Affirmative action policies are supposed to increase opportunities for minorities
by favoring them in hiring and promotion in government contracts and college
admissions.

Are they still needed now or are they counter productive and work more against
asian than help?

Have affirmative action been abused for politcal gains or they are accomplishing
the goals and purpose intended?

Is it right to be one issue minded to vote for only one political party because it claims
to back and defend affirmative actions?

Does affirmative action really make that much difference of increase opportunities for
minorities or will it forever limit just "20%" of everything for minorities and never
allow the 80% or 100% of the contract as a backdoor way of discrimination without
legally be discriminating?

dior girl,

It always intrigued me that significant numbers of AAs are in favor of affirmative action. It seems to me that Asians, of all people, would be the biggest denouncers of affirmative action because AAs are an extraordinarily successful group, earning admission to universities and landing high-paying jobs in numbers far in excess than our percentage of the population would suggest. Asians are lumped with whites when it comes to college admissions, on the basis that "too many" Asians are academically successful - I mean, we're minorities for God's sake! We should darn well act like it!

It brings to mind something I read a while ago that said that Asians are the new Jews. Jews in America are also an extraordinarily successful group, also highly academically oriented and successful in business and achieveing high standards of living. In the 1950's and earlier, many top universities actually held down the number of Jews accepted because they did not like the fact that had they accepted all the qualified applicants, their student bodies would be 20-30% Jewish, when Jews were barely 1-2% of the population total.

QUOTE

Have affirmative action been abused for politcal gains or they are accomplishing the goals and purpose intended?

I have read that the people who benfit most from affirmative action are those blacks and Latinos who are basically middle and upper-middle class, and generally wouldn't need any kind of affirmative action program. I believe that affirmative action, if it exists at all, should exist for students who are poor, not just those with dark skin.

QUOTE

Does affirmative action really make that much difference of increase opportunities for minorities or will it forever limit just "20%" of everything for minorities and never allow the 80% or 100% of the contract as a backdoor way of discrimination without legally be discriminating?

Hmm, that brings up an interesting thought - can affirmative action be a double-edged sword when minorities start becoming represented in larger numbers in previously minority-free fields? I think so.

I suppose the only credible reasons for Asian Americans to support affirmative action programs in secondary education are to support diversity and a truly equal society in America. We don't live in a country where race doesn't count. We all know what racism does in this country and how we got here. We know how race is played in America. There's no reason to pretend otherwise, unless you want to perpetuate a fantasy in your mind.

If Asians in the US oppose affirmative action programs like most conservatives do, then I say present an argument where we can accomplish a system of fair play in a race conscious country like ours where African-Americans and Hispanics get equal access to educational opportunities.

I'm sure there are Asians who support other forms of affirmative action in government contracts and businesses to remedy discrimmination and create access. Why not be open-minded and realize that under-represented minorities don't have the same cultural advantages that Asians in the US enjoy.

I actually read Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's recent book "The Majesty of the Law". After reading it, I was sure she would mend, not end, affirmative action. I just didn't know in what form it would be preserved. She is a conservative who does not wear blinders. She grapples with real issues and real consequences.

She is truly an intelligent, enlighted, classy lady.

She makes me proud to be an American.

With regards to college admissions, I see affirmative action as an equalizer to the inequity that is already present in inner city public schools. The fact is that affirmative action mostly benefits black and hispanic kids who come from poorly funded, overly crowded public school systems. Most teachers in these areas get paid less on average than in suburban, predominantly white schools. The quality of education is simply much poorer as evidenced by the growing number of illiterate kids being advanced in grade level in spite of their inability to even read a sentence. This is totally unacceptable! The kids are not being taught anything but just shuttled on to the next grade. As an Asian American, I cannot gain much from affirmative action yet I am in firm opposition to recent attempts to abolish it. Many cry reverse racism but I say that u cannot claim unfairness when inequity already places poor minority kids at a disadvantage. I don't think that affirmative action is perfect but something must be done to give poor minority kids a fair chance. My view is that affirm- action should not be abolished under the pretense of "fairness" at least not until u can claim that they had a fair shake from the beginning.

Boondockerz,

QUOTE

The fact is that affirmative action mostly benefits black and hispanic kids who come from poorly funded, overly crowded public school systems.

That is actually only partially correct. Studies have shown that the majority of minority (black and Hispanic) students who get admitted to universities on the basis of Affirmative Action tend to be in the same boat socio-economically as their white and Asian classmates.

QUOTE

The quality of education is simply much poorer as evidenced by the growing number of illiterate kids being advanced in grade level in spite of their inability to even read a sentence.

I agree that the standards of education in this country have sunk to abysmal levels. I am shocked that so many people with a high school diploma haven't learned a darn thing at all, besides how to sit relatively quiet for an hour at a time and scrape by with the minimum of effort, which, in our current school system, seems to consist of merely staying awake in class. However, if a kid is truly illiterate and very poorly prepared in comparison to graduates of more affluent, suburban schools, isn't it doing such kids a disservice to throw them into such a highly competitive atmosphere where they stand little chance of holding their own? Is it fair to hold a slot open for a "poorly prepared" minority student who will likely find himself in over his head in short order, while denying admission to a well-prepared, motivated student who, through no fault of his own, happens to be white or Asian?

QUOTE

I don't think that affirmative action is perfect but something must be done to give poor minority kids a fair chance.

BoonDockerz, I would agree 100% with this statement, if only the word "minority" was erased from it. I think that a white kid who excels despite coming from a poverty-stricken, broken home, who's been in foster homes a significant portion of his life, deserves a little leg up, much more so than the black son of a doctor and lawyer who lives in an exclusive upper-class neighborhood who only makes above-average grades. I know I'm getting into hyperbole, but you get my point.

I have a suggestion. Why not affirmative action based on poverty instead of race? In sum the majority of people affected by it would be minorities anyway and people could not claim racism-plus disadvantaged white students can benefit as well.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
What he said

BoonDockerz,

Now, please keep in mind, the recent affirmative action decision from the US Supreme Court was not held based on purely socio-economic reasons. For that matter, it was held due to poor school conditions. The majority opinion held that universities/colleges can use race as a plus (not dominant) factor so long as it was in the interest of creating a critical mass or diversity in the institution's student body.

For instance, how can a law or political science class with privileged white and Asian students discuss issues like racial profiling that affects black and Hispanic students and be in a good enough position to make socially conscious decisions that affect those minorities unless they get effective participation from a diverse student body?

How can an all white and Asian officers corps in the military possibly maintain discipline and command black and Hispanic officers without members of those minority groups feeling that their officers are not fully "legitimate".

The social, economic, educational and political benefits of a diverse student body are immeasureable. Major American businesses and retired military leaders came in defense of affirmative action. The establishment pleaded with the Court to not turn the clock back on racial progress in this country. Five courageous, enlightened, fair-minded members of the Court kept this country from going back to de-facto jim crow days of American history.

This was a critical test and our justices passed. I truly appreciate their decision. Our country will benefit from their decision for decades to come.

Hold no illusions, as Asian Americans do not benefit from Affirmative Action. Due to the fact that we are overrepresented at most colleges, and grossly overrepresented in the upper echelon of colleges (especially the West Coast), we do not get the "extra points" that the underrepresented African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native Americans get. Know that this is the perspective I will be arging from.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Martin Luther King's dream was that no one would be judged on their skin color, but rather on the content of their character. This equality demands color-blind treatment for everyone. The current inequalities might seem to require some "reverse discrimination" to correct, but this is an incrediblely myopic view. This "bandaid" of Affirmative Action is a short term fix that will cause more harm than good in the long term, and will delay the day when there will be equality for all.

First of all, the current race-based Affirmative Action emphasizes the role of race in America as opposed to the ideal de-emphasizing. It tells certain groups: "Sorry, shouldn't have been born with your skin color." Is this not exactly the same as the message African Americans got in the past? It also tells the historically have-not races that: "You're not capable of competing on the same playing field as everyone else." While this may be rationalized into: "You've been disadvantaged in the past, so we're going to compensate for that", it will always subliminally be: "You're incompetent, so we'll help you."

Also, many disadvantaged minority students who work hard, overcome great odds, and do become sucessful in their endeavor will always have the lingering thought that they may have "got in" only because of Affirmative Action. At the same time, this creates a resentment among the groups not benefited by Affirmative Action, most notably European Americans. It also creates a "clan" mentality of "us" vs "them".

True equality is not having one group handed an advantage over another. It is obvious that this is not the reality, as African, Hispanic, and Native Americans are still disadvantaged. However, the solution is not giving them an advantage. America is a land of much social mobility. Regression to mean is not a myth, and the wealth distribution in America will slowly go to equilibrium itself. If you don't believe me, think of all the rich kids who smoke a lot of weed and end up living off the trust fund, or worse, on the streets. At the same time, there are many poor people who do well in school, get scholarships, join the Army, or do other things to matriculate into sucessful adults.

As for racism, now that the seeds of equality have been sown, it will slowly fade away. It is human nature to pre-judge, a survival instinct ingrained in our genetics. If someone observes or is taught a particular pattern in a group, he will believe the pattern and apply it to new members of the group. However, while some members of various races do fit the stereotypes associated with them, not all do. People are not blind, they will see that generalizations do not always work, and will slowly lose their pre-judgements. They will stop teaching these judgements to their children, and if indeed we are all equal, racism will fade out.

