Harvard Says Asians Are Less Likable, Brave, Kind and Respected Than Non-Asians

Holy freaking crap.

   Harvard consistently rated Asian-American applicants lower than others on traits like “positive personality,” likability, courage, kindness and being “widely respected,” according to an analysis of more than 160,000 student records filed Friday by a group representing Asian-American students in a lawsuit against the university.
   Asian-Americans scored higher than applicants of any other racial or ethnic group on admissions measures like test scores, grades and extracurricular activities, according to the analysis commissioned by a group that opposes all race-based admissions criteria. But the students’ personal ratings significantly dragged down their chances of being admitted, the analysis found.

Also, they ranked, like, super low on scrutability...

   Lemme get this straight: Harvard is saying that Asians repellent, cowardly, mean and disreputable. What am I missing?*

   Behold, the wages of diversimania.

   I don't think that the relevant problems are inconsequential, and I don't think they're easy to solve. In fact, I'm not sure they're solvable. But the cult of "diversity" has chosen a strange and dangerous path. And it brooks no dissent. It can't. Because the ideas are pretty shit. If dissent is permitted, the religion is unsustainable. To even question Holy Diversity (Hallowed Be It's Name) is to court disaster in academia. But here it is, failing not only on reasonable terms, but on its own terms as well. 

   I currently tend to think that we'd be better off with meat-ax affirmative action--even quotas, fer the lova. Good old-fashioned liberal quotas. Those are policies. And they're just policies. They may be unjust (or not; I don't know) but you just have to meet them. "Diversity" has corrupted the soul of academia. Not to mention its mind. It's become a cult. The insanity and unfairness, instead of being implemented as clear policy, and isolated thereto, has been turned into a diffuse set of quasi-religious ideas that have permeated and deranged the entire institution. The word is a shibboleth, spoken in adulatory tones. To question it is to reveal yourself to be...evil racist...diabolical apostate...unfit for civil society. And you've got to use the holy Word itself. No one says "enforcing racial and sexual-minority quasi-quotas via an incoherent, cultish ideology is our strength." The hazy, smarmy, emotive connotations don't attach so much to the ideas as to the word. Actually words (plural) where I am: Diversity and Inclusion...Diversity and Inclusion...Diversity and Inclusion...Hallelujah!!!

   Some diversities are more diverse than others, though, I suppose, is the new point of dogma we'll be expected to genuflect before.

   Tough luck, Asians. You're down at the bottom of the progressive stack, along with Jews and straight white dudes and...I dunno...Armenians or whatever. Also I read somewhere that there are Chinese Jews... Those guys would need like a composite SAT score of like omega to get in.

   Honestly, it's like living in the damn Twilight Zone all up in here.

*I know, I know. They're actually just saying--technically, anyway--that they're less courageous, etc. To that I respond: most people aren't that brave. So if you say someone is less-than-average in that respect, you're calling them a chickenshit.