Racism Accusations Fly at Daily Princetonian newspaper
After finishing the unjust gambling post and about to hit the bed, I did a refresh of Yahoo.com web site, and of course, I noticed the "Princeton newspaper stirs racism accusations" link. I kinda figured what could it be. Another cartoon making fun of a religious or ethnic group? A bad joke column. Some Op-Ed about a controversial article on some minority figure?
Well, it turns out to be a bad joke column. The Associated Press article basically talks about the Daily Princetonian issue which included a column that closely resembled Jian Li, an 18-year-old Asian man who filed a civil rights complaint against the university last summer after he was denied admission.
In the controversial column, "Princeton University is racist against me, I mean, non-whites," the author "Lian Ji" mocks the school with broken English and uses several racial stereotypes for his rejection.
The beginning of the article began with, "Hi Princeton! Remember me? I so good at math and science. Perfect 2400 SAT score. Ring bells?.... Just in cases, let me refresh your memories. I the super smart Asian. Princeton the super dumb college, not accept me."
The rest of the column consists of "Ji" boasting about his extracurricular activities and racial reasons on why Princeton said no to his college application. There is one sentence about doing a better job in student government, another jab at Yale... sort of.
The content was quite satirical, but I think the humor kinda fell out by the fifth paragraph.
Well it seems that some students and alumni were not quite fond of it and are accusing those who wrote it of racism. Strange enough, the Editor Managing Board also has an asian editor on its team. They released an editor's note on the controversial column. "Using hyperbole and an unbelievable string of stereotypes, we hoped to lampoon racism by showing it at its most outrageous," the note said. "We embraced racist language in order to strangle it. At its worst, the column was a bad joke; at its best, it provoked serious thought about issues of race, fairness and diversity."
The real Jian Li was not happy with it either. He is currently attending Yale University. He said, "I think the article was extremely distasteful. Whoever decided to publish it showed an extreme lapse of judgment." Also, his complaint against Princeton for bias on his admission last year remains under investigation.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ok, truthfully, I find it a bit unfortunate that Jian Li chose to file a complaint against Princeton for not accepting him. The acceptance rate at this prestigious Ivy League school is 10.9 percent. For the Class of 2010, Princeton offered admission to 1,792 of 17,563 applicants. It also noted that of the 1,886 valedictorians who applied, only 17 percent were admitted!
Having a perfect score of 2400 on the SAT does not lead to automatic acceptance. There are many applicants like yourself (Jian Li) who have perfect grades, participated in student clubs holding leadership positions, or did some sort of noteworthy project that was mentioned in some local newspaper that did not get in. Forty-four percent of the ones that got accepted were of minority status. How can you file a civil rights complaint based on all of these facts?
Having achieved acceptance and enrollment at Yale University does not confirm your reasoning that Princeton should have given you admission. So if you got accepted at only one Ivy League school, should you whine and complain to the rest of them for not giving you the pleasure of attending their school?
Do I detect some hint of an ego trip here? Do I have to imagine you trying to apply for a job at some financial firm, and then start throwing racial bias if you did not get to work at Prudential, JP Morgan Chase, or Morgan Stanley? I can see it. A civil rights letter attesting that since you got into Goldman Sachs, the rest of the investment banks should offer you a job too.
I went and checked the civil rights compliant Jian Li made to the Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. He racked up the maximum 2400 points on the SAT I, and 2390 on the SAT II subject tests in physics, chemistry, and calculus. He also was denied admission to Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The Office for Civil Rights initially rejected Mr. Li's complaint due to "insufficient" evidence. Mr. Li appealed, citing a white high-school classmate admitted to Princeton despite lower test scores and grades. The office notified him late last month that it would look into the case.
This is where I draw the line. Obviously, there is bound to be another applicant with a lower test score and grades and getting accepted to Princeton. Who knows... it could be one of Li's high school classmates. Honestly, what if it was a student that got a 2200 on the SAT, and also had high grades but a bit lower than Li's, is that really "strong evidence" for racial bias?
His complaint seeks to suspend federal financial assistance to Princeton until the university "discontinues discrimination against Asian-Americans in all forms by eliminating race preferences, legacy preferences, and athlete preferences." Legacy preference is the edge
most elite colleges, including Princeton, give to alumni children. The Office for Civil Rights has the power to terminate such financial aid but usually works with colleges to resolve cases rather than taking enforcement action.
Hmm, it looks like he wants to show that he is not doing it just for the Asian-Americans, but for the rest of the minorities. Maybe he wants to show that it is not all about him.
I did not find the joke op-ed column funny. It was really terrible. If this was a standalone column and you were reading it for the first time, you would have felt sympathetic for Jian Li. However, if you add in his civil rights complaint against the University for racial bias, he sounds more of a sore loser.
