A Great Comment on Affirmative Action

[IanC]

An Academic Defense of Affirmative Action [Roger Clegg]


That's what Insider Higher Ed treats us to today — in an interview with James Sterba, professor of philosophy at Notre Dame and author of a new book, Affirmative Action for the Future. My posted comments:

1. Some kinds of “affirmative action” are uncontroversial, as a matter of law or policy, like taking positive steps to ensure no discrimination, or recruiting far and wide to ensure the best possible pool of candidates. But affirmative discrimination — favoring some over others because of race — assuredly is controversial.

2. In this interview, at least, the author does not seem to be very forthcoming in acknowledging that he is defending such discrimination. He is also wrong in calling the various ballot propositions banning it deceptive, and he is being deceptive in suggesting that they banned all affirmative action, since they did not (see point one).

3. Of the three justifications he gives for affirmative action, the first does not involve discrimination, and the second (his favorite, apparently, based on his answer to the last question) is legally a nonstarter, since the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected general, societal discrimination as an excuse for new, improved discrimination. The diversity rationale has Justice O’Connor’s expiration date on it, and may fall before that, since it is dubious legally and based on flimsy sociological evidence. And do we really want to use race as a proxy for what experiences and viewpoints someone brings to a campus?

4. But even if you think there are some benefits to affirmative discrimination, one must weigh them against the undeniable costs of such discrimination, and of course there is no mention of them here: It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism; it compromises the academic mission of the university and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials; it mismatches students and institutions, guaranteeing failure for many of the former; it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not, and how much blood is needed to establish group membership. In an increasingly multiethnic and multiracial society, we cannot embrace a legal regime that sorts people according to skin color and what country their ancestors came from, and treats some better and others worse depending on what box they have checked.

 

[IanC]

the interview Roger Clegg was responding to-----

'Affirmative Action for the Future'
November 18, 2009
While the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the consideration of race and ethnicity in college admissions, the future of affirmative action is far from certain. Some states have barred it and critics continue to look for ways to challenge it. In his new book, Affirmative Action for the Future (Cornell University Press), James P. Sterba offers a defense of affirmative action. Sterba is a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame and his analysis mixes philosophical and legal arguments. Via e-mail, he responded to questions about his book.

Q: How do you define affirmative action?

A: Affirmative action is a policy of favoring qualified women, minority, or economically disadvantaged candidates over qualified men, nonminority or economically advantaged candidates respectively with the immediate goals of outreach, remedying discrimination, or achieving diversity, and the ultimate goals of attaining a colorblind (racially just), a gender-free (sexually just) and equal opportunity (economically just) society.

Q: How vulnerable is affirmative action in higher education today?

A: The constitutionality of affirmative action in higher education has been endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bakke (1978) and then 25 years later even more firmly by a much more conservative U.S. Supreme Court in Grutter (2003). So affirmative action in higher education is not vulnerable at all from the courts. It has, however, been shown to be vulnerable to deceptively designed referendums as in California (Proposition 209) and Michigan (Proposition 2). When people in California were asked whether they would still favor Proposition 209 if it outlawed all affirmative action programs for women and minorities, support for 209 dropped to 30 percent while those opposed rose to 56 percent. But deceptively designed Proposition 209 was the referendum that legally banned affirmative action programs for women and minorities in California!

Q: Why do you distinguish in the book between "outreach," "remedial" and "diversity" affirmative action?

A: Outreach affirmative action has the goal of searching out qualified women, minority or economically disadvantaged candidates who would otherwise not know about or apply for the available positions, but then hire or accept only those who are actually the most qualified.

Remedial affirmative action attempts to remedy discrimination. Here, there are two possibilities. First, a remedial affirmative action program can be designed simply to put an end to an existing discriminatory practice, and create, possibly for the first time in a particular setting, a truly nondiscriminatory playing field. Second, a remedial affirmative action program can attempt to compensate for past discrimination and the effects of that discrimination.

Diversity affirmative action has the goal of diversity, where the pursuit of diversity is, in turn, justified either in terms of certain educational benefits it provides, or in terms of its ability to legitimately create a more effective workforce in such areas as policing or community relations, or in terms of achieving equal opportunity. Here it might even be said that the affirmative action candidates are, in fact, the most the most qualified candidates overall, since the less diverse candidates would not be as qualified.