In light of this, we should continue to de-emphasize the role of race in America. In fact, college and job applications probably should be color-blind, where applicants are assigned a number, and have their ethnicity and name hidden. This may be a bit harsh, but it would promote true eqality. In any case, equality in America will prevail, and we needn't "help" it along by giving preferential treatment to any one group.

RealityMage

While I do not support affirmative action as it stands now, I do believe that there needs to be compensation given for past misconduct. The easiest way to do this would be to improve the primary education system, by putting money that would have gone into affirmative action programs into funding school projects in the poor urban area schools. This will change the system from one of equality of results (i.e. everyone gets into college no matter what their credentials) into a system which is based on equality of opportunity (everyone has the same chance to excel in school because they were given equal funding and teachers). I know it is probably naive and idealistic to think this way, but it is better than the alternative - which is to keep affirmative action in its current form, forever keeping a segment of the population classified as second class citizens who need a helping hand at every stage of life.

Yes, I agree, education in general requires far more funding than we are giving it now. Or at least, the funding needs to be used more wisely. Our public schools and universities are crowded, and some are direly substandard.

I would strongly encourage each of the participant's in this discussion to read Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's majority opinion in the recent Michigan affirmative action decision. You're missing her rationale. It was, by far, a equitable compromise according to some leading legal scholars, civil rights leaders, and moderate politicians.

Her reasoning was that universities can use race as one factor. No college or university is allowed to give any ethnic group admission points based on their race. During the admissions process, staff look at several key factors to determine applicants' qualities and efforts to gain admission. The Michigan decision states that the Supreme Court will defer judgement to those universities so long as race is not the dominant factor.

Affirmative Action does benefit Asian Americans. True, Asians Americans are over-represented in certain technical fields and as students in colleges and universities in certains regions of the country. Here is how affirmation action benefits Asian Americans, specifically.

The Fourteenth Amendment was purposefully constructed to remedy discrimmination against African Americans. Have Asians benefited from the Fourteenth Amendment?

The Civil Rights and Voting Acts of 1964 and 1965 were written with the deliberate purpose of remedying discrimmination against African Americans. Does it not apply to Asians and Asian Americans?

Affirmative action programs are, inherently, proactive and corrective political programs to bring about equality in American society. It is not geared toward the arts and entertainment industry, elective bodies of government, or for that matter, to make sure that students who are admitted into education institutions eventually graduate.

Affirmative action is meant to create greater participation, equal distribution of opportunities in a multi-ethnic body politic. It takes into consideration that diversity in American society enables its citizens to effectively engage in economics, commerce and quality education.

The fact is the quality of health care we receive in this country, the number of good paying jobs, sound reasoning and good behavior on the part of citizens, political stability, economic viability, national security depends on how Americans treat each other, how much we rely on each other and our politicians, and how well we fully engage one another.

Affirmative action helps universities and colleges to bring about a critical mass of various ethnic and social diversity in their student bodies. These educational institutions help prepare students to be broad thinking, fair minded, ethical citizens. These same citizens will help shape our society and enact government policies for the future.

This collection of ideas should come from a broad range of ethnic groups since we are becoming more ethnically diverse.

I understand where you are coming from, but do you feel these benefits are worth the long-term effect of slowing the de-emphacization of race in America?

RealityMage,

Honestly, that's a very tough question. It's definitely touchy.

I don't want to see any proliferation of race based programs that do not take long-term effects into consideration. In Justice O'Connor's decision, she speculated that 25 years from now affirmative action programs may no longer be required. What that does is pend this issue definitely so that politicians and school admissions officials don't think of affirmative action as a legacy. Although, there are plenty of legacy programs available to privileged socialites and their offspring.

If affirmative action works correctly, then there will be increased representation of under-represented minorities (black, Hispanic and Native American) in fields of law, medicine, engineering, business and government. This will give more minorities a "piece of the pie". Through this reasoning white people and Asian Americans will have to carry less of a tax burden to provide government services, will be less likely to be victims of crimes and will be more likely to understand other people's perspectives. That is important. Our country actually gets better. Race relations will actually improve.

People who oppose affirmative action because they argue blacks and Hispanics will be desparaged due to benefits of those programs are, normally, the same conservative characters who perpetuate those stereotypes.

Think about it, what decent and reasonable student would question a black student's admissions status, unless they already consider them unqualified? I think they're clearly descendents of people who created those racial stereotypes. Think about it. They have created their own negative legacy and we have to be cognizant of it and prove that we are not the stereotype. That's not fair.

I see your point, Geoff DB, I suppose but most of those that benefit from Affirmative Action are minorities (not using that word in the strict literal term) who are already middle to upper class. These people are already fully capable of competing intellectually with everyone else. There are, however, poor people of all races. I suppose not having enough food, or hearing gunshots ring through one's neighborhood would be worse than any skin color.

Do you think Affirmative Action should be based on poverty instead of race? It would still benefit the same disadvantaged minorities as race-based affirmative action (though to a lesser degree). On the other hand, it would neutralize or greatly lessen the long term detriment I described above. I know many universities are already do this kind of poverty-based admissions. In light of this, do you think race-based Affirmative action is still necessary?

RealityMage,
I'm definitely opposed to and appalled at affirmative action programs that make any attempt to exclude poor, disadvantaged white and Asian students. Keep in mind though, the Supreme Court has ruled the Michigan affirmative action program for undergraduate students unconstitutional precisely because it granted points based on race. That practice is now illegal. I actually agree with 100% of Sandra Day O'Connor's reasoning. (Not that it matters if I disagree, because it's now the law of the land.)

As far as affirmative action largely benefitiing privileged black and Hispanic students - perhaps. Those who tend to go to college usually have more means than those who attend community colleges and adult schools. There are quite a number of prominent black and Hispanic families in this country. However, there aren't nearly as many compared to white and Asian families.

Let me arrange a few social scenarios for you to think about.

I will call these "Let's say's".

Let's say that only those who are qualified should be admitted into colleges and universitities. Let's say that only those who are qualified should be hired. Le't also say that only those who are qualified should be promoted once hired. Let's say that only those who are socially disadvantaged should be granted affirmative action remedies, regardless of race. So, here we have a perfect meritocracy where only those who are qualified are taken seriously.

Now, here are some "what if's".

What if those who are most qualified tend to be the most advantaged? What if those who are better qualified and most capable of keeping up in college tend to be people whose cultures encourage education? What if the most qualified tend to be people who come from families who created stable home environments? What if the entrance exam that universities, generally, use to test an applicants' qualifications tends to be culturally biased to benefit white and Asian people? What if it was proven that race plays a significant role in how students are educated in America and prepared for the work force?

What if I told you that up until 1954, a considerable number of states in the union systematically deprived certain people the right to be educated in equal education facilities? What if those same poorly educated parents failed to encourage subsequent generations to study hard and take advantage of opportunities?

Had the United States Supreme Court overturned both Michigan affirmative action policies like Clarence Thomas, Ward Connerly and their conservative colleagues had wanted, this country would have make a speedy reversal to pre-Brown vs. Board of Education racial segregation.

We came this close to a defacto Jim Crow educational system and work force. It's just that simple. And it's damn scarry.

I sometime question the role of formal education and success in the USA. A great many of entreprenuer skip the higher education route since they feel the opportunities are abound and formal schooling does not apply.

Geoff brings up a good point affirmative action will give disadvantaged individual a step in the right direction. However, how many generation of a disadvantage family need to go through affirmative action before a value change in the family occurs.

In the case of most asians, it is because the culture of social mobility through education and government standardize testing has been ingrained in the culture for a few thousand years. So even the poorest peasant asian immigrant knows that their kids have to pass standardize testing to climb up in society. Granted they don't know which standard test in the USA their kids have to take...but a switch to butt is a good motivator for children in any country nonetheless.

I guess the real underlying question is when will the USA truly become colorblind and become a meritocracy. That is when affirmative action will naturally disappear. Let's put it this way. When site like Goldsea become irrelavant in the USA is the day that will happen. Till then affiramative action is a political pork barrel for voters in 18-29 bracket.

AC Dropout, you raise some solid points. There are those who would immediately become defensive and go an outright tear in 100% defense of affirmative action. It is crucial to America's long term sucess that affirmative action programs remain solely temporary proactive and corrective measures to bring about diversity and remedy marganilization of under-represented ethnic groups.

If affirmative action is not supported by the American public, our competitive edge will continue to erode. Simply put, you cannot have a strong America with white and Asian people getting the bulk of economic weath, quality education and social stability. You will inevitably create a social class where African-American and Hispanics are supported by two races of people. That's not economically viable.

The late Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in his famous Brown vs. Board of Education decision: "Today, education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments...Today it is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values, in preparing him for later professional training, and in helping him to adjust normally to his environment." He further wrote: "In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education".

Black people are smart people. We are intelligent people. We are not lazy people. Generally, we are less likely to be formally educated. Asians and white people are mostly likely to be college educated, most likely to receive quality health care, most likely to gain quality careers, most likely to not be victims of crime, most likely to immigrate to the United States with some means of support, most likely to socially arrange themselves to create and take advantage of opportunities.

