[Marxism] The â€™60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire
lancemurdoch at gmail.com
Sat Jul 5 13:10:42 MDT 2008
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists
<ok.president+marxml at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is calumnious to suggest that the South and East Asians who get
> admitted to PhD programs in US universities in natural sciences or
> engineering, do so mostly because of "relatives back home connected
> enough to get their sons in these schools".
I didn't say "PhD programs in US universities", I said "a decent
university...[like] the US News and World Report 35th top university
in the US". In the top 35 US universities there is a limited number
of slots for foreign students - Yale has a total of about 1700 foreign
students overall, Princeton 850, Harvard 3500, MIT 2000. Most of the
Asian students I knew at a university of this type had relatives in
the top tier of their country, often very near the top. I don't see
this as controversial at all. Of the 6,300,000,000 people in the
world outside the US, who do you think is getting into those slots -
the son of a miner in China, the daughter of a farmer in rural India?
That hasn't been my experience at all. Are you suggesting your
Marxist view is these countries are meritocracies, and the US is a
meritocracy, and that the brightest most hard-working students are the
ones who get a chance to go to the top US schools?
> I think Lause's
> explanantion is much more on the mark. These disciplines are simply
> more international in character, where local knowledge / social
> capital matters less.
Which is the exact same thing I said regarding those disciplines, so
how is Lause's explanation much more on the mark? Lause and I said
more or less the same thing about why Americans and foreigners pick
different majors. Lause didn't say anything about your capitalist
meritocracy argument, which is a different subject entirely - who gets
into these schools, not which major they pick once they're already in.
More information about the Marxism