H 32°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°
I am as stereotypical as they come — a white kid from suburban Illinois. There were maybe 100 minority students in my high school of more than 2,000. I don’t like admitting it because it carries with it the stigma of being sheltered and ignorant, which could be true. But how would I know? I’ve never experienced anything else. Why should I have any say in what’s fair? What the hell do I know about oppression?
As an oblivious bystander, when it comes to affirmative action, I have to trust the policy-makers and those who whole-heartedly believe in its necessity do so for good reason, as do all of us. And, today, I see no reason to think otherwise.
For any debate that is still ongoing within our democratic system it is safe to assume it continues because both sides, to some degree, are right and wrong. Opponents of affirmative action will cite reverse discrimination, while proponents will cite the years of injustice. It’s a tug-of-war that, fortunately, is going the way of the proponents.
To the opponents of affirmative action:
When thinking in generalities, as all government policies have to do, white people have no one to “blame” for affirmative action but themselves. We are the ones who have created and continue to perpetuate the hostile work environment that led to affirmative action and its years of enforcement in the first place. In the grand scheme of things, our complaints about reverse discrimination are and should be nothing more than a minor irritant, like a mosquito bite on the ankle of the government.
Affirmative action shouldn’t be condemned for its flaws. The ones who fought for the equality that affirmative action tries mightily to enforce likely see the policy as a great stride forward. Sure, over the years its inadequacies have begun to surface but the differences it made and continues to make are real and, for the most part, positive.
There are still racial and sexual injustices occurring in America. Until people either learn to rid themselves of this ignorance or create a better policy that still produces results but excludes the reverse discrimination that seems to get white people’s Dockers all in a bunch, affirmative action remains our only option to correct these injustices.
Before criticizing affirmative action, one should ask if any policy can truly encompass all injustices.
Someone may have suffered from a divorce or a traumatic experience that distracted them from living up to the trite standard that employers or admissions offices see as adequate. Is it fair that someone who never experienced those things be judged by the same standards as those that haven’t? Honestly? Probably not, but they are. Those people would likely benefit from a little understanding, a little compassion.
Failure to embrace the policy for what it is is not a shortfall of the policy but instead a shortfall of humanity. It seems that a person’s compassion extends only as far as not inconveniencing themselves.
By protesting the current affirmative action ideas, you are putting yourself in front of the others that are benefiting. And by doing so you are saying you are more important than the masses. Accept that the inconvenience is for reasons bigger than yourself.
To me, an individual who finds himself in unyielding opposition to affirmative action resembles a 6-year-old at the check-out line of a grocery store, pouting because his father just told him he couldn’t have a Butterfinger. The father tries to explain to his son it’s so he doesn’t ruin his dinner or because he’s been eating a lot of candy lately, but all rationalizations do is just make the kid hold his breath longer and stomp his feet harder.
The fact that, despite the complaints, affirmative action is still an actively debated idea signifies that the majority still see sexual, racial and ethnic discrimination as a problem in America. For those who are opposed to it, the burden is on you to find a better solution.
Please, in the online forum or in a letter to The Badger Herald, mention an instance where you, the people, were directly negatively affected by affirmative action. Jobs lost, applications denied, hopes for equality crushed and how a new policy that still supports equality in the workplace and at universities could right those negative experiences. I don’t think it is possible. Convince me otherwise.
There are plenty of ways to be screwed over in life. Why not provide a crutch to those who have been screwed over the longest?
David Carter ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in forestry.
IP hash: db6cdaa4
Kid, supporters of legalized discrimination (aka affirmative action) have the burden of proof here. You can’t just make analogies about six-year-olds and apply them to a well-educated, liberal democracy.
IP hash: d3a931a3
what?
IP hash: f151ec33
“As an oblivious bystander, when it comes to affirmative action”
But then you go on about the topic for hundreds of words.
“We [white people] are the ones who have created and continue to perpetuate the hostile work environment “
You do realize that your statements are racist, right? How could “we” be guilty of such things when “we” haven’t even been out in the work environment yet? Are you counting white babies too? Do they have original sin?
IP hash: d3a931a3
yeah, white babies are included. you read it right
IP hash: 97e42a4e
Affirmative Action is dead. I wouldn’t want an Affirmative Action surgeon operating on me. There is no longer a need for it. Minorities are just as capable of personal success as anyone else, so they should be held to the same standards. No more free rides and no more extra points for being a minority. They should only get the same deal as everyone else.
IP hash: 97e42a4e
David, when minorities stop being hateful themselves I’ll consider supporting anything that benefits them. You try putting up with racial slurs from non-whites, sexist slurs from women and anti-straight slurs from gays and lesbians. Better yet, just read all the responses this comment will get. And then you can try justifying Affirmative Action’s existence.
IP hash: 60bdc1c1
The author failed to list most of the costs of using racial preferences in admissions: It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership.
IP hash: d3a931a3
HOW MUCH BLOOD!?
IP hash: 061feef3
Yes, blood, as in percentage of ethnicity.
