Blog

我们以事实说话。从提出SCA5的Hernandez到网上各种支持的声音（竟然有从我们华人嘴里发出），其论据一驳就倒。转贴两个我的同事对此的反驳，有理有据。

""Disadvantaged" and "minorities" are all subjective terms used by different people for different purposes.  Asians are minorities from the very beginning of this country and still are but when have asians been subjected to any favorite treatment?  Asians’ hardworking to overcome their disadvantaged treatment in almost all countries foreign to their native lands have been their curse, basis for the family wealth of politicians in good times and subject for mobs in bad times.  Want to know why the tuitions are keep raising? Run a correlation test on tuition and the fraction of students subsidized financially and you find the answer.  The "disadvantaged" are actually the advantaged while all those who pay taxes, income, property, and sales, and those who pay full tuitions are the truly disadvantaged by the social burden.  Increasing the non-tuition-paying students increases the disadvantage forced upon us while secures the voter base for those politicians. Nothing more than that. "

"There is a misconception that good neighborhood public schools have more funding. That is far from true. Actually, those low income area schools got more funding than high income areas. My daughter is doing presentations about good health diets through her school club to the low income elementary schools. She was surprised to find out all those schools have better buildings and facilities than her schools! But her schools are among the best public schools in the nation, at least academically. 

Simply throwing money at those schools won’t solve problems at all. Per student public funding (from Federal, state, and local) is higher in the low income area than that in the high income area.  The high income area public schools perform better because of the family involvement and because of environments. In those bad neighborhood schools, a lot of kids are doing drugs. If someone studies hard, gangs might give trouble to that kid. 

By the way, some Asians and white people also live in those low income neighborhood areas. The SCA 5 will do injustice to those people. If there is an affirmative action, it needs to be income based, not racially based. As President Obama said, his daughters did not need preferred treatment. But some kids of those low income white people do need help."

身为亚裔，我们应该认清自己，自己都看不起自己，那真是只能任人宰割了。我们亚裔有着相对其他族裔更高的智商，我们注重教育，更重要的是，我们勤奋。这些优良的基因我们应该引以为豪。华人从历史到现在都为美国作出了很大贡献。在现在以喝酒吸毒开party为荣的畸形校园文化影响下，亚裔被定义为nerd, 不酷，学习好成了bully的对象，勤奋成了罪，这是极其扭曲的价值观，极其有害。而事实是，我们的下一代比我们强很多，周围不乏全面发展的小中，凭什么一提亚裔就是nerd?  这是明显的 judge a person by race, 一提西裔就把他们说成只会生孩子领救济能行吗？我们凭什么任人这么诋毁我们的形象？

有人说亚裔之所以分高，全靠补习，是不公平竞争。首先，不能以偏概全，补习的是部分，其次亚裔为什么要去补习？这是一个鸡生蛋蛋生鸡的问题，在prop209禁止种族制的情况下，现在亚裔入加大系统已经要比有的族裔高出400到500分才有可能被录取，公平吗？你说我靠补习考高分所以你录取分数就应该比别人高，我还说是你潜规则亚裔必须高分我才不得不去补习呢。SCA5例一开， 这种补习的恶性竞争必然加剧。

天道酬勤，中华民族一向勤奋努力。美国经济之所以衰退，就是领救济的懒人太多。振兴美国经济，需要大量亚裔这样聪明勤奋的人才。 希望这次能通过抵制SCA5扭转以勤为罪的校园歪风。各个族裔都有他的长处，我们欣赏黑人的体育音乐才能，我们也欣赏西裔乐天知足的生活态度，那我们聪明勤奋的民族性为什么不能彰显， 不能得到尊重？

当然我们华人有很多需要自身提高的地方（哪个族裔又没有毛病呢？），小到穿衣打扮，大到言行举止，对社区的贡献和付出，都有可提升的空间，我们要从一点一滴的小事做起，一起努力提升华裔的总体形象，这是非常重要的。

其实与其搞SCA5，倒不如法律明令禁止任何SAT补习班，这样听起来也会让别的族裔感到公平，而对我们来说，只要不搞种族制，在所有学习条件一样的情况下，亚裔必然胜出。