Reddit reviews The Half-Opened Door: Discrimination and Admissions at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, 1900-1970

Oops. Meant Brandeis and Yeshiva University as major Jew schools. Not tufts.

In the early 1900s the biggest competitors was CCNY that had lots of Jewish enrollment.

edit - so I am still researching, it seems that not much was written about how the Jewish Quotas were dropped.

best i could find was this book: The Half Opened Door - Discrimination at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton

I think if we look at the history, we can find out how did Harvard lose the Jewish quotas? most articles on web do not explain it - this requires more research/ conjecture.

• from another article, it appears that the elites post-ww2 took over the protestants (globalist bankers / the people who dragged the US into WW2 in Europe)
  
  >By the 1960's, a new elite was displacing the Protestant Establishment across American society. And the elite university presidents behaved like "intellectual investment bankers," in the words of Geoffrey Kabaservice, the author of "The Guardians," a book about Yale. They realized, as Karabel writes, that they would profit in the long run if they dumped "stocks that showed signs of slipping" - the old Protestant bluebloods - and invested "in an array of newer stocks that, while perhaps riskier, promised higher rates of return": the rising meritocrats.
  
  https://newrepublic.com/article/67613/the-end-elite
  
  it seems that the end of jewish quotas came with the rise of the liberal establishment, but from our own experiences, I find that liberals were the most racist towards asians.
  
  https://www.amazon.com/The-Chosen-Admission-Exclusion-Princeton/dp/061877355X?tag=bisafetynet2-20
  
  >Many of Karabel’s findings are astonishing: the admission of blacks into the Ivy League wasn’t an idealistic response to the civil rights movement but a fearful reaction to inner-city riots; Yale and Princeton decided to accept women only after realizing that they were losing men to colleges (such as Harvard and Stanford) that had begun accepting “the second sex”; Harvard had a systematic quota on “intellectuals” until quite recently; and discrimination against Asian Americans in the 1980s mirrored the treatment of Jews earlier in the century.
  
  ^ I would read Karabel's book - it follows my own hunch that it is all a power play by the institution. If we believe that institutions exist to perpetuate themselves and to keep the existing power structure, I would surmise that only existential threats would be able to spur the necessary changes. That is why I strongly believe that as China gets stronger, Harvard will open more doors to asians, otherwise they will lose out to other rival institutions, We can see this happening slowly as Harvard and other schools open China campus in order to stay competitive.
  
  https://washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-the-ivy-league/2019/03/22/13fdb0da-4bf0-11e9-93d0-64dbcf38ba41_story.html
  
  It is because Harvard does not see Asian Americans as leadership material - thus the low admit percentage. The only way to be seen as leaders is to give it time and see if the limited number of 20% asians end up becoming leaders in industry. if not, they do not want to sacrifice their class size to create followers. So the previous graduates of these Ivy League schools must fight to positions of prominence before Harvard would be willing to increase the admit numbers. Thus why the cap continues