For those Asians who vehemently oppose affirmative action for myriad reasons, I ask that you take a brief walk down American history. Which laws and statutes were written to remedy discrimmination against African Americans, but eventually were used to help Asian Americans fight racism in this country. If Asians go on the record strongly dissenting affirmation action now, what will happen in the future of this country when Asians may benefit some way or another from an affirmative action program.

Some Asians will dismiss this as not even a possibility. That may be. However, American history will teach you to not count your eggs before they're hatched.

The equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment didn't even get ratified by California. Why? Because state legislators wanted to help black people, but they didn't want it to help the Chinese who immigrated here. Right now, when an Asian goes to federal court for equal treatment, they point their finger directly to the fourteenth amendment and its equal protection clause.

One historical note. California did eventually ratify the 14th Amendment. It was on May 6, 1959. Well after the modern civil rights movement had begun.

I'll support Affirmative Action when Asian-Americans enjoy similar easements as Blacks, Hispanics, and Native-Americans for the obvious discrimination that Asians face. Otherwise scrap it, playing soft on this issue is only gonna get AAs screwed over as usual.

Kimchi Devil,
It's a good thing that Justice O'Connor holds a different opinion from yours. She brings a broader understanding of these complex social and educational issues. I read her recent book. She is a conservative, but an enlightened lady. Your view contains only a regard for immediate, direct benefit to your community without considering the greater social good.

Actually, I'm not too surprised at your response. After all, we are opposing minorities. We're enemies, especially when it comes to this issue.

Hopefully, the Court's ruling will make our society more equal and these measure will not be necessary for future generations to grapple with.

Ahhhhh, behold the power of the swing voter. As much as I'd hate to say this -- And I really do mean this -- I might just have to vote for Bush next term. Uh, unless of course...

It really is a modest proposal when you think about it, since AAs do face discrimination not unlike any other minority. Surely AAs can be squeezed somewhere between Whites and Hispanics. No? Who knows, maybe even give some Asian folks some spare time to enjoy being American too, instead of studying their asses off, slaving away, and forfeiting beer money, etc.

And the funny thing is I heard on the radio the other day, some guy bitching and whining about "...ten points for Blacks, ten points for Hispanics, ten points for Asians, and twelve points for a perfect SAT score..." What?!? Asians?!? That's pretty f*cking sad when Asians are accused of benefitting from a program when they clearly do not. Obviously this was regarding the Michigan State admissions program.

I certainly hope that Asian-Americans being the perpetual scapegoat in this country isn't a part of this "greater social good" you speak of.

Kimchi Devil,
Asian-Americans and African-Americans constantly argue two different versions of civil rights.

Asians believe in the ideals of American success. Your various Asian cultures place well into America's capitalist economic structure. Asians do face racism in this country. Asians have been killed in this country, falsely accused as disloyal, politically disenfranchised, senselessly ridiculed, marginalized in the media. Your version of civil rights, however, does not speak to economic injustice.

African-American civil rights speaks to police brutality, racial intimidation, educational deprivation, political marginalization, poor health care. Our version of civil rights deals more with social justice concerning hard-core economic conditions. Black culture in this country has its roots in the ugly institution of slavery and its ensuing systemic barricades which have constantly stymied steady progress in race relations.

What affirmative action seeks to do is to remedy some of thoses poor economic conditions and to bring about more diversity so that under-represented minority Americans have better access to economic and social and political opportunities. That was the reasoning and wisdom of Justice O'Connor's recent majority opinion. For the most part, Asian Americans are probably uncomfortable with that reasoning, because it counters your version of a "perfect" America where people should be rewarded based on qualifications. It counters your version of civil rights.

Affirmative action is not a government "pork" program. It is a substantive, balanced counter-measure to remedy systemic discrimmination that currently exists.

Kimchi Devil,
In a previous post I made the following statement:

"We're enemies, especially when it comes to this issue."

The use of the word "enemies" was too harsh. We have a difference of opinion. That's perfectly normal. However, my use of that word was not fitting.

I do apologize.

I understand.

Didn't mean to come across as being too ignorant on the matter. I've just been overly cynical on the issue of Affirmative Action, and everything else for that matter. I guess in many ways it seems like watching everyone else get it "easy" in one way or another, depending on how you perceive it. From the perspective of many immigrants and foreigners, I'm sure many would dismiss much of what blacks have experienced (sans slavery) as "no big deal" or even plush relative to conditions and events outside of the US. Stated differently: Blacks are living in White America's backyard... and whoever said being accepted into white society was 'easy' for anyone except whites? It's a somewhat simplistic view not entirely inaccurate. Unfortunately, the same happens everywhere else in the world with minorities. The illusion -- at least on the surface -- of over-tolerance and pandering to African-Americans in today's society is in stark contrast to much of the treatment Asians and others(?) seem to get... Where Asians are largely left out and ignored, with all the odds stacked against us, unless success is mentioned, in which case we're in the spotlight with a bulls eye painted on our foreheads.

I don't have anything against Affirmative Action itself except whenever Asians have higher admissions standards compared to whites and the abuse of AA by individuals who really don't need it. That's pretty much been the extent of my opposition of AA, otherwise I thought the conservative attacks on the Michigan State admissions program were completely bogus and inherently flawed with one-sided facts. So you can imagine how strange it seems for someone like myself to cringe in opposition to Republican attacks on Affirmative Action, when I'm 'attacking' it for different reasons entirely. It's incredibly frustrating because it doesn't seem like either Democrats or Republicans are ever on our side.

Kimchi Devil,
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but this is how I view things.

Maybe the most frustrating thing for Asians in America to grapple with is how much political and media attention African-Americans get compared to Asian Americans. I have a great deal of respect for Asian Americans. Keep in mind though that the attention we get is because a lot of work is required to establish African Americans from a economic standpoint and educational standpoint.

Having said that, when violence and racism is targeted against Asian Americans, the media likes to either explain it away or make Asians the scapegoat. They don't balance their reporting to hold the right persons accountable.

Conservatives and Asian Americans tend to disregard how the condition of Black America got to where it is now. It's much easier to simply tell us to get off our lazy ass, stop blaming the white man and do something for ourselves instead of targeting white and Asian people. Problem is, when a society has, historically, placed social and racial barriers to success for certain minority Americans, then it takes time to unravel the source of the problem, plan a course of corrective action, get the government and citizenry to agree to it, and start the fix. This requires patience, reasoning and hard work. Make no mistake about it, the trends are getting better. Our country has seen a considerable amount of progress in race relations. We are still a divided country: white/Asian Americans, black people, Hispanic people and Native American people tend to live, work and socialize in different areas and at different social levels.

Probably the biggest reason an Asian American would support affirmative action in advanced education is for the greater social good that I mentioned. Asians don't need affirmative action for college and university admissions, because you tend to better quality, better rank and better graduate than even privileged white students who attend the most elite schools in the nation. It's probably safe to say that the only reason that an Asian American would support affirmative action in education is for the diversity it will produce in our country's economic and other social areas. Most conservatives and a considerable number of Asian Americans disagree with this approach. The Supreme Court's reasoning is that this should make us a more equal society.

Geoff,

I would like to see the AA program transformed in such a manner to take into account poverty and not race in the near future. Why should middle-class minorities benefit from such a program when Affirmative Action is supposedly there to correct the cultural problems that afflict specific lower-class minorities? At some point people have the ability to pursue a better life when they are removed from a poverty-stricken environment, and the AA program has diminishing returns as it benefits those with higher incomes. I'm not sure how focusing so much on race, in lieu of both race and poverty, AA will address the problems that you've brought up.

Is the objective of this program to turn Blacks into Whites? Or to have Black income match that of White American income? At this point what would be the incentive for anyone to even bother getting up for work or school. I don't think it's remotely possible to eliminate all of the social problems in this country (or any multiracial society) that AA is supposedly trying to address. A certain level of inequity will always be present and when AA creates enough inequities such that a sufficient number of people fall through the 'holes' then it's time for a major overhaul which I hope will become racially neutral.

The world isn't black and white anymore... Case in point: Colin Powell is always pointed out as having benefited from AA. Yet he isn't exactly black in a true sense or even dark for that matter, and he came from an immigrant family from Jamaica, so how did Affirmative Action seek to correct past injustices to African Americans by benefiting this individual? And why is it that AA benefits Hispanics as well when there didn't exist historical injustices towards them to the extent of African-Americans and Native-Americans in the U.S.? Simply because of their average/median income levels? My guess is that Hispanic poverty was seen as a potential problem that needed to be addressed now rather than later, but I'm sure politics came into play as well.

And AA will also tend to benefit the affluent "repeat customers" by allowing them to out-compete the poor minorities of the same race. This will make "the greater good" sound more like "Screw the poor, I'm getting something out of this!!" Again this doesn't exactly follow the intent of Affirmative Action as you've described. There seems to be quite a few inconsistencies and flaws that still need to be addressed in the AA program as we know it.

