Mamdani Identified as Asian and Black on College Application

[j brown's body]

The limitations of your solution is that you have offered no coherent definition of African-American whatsoever, while simultaneously insisting that it is absolutely essential that we award preferential treatment in college admissions to people who are in this undefinable category.

I'm saying that affirmative action doesn't actually work well in a multiracial society with lots of immigration, so the realistic options are either:
1. Stop using race-based preferences in college admissions entirely (i.e. what the Supreme Court ruled in 2023).
2. Set a clear definition of who is meant to be included by "African-American." The definition need not be perfect, but it needs to exist.

What's NOT realistic is for people who get huffy when Elon Musk trolls them with the term African-American to then turn around and insist that Zohran Mamdani is African-American. Based entirely, 100%, on the fact that they like Zohran Mamdani but not Elon Musk. For example, here is what you wrote about Elon Musk three years ago:

Your past self was right. You should listen to that guy.

I was addressing your concerns about the college program, not the race of Mamdani or Musk. So you are assuming that I support preferential treatment for undefinable people. I was simply pointing out that can be difficult for Blacks to define their lineage. Its possible the college has methods for discerning just how genuine the applicants' claims are. I don't know.

Thanks for the shout out. I stand by the quote. I dont defend Mamdani's claim of being African-American, but I'm sympathetic to the argument because while he's not African-American, he certainly isn't white. And whiteness is the problem we're trying to solve here.

 

[Gatsby]

Thanks for the shout out. I stand by the quote. I dont defend Mamdani's claim of being African-American, but I'm sympathetic to the argument because while he's not African-American, he certainly isn't white. And whiteness is the problem we're trying to solve here.

Is it?

That's certainly a much more expansive take on affirmative action than I think most Americans would be comfortable with. I doubt most people consider "whiteness" to be a "problem," nor do they consider ethnic Indians like Zohran Mamdani to be a particularly oppressed group in the United States. Either in the aggregate, or in Mamdani's case specifically.

I think this kind of annoying racial self-flagellation might hold some sway over wealthy white people at Columbia University, but most Americans of any race are not on board with it. People might be on board with correcting historical injustices, or even increasing racial diversity on college campuses for its own sake, but not treating "whiteness" as a problem to be solved.

 

[j brown's body]

Is it?

That's certainly a much more expansive take on affirmative action than I think most Americans would be comfortable with. I doubt most people consider "whiteness" to be a "problem," nor do they consider ethnic Indians like Zohran Mamdani to be a particularly oppressed group in the United States. Either in the aggregate, or in Mamdani's case specifically.

I thought that would get your attention.

I know most white people don't think whiteness to be a problem, but it, and its legacy here, is why we are having this discussion at all.

The the Supreme Court once declared a Japanese man could not become a citizen because he wasn't white - not Caucasian. A couple of years later, a Southeast Asian claimed he could be a citizen because he was Caucasian, by its definition. But the court said Nah, you don't look white.

So lots of others have been victimized by whiteness. And by that I mean white people. Its actually a very large group (pretty much anyone who isn't white).

I underline "by its definition" to highlight the slipperiness of whites defining race.

 

[Gatsby]

I thought that would get your attention.

I know most white people don't think whiteness to be a problem, but it, and its legacy here, is why we are having this discussion at all.

The the Supreme Court once declared a Japanese man could not become a citizen because he wasn't white - not Caucasian. A couple of years later, a Southeast Asian claimed he could be a citizen because he was Caucasian, by its definition. But the court said Nah, you don't look white.

So lots have others have been victimized by whiteness.

I underline "by its definition" to highlight the slipperiness of whites defining race.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Indians are the most successful of any immigrant group in the United States. They are widely celebrated in America. The sitting vice-president is married to one, and the previous vice-president is the daughter of one. If they don't meet the criteria, in your eyes, to have succeeded in America then it's a totally unfalsifiable belief.

My alma mater (one of those schools Donald Trump hates) is 37% Asian, although Asians are only 6% of the US population. Are you saying we also need to give Asians affirmative action in college admissions to solve the problem of "whiteness"? What are we even doing here? What are we trying to accomplish?

There are ways to make affirmative action more palatable. This isn't it.

 

[j brown's body]

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Indians are the most successful of any immigrant group in the United States. They are widely celebrated in America. The sitting vice-president is married to one, and the previous vice-president is the daughter of one. If they don't meet the criteria, in your eyes, to have succeeded in America then it's a totally unfalsifiable belief.

My alma mater (one of those school Donald Trump hates) is 37% Asian, although Asians are only 6% of the US population. Are you saying we also need to give Asians affirmative action in college admissions to "fight whiteness"? What are we even doing here? What are we trying to accomplish?

I wouldnt stereotype Asians as successful and fully accepted into whiteness based on the success of a minority of them. They don't face the challenges of African-Americans, but they can be subjected to discrimination at the drop of a hat. We've had Muslim bans and violence directed towards Asians.

