Rep. Ted Lieu Loses Six Democratic Endorsements Over anti-Affirmative Action Stance | #SCA5

April 4, 2014
Representative Ted Lieu, who represents California's 28th Senate District. (Photo credit: Sacramento Bee.)
Representative Ted Lieu, who represents California’s 28th Senate District. (Photo credit: Sacramento Bee.)

Representative Ted Lieu may be rethinking his position on affirmative action today.

Lieu, a Democrat who has been representing the 28th Senate District in the California State Senate, famously voted in favour of SCA5 — a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would have repealed Prop 209 for public education and restore affirmative action to the state —  in early January, only to later rescind his support for SCA5 in a joint letter signed by himself and two other Asian American politicians in the state (including disgraced representative and would-be gun runner Leland Yee). Lieu’s withdrawal of support for SCA5 came after his office was targeted by weeks of bitter objection from a subset of California Asian American voters, themselves misled by anti-affirmative action misinformation put forward by conservative PACs and ethnic media. Currently, Lieu is currently against 17 other candidates in a race for a Congressional seat vacated by retiring Congressman Henry Waxman, (D-Beverly Hills) and is considered one of the race’s front-runners.

In the joint letter withdrawing support for SCA5 issued in February, Lieu and his colleagues wrote:

As lifelong advocates for the Asian- American and other communities, we would never support a policy that we believed would negatively impact our children.

However, Proposition 209 has had a clear negative impact on California’s children: following passage of the law, admission rates for Black, Chicano and Native American applicants dropped precipitously with virtually no significant change in the overall rate of offers given to Asian American and White applicants.

In an 18-person race for the U.S. Congress, any candidate needs as much support as they can get. So, it’s a big deal when a representative loses endorsements, because it’s not only embarrassing, but it can also serve as a major blow to fund-raising and campaign energy.

Last week, 6 California legislators — all Democrats — issued their own joint letter to Ted Lieu. All 6 California legislators had previously endorsed Lieu’s candidacy for the US House of Representatives, but were now withdrawing support, citing concerns over Lieu’s commitment to diversity. They wrote:

As lifelong Democrats, we support the core democratic values of inclusion and diversity and we expect the candidates we support will share these values. Our constituents depend on us to take even the most divisive issues and use our leadership to help bring people together and guide the path toward progress.

At this point, we cannot in good conscience endorse a candidate who does not share that perspective.

The six legislators include 3 of Lieu’s State Senate colleagues — Sens. Ricardo Lara, Norma Torres and Holly Mitchell — as well as 3 California State Assemblymen: Lorena Gonzalez, Jose Medina and Anthony Renden.

So what’s the take-home message here? Race-based affirmative action is beneficial to the entire community, and is critical to help equalize access for underrepresented minority students to public education. An Asian American politician who takes a stand against affirmative action is taking a standing against diversity; and, if he chooses to take that stance, the least he can do is offer an explanation for his position. To date, neither he nor Liu or Yee — nor Congresswoman Judy Chu, for that matter — have offered an in-depth explanation to their constituents reconciling their core Democratic values of diversity and inclusion with their stance against affirmative action.

And, yes, we’re still waiting to hear from them.

Act Now! I urge you to take a stand with me in contacting Representative Ted Lieu through email or Twitter (@tedlieu), asking him to reaffirm his commitment to diversity and SCA5.

Did you like this content? Please consider becoming a patron of Reappropriate and get exclusive access to the brand new Reappropriate vlog!

  • crazy MMer

    If the Retardlicans will only stop their racist hate mongering against minorities then I’d probably vote for them instead of always the lesser evil of the Democraps.

    I actually agree with most of the GOP platform of “personal responsibility” and “fiscal responsibility” that the racist DNC Latino bloc seems to want to punish Asians for.

    Nonetheless, my whole voting strategy this year will be to oust all incumbents regardless of party.

  • GREAT ARTICLE. THANKS FOR THE TIME TO WRITE IT. WRITING MY LETTER NOW!!

  • None

    http://gladwell.com/outliers/rice-paddies-and-math-tests/

    Yes, Asians do have a built-in advantage with math . Yes, Asians do deserve to be over represented at Elite schools because they’re better at academics. Elite Universities like Berkeley are about academics.