Kimchi Devil,
A considerable number of college students? parents are not rich or upper middle class. I?ve heard a number of black conservatives argue that affirmative action benefits ?uppity blacks?. It really isn?t fair to assume that a minority student can afford to pay for his/her education. Quite a number of them drop out due to financial hardship. There are quite a number of minority students whose marginal financial means barely keep them on college campuses. This is, of course, the same for many white and Asian students. Many of the black, Hispanic and Native American students make tremendous sacrifices to stay in college despite all the economic odds and social disparities against them. Affirmative action does not assist you in graduation. It only gets you in the door. Once you get admitted, you?re on your own. You either make the grade or you don?t graduate.

The Court?s ruling is broad in that it allows university admissions officials to use ?race? as a plus factor ? while not the dominant factor ? in deciding who can be admitted. The majority opinion was written by a principled conservative lady. In the same way that the words ?race? and ?persons? were used to describe who can get relief under the equal protection clause, one could also argue that 50-75 years from now when white people are the minority, affirmative action will benefit them.

Fact is, the now outlawed Michigan affirmative action policy for undergraduate students benefited poor white applicants from rural counties in Michigan. Clearly, affirmative action actually helped white people from Michigan attend an elite university. Ironically, several privileged white students who fought the policy in court, ultimately, made it more difficult for poor white students to get a much needed admissions advantage. They expected the courts to put blacks in their place, but ended up hurting their own people.

Invariably there should exist some program of active redistribution of opportunity in this country simply because the roads of opportunity were, historically speaking, structured to benefit Euro-Caucasian peoples while summarily dooming other races to a life on the edge of society. If American life were structured on merit alone, then to be just you must also do away with nepotism, fraternal order preference and Ivy league insulation as well. It takes generations to create wealth for families and communities and in the historic sense non-white peoples were deined this ability.
Yet the methodology of Affirmative Action as it stands today is filled with far to many wholes and it is no wonder why the majority of Asian Americans do not support it. It is rather sophmoric to think that a specific minority (Asians in this case) would support a program that at best ignores them and at worst places road blocks before them.
To try and understand Affirmative Action the first fact you must understand is that this idea was based on improving opportunities for non-whites and women. The group to most benefit from Affirmative Action ironically is white females. I also find it ironic that many of Affirmative Actions biggest opponents have been white females.
In the racial application of AA the purpose was to improve diversity and create opportunity for groups that were historically denied social mobility. Hence the emphasis of the program was on Blacks and Hispanics. However you could very easily draw comparisons between the treatment of Chinese immigrants in the 19th century and Mexicans. Infact one could argue that a Mexican still had more resources at his disposal then a rail spike driver from Canton. Japanese Americans have the unique distinction of being the only immigrant group to be stripped of all property and placed in concentration camps less then 60 years ago. Yet very little has been done to correct historic injustice when the victim happens to be Asian. They must rely on thier own industry.
Today in America if you are East or South Asian you can expect the admissions process for higher education to be more difficult for you then for any other group. My personal experience excluded I have seen with my own eyes African American and Hispanic students who went to Ivy league Medical and Law schools while East and South Asian from the same college with the exact same grades finding no admission into any school at all. A system like this cannot be expected to be well received.
In the work place Asian fair a littel better with most corporations looking at the issue of diversity in the work place with a more rainbow appeal rather then limiting it only to two specific minorities.
Very few people know that the per capita poorest racial groups in America are Asians ( Hmong, Laotian and Cambodian) while the two richest are also Asian ( Indian and Japanese) yet very little is done to improve the situation of the poor Asian minorities possible due to the success of weathly ones. Perhaps the assumption is that since some Asians do better then average none of them need assitance.
This being said I feel Asians do thrive and prosper in meritocrasies. The closest thing we have to a merit based industry is Silicon valley ( and professional sports). Programmers and computer makers are judged by results and in this industry you will find that Asians are more a majority then a minority.
Finally I think the ultimately distortion with AA as it is used today is the ugly perception of incompitence and inferiority that goes hand in hand with such a deal. If you are black or hispanic and you do attend a good college or grad school the notion that you are attending not because you deserve to but because of your race is difficult to escape. This may not be fair but it is an inescapable double edged sword of such a system. This is particulary upsetting to many people because we are raised in such an overly competative society to begin with. Just imagine how well recieved a player on a professional sports team would be if the prevasive notion was that he did not earn his place but was given it due to race. And why not, should we treat the multi-billion dollar industry of grown men and women playing games as sacred to ability alone?

I seem to recall hearing in the past about a fairly large amount of minority scholarships and grants that go unspent each year. I'm not sure how things have changed in recent years but I would imagine that is still the case. Of course if push ever came to shove then wealthier minorities will tend to benefit more from AA than the poor as I've stated earlier. However I still think AA programs in general tend to be better utilized by middle-class minorities even without any competition for resources. If there are minorities dropping out in large numbers due to financial hardships then that's clearly a waste and more measures should be taken to ease the pursuit of their studies.

I suppose my reason for being upset at higher admissions standards for Asian-Americans than for whites is partly because of that image of the "beer-drinking, partying frat boys" vs. the "studious" Asian... Somehow I'm hard pressed to feel sorry for 'em considering that Asians with high-school diplomas only make about 75 cents for every dollar a white person earns (this gap closes a bit with college degrees but there's still a disparity). As one can clearly see, it is a smart maneuver to pursue higher education especially if you are a minority, whereas many whites at least seem to get by just fine without a college degree and have plenty of opportunities to make a descent living or better support themselves in pursuing higher education. And another thing that concerns me is perhaps the competition between Americanized Asians and recent Asian immigrants or foreigners, along with variations in academic achievement (or income levels) among Asians of various ethnicities. Recent immigrants will tend to displace more Americanized Asians, while SE-Asians (Hmong, Vietnamese, Filipinos, etc.) tend to suffer due to the higher admissions standards set by East Asians. I think the fact that Hispanics, Asians, and even Whites tend to include such a large variety of 'races' or cultures that it almost becomes pointless having blanket policies that help or hinder individuals based on race/ethnicity rather than a more appropriate factor such as individual income level. And having certain groups and individuals jump from one category to another only adds to the confusion, like East Indians who were once considered 'black', then 'Caucasian', and are perhaps now 'Asian' in order to gain gov't contracts as minorities. Filipinos in California are another example since their inclusion into the 'Asian' category would tend to hinder this group. For these reasons I would prefer that we drop differences in admissions standards based on race and eventually move toward easements related to individual/family income in the future. Of course it's not that simple since discrimination and bias do exist in society along with its cumulative effects that Affirmative Action seeks to correct, so to a limited extent I still support benefits toward underrepresented groups including Asians.

Regarding the Michigan State Affirmative Action program, from page six of the following link I've outlined some significant points. (My earlier quote contained wrong figures):
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/outreach/gratz-brief.pdf

20 points for underrepresented minority (black, hispanic, native-am).
12 points for a perfect ACT/SAT score.
80 points for a 4.0 GPA (20 points per grade point)
10 points for the quality of school
8 to -4 points for strength of high school curriculum
4 points for alumni relationships

On national television and conservative media it was constantly mentioned that select minorities received 20 points while a perfect SAT resulted in 12 points being awarded. It was rarely if ever mentioned that the GPA was worth 80 points. In addition to that, I'd say that certain minorities in general would also tend to suffer a lack of points awarded for school quality, high school curriculum, alumni relationships, and other unlisted factors such as residency in certain rural locations. The admissions program that existed Michigan States seemed fair to me. It was an obvious smear campaign, and if for no other reason than this, I oppose the particular case made against this AA program. Besides, Michigan State at least didn't penalize anyone for being Asian.

However in many other colleges and universities there are measures to reduce the number of Asian admissions which I completely object to. The only reason for ever setting higher standards for Asian-Americans than for whites is because of some anti-Asian agenda which can conveniently be exercised under the guise of Affirmative Action. Perhaps now they will begin implement better policies in the spirit of AA without resorting to racial divisiveness.

Hello,

I haven't posted recently, as I have been busy. I have read all your points, and they are all very valid. You people are all rather persuasive writers. Anyway, I've changed my mind, and decided that a limited form of Affirmative Action can be appropriate.

Although it frustrates me that I would have a smaller chance of getting into college because of Affirmative Action, I see how it could be important in rectifying previous inequalities. O'Conner is right in the fact that it should definitely not be a point-value for race. In fact, race should probably play a very small role if any role.

Right now, it's basically a question of self-interest vs American-interest. You're right in the fact that we could never sustain ourselves with a permanetly unproductive segment of society. Though, at the same time, I don't want to be disadvantaged when I apply for college. This self-conflict will probably not be resolved.

Excuse me for going off on a tangent, but, as an idealist, the group mentality of the "races" is rather disturbing. I suppose I can't really do anything about that, but it would be nice if they didn't exist. An interesting world that would be. If everyone was completely colorblind, 90% of Asian Americans, and about 80% of Black&Hispanic Americans would outmarry. What a strange world. Very quickly, race would lose meaning, in that scenario. In fact, it could be said that group mentality and the concept of race support themselves in a circular fashion. If there was no group-mentality, there would be no race, as everyone would mix very quickly. At the same time, there coudn't be a group-mentality without race.

