我很少看别人的帖子的,真的不了解这个事, 更别说,加州本地的,我们纽约的也帮不上什么啊。 刚才网上google, 中文的,就没找到具体的法案内容。不得已,您老人家交代的,只好去看英文的, 我粗粗看了一下,感觉和AA和大学入学没什么直接大关系啊。可能看得不准确,请同学们指教了,别说侵害华裔正当利益,就是针对性的侵害任何其他族裔的法案或者行为都是要坚决反对的。我先贴贴原文,看看我的理解对不对。 大家最关心的应该是 4 吧, 我的感觉这个和限制华裔入学没什么关系啊。 “collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of students for a report that includes student admission, enrollment,completion, or graduation rates. ”
8310.7. (a) This section shall only apply to the following stateagencies: (1) The Department of Industrial Relations. (2) The Department of Fair Employment and Housing. (3) The State Department of Public Health and the State Departmentof Health Care Services, on or after July 1, 2017, whenevercollecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin ofpersons for a report that includes the type and amount of health carecoverage, rates for major diseases, leading causes of death perdemographic, subcategories for leading causes of death in Californiaoverall, pregnancy rates, or housing numbers. (4) The [s] Board of Governors of the California CommunityColleges, the [/s] Trustees of the California State [s]University, [/s] University or the Regents of theUniversity of California, on or after July 1, 2017, whenever theentity collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic originof students for a report that includes student admission, enrollment,completion, or graduation rates.
目前美国的种族划分,主要有以下几种(以 UCLA 为例): • African American (黑人) • American Indian(印第安人) • Asian (亚裔) • Hispanic (墨西哥裔) • White (白人) • Others 而最近民主党议员提出的“亚裔细分法案” AB-1726 (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1726),则要求在加州细分 Asian 种族,把印尼人、马来人、泰国人、台湾人等单独划分: (1) Additional major Asian groups, including, but not limited to, Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian, Malaysian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Taiwanese, and Thai. (2) Additional major Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups, including, but not limited to, Fijian and Tongan. 这一亚裔细分政策,有可能会被用在加州大学的录取上: This section shall apply to the University of California only if the Regents of the University of California, by resolution, make it applicable. 提出这一议案的主要目的,是在于“收集数据”,以便更有针对性的提供公共服务。“这些数据或许将帮助加州高等教育方面立法的‘公平平等’提供基础”。
这一亚裔细分政策,有可能会被用在加州大学的录取上: This section shall apply to the University of California only if the Regents of the University of California, by resolution, make it applicable. 提出这一议案的主要目的,是在于“收集数据”,以便更有针对性的提供公共服务。“这些数据或许将帮助加州高等教育方面立法的‘公平平等’提供基础”。
这一亚裔细分政策,有可能会被用在加州大学的录取上: This section shall apply to the University of California only if the Regents of the University of California, by resolution, make it applicable. 提出这一议案的主要目的,是在于“收集数据”,以便更有针...... cocojj 发表于 8/1/2016 12:24:40 PM
主旨就是增加几个政府机构在人口数据收集时,新增加几个亚裔分类:(1) Additional major Asian groups, including, but not limited to, Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian, Malaysian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Taiwanese, and Thai. (2) Additional major Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups, including, but not limited to, Fijian and Tongan.
EXISTING LAW: 1) Requires state agencies, boards, and commissions that directly or by contract collect demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for each major API group, including, but not limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, Cambodian, Hawaiian, Guamanian, and Samoan (Government Code (GOV) Section 8310.5). 2) Requires the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) to collect and tabulate data for additional major API groups (GOV Section 8310.7).