    No, SCA-5 should not be voted through. The fact that it’s even being discussed is a giant joke – and only the Asian-American community would be low self-esteem enough to even entertain the idea of supporting it.

    It’s the equivalent of Asian-Americans arguing that there needs to be “more diversity” in NCAA basketball in California. And thus, the State should pass a law that would then guarantee a lower percentage of African-Americans from being on NCAA basketball teams, in favour of giving their spots to Asian-Americans – because “it creates diversity.”

    Except, if an Asian-American were to suggest this, African-Americans would then picket and riot. Because though Asian-Americans are better at academics, African-Americans aren’t as stupid as Asian-Americans, to entertain the thought of passing a racist bill against themselves – let alone publicly encourage others to pass it.

  • @None

    … Why does your comment imply that African Americans have laid claim to the sport of basketball?

  • “Yes, Asians do have a built-in advantage with math . Yes, Asians do deserve to be over represented at Elite schools because they’re better at academics.”

    Wow. First of all, that is a complete misreading of the very link you provided. Second, that is not… a perspective backed by any kind of science.

  • None

    You’re arguing in circles. Go check the stats of NCAA basketball players of African-American descent. You could easily make the same argument for affirmative action for more Asian-Americans in NCAA basketball as you could for African-Americans being admitted into Berkeley/UCLA/UCI.

    But you’d never make that argument – because it’s easier arguing for discrimination against Asian-Americans than it is for African-Americans. If an Asian democratic Rep tried passing a bill that would guarantee a lower % of African-Americans in NCAA basketball in favour of a higher number of Asian-Americans – he would be asked to step down immediately. His face would be all over CNN as Al Sharpton would be on CNN crying about discrimination. As Asian-American “bloggers” and “activists” like you write about “what a racist bill that is.”

    When a racist bill gets proposed against Asian-Americans? Asian-Americans like you are low self-esteem enough to support it. Maybe it’s self-hate, maybe it’s shame caused by the media, maybe it’s just because you’re damn confused about yourself.

    And when I said “built-in” I meant cultural. As you know, the Chinese speak Chinese. Thus, it’s a built-in cultural advantage. A cultural advantage you’re lobbying for them to be punished for (punishing someone because they can do math better than another person – Wow!)

    So, for your next post, since you’re all about “Diversity”, don’t be a hypocrite – post a blog about affirmative action in NCAA basketball, lower the number of African-Americans in favour of Chinese/Korean/Japanese-Americans.

    Do it, write it up. You’re all about “creating diversity” by race. Write up, do it.

    Unless you’re a hypocrite that only supports discrimination if it’s against East Asians.

  • None

    During WWII, there were Jewish people who helped run concentration camps. Their job included primarily selling out their Jewish brethren.

    They did this in order to save themselves, gain approval from the Nazis, and to gain better position within the Nazi society. They generally had little qualms about what they were doing to their own people, and enforcing clearly unjust forms of anti-antisemitism, because it ensured their own benefit within Nazi society.

    Now, due to the extreme success East Asians – mainly the Chinese & Japanese (and within the last decade a growing number of Koreans, Vietnamese) are having, there’s a growing societal backlash against them in the U.S.

    Included in this wave of hate, are Asian writers like Jenn, who side with the parts of society that spread the discrimination towards other Asians, to ensure her own perceived benefit within American society.

    First, it starts with lowering the number of Chinese & Japanese Americans at the private colleges they want to go to, like it happened with the Jewish in the 1930-40s. A Princeton admissions officer already admitted towards this discrimination towards Asians, and Harvard is under investigation as covered already covered in Bloomberg.

    Then, what’ll happen is the push for the same discrimination to happen towards the Chinese/Japanese at the elite public Universities they want to go to. This is currently what’s being proposed in California, and what Jenn is supporting.

    Next, when that Bill somehow gets passed, and spots are successfully taken away from Chinese/Japanese Americans, the next step is that then it’ll be decided that the Chinese/Japanese have too much money (what happened to the Jews in the 19th century). Maybe, a Bill will get proposed where the Asians imaking over $100,000 a year (there are plenty of them), will need to give half their earnings to African-Americans (who have much more power politically). Maybe they’ll pass a Bill where every time an Asian-American finds a startup worth over a hundred million (there are quite a few), the money for that must be taken away from him because the money he earned is “unjust” (they’ll mask it behind some argument about “diversity”, which is their way of saying it can’t be allowed if the Chinese/Japanese are good at it).