On second thought, by the time group mentality disappears, either Americans will have mixed their DNA around so much that everyone looks roughly the same, or racism is totally gone, and race is regarded much like hair color. We seem to be approaching that point in both ways, and if the logic in the above paragraph holds true, our rate of travel to that point will accelerate as we go along. Hmm... wonder how well that stands up to real life.

That is all.

This what Kimchi Devil wrote:
"...I would prefer that we drop differences in admissions standards based on race and eventually move toward easements related to individual/family income in the future."

Interestingly, that is pretty much what the Supreme Court just ruled. I guess that makes Kimchi Supreme Court material.

The Court's ruling allows a university to make an individualized assessment during admissions consideration. Applicants' recommendation letters, essay, application, socio-economic status and other factors are taken into consideration. Towards the end of consideration, admissions officials look at the racial make-up of the incoming class. It is then, only, that the college may use race as a plus factor in order to gain a critical mass - diversity. You CANNOT get in just because you're African-American. The undergraduate point system is now unconstitutional.

Frankly, I wasn't too disappointed to see that system go. I mean, if guys and gals are awarded points based on race, then the biggest prick or the biggest bitch could get bonus points just because they are black or Hispanic. That's a mistake.

Our country cannot survive if affirmative action is allowed to indefinitely take race into consideration. However, our country cannot survive if the country refuses to take race into consideration on a temporary basis in order to bring about diversity and effective participation. We cannot survive as a society unless we learn to understand each other and to develop broad constructive thought patterns and to bring about economic justice.

I wouldn't go so far as to support re-distribution of wealth or economics. I'm a capitalist. If you earn money you should be able to keep it. I also don't believe in over-taxing the rich. It inhibits entreprenuerialism and just plain anti-capitalism. I do, however, believe in equal distribution of opportunity. If you place more under-represented minorities in college lecture rooms and in laboratories and in dormitories, then you will empower them to construct meaningful lives. They will positively contribute to the country. We will actually benefit from our diversity.

If we fail to formally educate this generation, then it will only leave us with yet another generation of under-represented minority children to support who will, in turn, poorly educate and raise their offspring.

When will it stop? It will continue to foster a culture of inferior education and, even more scarry, a tolerance for it.

I am against Affirmative action(AA). Many think as if having AA will bring many more blacks into higher education. There is no indication that that will happen. With the abolishment of points, universities have promised to give Blacks and Hispanic only a marginal boost. Although a boost of 20/100 disturbs the public's (and the Supreme Court's) sensibilities too much to pass over, reasonable amounts of discrimination is not only condoned, but also encouraged. What is to be gained from that? Will sending a black student who would have gone to a top 10 school (Chicago or Columbia) to a top 5 school(HYPSM) really build a better society? Or will sending a student who would have gone to Bloomington to Berkeley cause the student to gain a major boost in income or knowledge or character? Nothing is gained from doing away with the principles of racial equality, except appeasement and soma for the black community and votes for the politicians who do not wish to deal with the real problems that face blacks and other minorities-such as drugs, the public school system, and crime. AA is Ineffective

There was an article on sfgate.com a month or so back with the shocking report that black medical students at UC Davis have plummeted after prop 209. While the article itself was a simple minded hit piece on Prop 209, the facts stated have been the most damning evidence against the efficacy of Affirmative action (AA) that I have ever seen. It was shocking and damning because it showed that after 30 years of AA, black students (whether from the colorblind UC system or schools that have AA) still could not get in on their own merits but must be helped and boosted and coddled. That qualified URMs cannot get in is not the problem. The real problem is that there are not enough qualified applicants from URM groups.

Besides its ineffectiveness, Affirmative action has many other problems. One of them is how to decide which persons are classified as a underrepresented minorities (URMs) and are attractive to admissions staff who try to strive to match certain numerical goals and which persons are run of the mill applicants who must make way for the URMs. A Persian and a Cambodian must make do with what skills and intellectual prowess they have managed to nurture, while a student who is 1/8th black or 1/16th Native American and has been showered with many of the benefits that money can buy gets another ace to play: the race card. Under Affirmative action, lines are drawn and groups divided arbitrarily through the population of America. AA is divisive

This throws some new light on the truth of Affirmative action. I?ve done a lot of reading but there is something puzzling about the supporting articles of AA. There are many good arguments for a socioeconomic compensation program, but those who support Affirmative action seldom reply to those arguments and those replies are usually along the lines of ?that wouldn?t work, I just know it.? I?ve realized that from a supporter?s point of view a socioeconomic compensation program will miss the point completely. Affirmative action is not actually a program to help disadvantaged students as it is a racial division of the political pie. Affirmative action is about racial "equality of results" and collective ?rights? by race, and as it cuts America into certain groups it deals out fairly equal shares of America?s benefits for each group as according to population. It is extremely fair unless you are an individual born into a racial group with a small population but a large pool of qualified applicants. Then you are screwed. This is the reason why Constitution grants rights to individuals. An ethnicity is no coherent entity and should have no more rights then it has as a group of individuals. If you like collective rights, you may take a boat to Cuba. And this is why AA undermines the foundations of a just society.AA is collectivism

Some may struggle and shout ?you?re missing the point. AA is actually about fostering a diverse university culture/making URMs comfortable (the critical mass argument).? But diversity may be fostered by color-blind socioeconomic methods too. The statistical numbers of ?blacks? and ?Hispanics? that make such great P.R. fodder may go down until the root causes that hold URMS down are fixed and not gilded over, but the numbers of demo derby racers and street dancers will go up. And the argument that a certain ?critical mass? must be achieved to accommodate URMs is a bald faced lie-Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans all tend to live in communities of the same ethnicity, yet universities match the ?critical mass? to the "population" of each race. See?

And the historical argument is even more ridiculous. My country has been plundered several times by the Japanese, the most recent instance being the 1940s. Is it because of the savageness and racism of the Japanese people that I have little better to do than to post to an internet forum until September comes and I finally matriculate into college?

Wow, this is long.

-Why Rue

kimchee.

Minor point but East Indians were never considered to be black. They were considered to be non-white Caucasians. Which put them in a similar boat with Hispanics. Ironically hundreds of Indians who cames to America in the 1920 that had fair skin whould change thier names to something western and pass for white. There are some interresting biographies concerning this practice. In one case an Indian born man was elected to Congress in 1950 running as a white guy....haha.

You made some sound points, however, you're basing your position on limited information.

Prop 209 in California was anti-affirmative action. Therefore, the low number of black students is a direct result of a ban on affirmative action.

Asians in America - whether immigrants or American born - curiously, have little interest in American history. That bothers me. I would love to be proved wrong and pleasantly surprised by information you may have that would prove me wrong. When it comes to history about Asian cultures and even some European cultures, you seem well schooled. However, when a non-Asians who I know have tried to make arguments to different Asian people about racism in America, you seem so willing to wave it off and accuse blacks and Hispanics of making excuses.

I know that Asians have fought for their civil rights here in the US. They were impressive fights at that. Look at the history of other civil rights battles in this country. Asians are directly benefiting from them.

When you say: "...There are many good arguments for a socioeconomic compensation program, but those who support Affirmative action seldom reply to those arguments". It's probably frustrating for people to deal with your statement, because you want to disregard the role race has played in America. It's more complicated than socioeconomic compensation. And, who said anything about compensating anyone??? Affirmative action has nothing to do with compensation.

Again, I understand your position, but I disagree that affirmative action is ineffective and divisive. If it's ineffective, then there must be beneficiairies of the program who have not been helped. If it's divisive, then the diversity it has created must have been an allusion. This country's race relations have improved. More under-representated minorities have graduated from college and engaged professional careers. It appears divisive to people who oppose it. It appears ineffective to people who oppose it. Those who oppose affirmative action, however, cannot deny that under-represented minorities have been admitted to college. That is a positive trend. We could always turn back the clock to pre-affirmative action trends. Would you be more comfortable with those negative trends?

What's good about the recent court decision is that it once again makes affirmative action a virtue. For a while, it was becoming a nasty word. Politicians were distancing themselves from it and using creative language to disguise their indifference. What the Supreme Court did was not only embrace it, but make it the law of the land. It allows the government to commit resources and encourage it's implementation.

Affirmative Action is nothing more then another entitlement program, and a good majority of those who are for AA are also for other forms of government entitlement programs. We are fastly becoming an entitlement nation, which is not how this country was founded and built. I did read my American history. Whatever happened to earning what you get? These days people think they are owed something, when they were never promised anything but an opportunity, which they've got.

I'm all for helping people who need it, but most of my compassion is reserved for those who really need it: little kids with cancer or who are abused, those with disabilities ( I mean real disabilities), etc. I'm also for helping those who lack a proper education to get one, which is different then sending a student who isn't quite Ivy material to an Ivy just because of their skin color. They can go to a good state university, and by the way, take out loans like the rest of us.

After all, if they can get into a decent state universtiy, I don't think they deserve any sympathy. They are doing better then a lot. There are a lot of very successful people who have a mediocra education, or none at all. It's just a matter of how much responsibility a person is willing to take for their own accomplishments and successes in life.