But was the column racist? For myself, the ability to determine whether the content was just satire or an attack on a specific ethnic group has been blurred by what we see in the media today. We laughed at Dave Chappelle's rendition of black culture as well as Borat's Kahzah impersonations. If a member of a ethnic or religious group makes fun of it, it is considered to be tolerable. If a member of a group makes fun of a different group, it's not tolerated. So the point is not whether the column was racist or not, it's to decide whether the people writing up the column were being stupid or not.
If this was an Onion article, Asian-American groups at Princeton would have criticised the editors' performance in using broken English. "Me would have done good better," they cried!
Some would privately tell everyone else - "So Jian Li got into Yale, well we did not get accepted there, so we had to go Princeton. Lucky him."
Sure, the column did not help smooth over things, but the reaction afterwards is just unnecessary. The evidence lies in a joint statement by the top editors and leaders of the Asian-American Students Association published in the campus newspaper on Monday saying they were all “frustrated that this episode has led some to believe that Princeton is an unwelcoming place for Asian-American students.” They said such an impression is “not validated” by their own experiences.
NY Times - At Princton, a Parody Raises Questions of Bias
Comments
Posted by: Albert
Posted on: January 22, 2007 05:20 AM
You seem to suggest that had the joke been good, one wouldn't consider siding with Jian Li.
I think the article can be defended regardless of one's humor sensibilities. Here are two pieces that do, one from a Princeton student, and the other from a Harvard student.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=516680
http://www.kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2007/01/19/ah-princeton/
Best,
Posted by: han
Posted on: January 23, 2007 04:18 PM
I prefer this one:
http://www.racialicious.com/2007/01/22/the-daily-princetons-rosie-carolla-defense-of-lian-ji-op-ed/
Posted by: Kathy
Posted on: March 23, 2007 02:21 AM
How did you get access to the civil rights complaint that was filed under the Dept of Education? Could you send me the link to it? I'm interested in reading.
Thanks!
Posted by: Elizabeth Mehan Calter
Posted on: October 31, 2008 11:51 AM
Dear Editor:
The Universal Law of Gravity as well as The Universal Law of Self-preservation must be respected as to not have horrific consequences.
One cannot prevent stressful events from happening, that's life, shit happens. We can't choose the hand we're dealt in life, only how we play that hand.
That line from a song "He aint heavy, he's my brother is a good example of how people are discriminated against. Like who's carrying the brother, probably a sister. Where is she mentioned?
I live in Philadelphia, PA The City of "Brotherly" Love
also, jokingly known as "Killadelphia" which is derived from our high homicide rate. I'll be the sisters are more loving overall than the brothers in Philadelphia, and yet we're not mentioned.
In a twelve step program I attend, we have a Big Book and at the end of the Book is a story called "Freedom from Bondage. At the end of the story is a fail-safe formula for getting rid of resentments, justified or otherwise.
You pray for the person who has offended you to have the good things you want for yourself. You do this for two to three weeks on a regular basis and the resentments lifts and (for me) I become aware of when I did a similar offense (thoughtlessly) also.
The best word that describes people who cause me to get resentments is the word "fuckers." My prayer usually goes as follows:
Dear God of All please give name of fucker (resentment) peace of mind, knowledge of God's will and the power to carry that out, and a hundred thousand dollars. I read/think/say this prayer for at least two to three weeks on a regular basis and it never fails to bring me resolution and peace.
The amount of money I've prayed for the fuckers (resentment) to get (and I've received) has gone from $3,000 to $5,000 to $10,000 and now I'm asking for the fuckers (resentments) to get a hundred thousand dollars.
It's ironic how the $10,000 came to my family. My daughter Mary was entering college and although my dependent tuition benefit from Penn paid the entire cost of her college tuition, she would have to commute.
I was a single parent of five children and had availed my children of the Big Sister/Big Brother organization's to have contact with a stable role model in their lives.
Mary's big sister in this organization took out a loan for $10,000 and paid the college for her to have two years of room and board. Julia wanted my daughter to experience college by rooming and boarding there.
I'm still waiting for my hundred thousand dollars to show up in my life as I pray for the resentments (fuckers) I encounter in my life.
The following is my offering to the masses to bring resolution and comfort in dealing with the "fuckers" (resentments, justified and otherwise of the world.
We could have a safe cities, home and schools if we would look at the part intended victims play in their victimization and take steps to remedy/eliminate that part.
I realize this is the most sacred of all taboos but the time has come to dismantle this sacred taboo so that we all have a chance to be safe and secure under any and all conditions.
Intended victims are not innocent bystanders - they are the negative reactors of fear and impending danger taking place in our society today. How much longer are we going to bury our heads in the sand and not look at the individuals part in their victimization?
The below mentioned creates a magic mirror experience for the would-be criminal after the conscious ego of the intended-victim is threatened, bruised and/or punctured due to the fear and/or impending danger of a crime encounter. This automatic magic mirror self-esteem response creates not only sanctuary for the intended victim but also a degree of healing for the would-be criminal. Truly a Win-Win Stress (crime encounter) Management Scenario.
