What's especially interesting to me is, based on Asian-American population demographics, those who feel most slighted by Harvard are probably on the West Coast.
This means that 15% of the UC population was international.
On the contrary, Harvard admits about 21% international students: https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/harvard-university/s....
By that metric, UC berkeley is way more pro-America than Harvard, because UC berkeley educates more Americans as a percentage of its class.
You should probably attempt to cite facts when making statements.
Harvard is actually a large graduate school that happens to teach some undergrads. Berkeley's main purpose is undergrad education.
Not saying his opinion is not baseless or wrong, but your rebuttal is flawed as well.
Given my own knowledge of the UC system, berkeley seems the most international, which is why I thought simply citing berkeley would be enough. But, point taken. Let's look into the system data.
The total UC enrollment is 286271. Of this, there are 40219 Non-resident international students, which means there are 14% international students in the UC system as a whole. Thus, my using just berkeley actually shifted the data in my opponent's favor, since -- as I hypothesized -- Berkeley does indeed have more international students as a percentage of enrollment.
Campus-wise, my anecdotal observation would be Irvine or Davis has most of international students by percentage, though.
How does favoring Europeans over Asians make it "pro-US"? Neither of those populations are American.