If you are a top ability student, but white, especially white male, you have scant chance of being admitted to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Dartmouth, Cornell, Brown, Penn, Stanford, MIT, CalTech, Berkeley, or UCLA.
The reason whites cannot gain admission is that in the entirety of the Ivy league, Jews are over-represented, relative to the pool of high ability students, by 381%. High ability Asians are under-represented at 62%, and non-Jewish whites are most under-represented of all with a presence in the Ivy League of only 35% of their presence in the pool of high ability students. The Asians are suing Harvard for discrimination, but any such action by whites would be dismissed as an act of "white supremacy."
At MIT and Stanford, Jews are also over-represented. At CalTech it is Asians, and at Berkeley and UCLA it is a combination of Jews and Asians. The over-representation is with reference to the pool of high ability students. Equally or better qualified whites are passed over in favor of admission of others.
These are the conclusions of Ron Unz.
Unz reports that in the past three decades, at Harvard "the presence of white Gentiles has dropped by as much as 70 percent, despite no remotely comparable decline in the relative size or academic performance of that population; meanwhile, the percentage of Jewish students has actually increased. This period certainly saw a very rapid rise in the number of Asian, Hispanic, and foreign students, as well as some increase in blacks. But it seems rather odd that all of these other gains would have come at the expense of whites of Christian background, and none at the expense of Jews."
It couldn't be more clearly stated that in America white gentiles are being excluded from the universities that create the elites.
Unz explores the statistics further and concludes:
"Based on these figures, Jewish students were roughly 1,000% more likely to be enrolled at Harvard and the rest of the Ivy League than white Gentiles of similar ability. This was an absolutely astonishing result given that under-representation in the range of 20% or 30% is often treated by courts as powerful prima facie evidence of racial discrimination. Furthermore, I noted the possibility that this discrepancy might be related to the overwhelming Jewish dominance of the top administration of those institutions.
"It would be unreasonable to ignore the salient fact that this massive apparent bias in favor of far less-qualified Jewish applicants coincides with an equally massive ethnic skew at the topmost administrative ranks of the universities in question, a situation which once again exactly parallels Karabel's account from the 1920s. Indeed, Karabel points out that by 1993 Harvard, Yale, and Princeton all had presidents of Jewish ancestry, and the same is true for the current presidents of Yale, Penn, Cornell, and possibly Columbia, as well as Princeton's president throughout during the 1990s and Yale's new incoming president, while all three of Harvard's most recent presidents have either had Jewish origins or a Jewish spouse.
"At most universities, a provost is the second-ranking official, being responsible for day-to-day academic operations. Although Princeton's current president is not Jewish, all seven of the most recent Princeton provosts stretching back to 1977 have had such ancestry, with several of the other Ivies not being far behind. A similar degree of massive over-representation is found throughout the other top administrative ranks of the rest of the Ivy League, and across American leading educational institutions in general, and these are the institutions which select our future national elites.
"Since the publication of my 2012 article, Harvard and Princeton have both selected new presidents, each of them Jewish, while Yale's Jewish president has remained in office.
"The exact mechanism by which this seemingly enormous bias in favor of Jewish applicants to our most elite colleges manifests itself is not entirely clear, and I very doubt that it takes the crude form of top administrators directing admissions officers to enroll under-qualified Jewish applicants. Instead, I strongly suggested that a leading factor was the 'negative pressure' of America's overwhelmingly Jewish media and Jewish activist groups, which might respond harshly to any significant decline in Jewish numbers.
"Meanwhile, any hint of 'anti-Semitism' in admissions is regarded as an absolutely mortal sin, and any significant reduction in Jewish enrollment may often be denounced as such by the hair-trigger media. For example, in 1999 Princeton discovered that its Jewish enrollment had declined to just 500 percent of parity, down from more than 700 percent in the mid-1980s, and far below the comparable figures for Harvard or Yale. This quickly resulted in four front-page stories in the Daily Princetonian, a major article in the New York Observer, and extensive national coverage in both the New York Times and the Chronicle of Higher Education. These articles included denunciations of Princeton's long historical legacy of anti-Semitism and quickly led to official apologies, followed by an immediate 30 percent rebound in Jewish numbers. During these same years, non-Jewish white enrollment across the entire Ivy League had dropped by roughly 50 percent, reducing those numbers to far below parity, but this was met with media silence or even occasional congratulations on the further 'multicultural' progress of America's elite education system.
"As the decades went by, I gradually noticed that the huge and continuing increase in the enrollment of non-white and foreign students at our most elite universities had caused a complete collapse in the enrollment of white American Gentiles, but oddly enough, no similar reduction in Jewish numbers. It was well-known that Jewish activists had been the primary force behind the establishment of Affirmative Action and related policies in college admissions, and I began to wonder about their true motivation, whether conscious or unconscious.
"Had the goal been the stated one, of providing educational opportunities to previously excluded groups? Or had that merely been the excuse used to advance a policy that eliminated the majority of white Gentiles, their primary ethnic competitors? With the Jewish population numbering merely 2%, there was an obvious limit as to how many elite college slots they themselves could possibly fill, but if enough other groups were also brought in, then Gentile numbers could easily be reduced to low levels, despite the fact that they constituted the bulk of the national population."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).