The law of self-preservation is the first fundamental natural law.
Kahlil Gibran writes in an essay from the book "The Prophet," …. "You are the way and the wayfarers. And when one of you falls down he falls for those behind him, a caution against the stumbling stone.
Ay, and he falls for those ahead of him, who though faster and surer of foot, yet removed not the stumbling stone."…
The time has come to remove the stumbling stone and enable all to be safe and secure under any and all conditions.
"When you save one life, you save the world," is taken from an ancient Jewish text.
We can learn how NOT to be a "Sitting Duck" for random "would-be" criminals (including racists of all races, anti-Semites and all others), thereby saving one life, our own.
When confronted by would-be criminals, unprepared intended-victims egos are threatened, bruised and/or punctured. This opens a window to the unconscious and exposes a negative energy pocket, which projects, absorbs and/or reflects negative self-images to the would-be criminal.
Ironically, the law of self-preservation innately compels the would-be criminal to destroy the negative self-image reflected by the unprepared intended-victim. This could be the answer to the heart-felt question "WHY" when apparently senseless carnage takes place.
The color of our thoughts, deeds and intentions are what do us in, when "our" buttons are pushed, it's our "stuff" that comes up, no one else's. The following is my attempt/description of how to remedy the dilemma.
A. BLUE - positive alpha-wave energy
B. RED negative bad energy.
C. YELLOW - cautionary energy.
A. BLUE positive alpha-wave vaccine energy "plate" can be (inserted) between the B. RED bad energy and the C. YELLOW cautionary energy and is represented by the following thoughts/wording:
"We share one universal mind, one humanity and one planet.
therefore, what we do to another, we in turn do to ourselves.
And what we do to ourselves, we in turn do to others
(this wording aids in preventing suicide).
Had our circumstances in life been reversed,
then our positions now too, would be reversed.
Let us have only love, compassion and understanding
for one another, for we are all a part of each other."
To be programmed in during a positive alteration in consciousness. (using yoga, meditation, devout prayer, etc, etc.).
This process must be coupled with the triggering mechanism of our conscious ego being threatened, bruised and/or punctured due to conscious and/or unconscious fear/danger.
Thus, the "sitting duck" scenario no longer exists, the intended-victim has prepared
ahead of time and is able to "bask in the sunlight of the spirit," if the conscious ego
is threatened, bruised and or punctured. The stress (crime encounter) can now be aborted.
When the "prepared" intended-victim's ego is threatened, bruised and/or punctured the window opens and exposes positive (blue alpha-wave) energy is projected, absorbed and reflects a "magic mirror" positive self-image to the would-be criminal. This reflection of a positive self (esteem) image breaks the spell of criminality the would-be criminal is under and a degree of healing take place for the would-be criminal.
The Law of Self-preservation comes into play and the would-be criminal is innately compelled to preserve this positive reflection of his/her real God-self image. Thus, the crime encounter is aborted, and Win-Win Stress (crime encounter) Management with Triggering Mechanisms has created positions of power and sanctuary for the intended-victim as well as a degree of healing for the would-be criminal.
For me, this was about as close to a unified field process (experience) that I could ever imagine.
Imagine the relief and joy of the families of both would-be criminals and intended-victims who are spared the nightmare of the "sitting duck" scenario. The intended-victim is no longer an intended-victim - they are survivors and healers. The would-be criminal is no longer intent on criminality but disarmed by having a "magic mirror" positive self-image (self-esteem) reflected to them on a subliminal level at a very crucial time (during a crime encounter).
Call 215-338-6447 or 1-800-564-4096 for a FREE cassette tape and process description of Win-Win Stress Management with Triggering Mechanisms AKA Psychic Self-defense with Humanistic Alpha-wave Programming ãâ1978 http://mysite.verizon.net/biztg3kt/
bettycalter1956.net@verizon.net
Respectfully,
Betty Mehan Calter
Philadelphia, PA 215-338-6447 or 1-800-564-4096
Posted by: truthfully
Posted on: April 20, 2009 11:28 AM
Asian Li was rejected for a less-qualified white applicant with lower scores and achievement. Based on merit, Li should have been admitted, and the less-qualified white student should have been rejected.
When a white female, Gratz (University of Michigan), files a complaint about racism, many whites applaud and abet her. When an Asian complains about racism, most whites laugh. This is a racist double standard.
The racist article relentlessly attacks Asians. They didn't make a racist article assailing whites because whites would WHINE and cry racism.
A student with a perfect SAT score doesn't communicate in broken English. So whites are jealous because a well-qualified Asian dared to request equal treatment. Less-qualified whites are favored over more-qualified Asians. This amounts to affirmative action for underqualified whites.