.
It's also interesting that you bring up the Native Americans again, as a lot of these so called "minority" programs basically exclude them...as well as any minority who isn't African American or Hispanic (and in many instances if they aren't simply just African American as many of the forms don't count Hispanics as a minority).
When I say Golden spoon, it's not that they are favored against the majority, but simply to state that in regards to the aid other races get, the ones with the Golden spoon are the golden children, or favored FAR more than any other minority. They get the most help, aid, benefits, and more importantly, PUSHBACK AGAINST discrimination...whereas the other races, in some cases, the discrimination against them is even promoted by the US government (for example, Asians actually have government...
Again, you'll get no argument from me that Native Americans are pretty much shit upon by our culture and government.
Your premise is that because certain people might have it worse, we can't do anything to fix issues regarding other people. Which that just makes it into an argument about which disadvantaged group actually has it worse, which is a stupid debate.
Instead of playing a game of one-up with how bad things are, why not talk about ways to improve things for the problems you see? That's the flaw of what you've said so far. You haven't talked about how to make things better, you're only trying to knock down others to the lowest level.
I'm confused. What groups do you mean by "South-East Asians"? I understand the term to meanFurthermore, even in this thread we have people trying to discount Southeast Asians as Asian (which is horrid in and of itself) and disregarding that Southwest Asians actually have a pretty horrid poverty rate in and of themselves.
Furthermore, when discussing Asian discrimination, some of these laws have no differentiation between Southeast Asians, and other Asians...and in worse case scenarios, some of the MORE RECENT LAWS actually created in the past decade specifically target those from South East Asia due to a bias and fear against Arabians and those of an Islamic leaning.
Southeast Asia or Southeastern Asia is a subregion of Asia, consisting of the countries that are geographically south of China, east of India, west of New Guinea and north of Australia.Saying "those from South East Asia due to a bias and fear against Arabians and those of an Islamic leaning" makes me think you're including Arabs as from South East Asia, which is just not correct.
I did argue that Americans of Middle Eastern descent aren't considered "Asian-Americans". Those of Southeast Asian descent are and I did not claim otherwise. I didn't make these terms up. That's how the Census uses the term and how most studies use it.
I think he is saying that the heavy Islamic influence in Indonesia and the Philippines has led to people from those areas and with those features being lumped in as Islamic extremists and equating it with Arabs being categorized similarly. At least, that is how I read it.
For what it's worth, almost all grant/aid program I have noticed at higher levels of education that favor minorities do not distinguish between minorities (and most are also available to women as well).
For what it's worth, almost all grant/aid program I have noticed at higher levels of education that favor minorities do not distinguish between minorities (and most are also available to women as well).
EXCEPT for many applications these days, it will ask about Minority status and leave out the Asian Americans. If it does ask for an Asian American, in many instances for certain benefits it will include ALL minorities EXCEPT for Asian Americans. It will give a statement of noninclusion for any one of Asian descent. I saw one just yesterday in fact for someone who was asking me about some benefit forms and applications, which was where the original thought in regards to this topic started to form. In many it also leaves out the Hispanic status, but leaves a spot for you to check it off in a different area. Native Americans are also treated differently on some forms on occasion.
As for Southeast Asia, I should be more clear, and in one or two parts I actually meant SouthWest Asia. I was writing in too much haste and should have checked what I wrote better. Southeast Asia includes areas such as Thailand and Indonesia.
I should also include South Asia, which would include areas such as Pakistan. This discrimination however, is remarkable in regards to those from Southeast Asia (which I stated includes Thailand). If they are Muslim and dress accordingly (or sometimes even if they don't, but dress in more traditional garb) they are treated as if they were terrorists, and included in the entire stereotype.
So, in truth we could include anyone from Southern Asia in the groups which are heavily discriminated against. Basically, anyone that wears certain clothes and acts a certain way, or have Islamic roots seem to be discriminated against these days, especially those from Asia.
With Southwest Asia, I would also toss in those from East Asia, and basically those of Arabian features as well as the Persia or Persian features. These are the focus in many instances of the current discrimination, though that fear seems to extend from those solidly in Asia itself from the areas of Pakistan.
Although they aren't lumped into the same boat as those who are Islamic, People of Indian descent are also heavily discriminated against in the US, with many people thinking anyone of Indian descent in the US has a weird accent or weird mannerisms. Sometimes they mistake the religions of Islam and Hinduism.
Some of the hatred towards Indians probably stems from the current labor troubles in the US. It also goes with US citizens having trouble distinguishing what an Islamic person from West Asia looks like in relation to an Islamic individual from South Central or Southeast asia, and can't even differentiate between what one wears or looks like if they are Hindi rather than Muslim.
The discrimination and hatred exhibited towards people of these descents are very visible in US culture these days and stereotypes as well as mocking those stereotypes are rampant.
Camboadians and Vietnamese have some pretty bad statistics as far as being accomplished as well, though they are not normally included in the Islamic hatred in the US.