Racism, oppression and discrimination are bad, and we have laws for that. Granted, those laws can be difficult to enforce at times, but I think a more concentrated effort should be made on enforcing those laws then fixating on another entitlement program.

As far as AA and compensation? If AA is going to exist, I'd rather it be based on a socio-economic level then a matter of race. Poor people, as a general rule, usually do lack in education, versus their more economically advantaged peers, but you have poor people of all races and genders. So why just concentrate on a few races, and not all? Wouldn't that be more fair?

If success was based totally on a top-tier education, then I might agree with AA, but it's not. Hey, I get peeved sometimes because women still make less then men for the same job, but I'm not ready to throw the towel in yet and blame men for my disadvantage, and therefore, demand special privilages because of it. There are laws against gender discrimination and it is my hope that we get to a point where they can be inforced like they should. In the meantime, I'll just work at putting myself in a position where I can benefit to the best of my ability, and compete to the best of my ability.

Didi, please spare me your preachment about entitlement programs.

You have immigrants of all races, colors and sizes coming here everyday and collecting social security benefits. Last time I checked, social security is an entitlement program with no means testing. There are European, Vietnamese, Chinese and Filipino immigrants who sail here on boats and other legal and illegal means. They step right onto Ameican soil and start collecting government assistance. This, along with rising health care costs, is literally bankrupting the social security fund. I don't hear anyone griping about that entitlement when it helps you.

Now I'm curious, who says that under-representated minority students who are admitted into colleges under affirmative action don't take out student loans like the "rest of you"? That's propaganda. Not even the most intense conservative opponents of affirmative action deny that most of those same minority students take out student loans and must repay them or default. A black or Hispanic student whose family is struggling financially have no other financial support than to carry a student loan. Your point in this respect is rubbish.

As far as your comment: "If AA is going to exist, I'd rather it be based on a socio-economic level then a matter of race".

You don't read very well, do you?

Why don't you settle down and read some key parts of Justice O'Connor's opinion. You might learn something.

You further argue: "Racism, oppression and discrimination are bad, and we have laws for that". Of course it's bad, why else would the Supreme Court rule on the matter otherwise. I'm sure that Justices Scalia and Thomas, and Chief Justice Rehnquist also believe that racism is bad. I'm sure Ward Connerly believes racism is bad. George W. Bush also believes that racism is bad. We all know racism is bad. Now how about doing something to fix it?

You write: "If success was based totally on a top-tier education, then I might agree with AA, but it's not."

If more top tier education was available in more economically depressed regions of the country, then you would have more qualified applicants trying to get into universities. Top tier education is usually available in white and Asian neighborhoods. That, along with Asian culture emphazising on education and family, enables more white and Asian students to be successful.

You write: "So why just concentrate on a few races, and not all? Wouldn't that be more fair?"

Well Didi, if you can demonstrate to the courts that white and Asians are more likely to receive inferior education, more likely to drop out of high school, more likely to have lower paying jobs, more likely to receive poor health care, more likely to not attend college, than under-represented minorities, then you would have a point.

There is not doubt in my mind - indeed there are clear examples - that many white and Asian people in this country are not getting a fair deal in America. Many Asian entrepreneurs (stores, restaurants, etc.) can't afford health care or other luxuries in life and must work long hours in order to survive. Many of them go unprotected against violent criminals. Many Asians are forced to offer an explanation to the media and society, in general, when a thug points a gun in their face or try to intimidate them. That's more than not fair, it's damn crude and demoralizing to them.

Affirmative action doesn't seek to ignore those unfair conditions. Rather, if more Americans are treated equal and if more people are given fair opportunity, then our country becomes more equal and inferior social conditions begin to decrease.

We can never have a Utopian society (2% unemployment rate, chicken in every pot, perfect schools and neighborhoods, uniform affordable health care, low crime in every part of the country, immigration laws where only good people get in, 90% internet access). However, we can have a more equal society.

I need to clarify a statement I wrote "They step right onto Ameican soil and start collecting government assistance."

Young Asian immigrants and many older ones come here and start working right away. However, elderly immigrants come to the US and can collect social security benefits without paying into the fund. It's legal. It's an entitlement program. It's helping to bankrupt the social security fund.

Seaman,

Yeah, kinda like how many half-asians could pass for Hispanic

You did bring up an interesting point that touches on immigration patterns... I noticed that generally South Asians in the US tend to come from more affluent roots and tend to be fair-skinned, whereas Mexicans in the US and Turks in Germany (from my observation) tended to be poor or working-class with respect to those in their homeland: This tends to skew the overall perception of an ethnicity based on immigrant populations, for better or worse.

I think in Ghandi's case, his experience in South Africa wasn't exactly the warm welcome one would expect for a non-white Caucasian.

Geoff,

No need to leave anyone out when discussing the benefits that immigrants receive, the same could be said of Hispanics too. But I'm sure the Chinese immigrants in the past and the affluent Asians today are more than carrying their fair share of the load of "society's burdens." And likewise Asians and Hispanics also tend to do the types of work that Whites and Blacks won't even touch, such as sweatshop work, which in many minds is closely associated with the two groups. I guess it's because of the fact that so many African-Americans refuse to "jump through the hoops" -- that many recent and not-so-recent immigrants must go through as a normal part of life -- that there's little sympathy outside of White-America for Blacks in this regard. And yet another reason is the tendency of the blacks in the ghettos to aggravate poverty into something much worse than it needed to be, as if poverty alone wasn't bad enough (normally people should make the best of a bad situation). We all have our own issues that need to be dealt with, I just tend to look Black-White issues as somewhat separate from issues dealing other minorities, no need to pick sides or whatever.

I also realize that Hispanics are short-changed quite often in the workforce, just as many immigrants are, and this somehow gets overlooked when discussing folks that receive more benefits than they provide to society. Hell, I almost got my ass fired at a job for sticking up for Hispanics in a similar heated argument with my supervisor(s). But all they care about is "their money, their taxes, their money, their taxes" for sitting on "their asses" with their overinflated white salaries, having little no regard to those who work for pocket change, then blaming them for being a burden to society. I don't see businesses in California whining about Hispanics or Mexican immigrants, nor do I see Republicans making an issue of it either... I wonder why? And I'm not sure why this should differ from any other immigrants or recent immigrants, if anything they'll tend to benefit less because they are even less represented in politics than Hispanics.

And of course, many immigrants brought skills to the United States that the education system in the States didn't (entirely) need to be burdened with... One must consider the vast amounts of human capital that America acquired from years of European immigration, and the relatively educated immigrants coming from Asia and elsewhere in recent times. Hell, even plans for machine tools had to be smuggled into the States from Europe.

Geoff,

The issue being discussed wasn't entitlement programs but Affirmative Action. I simply stated that AA was nothing more then an entitlement program, and I stand by that.

But since you bring it up, I'm not much for most of the entitlement programs our government provides. Like I said, we are fast becoming an entitlement nation.

You are right AA has nothing to do with receiving student loans. That I threw in on a side-note. There was a point behind it, but it wasn't your argument, just my ranting.

QUOTE

You don't read very well, do you? Why don't you settle down and read some key parts of Justice O'Connor's opinion. You might learn something.

I read very well, thank you. No need to settle down, either.

When I first posted to you I hadn't read all the previous posts on this issue, and when I did I discoverd you have a thing for Justice O'Conner. As a matter of fact, she's seems to be your argument. Not everyone agrees with her opinion, however she was one of the ones with the last say, just like the Supreme Court Justice's had the last say on the Gore/Bush thing. Now tell me, how many people disagreed with that little opinion? So you see Geoff, like many others, I'm not, nor do I have to be, impressed at all with Justice O'Connor's opinon.

QUOTE

You further argue: "Racism, oppression and discrimination are bad,...

No Geoff, that really wasn't an argument, but a fact.

QUOTE

If more top tier education was available in more economically depressed regions of the country, then you would have more qualified applicants trying to get into universities.

When I mentioned top-tier education I was referring to universities, not high schools. Few will argue that our public education is lacking.

QUOTE

Well Didi, if you can demonstrate to the courts that white and Asians are more likely to receive inferior education, more likely to drop out of high school, more likely to have lower paying jobs, more likely to receive poor health care, more likely to not attend college, than under-represented minorities, then you would have a point.

Yes, Geoff, I see where you're going with this. Whites and Asians, particularly whites, are the oppressors here and other minorities are the victims. Okay, but don't forget, Geoff, that 70% of all black babies are born out of wedlock, or the staggering number of new HIV cases each year in the black community. These are real concerns, too.

But none of these issues can be resolved through AA, Geoff. How long has AA been around? Why do the problems continue to get worse, instead of better?

What you say is true and I wish it wasn't because it's sad, but the black community are the only ones who can resolve these issues. (I'll not speak of other minority groups because I don't know enough about them.) But no amount of money or AA in the world can replace people taking complete control of their lives.

QUOTE

There is not doubt in my mind - indeed there are clear examples - that many white and Asian people in this country are not getting a fair deal in America. Many Asian entrepreneurs (stores, restaurants, etc.) can't afford health care or other luxuries in life and must work long hours in order to survive.

