Questions for Affirmative Action Supporters

[durutti]

I've been researching the topic of slavery reparations recently. It got me thinking a lot about issues of race more generally, and affirmative action in particular.

I support affirmative action. I see no alternative to it. But lately I've been wondering about some basic assumptions of AA supporters.

Racism exists in the United States. White supremacy is (unfortunately) an integral part of the American ideology. And clearly, racism affects racial and ethnic minorities a great deal today.

Most of the familiar arguments against affirmative action are weak at best. Perhaps the most egregious is the charge that AA is discrimination against whites. That's what I've believed for a long time, anyway.

Affirmative action isn't discrimination on the basis of race; it is discrimination on the basis of past injustice. There are many instances in our legal system where descendants of those who have been wronged are rewarded. Surely, African Americans, women, and others who were legally discriminated against for hundreds of years deserve some form of compensation for their losses.

Assuming this is the true basis of affirmative action, then it is entirely justified. But there's a small problem...

Many American whites -- actually, almost all American whites -- have some amount of African, Hispanic, Asian, and/or American Indian ancestry.

So, how can affirmative action as compensation for damages be justified when everyone has some ancestor who suffered due to racial discrimination? How many ancestors does one have to have had in order to be affected by affirmative action policies?

[sujan]

1. I think AA

should be based on class not race. That should include not only minorities but poor whites too.

[Karenina]

3. Here we go again!

:eyes: It does.

[AP]

7. Why can't you do both? A program for class and a program for race?

A program that only addresses class does nothing to help ANYONE whose problem is the glass ceiling.

A woman or black VP who is being held back from the executive sweets is not helped by class-based AA.

All people in the armed services, pretty much, are from the same economic and social class, so classed-based AA would NOT be of much use.

black and women associates in law firms who make 170K per year trying to make partner so they can make 1 mil per year aren't helped by class based AA. Are you saying that a law firm which has NO black or women partners shouldn't consider doing anything to remedy the problem?

[durutti]

8. I Disagree

That would do nothing to compensate for the hundreds of years of discrimination that women and minorities have faced. Redisribution of wealth is a separate issue.

[La_Serpiente]

2. that is true

there was anti-Catholic and anti-Irish sentiments as early as half a century ago. In fact, some of that anti-catholic bias still exists today, but it is not as prevalent.

I believe that in this case, the color of ones skin played a more deceisive factor than what ones religion was. Now that religious tolerance if embraced on a much greater degree now, I don't think it is not much of an issue. However, there are anti-Islam sentiments now, and I think we all know why.

I don't think AA is a perfect system, but it is a lot better than having no controls now. I mean, just look at the statistics. I don't mean to stereotype when I say this, but blacks have more negative statistics than whites. How many whites and hispanics do we see in the Senate? There is only one bi-racial member of Congress and that is Nighthorse Campbell. I believe 10 percent of the people who live in the US are African Americans, so I am kind of shocked that they don't have at least one representative of their community in the Senate.

Can it be based on class? I don't know and that is something I have been thinking about lately. I think it would help if it was based on both class and race. And maybe the white people in Appalachia could have a geographic component added to their college application. I am sure they already have that advantage. I don't know, this is just a lot to think about.

However, colleges have a legit reason not to base AA on class. The application process has two routes, not one. One route sends the application into a process which determines whether one has the credentials to be accepted or not. The other route is to determine how much money one would receive for financial aid. These processes are seperated to make sure the college or university doesn't choose a rich applicant over a poor one. Catch my drift?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

4. You can always find a technical reason why AA isn't perfect

"Many American whites -- actually, almost all American whites -- have some amount of African, Hispanic, Asian, and/or American Indian ancestry."

Have those people been discriminated against presently, like black people are in the jobs market, consistely and overwhelmingly? (See the recent studies published in the Wall Street Journal if you're sceptical)

"So, how can affirmative action as compensation for damages be justified when everyone has some ancestor who suffered due to racial discrimination? How many ancestors does one have to have had in order to be affected by affirmative action policies?"

Why are you trying to paint AA as unfair over past injustices, instead of the current injustices being done now? Past injustices did make sure that black people and other minorities couldn't build up wealth, but there's plenty of current injustice done right now you could focus on.

I like the idea of class based affirmative action myself as well.

[pw]

5. It ain't just past injustice.

When someone a job interviewer thinks is black is half as likely to be called for an interview as someone they think is white, that injustice is right there in the present.

The obvious question for the passing-as-white people who have some "nonwhite" ancestor up in the branches of their family tree is whether it's made a difference in their lives. If they've passed as white, and their parents passed as white, there's a big difference between them and the people who are reminded of their race every day.

(I was reminded of this at the grocery store the other day -- whenever I look at a face on a package or the cover of a magazine at the checkout line, it's an awfully good bet there will be someone with my skin tone looking back at me.)

[ant]

9. good point

The past contributed to building the current structure, and you can't fix that without active intervention.

For instance, we all know that most careers depend heavily on who you know. Making contacts, getting your foot in the door, having knowledgable mentors, etc. Simply put, white men have the networks to move into and advance within practically all fields. Those networks are even institutionalized through fraternities and country clubs and things like that. Women and minorities were locked out of these systems for a very long time, and unless society, by way of government, forces their inclusion the system will perpetuate itself in favor of white men. Not because of racism, necessarily, but because white men tend to move into those networks more easily and therefore gain an upper hand early on (think legacy admissions, for instance). Yes, it's changing, but slowly, and it's too soon to abandon AA.

So yes, it's more than just making up for past wrongs. It's about fixing a system that was built on those wrongs and still carries some of their momentum.

[AP]

6. Imagine your neighborhood were civilly wronged, by, say,

a large corporation which moved into your town and made everyone work for free for that corporation for generations. They decide to give up their unlawful hold on free labor in 2070, but they don't compensate anyone for the damages they have done. By 2070, since you didn't get any pay, you have no assets, and you can't buy land, or start your own small business, so you go work for the same corporation which you worked for for free, but now you get "slave" wages for your labour, so it still takes you and your family 100 years before you can even get even within sight of the economic position you were in in 2003.

So, to correct this problem which is really having very negative economic ramifications on your town, and gives that corporation a real unfair competitive advantage versus you and versus every other company in the same business, congress decideds to give you a cuase of action (just like the families of holocaust victims had a cause of action agains the banks which stole the contents of safety deposist boxes and abandoned savings accounts during and after WWII).

Now, there are a couple ways to deal with this. Certainly, some people will be able to trace very direct connections between their damages in 2170 and their ancestor's enslavement. Then, there will be some more diffuse claims. Also, the town as a whole will have some more socialized costs, which will need be remedied by different sortsof programs.

Bottom line, you can't let these damages go on. They cost to much to the town, and there's a party which is still benefitting unfairly from the damage they caused. If you have the opportunity to repair the harm, it should be done right?