    Then, maybe they’ll just decide, to put the Chinese/Japanese in the US into “camps:, because they’re having too much success. And the laws put up against them in private and public education aren’t enough.

    And maybe, Jenn will still be there, writing about why these “camps” and “laws” which target the Chinese/Japanese in the US are a great idea, like a certain sect of Jewish people did in Germany in suport of Nuremberg Laws during the 1930s.

    What does she care? As long as she finds a way to benefit, and doing what she has to do to benefit she’ll support these laws. I’m sure the Jews that worked for Nazis said much of the same mentality.

  • @None

    That’s quite some imagination you have there, and is pretty much a textbook example of the “slippery slope” fallacy — and a ridiculous one at that, if you assert that affirmative action is a “gateway” to internment. Absurd.

    Just FYI, ad hominem attacks are not permitted on this site. Tread carefully — you’re wandering into character assassination territory there. I will not hesitate to ban you if you continue to try and compare me to Nazis.

  • @None

    You’re arguing in circles. Go check the stats of NCAA basketball players of African-American descent. You could easily make the same argument for affirmative action for more Asian-Americans in NCAA basketball as you could for African-Americans being admitted into Berkeley/UCLA/UCI.

    I said you could easily argue that there is dicrimination against AAPIs in NCAA basketball that should be corrected because it is not ethical. I also said that it’s not clear that this discrimination — while bad — is actually creating a substantial barrier for Asian Americans to enter into higher education; to wit, we’re in college in greater numbers than our demographics, so we’re clearly not excluded from college.

    Also, as the NPR article points out (did you even read it?) most Asian American parents discourage their kids from pursuing athletic scholarships in favour of academic scholarships. So because Asian Americans are not limited ONLY to athletic scholarships to get into school, their relative paucity among athletic scholarships is NOT evidence that Asian Americans can’t get into college because they’re not getting in on an NCAA ride. The other piece of evidence of course being that we’re in college in very high numbers.

    When a racist bill gets proposed against Asian-Americans? Asian-Americans like you are low self-esteem enough to support it. Maybe it’s self-hate, maybe it’s shame caused by the media, maybe it’s just because you’re damn confused about yourself.

    This is your official first warning. I’m happy to ban you if you continue to try to lob baseless ad hominem attacks rather than argue your case.

    And when I said “built-in” I meant cultural. As you know, the Chinese speak Chinese. Thus, it’s a built-in cultural advantage. A cultural advantage you’re lobbying for them to be punished for (punishing someone because they can do math better than another person – Wow!)

    1) Assuming we even buy the argument, What about all the non-Chinese speaking Asian Americans? What about all the non-Chinese speaking Chinese Americans?
    2) You again assume that African Americans can’t do math based on their race or culture.

    So, for your next post, since you’re all about “Diversity”, don’t be a hypocrite – post a blog about affirmative action in NCAA basketball, lower the number of African-Americans in favour of Chinese/Korean/Japanese-Americans.

    I just wrote TWO comments saying that if there is discrimination against Asian Americans in the NCAA, it should end. But, if you read the NPR article, it’s CLEARLY not as clear-cut as all that. If anything, it seems to be a recruitment issue, not just a signing issue.

    And again, a final warning: if you can’t play nice, you will be banned.

  • Yun Xu

    >>Accusations aside, “none” has some legit points.

    It’s very weird that Asians support laws that discriminate against themselves. His nazi analogy is fitting for certain Asians – I don’t think you qualify though.

    Think of those self hating racist traitors like ken jeong and amy tan. They’re the bottom bitches of Asians in america.

    “..so we’re clearly not excluded from college.”
    >>This is a fallacy. It may or may not mean that.

    Imagine Asians outscored everyone on all metrics then Asians should get 100% of the spots. If they only got 90%, they’re still being excluded despite how absurd that may seem.