It would have been interesting if Vance's wife or the previous vp were Muslims. They passed the whiteness test.

 

[aociswundumho]

I underline "by its definition" to highlight the slipperiness of whites defining race.

Sounds like you’re saying whites defining race it is inherently illegitimate.

So which group has the moral authority to define race?

 

[j brown's body]

Sounds like you’re saying whites defining race it is inherently illegitimate.

So which group has the moral authority to define race?

The ones who didn't use it immorally and thus have a clearer understanding of its meaning and consequences.

 

[Gatsby]

The ones who didn't use it immorally and thus have a clearer understanding of its meaning and consequences.

How do we know who is in that group that can define race, without first defining race? How far down can we drill: If Armenian-Americans have not historically harmed anyone, can they be excluded from whiteness? Are Italian-Americans answerable for racist mafiosos from the 1920s, or are they themselves the victims of racism? Are the descendants of Irish immigrants from the 1880s accountable for the Scots-Irish slaveowners of the early 1800s? Are Mexican-Americans responsible for Spanish conquistadors? How about Cubans, who were considered white in the days of "I Love Lucy" but now are considered members of the newly-invented Hispanic race?

 

[aociswundumho]

The ones who didn't use it immorally and thus have a clearer understanding of its meaning and consequences.

So they have moral authority because they didn't use race immorally.

But who decides what counts as "immoral" use? They do.

It's circular.

 

[Gatsby]

I wouldnt stereotype Asians as successful and fully accepted into whiteness based on the success of a minority of them.

I'm not just talking about a minority of them, I'm talking overall. Indians, on average, are the most successful ethnic group in America (including white people or any subset of white people). They have the highest average income and the highest average level of education. They are much less likely to go to prison than Americans in general. They fill the top ranks in tech companies, in medicine, and increasingly in politics. Practically everyone likes them, even many of the people who hate other immigrant groups. They are already disproportionately represented at top universities. By any objective metric, Indian-Americans have succeeded astonishingly well.

They don't face the challenges of African-Americans, but they can be subjected to discrimination at the drop of a hat.

Anyone *can* be subjected to discrimination, it's just a question of how frequently this happens and how much it actually affects someone's life. Why would we need to give racial preferences to the most successful group in America? Do we need to treat "Indian-ness" as a problem the way you want to treat "whiteness" as a problem? What is the end goal that we are trying to accomplish, and how will we know when we have accomplished it?

We've had Muslim bans and violence directed towards Asians.

India was not subject to any of Donald Trump's immigration bans. It's currently the second-biggest source of our immigrants, after Mexico.
As for violence directed toward Asians...Is your position that any group that occasionally is the victim of violence needs preferential treatment in college admissions? Why? Indians are not struggling to succeed in college. Whatever struggles Asians face from criminals on the streets of SF (and I have seen some of that), it doesn't stop them from doing well in education.

It would have been interesting if Vance's wife or the previous vp were Muslims. They passed the whiteness test.

Usha Vance and Kamala Harris are very accomplished women, and very few Americans in 2025 would consider either of them to be white. But if you think they "passed the whiteness test" then why would they need racial preferences in college admissions? I thought whiteness was the problem you were trying to solve.

 

[VySky]

From the Oxford dictionary​

​

Af·ri·can A·mer·i·can​

/ˌafrəkənəˈmerəkən/
noun

• 1.a black American of African descent.

adjective

• 1.relating to black Americans of African descent.

 

[NatMorton]

We get it you're relying on racist ideas that Mamdani can't be qualified for the college he applied to... which anyone can do... because he's trying to couch his history as Ugandan-Indian in American terms. You've already said that, say something new already.

Who are you kidding? You’re not getting what I’m saying here. And you personal attacks just show how empty your arguments are.

 

[NatMorton]

Imagine that, and in America of all places.

You do seem to hate America as you never seem to go for very long without a crack like that. Why?

 

[j brown's body]

How do we know who is in that group that can define race, without first defining race? How far down can we drill: If Armenian-Americans have not historically harmed anyone, can they be excluded from whiteness? Are Italian-Americans answerable for racist mafiosos from the 1920s, or are they themselves the victims of racism? Are the descendants of Irish immigrants from the 1880s accountable for the Scots-Irish slaveowners of the early 1800s? Are Mexican-Americans responsible for Spanish conquistadors? How about Cubans, who were considered white in the days of "I Love Lucy" but now are considered members of the newly-invented Hispanic race?

Its easy. As a fellow from West Virginia once told me, "Son, if youre not white, youre black." A simple rule of thumb.

