The New York Times reported late Tuesday that the Justice Department is investigating and considering bringing lawsuits against universities over race-based affirmative action admissions policies that the Trump administration believes discriminate against white applicants. Well, truth be told, they also discriminate against Asian applicants as well—even more so. But Asians do not enjoy SJW-approved Special Protected Status so they don’t qualify.
The policy has come under fire in recent years, and eight states already ban affirmative action admission policies. Of course, there was a major Supreme Court decision overturning the University of Texas’ AA policy…a decision that prompted “Wise Latina” Justice Sonia Sotomayor to let loose a 58-page dissent that read like it was written by a jilted teenage girl.
The irony is that Affirmative Action, which seeks to fight racial discrimination, is a racist concept. By definition. Is it not “raced-based preference?” And is that not the very definition of racism? If you support affirmative action, then you support individuals, who would otherwise be considered less qualified, earning positions and certain other perks over more qualified people due to nothing more than their ethnicity. This, by definition, is racism.
Never mind the untold number of students and workers who have used this concept to land spots for which they were ill-prepared—consider the other consequences. Affirmative Action has given rise to the notion of “tokens.” It has allowed people to look at others with suspicion—wondering if they earned their job, or their seat in the classroom—or if they were “placed” there by a well-meaning system that is inherently flawed. Do you think this fosters a spirit of cooperation and goodwill? Or does it foster suspicion and resentment?
“We’re just trying to put everyone on an equal playing field,” you may argue. Don’t. The attempt to make everyone exactly the same is a fool’s errand which ultimately requires discrimination if it is to be successful. There will ALWAYS be someone with a little more or a little less in terms of money, power, prestige, smarts, wits, etc.
So what’s the answer? Allow me to go anecdotal. In 1985, I graduated Dan River High School in tiny Kentuck-Virginia, bound for Virginia Tech. Think about where we were at this point in history in terms of the development of computers. I NEVER touched a computer in high school. I barely knew what one looked like. I was 100% computer-illiterate. When I got to Tech, I quickly learned that those who graduated from high schools in more prosperous areas in Northern Virginia had LOTS of experience with computers and were quite savvy. Since we were competing for grades I was at a MAJOR competitive disadvantage.
If I followed the Affirmative Action philosophy, I would have complained to the university about the inherent and institutionalized disadvantage I was under. I would have complained about not being able to compete with students who came from homes where the household income was ten times higher than my own. I would have pushed for quotas allowing a proportionate percentage of students from “disadvantaged” school districts to be allowed access to the advanced classes—despite our poorer performance in entry-level courses. Anyone who disagreed with me would be “anti-rural” or “anti-poor.” I would have spent most of my waking hours denigrating them for their stance while claiming moral superiority.
Or…I could have done what I ended up doing. I busted my ass and studied hard. I learned about computers. I learned MORE about computers. I continued to learn about computers. I helped others who were having trouble with computers. By the time I got out of Tech, only the engineers possessed more computer knowledge than me. I think I made the right choice. That attitude has served me pretty well in other areas as well.
It’s time to face the facts. Applying the same solutions that were needed in the Civil Rights movement in a modern-day context is ineffective and counter-productive. At what point have we separated ourselves sufficiently from our past to end these “remedies?” In other words, when can we take the Band-Aid off of the wound? Do we keep it there forever; as it yellows and ceases to have any legitimate function, other than to remind us of the original wound? If we are going to be a truly color-blind society, we need to become…..(wait for it)…..color-blind.