Now that the majority of university students are women, can we stop calling them a minority?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
-My opinion on racism/discrimination did a complete 360 after living in east asia for 6 years,
-At least jobs in America can't say "We don't hire black people".
Also, I find your premise that by helping one group we are necessarily doing so at the expense of another troubling. It goes off the assumption that everything is a zero-sum game, which isn't true. For somethings it is, but for most it isn't.
We have a male problem developing in our culture. Acting like it only effects certain groups of males is silly and destructive. We should have programs try to get all males to achieve, not just assuming that certain groups are "fine" and others need help.
And despite that, men still make more than women do and are more likely to be hired and promoted, right out of college or later in their careers.
Men are more likely to have majored in a higher paying field.
Most of the pay gap for the same job is at the top 1%.Men are more likely to be unemployed. (because this recession/economic shift towards a service/financial economy has hit manufacturing production and other male oriented jobs harder)
Furthermore, even granting the "male problem", that doesn't mean there isn't also a "racial problem" as well. Fixing the male problem might leave that in place and wind up mostly benefiting white males, leaving other races out.
Possibly, if you set up a tax free zone for factories or something it would greatly benefit the stix where the costs are low and the people are white.
Was watching this for the umpteenth time in the past 48 hours and remain undecided as to whether I should use it as a Musical Interlude here or back in the Cis/Privilege thread.
Also, I find your premise that by helping one group we are necessarily doing so at the expense of another troubling. It goes off the assumption that everything is a zero-sum game, which isn't true. For somethings it is, but for most it isn't.We have a male problem developing in our culture. Acting like it only effects certain groups of males is silly and destructive. We should have programs try to get all males to achieve, not just assuming that certain groups are "fine" and others need help.
So, I made a point that saying X is worse than Y is a reason we aren't allowed to talk about Y is silly.
Your response was to say that X is worse than Y, so we can't talk about Y.
To be clear, the reason it's silly is that there is no magic bullet solution that will solve all problems everywhere simultaneously. While some solutions may cause additional problems that we couldn't foresee, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try or that the attempted solution was necessarily bad.
Billy's trapped in a well and could drown, we should lower him a rope.
No, we can't, Dave's house is on fire.
In that case of Billy and Dave...trying to treat both situations would seem appropriate.
However, in current status, and leaving Jim Crow laws against certain races (even if they were gotten rid of for African Americans) is more akin to helping set the fire out on Dave's house, but instead of lowering a rope for Billy...dropping a thousand pound boulder on top of him and then capping the well just to make sure he can't get out.
Native Americans on the reservation have a VERY hard situation at times to create a better life for themselves. There are supposed programs, but the red tape and the bureaucracy seem designed to stop them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, all you're doing is making it a contest of who has it worse. You haven't stopped doing that. That is the problem I have with how you're talking about this.
With what you have presented so far, you don't seem interested in helping people, just complaining about who has it worse. Responding with "these guys have it worse" doesn't disprove my point, because my point is that is how you've responded so far.
OF course it's a matter of who has the most discrimination (or in your words...who has it worse). I'd be for helping BOTH, and I'm not arguing about ending the others...but I think there's an uneven bias in who is helped and who is not in anti-discrimination.
Everything is who has it better or worse...that's the entire point of fighting discrimination. African Americans have the laws there to make it so that the discrimination against them does not play as big a factor in many aspects of their lives in the US.
The bigger question is when the African American has a law that states they cannot be discriminated in regards to race, but certain states show that it's still legal to discriminate against Asians, or more especially, Native Americans...why would the US allow such laws to remain?
Why do the laws that aid African Americans in some points...specifically target only certain minorities and exclude others rather then extending the same protections to ALL?
You started this thread because Obama commented on the African-American communities problems. Are you saying he's not allowed to talk about those issues unless he solves Asian-American problems first?
I was using it to show how other races with problems are completely ignored. Excuses are made or brought up to justify...but in the end...some minorities are favored over others in regards to trying to aid them. Hence in my opinion, pure discrimination against any minority NOT involved with his plan to aid "minorities."
What I'm saying is instead of focusing on ONE or ANOTHER minority, include ALL minorities in plans on helping minorities in general.
Otherwise, it's still discrimination, just more focused discrimination...aka...propping up your favorite minority whilst allowing the others to have more intense and severe discrimination.
Battle discrimination on an even handed and non-discriminatory manner is what I'm saying and thinking should be brought up. That there isn't...indicates to me a severe problem in how discrimination and prejudice are being opposed.
Do you think that the solutions for solving problems in the two communities are going to be identical?
I'd put forward the issues for black and asian students at ivy league schools are pretty different. While they both suffer some discrimination, the forms and results that it takes are pretty different.
For example, 2011, 12% of new students at Harvard were asian, more than double their representation in the US as a whole. The potential issue is that their participation rate has not changed over time, even though their presence in the overall population has increased. Indeed the various schools used to have a higher degree of variation between them, but that variation has diminished with the overall rate very slightly declining.
Only 7% were black, a little over half their presence in the general population, meaning they're clearly underrepresented.