IP hash: d0ca982a
Perhaps we will see DNA tests to establish genetic profiles, which will then determine what preferences will be given for education and employment?
IP hash: d3a931a3
yes, i’m a moron, as in percentage of retardation
IP hash: d10ec475
Roger: The law school selection process has always been centered around the US Constitution and the responsibilites of Representation and not the ‘for profits’ of the individual attorney. The missing step for law school has always been that the council failed to acknowledge the candidate first for all opportunities by which admissions into law school is required, regardless of the ability for a community to pay.
The government has the answer that it seeks for admissions and with that stated, we can adopt processes that ensures all individuals have access to education without the human bias attached. These solutions do not hinder in any way the opportunities that our young law applicants seek in respects to financial gains, however not all communities can afford the payments, this is why LSAS was created as non-profit, but in doing so, the association thru the selection process is deemed as affirmative action. The law schools have also been awarding law seats on dollar donations and as reported by Coleman of that Super Duper Law School, 80 Billion dollars is now uncollectable.
For AA in Higher Ed, the center has always been focused on law school admissions. In working directly with the US & Texas Attorney Generals and the DOJ in resolving the impasse, you fail to explore the solutions. If you want to make a difference, allow the various solutions to be published by your organization.
John A Silvi
IP hash: b18ff2f8
Dave, find something more interesting to write about, not this BS!
IP hash: 1b3e5003
Clearly, Conservatives have yet to google Affirmative Action. Affirmative Action is not a quota system. It does not involve “unqualified blacks” taking over-qualified whites jobs and college positions. That would be illegal. Please, learn about Affirmative Action before commenting you ignorant fucks.
IP hash: f151ec33
Here’s what Herman Belz, professor of history and expert on constitutional history and civil rights has to say:
“[Affirmative action] Is a term of general application referring to government policies that directly or indirectly award jobs, admission to universities and professional schools, and other social goods and resources to individuals on the basis of membership in designated protected groups in order to compensate those groups for past discrimination caused by society as a whole. For political as well as prudential reasons reflecting racial sensitivities, public justification of affirmative action has tended to describe it as a logical extension of equality of opportunity for individuals. In fact, affirmative action embodies ideas that are philosophically antithetical to the principle of equal protection of the laws that is the basis of equality of opportunity. The essential difference is that affirmative action policies are designed to benefit persons on the basis of membership in a group, rather than according to individual qualifications and experience. Affirmative action focuses on the results of the procedures used by public and private organizations measured with respect to racial balance rather than on the existence of procedures that assure equal treatment of individuals irrespective of race, ethnicity, or sex. It can therefore be described as a civil rights policy premised on the concept of group rather than individual rights, which seeks equality of result rather than equality of opportunity.”
Sounds like racism to me.
IP hash: a45354f8
I was applying for a supervisor position in my current workplace. The final rounds of interviewing came down to me (a female) and another candidate (who was male). He got the job. After a post-interview meeting where I asked my employer how I could improve, my female boss’s suggestion:
“We had to hire a male this time because last time we hired a female. So I guess my only suggestion would be to have been born a male.”
To which I responded:
“Well, was he more qualified?”
Her response:
“Nope.”
IP hash: 7d38cfed
See, now if we were to do this same thing… except with race, we could solve so many more social injustices! Why hasn’t anyone thought of this?
IP hash: 712e53af
You did not mention whether or not YOU were “more qualified.” I will assume that this glaring omission was intentional. If in fact you were both equally qualified, there is nothing wrong about the hiring.
However, if you are just terrible with wording and they in fact hired someone less qualified than you on the basis of their sex, that is in fact against the law. You either made this bullshit up, or you are completely uninformed of the law. If that actually happened, file a complaint.
By the way, Affirmative Action clearly DIDN’T work for you (a female). So I don’t understand if you were attempting to argue against it or not. The overwhelming majority of people who benefit most from Affirmative Action are women.
How ironic that you, a woman, did not get a job, and blamed it on Affirmative Action. LULZ
IP hash: d2704201
your high school had 2000 people in it?! THATS TWICE MY HOMETOWN!
IP hash: 677ef960
enough with all this diversity bullshit in the herald. it was interesting for two days. NO ONE GIVES A FUCK!
IP hash: 46544a44
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/29/supreme.court.discrimination/index.html
IP hash: 3c31fac0
Good take. I worry that people may have missed some of your more powerful poitns in the last half of the column. I especially appreciated “Accept that the inconvenience is for reasons bigger than yourself.”
IP hash: f151ec33
Bigger than yourself? What does this mean?
Affirmative action is bad for everyone. That’s why people like me oppose it. Judging people by an irrational standard - i.e., their race - is bad for the racist and the victim.
Racism is bad for individuals. What is “bigger” than that?
IP hash: d3a931a3
the sun is pretty big
IP hash: d1d9a033
dave, you are The Man
IP hash: 40156c91
You are a powerfully gifted writer. Keep up the thought provoking columns.