NationStates

The Economist wrote:Time to scrap affirmative action

ABOVE the entrance to America’s Supreme Court four words are carved: “Equal justice under law”. The court is pondering whether affirmative action breaks that promise. The justices recently accepted a case concerning a vote in Michigan that banned it, and will soon rule on whether the University of Texas’s race-conscious admissions policies are lawful. The question in both cases is as simple as it is divisive: should government be colour-blind?

America is one of many countries where the state gives a leg-up to members of certain racial, ethnic, or other groups by holding them to different standards. The details vary. In some countries, the policy applies only to areas under direct state control, such as public-works contracts or admission to public universities. In others, private firms are also obliged to take account of the race of their employees, contractors and even owners. But the effects are strikingly similar around the world (see article).

Many of these policies were put in place with the best of intentions: to atone for past injustices and ameliorate their legacy. No one can deny that, for example, blacks in America or dalits in India (members of the caste once branded “untouchable”) have suffered grievous wrongs, and continue to suffer discrimination. Favouring members of these groups seems like a quick and effective way of making society fairer.

Most of these groups have made great progress. But establishing how much credit affirmative action can take is hard, when growth also brings progress and some of the good—for example the confidence-boosting effect of creating prominent role models for a benighted group—is intangible. And it is impossible to know how a targeted group would have got on without this special treatment. Malays are three times richer in Singapore, where they do not get preferences, than in next-door Malaysia, where they do. At the same time, the downside of affirmative action has become all too apparent.

(Loads) More Words Etc. Here

Nazi France wrote:The government should be completely color-blind and not distinguish between races. I mean, whatever happened to "All men are created equal"? The message that affirmative action gives is that minority groups are inferior and that they therefore need government assistance to get anywhere in life.

Farnhamia wrote:No, it says that minorities have been discriminated against and that the government is helping by leveling the playing field so that all people are treated equally.

The way to stop discriminating based on race is to stop discriminating based on race

Nazi France wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:No, it says that minorities have been discriminated against and that the government is helping by leveling the playing field so that all people are treated equally.

So it treats people unequally so that they will be treated equally? Makes sense.

Farnhamia wrote:

Nazi France wrote:So it treats people unequally so that they will be treated equally? Makes sense.

No. In employment, it says that hiring should reflect the community's make-up. It does not require less qualified people to be hired, however. In education, quotas were struck down long ago. Why do you hate freedom and equality?

Zweite Alaje wrote:Affrimative Action is bad from a purely economic viewpoint, so is minimum wage.

The Electoral College wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:No. In employment, it says that hiring should reflect the community's make-up. It does not require less qualified people to be hired, however. In education, quotas were struck down long ago. Why do you hate freedom and equality?

The community's makeup may not naturally reflect the makeup of the institution, which is why greater opportunities should be made available to those groups, rather than an expansion of Affirmative Action programs.

Universities may not truly represent American racial percentages, for example, because of the still fairly sizable number of those in the African-American community receiving disproportionately poor education. Integration by artificial means shouldn't be approached until those opportunities are fixed to allow them an equal standing with competing applicants.

greed and death wrote:

The way to stop discriminating based on race is to stop discriminating based on race

Chief Justice Roberts

Sums up my view.

The Broken Imperial Sector wrote:I say get rid of it. All it does is hold minority's hands who want equal rights as us and now that they have them it should no longer be in effect.

Imota wrote:

The Electoral College wrote:The community's makeup may not naturally reflect the makeup of the institution, which is why greater opportunities should be made available to those groups, rather than an expansion of Affirmative Action programs.

Universities may not truly represent American racial percentages, for example, because of the still fairly sizable number of those in the African-American community receiving disproportionately poor education. Integration by artificial means shouldn't be approached until those opportunities are fixed to allow them an equal standing with competing applicants.

A noble sentiment. The problem is, most people who oppose affirmative action also oppose fixing the problem of lack of opportunity for precisely the same reason.

Phocidaea wrote:As a "middle class white person", I oppose affirmative action partly because it's ideologically questionable, but also - and admittedly much more so - because it actively hurts me as an individual.

For college admissions, for instance - as blunt as it sounds, I don't care if you're a half-black half-Mexican female, if you want to get into the same school as me, you should have to do the same fucking stuff. It's not fair that I should be punished for being white or male. It is absolutely reverse discrimination, and no amount of lefty PC lotion can fix that.

Phocidaea wrote:As a "middle class white person", I oppose affirmative action partly because it's ideologically questionable, but also - and admittedly much more so - because it actively hurts me as an individual.

Mavorpen wrote:

Phocidaea wrote:As a "middle class white person", I oppose affirmative action partly because it's ideologically questionable, but also - and admittedly much more so - because it actively hurts me as an individual.

For college admissions, for instance - as blunt as it sounds, I don't care if you're a half-black half-Mexican female, if you want to get into the same school as me, you should have to do the same fucking stuff. It's not fair that I should be punished for being white or male. It is absolutely reverse discrimination, and no amount of lefty PC lotion can fix that.

We do.

Ifreann wrote:

Phocidaea wrote:As a "middle class white person", I oppose affirmative action partly because it's ideologically questionable, but also - and admittedly much more so - because it actively hurts me as an individual.

Good of you to admit that you're more concerned with having an easy life than the equal treatment of all people in society. Now we can just dismiss everything you say out of hand as the usual "But...but...my privilege!" whining.

Mavorpen wrote:

Phocidaea wrote:As a "middle class white person", I oppose affirmative action partly because it's ideologically questionable, but also - and admittedly much more so - because it actively hurts me as an individual.

For college admissions, for instance - as blunt as it sounds, I don't care if you're a half-black half-Mexican female, if you want to get into the same school as me, you should have to do the same fucking stuff. It's not fair that I should be punished for being white or male. It is absolutely reverse discrimination, and no amount of lefty PC lotion can fix that.

We do. It's not like I walked into the university, yelled out, "ACCEPT ME, BITCHES!" and was promptly presented with admittance to the university.

Phocidaea wrote:It's not fair that I should be punished for being white or male.

Phocidaea wrote:

Mavorpen wrote:We do.

Well, I'm sure many of "you" (whatever demographic "you" is) do, but the point is that with AA you don't necessarily have to do quite as much to achieve the same outcome.