    “If anything, it seems to be a recruitment issue, not just a signing issue.”
    >>No. Look at Jeremy Lin. The guy can ball and he’s treated like shit AFTER recruitment. I can only imagine how many other potential stars were ignored because they look “too Asian”

    “most Asian American parents discourage their kids from pursuing athletic scholarships in favour of academic scholarships”
    Btw, did you read the article prouduc? linked to http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8829545 ? I alluded to this in one of my posts regarding sca5 regarding non-Asian cultures shunning school/academics. It’s something that needs to be addressed.

  • None

    –“That’s quite some imagination you have there, and is pretty much a textbook example of the “slippery slope” fallacy — and a ridiculous one at that, if you assert that affirmative action is a “gateway” to internment. Absurd.”–

    Actually, the stripping away of civil rights (the right to post-secondary education that you’ve justly earned, being taken away because of you’re Chinese-American) is exactly the type of laws the Jews went through in the early 20th century before the Holocaust happens. The taking of civil rights happen gradually, is accepted, until all your rights are taken away and people look the other way – like you’re looking the other way, like Jewish cooperators of the Nazis in the 1930s.

    –“Also, as the NPR article points out (did you even read it?) most Asian American parents discourage their kids from pursuing athletic scholarships in favour of academic scholarships.”–

    Anecdoctal evidence. I could argue that a lot of Asian-American parents encourage their kids to play sports, but that they know there’s discrimination against them in the NCAA. It’s no more less valid than your “African-American parents ask their kids if they’ve done their homework more than Asian parents” argument.

    –“This is your official first warning. I’m happy to ban you if you continue to try to lob baseless ad hominem attacks rather than argue your case.”–

    Back in the 1930s, when Jews questioned the laws barring them from elite American Universities, they were also threatened to “bannings” from general society.

    –“1) Assuming we even buy the argument, What about all the non-Chinese speaking Asian Americans? “–

    What about them? I specifically said Chinese/Japanese Americans.

    “Asian American” is really just an umbrella term Americans use because they can’t tell Asians apart so they lump you into a politically category. And that colleges and the SAT have a box for you to check off because they’re too lazy to make the differentation. A Chinese person from Palo Alto is vastly different than a Korean person from Baltimore than a Japanese person from Seattle. If you want “diversity”, there it is.

    –“And again, a final warning: if you can’t play nice, you will be banned.”–

    Back in Germany in the 1930s, when you spoke out against the Holocaust, the Jews that operated the concerntration camps would sellout the Jews under capture to the Nazis for speaking out, or threaten it.

    –“It’s very weird that Asians support laws that discriminate against themselves. His nazi analogy is fitting for certain Asians – ”

    It’s actually very similar to the Jewish plight, 1 century after. We’re actually not that far removed from when this happened to the Jews (only 90-100 years after it happened). It started with education, the taking of their rights, then….well, we all know.

    There were also people back then like Jenn saying the “idea” of the final solution was ridiculous, and the idea of a big war breaking out was “ridiculous & a slippery slope” because of what they witnessed in WWI (“Never Again”). All they were doing was keeping the Jewish out of Harvard and Princeton in favour of other races. No big deal right? Then, all we’re doing is putting them in “camps”. The world was in denial, they didn’t care. No big deal right? Exactly like Jenn says – “no big deal”, just like 100 years ago. Just a race of people losing their rights to something they earned, they won’t make noise about it, “no big deal.” They won’t do anything about it, make noise – there’s not enough of them to fight back.

    “No big deal”, put them into camps.

    It’s absurd otherwise – just like Jenn says

  • None

    –“I just wrote TWO comments saying that if there is discrimination against Asian Americans in the NCAA, it should end. But, if you read the NPR article, it’s CLEARLY not as clear-cut as all that. If anything, it seems to be a recruitment issue, not just a signing issue.”–

    Not a comment post that won’t be found through Google searches or that barely anyone will read.

    Write a blog post – like you’ve written multiple blog posts on how Chinese-Americans should be kept out of the UCs based on “diversity.” Except, write it about how there are too many African-Americans in NCAA basketball, and that there should be more Chinese/Japanese Americans taking these spots.

    Do it.

    If you’re all for “creating diversity”, you’d write this blog post. See what happens. Watch the backlash. What everyone call it “absurd”, and racist.