现存法律亚裔(Asian and Pacific Islanders) 统计分类包括但不限于: 中国,日本,菲律宾,韩国,越南,印度,老挝,柬埔寨,夏威夷,关岛,萨摩亚。
COMMENTS: Background. According to the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs' Issue Paper on September 5, 2014, data disaggregation is imperative for uncovering economic, educational, and social disparities inherent not only in API American communities, but in all ethnic populations. The Commission finds that the need to disaggregate data is often exemplified by the needs of Southeast Asian American students; often categorized as "Asian," their "lower academic achievement rates are overshadowed by the stereotype that all Asian students excel in academics." According to information provided by the author's office, many of the communities within the API population face similar challenges in California, such as language barriers and immigration; however, they differ on many issues. This is most evident with respect to education and public health, where the outcomes of some of the largest API groups within the API population raise the average outcome of the greater API population as a whole. For example, although data related to the average API student demonstrates high academic achievements, disaggregated data sheds light on the harsh reality that Southeast Asian subgroups suffer from much lower achievement rates than other API groups. Similarly, data from a 2013 report done by the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice demonstrates that 14 percent of Asian Americans are uninsured; disaggregated data demonstrates that Korean, Tongan, and Thai populations have uninsured rates higher than 22 percent whereas only eight-10 percent of Japanese and Asian Indian populations are uninsured. Purpose of the measure. According to the author, "despite the diversity of California's large API population, state agencies only disaggregate demographic data for a few of the major API groups. By failing to measure a large portion of the API population, California is unable to track the progress of the most disadvantaged segments of that population." The author contends that without disaggregated data, policymakers and researchers have to rely on data in the aggregate as released by various state and local agencies. Said data is not consistent and varies in different jurisdictions. This measure will require the CCC, CSU, DPH, and DHCS, and request the UC, to collect and release disaggregated demographic data for specified groups of the API and Native Hawaiian ethnicities.
Existing law: 1)Prohibits an application to any state department, board, or commission from including any question relative to an applicant's race, sex, marital status, or religion, except for the collection of data on gender and marital status to be obtained subsequent to employment for research and statistical purposes.
2)Requires a state agency, board, or commission that directly or by contract collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for the following:
a) Each major Asian group, including but not limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, and Cambodian; and,
b) Each major Pacific Islander group, including but not limited to, Hawaiian, Guamanian, and Samoan.
This bill: 1)Requires the Departments of Public Health (DPH) and Health Care Services (DHCS), on or after July 1, 2017, in the course of collecting demographic data directly or by contract as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of California residents for a report that includes the type and amount of health care coverage, rates for major diseases, leading causes of death per demographic, subcategories for leading causes of death in California overall, pregnancy rates, or housing numbers, to collect and tabulate data for the groups mentioned in 3) above.
2)Requires the Trustees of the California State University (CSU) or the Regents of the University of California (UC), on or after July 1, 2017, whenever the entity collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of students for a report that includes student admission, enrollment, completion, or graduation rates, to collect and tabulate data for the groups mentioned in 3) above. Requires the provisions in this bill to apply to the UC only if the Regents, by resolution, make it applicable.
3)Requires the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges (CCC), on or after July 1, 2020, whenever the entity collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of students for a report that includes student enrollment, completion, or graduation rates, to collect and tabulate data for the groups mentioned in 3) above.
4)Requires state agencies to make any data collected publicly available by posting the data on their Internet Web sites, as
至于你说的反对,我能理解,也认为细分或许对华裔在大学入学上有潜在的不利影响的可能性,如果是我,我会认同你和楼主的想法,不过这个事情比较tricky, 提这个议案的是菲律宾裔的议员, 并非白人议员,这更像是亚裔内部的“内斗”,或者“内耗”, 如果说歧视等等, 是很难站得住脚的,也不会得到主流的认可的,甚至认为华裔莫名其妙的把屎盆子扣到自己身上。这更像是,夫妻中一方,提出离婚,像是英国公投脱离欧盟, 是亚裔里更弱小的一方追求“孤立主义”, 就菲律宾裔对华裔的话,歧视的指控是站不住脚的,也不会为非亚裔甚至亚裔内其他族裔所接受的。 要好好研究对策。政治讲究冷静思考,讲究策略,团结,果断出击,斗争,妥协。。。Just yelling won’t help at all, 甚至可能 make worse.
