I was deeply irritated by Glaude describing the backlash against DEI and affirmative action as a matter of white people ("the Christopher Rufos of the world") taking something away from black and brown students. The fact is that merit-based admission, including the use of standardized testing, has greatly helped minority students gain ac…
I was deeply irritated by Glaude describing the backlash against DEI and affirmative action as a matter of white people ("the Christopher Rufos of the world") taking something away from black and brown students. The fact is that merit-based admission, including the use of standardized testing, has greatly helped minority students gain access to higher education, and especially to the most selective schools. There is absolutely no quicker way to alienate the Asian community, of which I am a member of, than to continue promoting DEI and racial quotas as a basis for admissions. If a certain minority group can't compete on test scores, the answer is to give them every bit of help they need - tutoring, test prep, financial assistance to afford this things - rather than just let them in by giving them a lower bar to clear. Every Asian family in our orbit is feeling some version of "this woke stuff has gone too far" and is very open to voting for Republicans, especially at the state and local level. If the Republican nominee was someone other than Trump, many Asian voters would be joining the black and Hispanic voters switching sides. Indeed, some are doing it anyway in spite of Trump. Glaude framed DEI, equity, and merit-free affirmative action as intrinsic goods and was highly presumptuous that the Bulwark audience would be in his camp. Tim disappointingly didn't challenge him during that part of the podcast. I didn't bother listening to the last 10 or so minutes, Glaude simply lost me.
I think we all have to be a bit more honest anout this. He didn’t say anything about quotas at all. All who are not whote males just want an equal shot. They are not the standard that we all have to match. I don’t want to be anywhere that people are the same - whether I am one of the sames or the only one different. I don’t want special treatment and he didn’t say he did either. He just wants to be there if he deserves it. That’s what I heard. But in order to fully understand I’ll have to read the book.
Honestly, it is one of the few episodes where I left early too. I did not feel the professor was open to different thought. Even about my aforementioned comment, he minimized.
I had a lot of trouble with his deep sympathy for the anti-Israel protests (like, it's totally normal that they want Israel wiped off the map and 7 million Jews ethnically cleansed... after all, Israel has had a RIGHT WING government for much of their lives! What else are they supposed to think?!), contrasted with his analysis of Trump voters ("white folks have gone crazy again").
I'm a Bulwark subscriber; of course my sympathy for Trump voters is limited. But Dr. Glaude's wildly different standards for understanding others is pretty hypocritical, and I don't think we're going to defeat Trump by writing off his voters as morons who can't possibly be understood in other terms. This is probably my deepest disagreement with the turn the Bulwark has taken recently.
I was deeply irritated by Glaude describing the backlash against DEI and affirmative action as a matter of white people ("the Christopher Rufos of the world") taking something away from black and brown students. The fact is that merit-based admission, including the use of standardized testing, has greatly helped minority students gain access to higher education, and especially to the most selective schools. There is absolutely no quicker way to alienate the Asian community, of which I am a member of, than to continue promoting DEI and racial quotas as a basis for admissions. If a certain minority group can't compete on test scores, the answer is to give them every bit of help they need - tutoring, test prep, financial assistance to afford this things - rather than just let them in by giving them a lower bar to clear. Every Asian family in our orbit is feeling some version of "this woke stuff has gone too far" and is very open to voting for Republicans, especially at the state and local level. If the Republican nominee was someone other than Trump, many Asian voters would be joining the black and Hispanic voters switching sides. Indeed, some are doing it anyway in spite of Trump. Glaude framed DEI, equity, and merit-free affirmative action as intrinsic goods and was highly presumptuous that the Bulwark audience would be in his camp. Tim disappointingly didn't challenge him during that part of the podcast. I didn't bother listening to the last 10 or so minutes, Glaude simply lost me.
Why did you hear merit free? I didn’t.
I think we all have to be a bit more honest anout this. He didn’t say anything about quotas at all. All who are not whote males just want an equal shot. They are not the standard that we all have to match. I don’t want to be anywhere that people are the same - whether I am one of the sames or the only one different. I don’t want special treatment and he didn’t say he did either. He just wants to be there if he deserves it. That’s what I heard. But in order to fully understand I’ll have to read the book.
Honestly, it is one of the few episodes where I left early too. I did not feel the professor was open to different thought. Even about my aforementioned comment, he minimized.
I had a lot of trouble with his deep sympathy for the anti-Israel protests (like, it's totally normal that they want Israel wiped off the map and 7 million Jews ethnically cleansed... after all, Israel has had a RIGHT WING government for much of their lives! What else are they supposed to think?!), contrasted with his analysis of Trump voters ("white folks have gone crazy again").
I'm a Bulwark subscriber; of course my sympathy for Trump voters is limited. But Dr. Glaude's wildly different standards for understanding others is pretty hypocritical, and I don't think we're going to defeat Trump by writing off his voters as morons who can't possibly be understood in other terms. This is probably my deepest disagreement with the turn the Bulwark has taken recently.