    Because, it’s easy to take away the rights of the voiceless (largely, in the US, Japanese and Chinese men). Especially when they’ve worked so hard to become the majority at schools like Berkeley, and to become the highest earners in the country (some of whom are immigrants who didn’t even speak English as a first language).

    It’s VERY easy for you to pick on them. Again, they’re quiet, they accept being hit, and never hit back. CNN, Fox, never stands up for them. Like the Jews in the 1930s, they’re highly educated, and work their ways into prestigious jobs. But like the Jews in the 1930s, they have far more haters than supporters.

    Writing a blog post about “creating diversity in the NCAA” at the expense of African-Americans? Screw that, right? That’d be the end of your career.

  • None

    Germany: On 25 April 1933,
    the Nazi government introduced a 1.5 quota for new admissions of German Non-Aryans—i.e. essentially of German Jews—as core issue of a law claiming to generally limit the number of (Aryan and non-Aryan) students admitted to high-schools (höhere Schulen) and universities.

    Germany: 9–10 November 1938,
    November pogrome, was a pogrom (a series of coordinated attacks) against Jews throughout Nazi Germany and parts of Austria on 9–10 November 1938, carried out by SA paramilitary forces and non-Jewish civilians. German authorities looked on without intervening. 30,000 were sent to concentration camps, including Dachau, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, and Oranieburg, where they were kept for several weeks, and released when they could either prove that they were about to emigrate in the near future, or transferred their property to the Nazis.

    September 1939:
    Germany’s invasion of Poland, increased the urgency of the “Jewish Question”.

    Slippery slope, right? Just the taking of civil rights Jenn. Because I guess, attacking the Chinese and Japanese forwards your career.

  • @None

    Except affirmative action does not restrict admission to Asian Americans into higher education because we are Asian. If the purpose of affirmative action is a gateway to creating Nazi-style concentration camps, why would Asian Americans still be admitted into higher education at twice our national demographics?

    If the purpose is a huge country-wide conspiracy eventually leading to White people gassing Asian Americans, with Jenn as their helpmate, why would 1) racial quotas still be illegal in this country and not the basis of how affirmative action is practiced, and 2) why would Asian Americans still have far greater access to colleges than any other minority?

  • If you’re all for “creating diversity”, you’d write this blog post. See what happens. Watch the backlash. What everyone call it “absurd”, and racist.

    No one has called the NPR post I linked either of those things.

  • FUCK. I accidentally wiped my comment. Okay, starting over.

    @Yun

    It’s very weird that Asians support laws that discriminate against themselves. His nazi analogy is fitting for certain Asians – I don’t think you qualify though.

    The analogy is only apt if racial quotas were being set. They are not.

    Imagine Asians outscored everyone on all metrics then Asians should get 100% of the spots. If they only got 90%, they’re still being excluded despite how absurd that may seem.

    Except this still points to a fundamental misunderstanding of how college admissions work. Test scores and GPA only do two things — 1) get you into the top 5% where you skip the holistic review process and you get an admittance, and 2) qualify you for holistic review, at which point variation in test scores are largely meaningless. If you are in the holistic review pile, your test scores don’t make you “more qualified” than another candidate in the holistic review pile and if you leave the holistic review pile. That’s because holistic review, not test scores and GPA are the metrics that candidates need to score highly on.

    If you have a 1550 on the 1600-base SAT, but a shitty essay and reference letters, you’ll get a low holistic review score, and you might not get admitted, compared to a student with a 1450, a great essay and reference letters. Despite the 100-point different in SAT scores, that student has outscored you. Coming out of the holistic review process, if you argue that you were still more qualified based on SAT scores and gpa, you are still assuming that those two metrics are the primary basis for the decision, which they’re not.

    People against SCA5 simply need to accept that the fundamental flaw of virtually all studies that have purported to show an anti-Asian bias in college admissions still use SAT scores as an objective measure of the quality of a candidate, which results in a self-fulfilling finding precisely because holistic review exists to downplay the importance of test scores and GPA in favour of, well, more holistic criteria.