这个首先犹太人当年的故事,当年的历史背景和现在的社会大环境变化太大了,不具有可比性,现在伊朗的犹太人都不会担心这种情况。 至于你说的反对,我能理解,也认为细分或许对华裔在大学入学上有潜在的不利影响的可能性,如果是我,我会认同你和楼主的想法,不过这个事情比较tricky, 提这个议案的是菲律宾裔的议员, 并非白人议员,这更像是亚裔内部的“内斗”,或者“内耗”, 如果说歧视等等, 是很难站得住脚的,也不会得到主流的认可的,甚至认为华裔莫名其妙的把屎盆子扣到自己身上。这更像是,夫妻中一方,提出离婚,像是英国公投脱离欧盟, 是亚裔里更弱小的一方追求“孤立主义”, 就菲律宾裔对华裔的话,歧视的指控是站不住脚的,也不会为非亚裔甚至亚裔内其他族裔所接受的。 要好好研究对策。政治讲究冷静思考,讲究策略,团结,果断出击,斗争,妥协。。。Just yelling won’t help at all, 甚至可能 make worse.
我坦率的说一句,我们在美国玩儿,就要按照美国的套路,你就这水平,也就这里咋呼咋呼吧, 真到了面对媒体记者,面对hearing的时候,你上面说的这些全部都是帮倒忙。 judge别人的opinion wrong。。。啧啧,在美国的玩法里,opinion是没有right和wrong一说的,只有你agree or disagree, like or dislike, for or against. anyway吧,你要坚持认为你的方式对,我说的全是屁话, 那就just pick up the phone and call the congressmen/women.
还真有这么天真的吗?能觉得细分亚裔是对华人利好?
“说以后可以直接轰走伊朗伊拉克。” 这是为了怕难民吗? 细分又不是分区居住。
以后加州州立入学怎么调查二代中国人来自内地还是台湾?
如果我知道对方小孩会比我的小孩更容易进好学校获得更好的资源,我绝对无法心平气和跟对方交往的,这法案后果非常严重啊。
☆ 发自 iPhone 华人一网 1.11.07
不一定大家都是盯着排名这一个标准选学校。 研究院好本科不好就不去上本科。
支持!
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2033281&forumpage=1
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2047235&forumpage=1
re
看看历史上把一个种族细分出来的后果, 再看看投票结果,想明白华人该支持谁。
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2033281&forumpage=1
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2047235&forumpage=1
看看历史上把一个种族细分出来的后果, 再看看投票结果,想明白华人该支持谁。
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2033281&forumpage=1
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2047235&forumpage=1
这也太神奇了,公共论坛,别人讲话你也要不允许?
只会一味复读,自己抛个理论出来自己解释不了只会骂人。狗与不狗的不是再明显不过了吗?
你们那个帖子更是啊。。。
把优秀亚裔赶走了后,就该轮到他们了吧。
真以为自己嫁了白人就变成白人?
真的是抱着讨论的心理, 一定会去了解一下这个法案的背景和具体细条。 整天追着上蹿下跳, 把别人都当瞎子?
我发帖不拿钱, 就是为了广而告之,想了解的人自然回去了解。
看看历史上把一个种族细分出来的后果, 再看看投票结果,想明白华人该支持谁。
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2033281&forumpage=1
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2047235&forumpage=1
亚裔本来就是小族群
我们亚裔受到不公平待遇还少吗?
就说粱警官一案吧,居然还有这么多人不为亚裔自己人呼声?!
真不明白这种人是怎么想的???