Q: Do you view the moral arguments you make and the legal arguments you make as distinct? Which are more important to you?

A: I do see the legal and moral arguments for affirmative action as distinct, but sometimes they are intertwined. For example, showing that the U.S. Supreme Court has always interpreted diversity affirmative action to be in accord with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides both moral and legal support for this form of affirmative action because these fundamental U.S. laws are at the same time also taken to be morally justified.

Q: How is the success of some Asian American groups in higher education changing the debates on affirmative action?

A: The success of some Asian American groups is a proven success of affirmative action. At the time of Bakke (1978) members of these groups did receive affirmative action. Today they no longer need affirmative action in order to be enrolled in top-flight colleges and university in sufficient numbers to bring the benefits of diversity. If affirmative action continues for members of minority groups who are still disadvantaged and steps are also taken to improve the still inferior K-12 educational systems that service these groups, in the not too distant future affirmative action as we know it will come to an end.

Q: Do you think opponents of affirmative action can be convinced to change their views?

A: Most opponents of affirmative action can be convinced to change their minds because they have formed their opinion about affirmative action knowing no more than half the facts and half the arguments that are relevant to an assessment of the practice. Once they get a fuller picture of what is relevant to an assessment of the affirmative action, they are confronted with good reasons to change their view. For example, once opponents do a comparative evaluation of diversity affirmative action against two other preference programs in higher education – legacy preference and athletic preference – each of which is twice the usual size of the college or university affirmative action program, it is difficult for them not to see the superior moral and educational justification of diversity affirmative action.

Q: Why is affirmative action important today?

A: My book begins by chronicling study after study showing present day racial and sexual discrimination in the U.S. Since direct government action against this continuing discrimination is both sporadic and weak, affirmative action programs still remain one of the more effective tools for undermining the racial and sexual prejudice that fuels this discrimination, thereby helping to diminish its frequency and severity.

 

[IanC]

I know that is way more than most people want to read. here is the one section that especially struck me as being important.

4. ...even if you think there are some benefits to affirmative discrimination, one must weigh them against the undeniable costs of such discrimination...: It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism...and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials...it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not...In an increasingly multiethnic and multiracial society, we cannot embrace a legal regime that sorts people according to skin color and what country their ancestors came from, and treats some better and others worse depending on what box they have checked.

outstanding!

 

[IanC]

I'm curious. are there any minorities out there that are proud to have been beneficiaries of AA? do you tell lots of people that you wouldn't have been picked if it weren't for AA? or is AA considered something that the other guy got, I earned my spot.

are there any minorities out there that see AA as a lucky opportunity? why not take it as long as it's there, right?

I can totally see collecting AA but I wouldn't be proud of it.

 

[CurveLight]

I know that is way more than most people want to read. here is the one section that especially struck me as being important.

4. ...even if you think there are some benefits to affirmative discrimination, one must weigh them against the undeniable costs of such discrimination...: It is personally unfair, passes over better qualified students, and sets a disturbing legal, political, and moral precedent in allowing racial discrimination; it creates resentment; it stigmatizes the so-called beneficiaries in the eyes of their classmates, teachers, and themselves, as well as future employers, clients, and patients; it fosters a victim mindset, removes the incentive for academic excellence, and encourages separatism...and lowers the overall academic quality of the student body; it creates pressure to discriminate in grading and graduation; it breeds hypocrisy within the school; it encourages a scofflaw attitude among college officials...it papers over the real social problem of why so many African Americans and Latinos are academically uncompetitive; and it gets states and schools involved in unsavory activities like deciding which racial and ethnic minorities will be favored and which ones not...In an increasingly multiethnic and multiracial society, we cannot embrace a legal regime that sorts people according to skin color and what country their ancestors came from, and treats some better and others worse depending on what box they have checked.

outstanding!

That paragraph is guilty of what the author addressed in this question:

Q: Do you think opponents of affirmative action can be convinced to change their views?

A: Most opponents of affirmative action can be convinced to change their minds because they have formed their opinion about affirmative action knowing no more than half the facts and half the arguments that are relevant to an assessment of the practice. Once they get a fuller picture of what is relevant to an assessment of the affirmative action, they are confronted with good reasons to change their view. For example, once opponents do a comparative evaluation of diversity affirmative action against two other preference programs in higher education – legacy preference and athletic preference – each of which is twice the usual size of the college or university affirmative action program, it is difficult for them not to see the superior moral and educational justification of diversity affirmative action.