 

[j brown's body]

How do we know who is in that group that can define race, without first defining race? How far down can we drill: If Armenian-Americans have not historically harmed anyone, can they be excluded from whiteness? Are Italian-Americans answerable for racist mafiosos from the 1920s, or are they themselves the victims of racism? Are the descendants of Irish immigrants from the 1880s accountable for the Scots-Irish slaveowners of the early 1800s? Are Mexican-Americans responsible for Spanish conquistadors? How about Cubans, who were considered white in the days of "I Love Lucy" but now are considered members of the newly-invented Hispanic race?

Its easy. As a fellow from West Virginia once told me, "Son, if you're not white, you're black."

 

[j brown's body]

You do seem to hate America as you never seem to go for very long without a crack like that. Why?

Lol, our president is a convicted felon.

 

[j brown's body]

I'm not just talking about a minority of them, I'm talking overall. Indians, on average, are the most successful ethnic group in America (including white people or any subset of white people). They have the highest average income and the highest average level of education. They are much less likely to go to prison than Americans in general. They fill the top ranks in tech companies, in medicine, and increasingly in politics. Practically everyone likes them, even many of the people who hate other immigrant groups. They are already disproportionately represented at top universities. By any objective metric, Indian-Americans have succeeded astonishingly well.


Anyone *can* be subjected to discrimination, it's just a question of how frequently this happens and how much it actually affects someone's life. Why would we need to give racial preferences to the most successful group in America? Do we need to treat "Indian-ness" as a problem the way you want to treat "whiteness" as a problem? What is the end goal that we are trying to accomplish, and how will we know when we have accomplished it?


India was not subject to any of Donald Trump's immigration bans. It's currently the second-biggest source of our immigrants, after Mexico.
As for violence directed toward Asians...Is your position that any group that occasionally is the victim of violence needs preferential treatment in college admissions? Why? Indians are not struggling to succeed in college. Whatever struggles Asians face from criminals on the streets of SF (and I have seen some of that), it doesn't stop them from doing well in education.

Usha Vance and Kamala Harris are very accomplished women, and very few Americans in 2025 would consider either of them to be white. But if you think they "passed the whiteness test" then why would they need racial preferences in college admissions? I thought whiteness was the problem you were trying to solve.

.

Mamdani's lack of whiteness comes more from him being a Muslim than being Indian. If Vance. and Harris were Muslim, I'm skeptical they would be where they are today

Islamophobia Surges Online After Zohran Mamdani’s Win

Zohran Mamdani’s win sparked a massive online Islamophobic backlash, highlighting rising digital hate in politics.

time.com

Asians targeted for violence because of who they are.

How Trump Fueled Anti-Asian Violence in America

Trump’s encouragement of white supremacy and his strident anti-China rhetoric proved a toxic combination for Asian Americans.

thediplomat.com

 

[VySky]

Mamdummy knew exactly what the question meant.

Are you Black/African American based on the definition left in #386.

They could give a cluck if he was from Uganda or wherever. They wanted to know if he was black.

Socialist boy knew this.

 

[j brown's body]

Mamdummy knew exactly what the question meant.

Are you Black/African American based on the definition left in #386.

They could give a cluck if he was from Uganda or wherever. They wanted to know if he was black.

Socialist boy knew this.

Smart.

 

[Rogue Valley]

CF.ORG

< 1 min read

www.cf.org

Conservative Fighters as a source.....

Overall, we rate Conservative Fighters as right-biased and questionable based on the promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, plagiarism, poor sourcing, and a lack of transparency.

Conservative Fighters - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[VySky]

Conservative Fighters as a source.....

Conservative Fighters - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Who cares what a leftist site thinks?

 

[VySky]

Smart.

And? You know my comment is logical and reasonable.

 

[j brown's body]

And? You know my comment is logical and reasonable.

As was mine. He was smart to seek every advantage. Its the American way. Shows real leadership qualities.

New York Times: Daughters of foot doctor say he diagnosed Trump with bone spurs as ‘favor’ to Fred Trump

 

[uptower]

What's the matter Vysky, couldn't you find a hoodie pic?

 

[Gatsby]

Mamdani's lack of whiteness comes more from him being a Muslim than being Indian.

This raises a whole lot of other questions.

• Granted I'm no theologian, but does Allah change the color of your skin when you convert to Islam?
• If I, a guy of assorted Northern European descent who burns in the sun, converted to Islam, could I too get some non-white oppression points?
• Should secular or nominally-Christian colleges start giving preferential admissions treatment to people in minority religions, to help solve the problem of "whiteness"?
• Would I need to prove to the admissions committee that I'm a sincere convert to Islam, or can I eat some pork rinds in public view? Who are they to tell me how to practice my faith?
• Would anyone even know Zohran Mamdani was Muslim if he didn't tell them? If I met an ethnic-Indian born in Uganda who lived in NYC and dropped F-bombs in rap videos, Islam would be...maybe my fourth or fifth guess.

If Vance. and Harris were Muslim, I'm skeptical they would be where they are today

Perhaps so, but not because of their race or skin color. You can judge for yourself but I think Mamdani could pass for white more easily than either of the other two.