我很少看别人的帖子的,真的不了解这个事, 更别说,加州本地的,我们纽约的也帮不上什么啊。 刚才网上google, 中文的,就没找到具体的法案内容。不得已,您老人家交代的,只好去看英文的, 我粗粗看了一下,感觉和AA和大学入学没什么直接大关系啊。可能看得不准确,请同学们指教了,别说侵害华裔正当利益,就是针对性的侵害任何其他族裔的法案或者行为都是要坚决反对的。我先贴贴原文,看看我的理解对不对。
大家最关心的应该是 4 吧, 我的感觉这个和限制华裔入学没什么关系啊。
“collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of students for a report that includes student admission, enrollment,completion, or graduation rates. ”
这是入学后,成为大学系统的Student了之后,才细分吧, 高中录取的时候又不分啊,不会影响大学录取吧? 具体这点,是不是我理解有误还是见识太少,请指教。。
附相关法案内容, 没看全啊,就看了这一部分。 干! 加州华人这么在意这个事情,居然都没有人把这个法案翻译成中文的,加州很多华人不懂英文,好不好啊! 做事情,就要专业认真么!就像我对待cocojj一样, 哈哈
8310.7. (a) This section shall only apply to the following stateagencies: (1) The Department of Industrial Relations. (2) The Department of Fair Employment and Housing. (3) The State Department of Public Health and the State Departmentof Health Care Services, on or after July 1, 2017, whenevercollecting demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin ofpersons for a report that includes the type and amount of health carecoverage, rates for major diseases, leading causes of death perdemographic, subcategories for leading causes of death in Californiaoverall, pregnancy rates, or housing numbers. (4) The [s] Board of Governors of the California CommunityColleges, the [/s] Trustees of the California State [s]University, [/s] University or the Regents of theUniversity of California, on or after July 1, 2017, whenever theentity collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic originof students for a report that includes student admission, enrollment,completion, or graduation rates.
坐等有识之士来回答!
亚洲细化法案,
目前美国的种族划分,主要有以下几种(以 UCLA 为例):
• African American (黑人)
• American Indian(印第安人)
• Asian (亚裔)
• Hispanic (墨西哥裔)
• White (白人)
• Others
而最近民主党议员提出的“亚裔细分法案” AB-1726 (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1726),则要求在加州细分 Asian 种族,把印尼人、马来人、泰国人、台湾人等单独划分:
(1) Additional major Asian groups, including, but not limited to, Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian, Malaysian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Taiwanese, and Thai.
(2) Additional major Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups, including, but not limited to, Fijian and Tongan.
这一亚裔细分政策,有可能会被用在加州大学的录取上:
This section shall apply to the University of California only if the Regents of the University of California, by resolution, make it applicable.
提出这一议案的主要目的,是在于“收集数据”,以便更有针对性的提供公共服务。“这些数据或许将帮助加州高等教育方面立法的‘公平平等’提供基础”。
AB-1726 不得不让人们想起前段时间让华人社区震怒的险些通过的 SCA-5 法案。SCA-5 要求加州公立大学考虑种族因素录取学生,压低表现过好的亚裔学生录取率,帮助黑人、墨西哥裔等“少数”族群提高录取率。
AB-1726 一旦被通过,将来 SCA-5 改头换面卷土重来是一个必然的推论。为什么要把亚裔中的少数族群分出来?就是为了让这些亚裔中的少数族群享受真正的少数族群待遇,而让亚裔中的多数人——中日韩和印度裔的人排除在外。谁让我们这些亚裔太努力了表现太好了呢!一旦把亚裔细分出来,数据肯定会显示华裔、印度裔等上大学的比例比其他族裔高出太多了。但是,华裔是因为受到了政策优待才有这么高的升学率的吗?我们凭借的,仅仅是自己的努力,以及大学录取的时候人人平等、不看种族的录取政策啊!
如果真的是为了“收集信息”以便给出更好的公共服务,请问为什么要专门细分亚裔种族?为什么不先把占多数人口的白人细分成盎格鲁撒克逊人、日耳曼人、凯尔特人、犹太人等等?为什么不细分黑人和墨西哥裔?犹太人当年被当做一个单独的种族,遭受了常青藤联盟的犹太配额政策,然后费尽了千辛万苦把自己划归到了白人里面,从此就与其他白人们一起平等竞争了。请问这些支持亚裔细分的人,你们敢不敢提出把犹太人重新细分出来提供“更有针对性的公共服务”?
亚裔细分这种法案,表面上看起来是在关注弱势群体,实则是真真正正的种族主义,分裂主义,让不同族群的人无法形成一个统一的利益共同体。实际上,AB-1726 法案有一个前身——AB-176,当时最终是被州长否决的,而否决的理由正是这类法案可能鼓励分化。“将族裔作更细微区分或可取得更多信息,但伴随而来的行动却未必更明智,把焦点仅专注于一个族群很可能不够。”
如果这一法案在华人占比如此高的加州被最终通过了,那么在其他州,华人人数更少,为华人说话的力量就更小了!
