Affirmative Inaction

As Proposition 209, which prevents racial, ethnic, or gender preference in education, employment and contracting, is now being challenged in court (click here for the full story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/02/13/state/n010134S40.DTL), it would make sense for me to speak out my opinion about affirmative action.  In short, I blatantly disagree with the idea of affirmative action.  In long, here's why.

Let us first take a look at the concept of affirmative action.  Affirmative action is the notion of taking race, gender, sexual orientation and ethnicity into account when it comes to things like college admissions, job opportunities, and contracting.  Those in support of affirmative action would say that it benefits "underrepresented" minorities when they would otherwise be at a disadvantage.  They would also claim that affirmative action creates a broader sense of diversity in the American environment.  Now, let's create a scenario here: you are a successful white male high school student applying to a prestigious school.  You exceed the minimal requirements of getting into that school, and you are almost certain of being admitted.  A couple months after applying, you receive the letter.  You open it excitedly, only to discover that you have been rejected.  Somehow, sometime later, you learn that in your place, a male was admitted that did not even meet the minimum standards of the college, and the main reason he was admitted is because he is black and thus "underrepresented."  How would you feel about that?  Do you believe it is fair that someone who did not work as hard as you did was admitted over you because of the color of his skin?

It is far from fair, just as Jim Crow laws and segregation were far from fair before 1964.  What affirmative action is, is discrimination.  It is a failed attempt to "integrate" different cultures.  It is against the American principle of individualism, the idea that with hard work, you will be rewarded.  In the scenario, you worked your butt off, and in your place is a man who did not work as hard but was admitted because of the skin color he was born with.  A college is an institution of learning, a place allowing for the free expression of ideas and expansion of the mind for those with the aptitude of doing so.  Trivial things like race and ethnicity have absolutely NOTHING to do with learning.  And then of course, people reading this will probably get angry that I don't say that diversity has something to do with learning.  To me, diversity comes naturally, just as most political and economic systems work when the government doesn't manipulate them.  Diversity is just a plus; it enriches learning.  However, when institutions such as college boards make such a big deal out of diversity and purposely try to manipulate the system to force it, it causes problems, simply put.  The proof that diversity can be achieved by leaving it alone is in the article "'Race-Neutral' University Admissions in Spotlight UC, Florida..." by Mitchell Landsberg, Peter Y. Hong and Rebecca Trounson.  By eliminating affirmative action policies, The University of California "[...] has increased the percentage of admitted African American, Latino, and Native American students from 18.8% in 1997 - the last year of race-based policy - to 19% in 2002." Also, "Since scrapping its affirmative action program in 1996, the University of Texas system has seen a 15% increase in the number of black students and a 10% increase in Latinos."  So by getting rid of affirmative action, by admitting students that are academically qualified to be admitted into these colleges, by having diversity not be a top priority, they actually gained diversity.  It just goes to show that when you don't have authorities fiddling with the system and gaining political power, society works better.

People such as Time Wise typically refer to history instead of the present day when it comes to racial issues like affirmative action.  Wise is predominantly known as an antiracist, but to me, he's racist against whites.  He asserts in his article, "Whites Swim in Racial Preference," "Yet few whites have ever thought of our position as resulting from racial preferences.  Indeed, we pride ourselves on our hard work and ambition as if somehow we invented the concepts.  As if we have worked harder than the folks who were forced to pick cotton and build levies for free; harder than the Latino immigrants who spend 10 hours a day in fields picking strawberries or tomatoes; harder than the (mostly) women of color who clean hotel rooms or change bedpans in hospitals, or the (mostly) men of color who collect our garbage."  First of all, most of these examples are a part of the American past; nobody is forced to pick cotton anymore.  It's like saying that a lowlife black man in the city is a hard worker because his ancestors were once slaves.  Everyone knows that America is the land of the free, and with the right attitude and ambition that man could work his way up, just as Oprah did.  But you can't say that this lowlife black man knows what hard work is, and the same goes for the white man living in his mother's basement!  There are people out there, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and/or national origin, that truly understand what hard work is, just as there are some that don't.  To me, by addressing and grouping people in "underprivileged" and "privileged" sections, Wise is really creating more stereotypical divisions.  His argument is also based off of revenge, an irrational notion: we did it to them, so we should let them do it to us.  America has developed so that virtually every individual has an equal opportunity to succeed, and it should stay that way: no handicaps for the so-called "underrepresented." It is ignorant people like Wise that imply what is said in Orwell's Animal Farm: "All men are created equal, but some are more equal than others."