Tell me that the solution to their problems in the ivy league are going to be exactly the same.
And that's the problem. People look at it as minorities facing different problems to different degrees...instead of the entire picture. Many of the differences on face value (such as admittance rates) could be traced to the actual culture that is cultivated in certain areas of the nation (and to tell the truth, that isn't actually race specific, you'd find the same statistics for whites in those areas...it's more of an area thing...unfortunately the majority in many of these areas ARE African Americans, hence they are affected far more than any other race).
However, the discrimination as a whole isn't something just relegated to African Americans or Hispanics. In fact, when looking at discrimination as a whole...it's illegal to discriminate against African Americans...and in some cases Hispanics (that's SOME cases) as long as you can prove it. Many of these protections are NOT extended to other races though. Stats are manipulated or thrown out so on face value it looks like it's fine...but when you look deeper at the actual stats you find out that Asians from the same areas as those African Americans at times actually have LOWER rates of college acceptance than African Americans. This indicates that it's not simply an African American problem...but also has other factors such as where they are living and in what conditions.
Is it fair for 2 to 1 African Americans to be accepted vs. Asian Americans from the same portion of the slums? Is it fair for a greater then 1 to 1 ratio of African Americans to be accepted vs. Hispanics (tossing in those who are in the US under not quite legal circumstances in that number) either?
When comparing those from the same neighborhood, the numbers are not as stellar in some instances...
This is uneven discrimination.
On the surface it may appear everything is good, but you have to realize ANOTHER REASON why more Asians may get into good schools. Discrimination was so severe against Asians in the 20th century, that unless you were a refuge...for many you had to already be independently successful in order to even think about entering the US. Of course if your parents are in the Rich areas...you will already be able to have a higher rate...that ALSO APPLIES to African Americans and Whites.
The problem is that there are more African Americans in the poverty stricken areas, and certain areas with their schools are treated worse. However, ALL individuals in those areas are affected likewise...including the Asians, Hispanics, and others.
So, yes, the problems ARE very similar between the minorities. It is glossed over in the big stats people quote, but when you look at a closer inspection...one can get a better picture.
Did you know, Asians and Native Americans were actually legally able to be discriminated against by some government laws...in a much more severe manner. It's illegal to do this with African Americans...the 14th applies. These constitutional rights apparently do not apply evenly though...for as I said, in some governmental forms, applications, rights, and benefits...Asians are allowed to legally be discriminated against as are Native Americans.
Many Hispanics would also state this discrimination also applies to their plight...especially in regards to things such as requirements to speak or write English to vote (that's like the Jim crow laws of the south), and other such requirements which even if you are legally a US citizen...could ostracize you and prevent you from your legal rights under the US constitution.
There is a way to solve the racial, sexual, and other equality problems in a time frame most people consider reasonable... It's a surprisingly effective way... It requires some sacrifice, though. And you may not like what it involves.
If you're wanting to solve it in a way that is less distasteful... well, let's be blunt: Most people, including pretty much every civil rights leader I've seen, have no clue what a realistic time frame on this actually is. Societies do not change overnight, and often do not fully change in only a few decades without something horrific involved. You're typically talking century-scale time units for change, and usually multiple. Especially for items that have centuries of being in use backing them.
However, if people are not willing to wait for a realistic amount of time, there's always the faster solution...
Do you think that the solutions for solving problems in the two communities are going to be identical?
I'd put forward the issues for black and asian students at ivy league schools are pretty different. While they both suffer some discrimination, the forms and results that it takes are pretty different.
But you can only come to this conclusion if you lump all asians in together, which I believe is half of the OP's point. Persons of southeast asian descent, or even Chinese ethnic minorities, have a very different experience to that of first or second generation East Asian (Japanese, Korean, Han Chinese) families.
I agree with you that the "X is discriminated against therefore we can't help Y" paradigm is nonsensical, but it's at least worth mentally distinguishing between distinct ethnic and socioeconomic groups when we are talking about social mobility.
Did you know, Asians and Native Americans were actually legally able to be discriminated against by some government laws...in a much more severe manner. It's illegal to do this with African Americans...the 14th applies. These constitutional rights apparently do not apply evenly though...for as I said, in some governmental forms, applications, rights, and benefits...Asians are allowed to legally be discriminated against as are Native Americans.
The California Supreme Court disagrees with you. Sei Fujii v State of California
In the light of the foregoing discussion, we have concluded that the constitutional theories upon which the Porterfield case was based are today without support and must be abandoned. [7c] The California Alien Land Law is obviously designed and administered as an instrument for effectuating 738*738 racial discrimination, and the most searching examination discloses no circumstances justifying classification on that basis. There is nothing to indicate that those alien residents who are racially ineligible for citizenship possess characteristics which are dangerous to the legitimate interests of the state, or that they, as a class, might use the land for purposes injurious to public morals, safety or welfare. Accordingly, we hold that the alien land law is invalid as in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
As you can see in the last sentence, the 14th Amendment is specifically interpreted to apply to people of Asian origin.