是亚裔细分,不是华裔细分, 法案前面也说了健康等等, 你读读法案很难么? 当然了,我也看了有个参议员说的,历史上任何针对华裔的,或者收集华裔数据的,事实上证明都是对华裔不利的, 这个因素确实要考虑进去。 我还在看,需要不时的修正和update.
你这个我昨天就看了,不是法案全文。 我个人更倾向看一下英文法案全文再分析啦。。
This section shall apply to the University of California only if the Regents of the University of California, by resolution, make it applicable.
提出这一议案的主要目的,是在于“收集数据”,以便更有针对性的提供公共服务。“这些数据或许将帮助加州高等教育方面立法的‘公平平等’提供基础”。
录取大学会采用这个数据。
我就是看得这个英文的啊, 很多中国人,有投票权的还是,问题是不懂英文啊。 加州这么多华人,都没有给翻译成中文的。
历史上收集数据,确实是对华裔不利的。 现在呢,也有可能,很大的可能。 但也要指出,时代变了, 大数据时代, 医疗健康等等都在搞这些数据分析,对提高全民健康是有好处的,当然隐私性一直是争议。
具体到大学录取上, 你列的这句话里,我真看不出会限制或者降低华裔入学率来。 当然,也要说明,我对加州当前的斗争情况不了解,感觉一直有人想搞华裔, 这只是个试探或者“曲线救国”什么的,我还不完全了解,我记得平权入学在加州是禁止的,是非法的啊。 难道这个通过了,会否定之前的? 我现在要工作一会儿啦,之后再update。
提案的是Rob Bonta, 菲律宾裔民主党议员,共同提议的还有其他几个亚裔民主党议员,比如David Qiu.
主旨就是增加几个政府机构在人口数据收集时,新增加几个亚裔分类:(1) Additional major Asian groups, including, but not limited to, Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian, Malaysian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Taiwanese, and Thai.
(2) Additional major Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander groups, including, but not limited to, Fijian and Tongan.
就是加1)孟加拉,苗族人,印尼,马来西亚,巴基斯坦,斯里兰卡,台湾和泰国,2), 夏威夷原住民,其他太平洋岛国包括但不限于斐济和汤加。
其实现存法律亚裔统计已经是分了11类了:
EXISTING LAW:
1) Requires state agencies, boards, and commissions that directly or by contract collect demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection categories and tabulations for each major API group, including, but not limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, Cambodian, Hawaiian, Guamanian, and Samoan (Government Code (GOV) Section 8310.5).
2) Requires the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) to collect and tabulate data for additional major API groups (GOV Section 8310.7).
现存法律亚裔(Asian and Pacific Islanders) 统计分类包括但不限于: 中国,日本,菲律宾,韩国,越南,印度,老挝,柬埔寨,夏威夷,关岛,萨摩亚。
COMMENTS: Background. According to the California Commission on Asian and Pacific Islander American Affairs' Issue Paper on September 5, 2014, data disaggregation is imperative for uncovering economic, educational, and social disparities inherent not only in API American communities, but in all ethnic populations. The Commission finds that the need to disaggregate data is often exemplified by the needs of Southeast Asian American students; often categorized as "Asian," their "lower academic achievement rates are overshadowed by the stereotype that all Asian students excel in academics."
According to information provided by the author's office, many of the communities within the API population face similar challenges in California, such as language barriers and immigration; however, they differ on many issues. This is most evident with respect to education and public health, where the outcomes of some of the largest API groups within the API population raise the average outcome of the greater API population as a whole. For example, although data related to the average API student demonstrates high academic achievements, disaggregated data sheds light on the harsh reality that Southeast Asian subgroups suffer from much lower achievement rates than other API groups. Similarly, data from a 2013 report done by the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice demonstrates that 14 percent of Asian Americans are uninsured; disaggregated data demonstrates that Korean, Tongan, and Thai populations have uninsured rates higher than 22 percent whereas only eight-10 percent of Japanese and Asian Indian populations are uninsured.
