There is a battle brewing on the horizon of this nation's murky shores and misty mountains. The battle is a vestige of a war that once defined and consumed every facet of American society. The war is the racial oppression that has characterized, and still does characterize, American society. The current battle is that of affirmative action. After reading several editorials in The Dartmouth about the "fallacies" of affirmative action and hearing of the pending case against it in Michigan, I became infuriated and decided to offer my opinion of affirmative action.
One of the major arguments propagated in anti-affirmative action rhetoric today is the belief that affirmative action is a biased policy that perpetuates racial inequality and, by dismantling the policy, America will somehow return to the colorblind and fair society it never was. Proponents of this view suggest substituting other socio-demographic attributes for race and culture in affirmative action policies. To these people, I say cut the crap. These are often thinly veiled attempts to shift emphasis away from the issue of race and culture. This policy would be effective only if America were truly a colorblind society. Socio-economic classification does not carry the same historical baggage as race and culture.
According to APA Online, "It was racial classification, not socio-economic status that prevented Thurgood Marshall's admission to the University of Maryland's law school." Affirmative action is constantly referred to as a relatively new phenomenon that seeks to diversify institutions of higher education, workplaces etc., but this country has always had affirmative action for white males.
This country has always considered race when admitting college students or hiring employees, thus affirmative action is by no means a new policy. Consider the informal forms of affirmative action that exist today and are rarely disputed, such as the "legacy" distinction in the admissions process when Dad is an alumnus, or when Junior gets a good job because Dad is the president of the company or plays golf with the president of another company.
Affirmative action is an acknowledgment that America is less fair than we think and hope it to be in our hearts and our minds. It is an acknowledgment that it's time to begin healing the wounds inflicted upon our national character by 300 years of oppression. By admitting that affirmative action is necessary in today's society, one must admit that discrimination is still prevalent in today's society. One must admit that amorphous notions of "equality for all" are as prevaricated as notions of the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. Anyone who would dare dispute this should take a look at the make up of the Senate, the House of Representatives and academia.
According to Julian Bond, "White males make up 92 percent of the U.S. Senate, 80 percent of the U.S. House, 90 percent of the nation's newspaper editors and 80 percent of the tenured faculty at the nation's colleges and universities." Something is wrong in America when approximately 40 percent of its inhabitants are minorities, but government intuitions, businesses and academia continue to be white-washed.
Another argument that is salient in anti-affirmative action propaganda is the proclamation that color-conscious selection procedures undermine meritocratic standards. This I propose is as spoiled an argument as two-week-old milk, and thus should be flushed down the toilet. Excuse the hell out of me, but why all of sudden when race is considered for the minority do all these assumptions that the bar of academic and intellectual excellence has somehow been lowered? Why must it automatically be assumed that admissions officers or employers have somehow lowered their expectations or requirements when admitting minorities? Why must the minority be accused of receiving preferential treatment without merit because of an obvious "lack" of talent or potential?
I contend that these very assumptions illustrate the perpetuation of discrimination in America. If the minority is guilty of anything it's guilty of trying to succeed in a society that is designed to perpetuate their misfortunes through a biased educational system, media and political institution. In an editorial last week it was stated that race, geography, life experiences and other factors have nothing to do with one's intelligence or merit. While this is true when discussing biological determinism, it is not true in America.
In America race, geography and even life experiences play a large role in how one's intelligence or merit is perceived and utilized. Education is a social construction, thus the linking of race, geography, etc, to intelligence or merit is a direct result of this social constructionism as opposed to biological determinism. In a perfectly just society, each of us would fail or succeed on our own merits: this is not a perfectly just society. There are underlying factors at work.
Until this country reaches a plateau of racial equality, some form of affirmative action is necessary for the successful diversification of prestigious institutions. Affirmative action benefits society as a whole in the process of this diversification. For those who dare dispute the success of affirmative action, I challenge you to research minority enrollment statistics in colleges and law schools in states like Texas and California, which have banned affirmative action. Note how quickly minority enrollment declines.
It's time to confront the fairytale that is American history with clenched fists and teeth. The age of white male superiority is over, so get over it. It is time for this country to live up to the hypocritical rhetoric of equality and justice for all that it has proposed for so long. It's time to really give meaning to the superficial and fallacious notions of racial equality that now permeate American society. I salute the efforts of President James Wright and others like him fighting the battle on that grim horizon. In the words of Sam Cooke: "It's been a long, long time coming, but I know a change is going to come."