anti-Asian discrimination

 The Democrat party is the party of anti-Asian discrimination.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-duo-that-defeated-the-diversity-industry-11605904415

No on 16 had to overcome a vast funding disparity. Whereas the referendum’s backers had a war chest of $27 million, “we raised a little over $1.7 million,” Ms. Wu says, “and nearly all of our funds came from 7,000 Chinese-American donors of modest means.” 

Asians are harder hit than whites by racial preferences in higher education; Ms. Wu estimates their admissions to UC schools would have fallen as much as 50% if Proposition 16 passed. 

When an NBC reporter raised this point with a Democratic state senator, he shrugged it off: “Black and Hispanic people have even greater concerns.”

The Yes campaign received $6.5 million from a single donor—Quinn Delaney, chairman of the Oakland-based Akonadi Foundation, which says it aims to “eliminate structural racism.” The largest contribution received by No on 16 was less than 1% as large—$50,000 from Students for Fair Admissions, a nonprofit group that has sued Harvard, alleging that it discriminates against Asians.

“Patricia Quillin, wife of the Netflix CEO, gave $1 million,” Ms. Wu adds, then goes on to list other givers of “big sums”: the California Teachers Association, Blue Shield, the Pacific Gas & Electric Co. 

Other donors include Steve Ballmer, former CEO of Microsoft, as well as owners of the San Francisco 49ers, the San Francisco Giants and the Los Angeles Dodgers. By contrast, Ms. Wu says, the lone $50,000 donation accounted for “only 2.9% of our funds.”

Ms. Wu came to the U.S. in 2009 from Wuxi, population five million—“a small town by Chinese standards.” She earned a doctorate in international studies from the University of Miami and was “perplexed” when it dawned on her that Asians, “as a group, are being scapegoated in education to fulfill a narrative of very shallow diversity.” It shocked her to discover that America wasn’t living up to its ideals as a “land free for everyone.”

She hears from parents in New York’s Chinatown who fear their children will be squeezed out of the city’s specialized public high schools because of their leftist mayor’s push for “diversity.” They tell her that they worry their kids will be unable to “redeem the American dream.” These are poor parents who don’t speak English and have told their children: “You work hard, you study hard, you’re going to get out this ethnic enclave. You’re going to get out of Chinatown.”

When politicians and school administrators say there are “too many” Asians in elite classrooms, “I feel minimized,” Ms. Wu says. “I feel stigmatized that I was reduced to a racial box—that my hard work is being blamed for the lack of so-called proportionality in these institutions.” 

Mr. Connerly, listening, can’t contain himself. “I have a more visceral reaction,” he says. “I am repulsed by that kind of language, because I have lived it. That’s what’s wrong with prejudice. You don’t see people as individuals.”

Mr. Connerly describes the Asian-American fight for educational equality as “probably the truest civil-rights movement of our time.” The civil-rights movement in the 1960s, he says, “was about civil rights, yes. But it became about advancing the condition of black people.” That’s why “you have people who have accused me of not really being a civil-rights guy—because civil rights in their mind is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. But those guys are race advocates.” 

Mr. Connerly offers a test for whether people are “really pro-civil rights”: “It’s when they will defend the right of a white person—a white male—to be treated equal to everyone else.”