Purpose of the measure. According to the author, "despite the diversity of California's large API population, state agencies only disaggregate demographic data for a few of the major API groups. By failing to measure a large portion of the API population, California is unable to track the progress of the most disadvantaged segments of that population."
The author contends that without disaggregated data, policymakers and researchers have to rely on data in the aggregate as released by various state and local agencies. Said data is not consistent and varies in different jurisdictions.
This measure will require the CCC, CSU, DPH, and DHCS, and request the UC, to collect and release disaggregated demographic data for specified groups of the API and Native Hawaiian ethnicities.
这一段基本就是我猜想的,提按者认为亚裔里的少数裔,因为亚裔平均水平高,而受不到政策倾斜。所以要单独统计出来,为将来政策制定提供依据。
在教育口统计,要求加州社区大学,加州州立执行这个法令,UC如果选择遵循这个法令,可以只分类统计本科,不需要遵循分类来统计研究收院和professional schools (法医商)。
其次,现存法令已经分类很细了,这个法令要细分一些minority。
SCA 5,由 西裔背景的加州 参议员 Ed Hernandez提出。理由是加州大学中”少数族裔”比例太少,需要宪法允许公立大学录取时候考虑种族背景,平均受教育的权力。
而SCA5方向的最终目的,则是根据人口比例分配加州的大学教育资源,而不是成绩。即招100学生的话,各种族学生仅和自己族群内学生进行竞争。
当然你要说别名族都特别善良, 无论亚细还有SCA5 没有对中国人的不好企图, 那就当我们没说。
犹太人当年被当做一个单独的种族,遭受了常青藤联盟的犹太配额政策,然后费尽了千辛万苦把自己划归到了白人里面,从此就与其他白人们一起平等竞争了。作为教育的大种族国家, 谁愿意这时候把自己划出去呐。 剩下的, 你那么聪明, 我就不用多废话了。
你是民主党支持者, 我这也就最后一次给你解释了。 我说多了, 你也不信, 我也是白费力气。
民主党主推的大学入学AA,将直接毁灭在美华人下一代的上升通道,其结果就是华人的
子女被强制的限制发展,最终只能和多数黑人同属一个社会最底层的阶级。
入学AA这事放到古代就是废除科举,恢复举荐制。
你如果有下一代并且关心在乎你的下一代,那你就没有任何选民主党的理由。
我的政治倾向在中间非左非右,拜托不要乱贴标签儿。
SCA5按肤色政策倾斜是要坚决反对的,按social economical来倾斜是可以一定程度接受的。任何社会都是要奖勤罚懒的,也是美国最初清教徒立国的根本理念。
如果美国人口组成改变,multicultural experiment 终于失败,象Samuel Hamilton忧虑的那样,分裂成几个国家好了。各自按各自的理念找归属。
这一点上我没有异议啊,我只是强调是亚裔内部分裂。
就是要细分, 为什么不把犹太人从白人里分出来?民主党敢不敢提出要把犹太人分出来?
政治上的事情, 就算背后有什么阴谋, 难道它会从一开始就让大家明白?如果这个细分没有实际目的, 为什么要一次次投票浪费时间?
紧箍咒总是一点一点收紧的。 希特勒要是一开始就让犹太人知道他的计划, 那犹太人怎么着都早跑光了。 华人政治上这么弱, 防微杜渐是必须的。
就算是上了大学以后再统计,它可以拿统计好了的,以后录取的时候作为数据基础啊,你看,我们去年,亚裔录取太多了,你把那些其他亚裔分出去以后,看着大陆什么的这些人录取率是更高了,以后这些人要分给他们的名额再少一些。还能更直接吗???