 

[IanC]

thanks for reading the articles. I actually am for AA as long as it is tailored to the individual, not a straight quota as universities and such have.

anyone who is against legacy and athletic preferences has my support. although the legacy cohort has much better qualifications than either the minority or athletic cohort.

 

[JenyEliza]

I can totally see collecting AA but I wouldn't be proud of it.

Yep. Easy to take freebies. I wouldn't be proud of it though.

 

[CurveLight]

thanks for reading the articles. I actually am for AA as long as it is tailored to the individual, not a straight quota as universities and such have.

anyone who is against legacy and athletic preferences has my support. although the legacy cohort has much better qualifications than either the minority or athletic cohort.

Segregation is still a huge problem.
Still Separate, Still Unequal: America's Educational Apartheid JONATHAN KOZOL / Harper's Magazine v.311, n.1864 1sep2005


The hypocrisy on AA is overwhelming and shows the established Peck(ing) order of our society. The Legacy and Athletic forms of AA have existed for as long as the Nation but how many people complained about them?

 

[CurveLight]

I can totally see collecting AA but I wouldn't be proud of it.

Yep. Easy to take freebies. I wouldn't be proud of it though.

That must mean you are not proud of America. Our Nation was built by the "freebies" of many people and cultures.

 

[IanC]

thanks for reading the articles. I actually am for AA as long as it is tailored to the individual, not a straight quota as universities and such have.

anyone who is against legacy and athletic preferences has my support. although the legacy cohort has much better qualifications than either the minority or athletic cohort.

Segregation is still a huge problem.
Still Separate, Still Unequal: America's Educational Apartheid JONATHAN KOZOL / Harper's Magazine v.311, n.1864 1sep2005


The hypocrisy on AA is overwhelming and shows the established Peck(ing) order of our society. The Legacy and Athletic forms of AA have existed for as long as the Nation but how many people complained about them?

I read the first half of your very long article. I am a Canadian so our school funding system is different, school boards get funded by the province (=state) mostly, in a per pupil fashion. racial and class differences are still plainly visible in performance and behaviour. Segregation and white flight are an inevitable consequence of white parents wanting to give their children the best start possible in life. and they pay large sums of money to do it. buying houses in the right neighbourhoods is expensive, and so are private schools. all the while they still pay the lion's share of taxes for schools they don't even use.

The Coleman Report found out to its surprise that the success of school was much more influenced by the students attending than the school or the money spent. I think the parents and the students need to play a bigger and more competent role in 'diverse' schools. there is no reason that any school can't be safe and successful if the students co-operate. just look at Catholic schools that operate on a mere fraction of public schools.

 

[CurveLight]

thanks for reading the articles. I actually am for AA as long as it is tailored to the individual, not a straight quota as universities and such have.

anyone who is against legacy and athletic preferences has my support. although the legacy cohort has much better qualifications than either the minority or athletic cohort.

Segregation is still a huge problem.
Still Separate, Still Unequal: America's Educational Apartheid JONATHAN KOZOL / Harper's Magazine v.311, n.1864 1sep2005


The hypocrisy on AA is overwhelming and shows the established Peck(ing) order of our society. The Legacy and Athletic forms of AA have existed for as long as the Nation but how many people complained about them?

I read the first half of your very long article. I am a Canadian so our school funding system is different, school boards get funded by the province (=state) mostly, in a per pupil fashion. racial and class differences are still plainly visible in performance and behaviour. Segregation and white flight are an inevitable consequence of white parents wanting to give their children the best start possible in life. and they pay large sums of money to do it. buying houses in the right neighbourhoods is expensive, and so are private schools. all the while they still pay the lion's share of taxes for schools they don't even use.

The Coleman Report found out to its surprise that the success of school was much more influenced by the students attending than the school or the money spent. I think the parents and the students need to play a bigger and more competent role in 'diverse' schools. there is no reason that any school can't be safe and successful if the students co-operate. just look at Catholic schools that operate on a mere fraction of public schools.