    >>No. Look at Jeremy Lin. The guy can ball and he’s treated like shit AFTER recruitment. I can only imagine how many other potential stars were ignored because they look “too Asian”

    Agreed, which is why I said “not just a signing issue”. I would suggest you check out the NPR article, which did a far better job synthesizing the complexity of the question than I ever could. J. Lin had difficulty getting signed, but the far bigger “source of discrimination” appears to be failure to recruit and probably a cultural bias against taking an athletic scholarship — which requires a student to play sports instead of focusing on academics in order to maintain the scholarship, so it’s sort of by definition an inferior avenue compared to the options available to a student who can get into school and pay for it by other mechanisms.

    Btw, did you read the article prouduc? linked to http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_8829545 ? I alluded to this in one of my posts regarding sca5 regarding non-Asian cultures shunning school/academics. It’s something that needs to be addressed.

    If you read the “class-based affirmative action is not enough” post over again, you’ll see I link to several primary research articles that challenge this myth of non-Asian cultures “shunning” school. In fact, when you eliminate the impact of SES, non-Asian cultures are equal or even more likely to invest in academic pursuits for their children compared to White students.

  • None

    –“Except affirmative action does not restrict admission to Asian Americans into higher education because we are Asian. If the purpose of affirmative action is a gateway to creating Nazi-style concentration camps, why would Asian Americans still be admitted into higher education at twice our national demographics?–”

    Because they’re really really good.

    Because of culture – a culture of wanting to know. The culture that has kept China a top power since…well, since written History, since as far back as we know human history. The cultural curiosity that brought paper, the compass, currency, cast iron, gunpowder/cannons/grenades, full stoned arch bridges, the 360 day calendar based on astronomical measurements.

    The culture of wanting to know that bring you ridiculously powerful graphic cards, top CMOS sensors, sound/visual systems, and GPS today. The people who got the code they wanted from Google, Apple/Adobe, Symantec, Microsoft, Dow Chemical, Yahoo! and Morgan Stanley.

    Why don’t you ever question why the NBA has so many African-Americans? Or why the NHL has so many French Canadians? Or so many top Russians in female tennis?

    Why do you only question the success of East Asians in academia, then blame their success on an “unfair system” as opposed to the explanation that they’re just really good. You’d never see an African-American question why they make up the majority of the NBA and the reason due to an “unfair system.”

    What next, you gonna say that Africa can’t breach the network of 34 high tech American companies because “of lack of diversity”?

    Is “diversity” even a real thing? I didn’t know that a group of 5 white kids from different areas, with different backgrounds, different upbringings, different life perspectives were any less “diverse” than 4 middle class African-American kids and 1 Hispanic kid from L.A. Isn’t that racist to even assume, you can’t have a extremely diverse group of 5 white and 5 East Asian kids in a class at Berkeley? Or do they all have the same upbringings and personality, according to you, because um…”diversity”.

    –” 1) racial quotas still be illegal in this country and not the basis of how affirmative action is practiced”–

    Because it is a quota. It’s just another name for a “quota.” You thnk everyone called the 1.5 rule on Jews the “Keeping deserving Jews out of college rule”? Do you think they called the execution camps “execution camps”? Why do you think the “Final Solution” wasn’t called “Let’s kill every single Jew” Jenn?

    It’s called Politics Jenn. You’re an adult now, time to grow up and see the world as one. Why do you think the Patriot act wasn’t called “Wiretaps that allow us to survey people unconstitutionally”?

    Do you seriously not get it? You seriously do not see it?

    It’s just another political phrase for the same law, so those that politically don’t care or the people that harbour jealousy will look the other way – like they looked the other way on what happened to Jews in WWII.

    See, it looks plain stupid if Jenn writes a blog about “supporting the new law that lowers the number of Chinese Americans at UCLA and Berkeley.” But give the law another name, write it in flowery language, avoid the real issue of what you’re doing (keeping the Chinese and Japanese Americans out of the schools they want to go to), and suddenly you look very “progressive” and “forward thinking”, especially to the races that harbour resentment over the success of the Chinese.

    Hmm…sound familiar to something else that happened in the early to mid 20th century?

  • @None

    So basically your logic is that it’s a quota because you say it’s a quota, despite all evidence to the contrary. And then that affirmative action is the first step in a mass American conspiracy to institute death camps against Asians, pretty much just because you say there will one day be death camps against Asians.

    Got it.

