Columbia is at it again with some baffling statements.
Recently, its official Twitter posted a puzzling claim:
"Although Asian students admitted to Harvard are smart, hardworking, and accomplished, they have long benefited from racial advantages."
Reading that leaves one completely dumbfounded. Netizens erupted:
"Did the official account really post this? ❓"
.png)
Well, it wasn't a staff post—just a retweet. The source is an article by Columbia sociology professor Jennifer Lee published in The New York Times.
Wait, but isn't the author Asian herself...
"Maybe because she married a white man, she's automatically taking a white perspective and thinks Asians have privilege? ❓ Shocked my whole family, honestly."
.png)
"Asians discriminating against Asians—so true. Her 'research' shows that just by being in class, Asian students harm Black and Hispanic students 😓."
.jpeg)
In one sentence: Asians can't even breathe without being wrong.
Alright, maybe Columbia took it out of context when retweeting. Let's see what Professor Lee actually wrote.
Columbia Professor's Controversial View: Asian Privilege?
The article references the recent "Harvard Asian Discrimination lawsuit." This lawsuit against Harvard has been dragging on for eight years and finally went to trial recently.
The U.S. Supreme Court engaged in intense debate over U.S. college admissions: Should universities be allowed to continue considering race as a deciding factor?
The plaintiffs presented ample evidence exposing Harvard's discrimination against Asians in admissions, fighting for equality, and we may witness history being made.
Professor Lee clearly takes the opposite view from the plaintiffs. She argues that Asian students actually benefit from racial "stereotypes." Teachers generally perceive Asian students as smarter, more diligent, and higher-achieving, which even allows mediocre Asian students to reap benefits and receive higher grades.
With this positive "bias" and psychological predisposition, teachers tend to encourage Asian students to choose more challenging courses, such as AP and honors classes. Such competitive course selections make Asians more likely to stand out in college applications.
So these students only work hard because they're forced to be this outstanding? ❓
In other words, their talent is mediocre, forced to excel.
Reading this really makes one baffled, but she claims to have interviewed 162 people, so there's evidence.
So I gritted my teeth and kept reading. Professor Lee says her "research" indicates that just the presence of Asian students in class exacerbates teachers' negative evaluations of Black and Hispanic students. Such "racial advantage," she claims, is something white, Black, and Hispanic students have never enjoyed.
Thus she concludes: Asians have an inherent racial halo, and if race considerations in college admissions were abolished, Asians would lose the privilege they gain due to their race.
With this deep worry, Professor Lee took to Twitter to shout: Asians must be at the center of America's racial discourse!
For a moment, it's hard to tell if she's friend or foe 😓
Professor Lee argues that 27.6% of Harvard's Class of 2026 are Asian. If equal rights advocates keep pushing, how many Asians would there be in a class?
Netizens say: Why don't you resign and give your Columbia professor position to a Black person?
One has to say, Professor Lee, as an Asian, is really a spiritual white person—constantly concerned about Black and Hispanic people while guarding against Asian ascent.
The Harvard Asian Admissions Discrimination Case Overview
As the fastest-growing racial group in the U.S., Asian students already make up a significant portion of American universities. For Asian families, deep down, there's a dream of getting into the Ivy League.
However, reports of unfair admissions treatment of Asians by American universities keep emerging, with the biggest scandal being the Harvard Asian discrimination case.
The tug-of-war between the civil rights group and Harvard has been going on for nearly a decade.
As early as 2014, Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) sued Harvard, alleging that for decades, white, Black, and Hispanic applicants were given preferential admissions treatment over more qualified Asian applicants. So SFFA accused Harvard of discriminating against Asians and demanded the school make its admissions records public.
But Harvard arrogantly refused, citing student privacy to avoid disclosing relevant documents.
In 2015, the Asian American Coalition for Education (AACE) again stepped up, filing a joint complaint on behalf of 64 Asian organizations with the U.S. Department of Education and the Department of Justice, urging an investigation into Harvard and other Ivy League schools for discriminating against Asian students in admissions.
In 2018, a report by SFFA titled "Harvard's Finances and Admissions" analyzed data from 160,000 applicants between 2010 and 2015, pointing out that Asian students' performance was indeed unfairly treated:
Harvard didn't even interview Asian candidates and directly gave them the lowest scores.
A Duke University economics professor, after reviewing Harvard's admissions materials, found that in the subjective scoring categories, Asian students scored the lowest. Harvard was suspected of deliberately lowering Asian applicants' personality scores.
Asian applicants were described as "Standard Strong," lacking distinctive traits. In personality evaluations, 21.3% of white applicants received the top two ratings, while only 17.6% of Asians did.
A Princeton professor mentioned in "No Longer Separate, Not Yet Equal" that in SAT consideration (out of 1600), certain Ivy League schools added 310 points for Black applicants, 130 for Hispanic applicants, no change for whites, and deducted 140 points for Asians.
So what's the proportion of Asian students at schools that don't practice race-based admissions? Look at Caltech: 44%. Nearly half are Asian, far higher than the 25% at other schools.
If you let everyone compete freely, many wouldn't have a chance.
The so-called preservation of racial diversity simply "balances out" some excellent Asian students.
It's obvious who the victims of diversity are.
California Government Pressure, UC System Continues to Reduce Enrollment
If old private elites carry inherent arrogance, public elites are caught in reluctant choices.
Last June, California's budget bill, which mandated enrollment cuts, poured cold water on out-of-state and international applicants:
Starting in fall 2022, over five years, UCLA, UC Berkeley, and UC San Diego plan to reduce out-of-state undergraduate enrollment from 22% to 18%, freeing up about 4,500 spots for in-state students.
That means an average reduction of 900 students per year, including out-of-state and international students.
In February this year, UC Berkeley applicants received heartbreaking emails from the admissions office: Due to a court ruling, the school was forced to cut overall enrollment temporarily...
The email stated that UC Berkeley was forced to reduce its fall 2022 freshman class by at least 3,050 students (about one-third), meaning at least 5,100 fewer admission offers would be sent.
With nearly 130,000 applicants to UC Berkeley, such a large-scale enrollment cut was a bolt from the blue for applicant families.
How this lawsuit started hardly matters anymore. The result is that, led by UC Berkeley, the UC system has been increasingly tightening enrollment for out-of-state and international students over the years.
Additionally, last year's UC announcement to eliminate standardized tests and the gradual removal of D/F grades in California school districts have both stripped Asian students of their high-score advantage.
As a public university, many of UC's decisions are influenced by local political pressures—an unfortunate reality.
Although we all strive for educational equity and resource fairness, the road remains long and arduous.
Whether Asian American or international students, they must maintain exceptional abilities while enduring unwarranted doubts and criticism. This journey hasn't been easy.
Hopefully, with such incidents coming to light, society will give more attention and respect to Asian and international students.
In the face of racial discrimination, we refuse to stay silent!