Which Coleman Report? (66' or 75') White parents who want to give their kids the best possible start in life do so by avoiding blacks in schools? You say private schools are very expensive but academic performance isn't based on the money spent. So whites pay an exorbitant amount simply to keep it white? I don't know if it's realized or not but the basic message being expressed here is pretty troubling.

 

[CurveLight]

ianc, what's your username on Stormfront? Just curious to see if your spamming racist bullshit is as frequent on that site.

 

[IanC]

ianc, what's your username on Stormfront? Just curious to see if your spamming racist bullshit is as frequent on that site.

typical response. you can't handle the debate so you start crying racist. so far you are the only one here showing intimate knowledge of white supremist websites.

 

[JenyEliza]

I can totally see collecting AA but I wouldn't be proud of it.

Yep. Easy to take freebies. I wouldn't be proud of it though.

That must mean you are not proud of America. Our Nation was built by the "freebies" of many people and cultures.

Don't lecture me, asswipe.

I am 4th generation Irish/American, descended from potato famine refugees. My relatives were indentured servants who worked for FREE for years to pay their passage to the US, so that they didn't starve to death in Ireland during the famine.

In spite of their rocky start in the US, they didn't demand special treatment when signs went up "No Irish Need Apply". They didn't demand Americans give them any special credit for being immigrants or whatever. They just worked their ass off, kept focused on their goals, educated their children and made their way in the world. WITHOUT FREEBIES like AA.

So shut your fucking yap....

 

[IanC]

White parents who want to give their kids the best possible start in life do so by avoiding blacks in schools? You say private schools are very expensive but academic performance isn't based on the money spent. So whites pay an exorbitant amount simply to keep it white? I don't know if it's realized or not but the basic message being expressed here is pretty troubling.

private schools are more expensive than public schools for 'free', no? and my point was that students are the biggest factor of a school's success. whites prefer a setting where teachers are permitted to actually teach, rather than spend most of their time trying to keep order in the classroom. unfortunately majority minority classes tend to become raucous and teachers are not allowed to discipline the little angels.

as far as the message being troubling...what about your article that seems to say that a school can only be successful with a sizable portion of white students? why can't minorities do well without the guidance of white students? why can't minority parents make sure their children's schools are run cleanly and effectively without white intervention?

 

[CurveLight]

ianc, what's your username on Stormfront? Just curious to see if your spamming racist bullshit is as frequent on that site.

typical response. you can't handle the debate so you start crying racist. so far you are the only one here showing intimate knowledge of white supremist websites.

Lol....can't handle the debate? I responded to your claim about the Coleman Report and you have yet to support that claim. I looked at the forum and saw you started about 6 racist threads while in this op you try to mask your racism.

 

[CurveLight]

White parents who want to give their kids the best possible start in life do so by avoiding blacks in schools? You say private schools are very expensive but academic performance isn't based on the money spent. So whites pay an exorbitant amount simply to keep it white? I don't know if it's realized or not but the basic message being expressed here is pretty troubling.

private schools are more expensive than public schools for 'free', no? and my point was that students are the biggest factor of a school's success. whites prefer a setting where teachers are permitted to actually teach, rather than spend most of their time trying to keep order in the classroom. unfortunately majority minority classes tend to become raucous and teachers are not allowed to discipline the little angels.

as far as the message being troubling...what about your article that seems to say that a school can only be successful with a sizable portion of white students? why can't minorities do well without the guidance of white students? why can't minority parents make sure their children's schools are run cleanly and effectively without white intervention?

So blacks prevent teachers from teaching simply because they are black?

My article doesn't come anywhere close to saying that and your active dishonesty is expect
ed because you know nothing of value. Hell, you can't even be honest and admit you're active on white supremacist websites. Now use that to hide behind why you cannot defend your racist claims.

 

[CurveLight]

Yep. Easy to take freebies. I wouldn't be proud of it though.

That must mean you are not proud of America. Our Nation was built by the "freebies" of many people and cultures.

Don't lecture me, asswipe.

I am 4th generation Irish/American, descended from potato famine refugees. My relatives were indentured servants who worked for FREE for years to pay their passage to the US, so that they didn't starve to death in Ireland during the famine.

In spite of their rocky start in the US, they didn't demand special treatment when signs went up "No Irish Need Apply". They didn't demand Americans give them any special credit for being immigrants or whatever. They just worked their ass off, kept focused on their goals, educated their children and made their way in the world. WITHOUT FREEBIES like AA.