  • None

    Jenn – Why don’t you read up on the progression to the Nuremberg Laws? Read up on how Germany got there, and the stuff that happened after.

    You think the progression of taking away an ethnicity’s rights just “happens” overnight, and it’s plain there for everyone to see? It’s a progression that builds.

    I hope you realize that when the holocaust was actually happening, people didn’t actually believe it was actually happening. They didn’t want to believe, and there was enough resentment that they looked the other way. People didn’t “want to know.”

    It was like the Nuremberg Laws. There was political justification behind, stats, numbers. Same stuff you talk about, really. 100 years back. Different time, same idea – 1 race is having too much success, you have to end it.

    The idea of it, and what people said about was similar to what you were saying – it was absurd. After the atrocities of WWI, it was “absurd” that another World War would breakout. Something like that would NEVER happen again, in the 1930s-40s. They thought, society was well past that.

    They thought that right up until people actually went into the “camps” and saw what they saw. Then they couldn’t deny it anymore.

    How do you think these things keep on happening over and over and over again throughout history Jenn? Tell me, how do you think purposely lowering the # of Jews 100 years back (similar to what’s going to happen to the Chinese, and has already happened at private east coast schools) was even allowed? How do you think völkisch nationalists progressed to the point of Nuremberg?

    It was only 100 years ago. And 30 years before that when they said another War like that would be “absurd” and “would never happen again” in human history. Except, it did, and it happened.

    In the United States, less than 100 years ago when they passed the laws lowering the # of Jews out of elite colleges (but according to Jenn that’s OK, because like the Chinese they were “over represented” therefore everything’s fine, this wasn’t discrimination it was just “diversity”).

    This is EXACTLY how it happens.

  • None

    Why is it when discrimination happens against African-Americans, it’s a huge deal, it’s obvious, it’s Government propaganda discriminating against a race and it needs to be stopped?

    But when it happens to Chinese and Japanese Americans, then according to Jenn “It’s not really happening” and “it’s not a quota or discrimination”, except if the same thing were to happen to African-Americans, then it is.

    Very interesting.

Comment Policy

Before posting, please review the following guidelines:

  • No ad hominem attacks: A person's identity, personal history, or background is not up for debate. Talk about ideas, not people.
  • Be courteous: Respect everyone else in this space.
  • Present evidence: This space endeavours to encourage academic and rational debate around identity politics. Do your best to build an argument backed not just with your own ideas, but also with science.
  • Don't be pedantic: Listen to those debating you not just for places to attack, but also where you might learn and even change your own opinion. Repeatedly arguing the same point irrespective of presented counterfacts will now be considered a violation of this site's comment policy.
  • Respect the humanity of all groups: To elevate the quality of debate, this site will no longer tolerate (racial, cultural, gender, etc.) supremacist or inferiority lines of argumentation. There are other places on the internet where nationalist arguments can be expressed; this blog is not those places.
  • Don't be an asshole: If you think your behaviour would get you punched in the face outside of the internets, don't say it on the internets.
  • Don't abuse Disqus features: Don't upvote your own comments. Don't flag other people's comments without reasonable cause. Basically, don't try to game the system. You are not being slick.

Is your comment not approved, unpublished, or deleted? Here are some common reasons why:

  • Did you sign in? You are required to register an account with Disqus or one of your social media accounts in order to comment.
  • Did your comment get caught in the spam filter? Disqus is set to automatically detect and filter out spam comments. Sometimes, its algorithm gets over-zealous, particularly if you post multiple comments in rapid succession, if your comment contains keywords often associated with spam, and/or if your comment contains multiple links. If your comment has been erroneously caught in the spam filter, contact me and I will retrieve it.
  • Did a comment get flagged? Comments will be default be published but flagged comments will be temporarily removed from view until they are reviewed by me.
  • Did you not play nice? You may have gotten banned and a bunch of your comments may have been therefore deleted. Sorry.

I monitor all comment threads, and try to address comments requiring moderation within 24-48 hours. Comments that violate this comment policy may receive a warning and removal of offensive content; overt or repeat violations are subject to deletion and/or banning of comment authors without warning.

I reserve final decision over how this comment policy will be enforced.

Summary:

Play nice and don't be a jerk, and you'll do just fine.