Geoff, there is no such thing as a fair deal. Although it's a nice thought, there will always be people at a disadvantage. For instance, pretty people usually do better socially and economically then not pretty people. It's just a fact of life. People who truely want to succeed will find a way to do it, regardless of the obstacles. I don't know what more I can say on this.

QUOTE

Affirmative action doesn't seek to ignore those unfair conditions. Rather, if more Americans are treated equal and if more people are given fair opportunity, then our country becomes more equal and inferior social conditions begin to decrease.

Inferior social conditions will not decrease until people start accepting responsibility for the success and failures of their own lives. If I fail I have no one to blame but me, and I would hate to think my success or failure depended on what another person could do for me.

Didi,
You go into detail about a number of poor social conditions in the black community. It's important to stay on the topic of affirmative action and whether it's a "fair" program for colleges, government and private industry to use. The topic already creates enough complexity and emotion without discussing all the ills in predominantly black communities. For the record, I'm neither conservative nor liberal in my political beliefs. I don't coddle black criminals. I'm not registered as an Independent. I am a registered Democrat and a staunch one at that. One with centrist views and social values.

I not only see gray areas, but also different shades of gray. See where I'm coming from? Hope that give you a more clear impression of who I am.

You're not talking to a black guy who steps up to the microphone to excuse violent behavior on the part of certain black males. You're also not talking to a black guy who disregards historical and current marginalization based on race and try to paint a rosey picture of America.

Yes, Didi, there is such a thing as a fair deal in America. The question is who get's it! White and Asian people currently argue that affirmative action is unfair to them. There are a number of white and Asians citizens throughout the US who claim that African-Americans are now getting an advantage over them. They further argue that affirmative action violates your civil rights.

If affirmative action violates the civil rights of white and Asian people, then why are student bodies on college campuses still overwhelmingly white and Asian?

If affirmative action violates equal employment rights of white and Asian people, then why do white and Asian people still out-gross incomes of African-Americans?

If affirmative action gives black people an edge over white and Asian people, then why do US demographic data for economics and education still show otherwise?

Because your law class now has maybe 3-5 more black students enrolled, it's now unfair to white and Asian students that your class size is now only 87% white and Asian? Is that what you call a violation of your civil rights? Is that what you call social deprivation?

Fact is, affirmative action is exactly that and nothing more. It is a policy by a corporation, a college, a government or other institution that states that it will not only actively recruit under-represented minorities, but also do something constructive to create some type of balance to off-set social imbalance. It attempts to bring about a critical mass of diversity where none would otherwise exist.

Kimchi Devil,
Yes, I was wrong to exclude Hispanics from last post on entitlement programs. Black people can also be used in my example. Sorry about that.

Social security is in dire straights. It's on the verge of instability. Asian-American professionals pay tons of money into Social Security. Point well made. I was simply responding to Didi's criticism about affirmative action as an entitlement program.

Affirmative action used as an entitlement program could only weaken America, not help it. It has to be used as a temporary corrective measure.

Geoff,

QUOTE

Well Didi, if you can demonstrate to the courts that white and Asians are more likely to receive inferior education, more likely to drop out of high school, more likely to have lower paying jobs, more likely to receive poor health care, more likely to not attend college, than under-represented minorities, then you would have a point.

Did you not bring this up? I was simply adding to your list. If you didn't want me to discuss them then you shouldn't have brought them up. And, by the way, weren't you the one that brought up the discussion of other entitlement programs other then AA? So, tell me again how I'm not staying on topic when I'm just following your lead?

QUOTE

If affirmative action violates the civil rights of white and Asian people, then why are student bodies on college campuses still overwhelmingly white and Asian?

I've always figured that those who really wanted to be there, would. The only catch here is they don't give it away. It'll cost a person in time, money and effort. A lot of people just don't want to pay that price, or they are simply not interested. Perhaps it's that simple.

This day and age there is no reason why anyone who really wants an education can't get one. The only thing that is stopping someone is the will to do it. Even those who don't have a competent high school education can have one if they really want it.

As far as affirmative action goes, if a minority can't cut it and compete with his or her peers on a level playing field, then they shouldn't be given anything but the directions to a university where they can compete. Instead we have people crying and whining because they aren't treated fair. Affirmative action is nothing but giving someone what they didn't earn.

Let us make this simple, if a person is a first generation college grad like me, who couldn't even do simple division after they graduated high school, then they shouldn't expect to be going to an Ivy. Jeeesh... that makes too much sense.

Coming from a family that despised education, I took a lot of crap when I decided to go. I was a single mother and I did it all by myself. I worked, went to school and did my best to be a mom. It was hard, but you don't get it by wishing for it. And I knew if I went then there would be a good chance my son would go too. It was as much for him as it was for me. And with the exception of a pell grant and student loans, I've never accepted any welfare of any kind. Therefore, I don't have much patience for whiners and victims. Especially those who could almost get into an Ivy, but couldn't.

Sorry I'm not so compassionate, but I'd be pissed if I was some white or Asian kid who worked my butt off just to be displaced by a minority who couldn't quite cut it.

Okay, now I'm emotional.....

People sacrifice for the opportunity to compete for positions that your AA just gives to someone because they are a minority! It's an insult!

And how about Asains, the only thing they did wrong to not deserve your affirmative action is to have taken some initive to excel in acadmics! Too bad for them, huh? They get punished for trying not to be disadvantaged. What a raw deal! You say you can see their side, but I question that, because if you could, how could you approve of taking something away from them that they EARNED! And they are the minority of the minorities for Pete's sake!

I don't feel sorry for Asians or whites, so don't think that's what I'm doing here, but history shows us that Asians went through the same kind of hell as every other minority group in this country, so with that in mind, why are they considered the privileged when the same opportunities that they took have been afforded to every other minority group in this country? Do you think one day Asians just started waking up and decided to become privileged? It probably took a lot of hard work and sacrifice from parents and grandparents to become privileged. Unfortunatly for some other minority groups they weren't as far-sighted, and because of that they are being rewarded.

I don't doubt that you are probably a decent person, but we are never going to agree on this.

Didi,
You made a number of valid points. The whole issue of entitlement programs was broached by yourself. You mentioned that we are becoming a nation of entitlements. I responded to your argument. As that one point can become convoluted, I simply ask you to refer to your initial post.

Several points you made could have very easily been made by an African-American man or woman who - while supporting affirmative action - continue to struggle as to why conditions in black communities remain poor. There are a number of black people who simply don't give a damn. Seriously, those guys and gals are not trying to take advantage of affirmative action.

I'm disappointed that you base your opposition to affirmative action on limited information, misinformation and disinformation. That's the problem people get into when you go on emotional tirades without taking the time to research your position.

I'm neither a white apologist nor white hater. When individuals fail to take responsibility for their own actions and refuse to better themselves, they have only themselves to blame. The government provides services. We, however, must do as much as humanly possible to take advantage of opportunities and work hard. Current affirmative action programs in colleges and universities as approved by the recent Supreme Court decision does not reward any particular person based solely on race. Affirmative action provides opportunities. It does not distribute or re-distribute wealth or cash. It only places an opporutnity before an eager individual. I've stated previously that I would be troubled by and, indeed, would oppose any affirmative action program that would seek to exclude disadvantaged white or Asian people. Go back and read what I wrote.

The whole issue of Asians being privileged has its roots in Asian economic success. Asians tend to be more economically successful because their culture fosters education, duty to family, community and hard work. Asians work very hard. Many Asian children work for their family businesses as well as study hard for school. That is commendable. That is honorable. That is very Asian. Their culture was not created over night. It has been nurtured for thousands of years. American history teaches us and current negative media depictions of Asians tells us that while Asians have benefited successfully in American enterprise and economics, they have been villified in other areas. I've never sought to cover that up.

I don't ever recall blaming Asians for anything. I've stated previously that the only reason an Asian-American would probably support affirmative action in higher education is for the purpose of diversity and the social good it does for our nation.

Again, you need to settle down, take a deep breath and do some homework. Read the first parts of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor majority opinion. Before you mount a strongly worded, heated, emotional opposition to affirmative action, you should read more about it.
Currently, the use of race can only be used as a plus factor.

Lastly, of course we see things differently about how government and universities can resolve race related social and educational inequities. I'm not surprised. I don't see why you needed to remind me. Both of us see this country through two different pairs of eyes. We both have two separate opinions about this country. I love my country, but I also recognize the ugly affects of its racism. To make matters worse, people are becoming even more sophisticated in their racism.

Affirmative action in higher education, government contracts and employment are programs that the Supreme Court has sanctioned as compelling interests and public policy. It's legal affect puts our country on the right path.

Geoff,

I appreciate your taking an interest in my emotional well-being, but unfortunatly I do find myself getting somewhat emotional when confronted with liberal views. Yes, Geoff, you are a liberal in denial. Nothing wrong with liberals outside of their politics, of course. Some of the nicest people I know are liberals, and many of them are minorities in one form or another.

To be fair, you are talking to a person who isn't exactly far-right, but will not go so far to say I'm a moderate. Your admittance of being a stanch democrat, in compilation of some of your other views, lead me to conclude you are not a moderate, no matter how bad you want to be.