So shut your fucking yap....

What does indentured servitude in ireland have to do with America? Irish did face discrimination in the US but it was no where near the frequency, severity, nor longevity faced by african americans.

 

[IanC]

White parents who want to give their kids the best possible start in life do so by avoiding blacks in schools? You say private schools are very expensive but academic performance isn't based on the money spent. So whites pay an exorbitant amount simply to keep it white? I don't know if it's realized or not but the basic message being expressed here is pretty troubling.

private schools are more expensive than public schools for 'free', no? and my point was that students are the biggest factor of a school's success. whites prefer a setting where teachers are permitted to actually teach, rather than spend most of their time trying to keep order in the classroom. unfortunately majority minority classes tend to become raucous and teachers are not allowed to discipline the little angels.

as far as the message being troubling...what about your article that seems to say that a school can only be successful with a sizable portion of white students? why can't minorities do well without the guidance of white students? why can't minority parents make sure their children's schools are run cleanly and effectively without white intervention?

So blacks prevent teachers from teaching simply because they are black?

My article doesn't come anywhere close to saying that and your active dishonesty is expect
ed because you know nothing of value. Hell, you can't even be honest and admit you're active on white supremacist websites. Now use that to hide behind why you cannot defend your racist claims.

black students are more unruly than white students ( on average, of course) and there are more discipline problems in majority minority classrooms. do you disbelieve that?

your article, paragraph after paragraph, talks about how no whites are in their schools and then points out how dreadful schools with names like MLK High are.

In a Seattle neighborhood that I visited in 2002, for instance, where approximately half the families were Caucasian, 95 percent of students at the Thurgood Marshall Elementary School were black, Hispanic, Native American, or of Asian origin. An African-American teacher at the school told me—not with bitterness but wistfully—of seeing clusters of white parents and their children each morning on the corner of a street close to the school, waiting for a bus that took the children to a predominantly white school.

woe is me, my school don't have no toilet paper. but the pretty white school does, fo shur.

I can't imagine white parents allowing that to happen (or at least to continue) in their school. where are the minority parents at the school board meetings? lose the entitlement attitude and get on with the job of providing for your kids!

Hell, you can't even be honest and admit you're active on white supremacist websites.

do you always slander people?

 

[CurveLight]

private schools are more expensive than public schools for 'free', no? and my point was that students are the biggest factor of a school's success. whites prefer a setting where teachers are permitted to actually teach, rather than spend most of their time trying to keep order in the classroom. unfortunately majority minority classes tend to become raucous and teachers are not allowed to discipline the little angels.

as far as the message being troubling...what about your article that seems to say that a school can only be successful with a sizable portion of white students? why can't minorities do well without the guidance of white students? why can't minority parents make sure their children's schools are run cleanly and effectively without white intervention?

So blacks prevent teachers from teaching simply because they are black?

My article doesn't come anywhere close to saying that and your active dishonesty is expect
ed because you know nothing of value. Hell, you can't even be honest and admit you're active on white supremacist websites. Now use that to hide behind why you cannot defend your racist claims.

black students are more unruly than white students ( on average, of course) and there are more discipline problems in majority minority classrooms. do you disbelieve that?

your article, paragraph after paragraph, talks about how no whites are in their schools and then points out how dreadful schools with names like MLK High are.

In a Seattle neighborhood that I visited in 2002, for instance, where approximately half the families were Caucasian, 95 percent of students at the Thurgood Marshall Elementary School were black, Hispanic, Native American, or of Asian origin. An African-American teacher at the school told me—not with bitterness but wistfully—of seeing clusters of white parents and their children each morning on the corner of a street close to the school, waiting for a bus that took the children to a predominantly white school.

woe is me, my school don't have no toilet paper. but the pretty white school does, fo shur.

I can't imagine white parents allowing that to happen (or at least to continue) in their school. where are the minority parents at the school board meetings? lose the entitlement attitude and get on with the job of providing for your kids!

Hell, you can't even be honest and admit you're active on white supremacist websites.

do you always slander people?

Kozol points out the economic disparities and you are ignoring that to claim there is something wrong with blacks only because they are black.

Are you ever going to support your claim about the Coleman Report?