能干得了什么就干什么,现在我想找个医生,一搜,黑人墨西哥人越来越多,我真不是种族歧视,我特别喜欢黑人的护士,我们家孩子去医院黑人护士扎针又快又不疼,但是黑人大夫碰上好几次,水平真的不行,有一次我婆婆都进急诊了,因为一个黑人医生给她打封闭没打好,结果到了急诊还是个黑人大夫,完全不负责任,老太太差点不行了。我知道这么说绝对爱拍,但是我真心痛恨这个AA啊。
You are either with us, or against us是最简单的思维模式。因为信息简单明了,黑白分明。
其实很多人都是落在政治光谱两端的中间,不可能全部认同极右或极左的种种观点立场,所以自我identify为中间派,好奇怪么。
这个不是早就指出来了么,其实是东南亚裔不想跟着儒家文化圈亚裔被reverse AA搞出来的嘛。西裔非裔这个方面和他们利益一致,所以联盟。所以我们要维权,喊维护亚裔权益其实是维护中印韩裔权益,同盟应该是同样被AA伤害的白人。
分裂了有个Anglo-Saxon White Republic, 华人被授予honorary whites地位,哈哈。那可能是华人的理想国度。
怎么感觉细分的法案,最初版本已经通过,是existing law了,现在这个是要让更多的uc部门执行这个细分的data collection。这种细分的法案第一步就不应该通过阿!!!!
这个是我网上copy paste的
Existing law:
1)Prohibits an application to any state department, board, or
commission from including any question relative to an
applicant's race, sex, marital status, or religion, except for
the collection of data on gender and marital status to be
obtained subsequent to employment for research and statistical
purposes.
2)Requires a state agency, board, or commission that directly or
by contract collects demographic data as to the ancestry or
ethnic origin of Californians to use separate collection
categories and tabulations for the following:
a) Each major Asian group, including but not
limited to, Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean,
Vietnamese, Asian Indian, Laotian, and Cambodian; and,
b) Each major Pacific Islander group, including
but not limited to, Hawaiian, Guamanian, and Samoan.
This bill:
1)Requires the Departments of Public Health (DPH) and Health
Care Services (DHCS), on or after July 1, 2017, in the course
of collecting demographic data directly or by contract as to
the ancestry or ethnic origin of California residents for a
report that includes the type and amount of health care
coverage, rates for major diseases, leading causes of death
per demographic, subcategories for leading causes of death in
California overall, pregnancy rates, or housing numbers, to
collect and tabulate data for the groups mentioned in 3)
above.
2)Requires the Trustees of the California State University (CSU)
or the Regents of the University of California (UC), on or
after July 1, 2017, whenever the entity collects demographic
data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin of students for a
report that includes student admission, enrollment,
completion, or graduation rates, to collect and tabulate data
for the groups mentioned in 3) above. Requires the provisions
in this bill to apply to the UC only if the Regents, by
resolution, make it applicable.
3)Requires the Board of Governors of the California Community
Colleges (CCC), on or after July 1, 2020, whenever the entity
collects demographic data as to the ancestry or ethnic origin
of students for a report that includes student enrollment,
completion, or graduation rates, to collect and tabulate data
for the groups mentioned in 3) above.
4)Requires state agencies to make any data collected publicly
available by posting the data on their Internet Web sites, as
看这个吧:
http://forums.huaren.us/showtopic.aspx?topicid=2047154&forumpage=1
二战之后, 犹太人可以说趁着国际社会对他们同情的大环境,团结一致,倾心倾力倾财做到这一点。
他们做到现在这个样子真是不容易,为自己族裔的生存做的努力值得敬佩。 可恶犹太人操纵的猪党现在想尽办法欺负华人。DNC上犹太人的嘴脸,看都看不下去。
这个首先犹太人当年的故事,当年的历史背景和现在的社会大环境变化太大了,不具有可比性,现在伊朗的犹太人都不会担心这种情况。
至于你说的反对,我能理解,也认为细分或许对华裔在大学入学上有潜在的不利影响的可能性,如果是我,我会认同你和楼主的想法,不过这个事情比较tricky, 提这个议案的是菲律宾裔的议员, 并非白人议员,这更像是亚裔内部的“内斗”,或者“内耗”, 如果说歧视等等, 是很难站得住脚的,也不会得到主流的认可的,甚至认为华裔莫名其妙的把屎盆子扣到自己身上。这更像是,夫妻中一方,提出离婚,像是英国公投脱离欧盟, 是亚裔里更弱小的一方追求“孤立主义”, 就菲律宾裔对华裔的话,歧视的指控是站不住脚的,也不会为非亚裔甚至亚裔内其他族裔所接受的。
要好好研究对策。政治讲究冷静思考,讲究策略,团结,果断出击,斗争,妥协。。。Just yelling won’t help at all, 甚至可能 make worse.