No need to be disappointed, Geoff. I'm well aware of the issues and conditions associated with affirmative action. There is research out there that does not support affirmative action, but I'm sure you already know that. Just as there is some that could support your views (I actually did some research on affirmative action in grad school). What it boils down to is you don't like my opinions on the matter, and I don't like yours. But what can you expect when you mix a liberal and conservatives points of view.

Okay, I see you are back to Justice O'Connor... I wish you could understand that not everyone finds her as inspiring as you do, or even correct, for that matter. Okay, I admit, I may be a little sore that she gets the final say and it's not mine, but that's what I get for not going to law school. And, to make you feel better, I'll admit to having read her opinion. I read it a while back when the news of it and the decision was plastered all over the news channels. I'll even confess to being somewhat of a news junkie, so I stay fairly current.

Fairness perceptions and attitudes toward affirmative action pretty much go together. Obviously, you think they are fair and I don't so our attitudes are different. There is the argument of "all men being created equal," and the question of egocentric bias that stands in my way.

Whereas I believe opportunites come from filling out the paper work for grants, loans, scholarships; going to class, being committed, and taking that opportunity as far as one is willing to sacrifice for it; you seem to believe opportunity comes from being disadvantaged, and therefore getting an unearned advantage over someone else, even if it's only a tinny-tiny advantage.

We could continue with this forever. Unfortunatly my long weekend is about over, so it's back to the real world and I doubt I'll have time to banter with you anymore. It's been a pleasure. I'll give you the last say.

Didi,
No need to let me write the last word on this subject. I know your schedule is busy but it only takes a couple of minutes to compose a post.

Support for affirmative action is not a liberal position. Justices O'Connor and John Paul Stevens are both Republicans. Justice O'Connor was nominated by the "Gipper" himself - President Ronald Reagan - in 1981. Justice Stevens was nominated by President Ford.

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger once said that you're in a pretty good position when the liberals call you conservative and the conservatives call you liberal. That's exactly where I want to be. Conservative support for affirmative action is pretty much limited to recruitment. They normally do not support any use of race. In that respect, yes, I guess I am a liberal.

Opposition to affirmative action is not necessarily a racist position. Support for affirmative action does not necessarily mean you condone rewarding someone for not being a high achiever.

Didi, many white and Asian people think the same way you do. It doesn't mean you're out to hurt anyone or condone racism or would proliferate racism. We have a difference of opinion.

Kimchi devil,

I hope I'm not derailing this discussion but I would like to respond to your post. I think there is some truth to the higher social class of South Asians in America but only in a limited scope. The migration of the 60's and 70's was mostly Indians with medical degrees. While that does put them in an educated class it does not mean they were higher class in their native country. Many of these physicians came from very poor families. It just happened that America had a major shortage of doctors during that period and needed ones who could at least communicate in English. They also trained Indian physicains to go to Vietnam but that engagement ended before most could be deployed. The 80's however saw an influx of rather unskilled blue collar South Asian types. But being business minded and rather industrious they opened up small business such as convenience stores, motels, cab companies, dry cleaning, liquor stores. Nearly all of these immiants were sponsored by familiy members already residing in the states. Then the 90's saw an influx of computer engineers again to fill a large labor shortage. Generally speaking it is very rare to find immigrants that come from very affluent backgrounds unless there are politicals reasons ( i.e. Hong Kongers or Iranains).

The idea that Indian Americans are fairer skinned is debatable. One reason why you might think that is that most Indians in America seem to be from a state in India called Gujurat ( don't ask me why). Gujuratis are generally not as dark skinned as South Indians ( a few are very light skinned with blue/green eyes) so perhaps thats why it may seem they are lighter then the Indians you see on the news most times. But if you go to states like Kashmir, N.W.F.P. ( in Pakistan) or Punjab you will find most Indians there are fairer then their American counter parts.

Ghandhi had a very tough time in South Africa because South Africa had specific racial laws that barred Indians from many areas of society. The U.S on the other hand had very little experience with South Asians due to the fact that there were so few. South Africa on the other hand had an enormous population. ( commonwealth and all) Ghandi fought against laws that stated that South African police did not need search warrants to enter Indian homes and that Non-Christian marriages were not considered legal. Hence all Hindu and Muslim couples were not married in the eyes of the state.

As I stated before Affirmative Action is generally unpopular with most Asians (East or South) because in the educational field ( where the majority tend to be involved) the system works against us. It limits our numbers and places high standards in front of us. This is the equivalent of running a foot race where your hurdles ar 6 inches higher then the next guy and a foot higher th the other guy. The guy with the higher hurdle will naturally complain and desire changes while the fellow with the lower hurdle will not.

I thought this was an excellent article on affirmative action and how it is harmful to Asians:

Asians are hurt by affirmative action

by Gary Tsai

These two idiots respond to the article by claiming the writer is a whiner, but it's pretty obvious he's not. Just goes to show you that affirmative action is great for some and not so great for others.

Sody

Sody,

Surprisingly, Gary Tsai (Taiwanese, I believe?) states that had Justice O'Connor decided to vote against affirmative action, that would have opened a plethora of opportunities for Asians.

Interesting because he then provides the following statistics: (1) one fifth of the nations 67,000 medical students are Asians even though you only account for 4% of the US population; (2) 43% of student body at UC Berkeley are Asian; (3) 33.9% of student population at UCLA are Asian.

What else could Justice Sandra Day O'Connor possibly do for Asian Americans? Increase those percentages by another several points?

The author, not surprisingly, goes on about how much Prop 209 in California helped Asians. Prop 209 was devastating to under-represented minority students in California. Those black and Hispanic students literally had the door slammed in their face by white and Asian voters and the best he can do is raise his billboard about how an already economically advantaged group benefited even more.

Let me respond to several points he made.

"However, this minority list includes all but the Asian community"

How many times have I heard Asians brag about how you have more in common with white people than African-Americans? It is assumed by most African-Americans - including this one - that Asian-Americans don't tend to consider themselves a minority until it is convenient to do so. Am I completely off the mark? If so, someone please correct me. I don't want to be misguided any more than I am already.

"In many ways Asians have become victims of affirmative action"

While I can understand why an Asian would oppose affirmative action on your own moral, cultural ground, please let's keep this argument balanced. With the data Gary Tsai mentioned above, I would hardly say that affirmative action has been a dagger in the heart of Asian American success.

"It (affirmative action) increases the competitiveness amongst Asians and decreases the competitiveness for other minorities and whites"

Sound point. However, keep in mind, since the Court upheld affirmative action in order to gain a critical mass, then some qualified black students won't get admitted once the university accomplishes its critical mass.

"...Many colleges use a quota system and admit a certain number of minorities"

False. Propaganda. The Court struck down Michigan's point system based on race as unconstitutional. No one gets a set number of points based on race.

"An increase of Asian applicants to Berkeley and UCLA suggests that Asians were more qualified in their applicant pool than any other race"

How nice! Wouldn't it be nice for more African-Americans to make the same statements? You see, some strange things happened on our road to civil rights in America! Asians have significant cultural advantages that help to you benefit.

I wonder if Gary Tsai would like to compare Asian-American culture with African-American culture? If Asians had the same obstacles and cultural barriers placed in front of you that this country has deliberately, "legally" and socially placed in front of black people, then you wouldn't be in any place to make that statement.

"Just imagine the percentage of Asians at other top schools such as Yale, Princeton or Columbia if their quota system and affirmative action programs was withdrawn..."

My God. Does this guy have any idea what he is saying? You want black and Hispanic students to disappear in order to make room for more Asian students who are already at a significantly greater economic position? If we lived in a more equal society, I could see that statment making some sense. However, we live in America, remember!

"Asians are by far the most competitive race in the United States..."

Well, it must be nice to make these statements. Asians tend to be better educated, have more resources, and are better positioned for success in America. That makes many people envious. I am not envious of Asian Americans. I am, however, concerned about racial division in our country.

"What I am advocating is that people in the employment market and college admissions boards judge people by their merits and not by race"

I say to Gary Tsai, at least we agree on this statement. Problem is, race is still a factor in who gets the best opportunities and who gets the best education.

QUOTE

The author, not surprisingly, goes on about how much Prop 209 in California helped Asians. Prop 209 was devastating to under-represented minority students in California. Those black and Hispanic students literally had the door slammed in their face by white and Asian voters and the best he can do is raise his billboard about how an already economically advantaged group benefited even more.

Geoff, you've raised some really interesting points that I wasn't even aware of. I don't really have any right to comment on affirmative action in the US since I'm from Canada. As a Canadian I didn't realize all the facts and it sucks that certain minorities have to suffer because of others. I basically reacted negatively to affirmative action because it sounded like only Asians were suffering from its effects. Here in Canada we don't have the same problems. All my Black and Hispanic friends in Toronto are very hard working and well off. They are pretty happy here, it is very different. It is mostly just Aboriginal Canadians who are dependant on affirmative action here.

QUOTE

How many times have I heard Asians brag about how you have more in common with white people than African-Americans? It is assumed by most African-Americans - including this one - that Asian-Americans don't tend to consider themselves a minority until it is convenient to do so. Am I completely off the mark?

Don't let this get to you. I personally don't think you are off the mark, but try and understand that us Asians are minorities too. Our biggest competition is from other minorities, not Caucasian Americans.

Sody