不管什么裔,他身份是议员,是代表管理层发声的,再要其他议员也通过,那就是妥妥的欺负华裔瓜分华裔利益。
华裔就靠成绩好进好大学进好公司有体面工作有地位的,这个剥夺了,以后华裔大部分都做谁都可以取代的底层工作,那华裔就变成这个社会的最底层了,你希望这样?难道你在国内?恨出国的同胞?那就难怪你会这样说话了,但是你好歹也是个版主,连装着支持华人不出声都不会吗?
我理解你的心情,但每个人表述事情和做事的方式不一样,虽然他们有共同的目标, 也请你理解,谢谢!
你说的这些拿到公开的辩论中,不会有你期待的效果,就这么简单。
提出和联署这个议案的,就我看到的有限的资料,就没有一个白人议员,最多的还是华裔议员。 请问歧视怎么构成? 谁歧视谁? 当然,议员是公职,但这只是一个出击点而已,不做更精准分析和策略,不会有撼动性的效果的。
加州“亚裔细分法案”AB-1726由奥克兰(Oakland)选区的菲律宾裔的民主党众议员鲍伯‧邦塔(Bob Bonta)提出,由3位来自旧金山湾区的华裔民主党众议员邱信福(David Chiu)、丁右立(Phil Ting)和罗达伦(Evan Low),以及非裔民主党众议员Shirley N. Weber和拉丁裔民主党众议员Das Williams共同联署。
只有白人才是歧视,菲律宾裔的歧视就不是歧视?你这逻辑我也真是够够的了,华人的媒体就是你这样的人在掌握的?难怪华人不团结,难怪历史上有那么多次排华大屠杀,你现在就是在推波助澜这件事,告诉你了别装不知道
Who give you the authority to judge?
你问的问题很好。 民主党让这几个人提议该法案, 显然考虑到这点。实际上大家都知道, 移民都跟母国有千丝万缕的联系。 这些亚裔都是来自跟中国大陆不和的地区和国家。民主党就是故意让大陆移民吃哑巴亏。
没错, 源于中国大陆的移民虽然在美国人数众多, 但是no representation,这个就是大陆移民的悲哀和需要做的工作。
同时,民主党以近全票通过该法案,又可谓司马昭之心路人皆知,这绝对不是几个人偶然的所作所为。这些政客深思熟虑的法案, 必须请政客或者律师来拆解。 我个人觉得SVCA给州长的公开信不够完善。
我坦率的说一句,我们在美国玩儿,就要按照美国的套路,你就这水平,也就这里咋呼咋呼吧, 真到了面对媒体记者,面对hearing的时候,你上面说的这些全部都是帮倒忙。
judge别人的opinion wrong。。。啧啧,在美国的玩法里,opinion是没有right和wrong一说的,只有你agree or disagree, like or dislike, for or against.
anyway吧,你要坚持认为你的方式对,我说的全是屁话, 那就just pick up the phone and call the congressmen/women.
我记得你们加州有个禁止平权的法案啊,还是有个催动平权的被否决了? If I were you guys, 这个是保底的,底线保住。 至于细分这个,可以从增加州开销而没有任何积极回报,浪费纳税人的钱,等等方面着手,同时pressure这几个议员,尤其是华裔的这几个,争取withdraw。
一味的说歧视, 不会有太理想的效果的。
my only two cents. 乐见你们做的更好!
或者争取添加earmark,备注。
或者要求更细分,把犹太人细,非洲裔等再细分,更能促进教育和健康公平方面努力的名义捧杀死这个议案。
既然前面翻译出苗族来,那就索性把大陆55个少数民族都加进去嘛
然后我们移民申请的时候填过民族汉吗?没填过就大家算算好55个里面均分下好了,那样每个都不太大就可以了
中国的苗族是人家老挝的苗族的一部分。 人家才是苗族的正枝啊。。。