The Cons of Affirmative Action
Now let me address the critics of affirmation action. They argue that affirmative action can lead to something called "reverse discrimination," where individuals from historically privileged groups may face disadvantages in admissions or hiring processes. This viewpoint contends that considering race or gender can be inherently unfair and violate principles of meritocracy. Of course, in reality this has not really happened and there is absolutely no comprehensive proof or data to support this criticism.
Like its twin sister above the Right Wing argues that somehow in a society where Black and Brown people are routinely and daily the victims of racism and stereotyping, somehow its "the others" in society - read whites and others - that will suffer from stigmatization and stereotyping. They claim that affirmative action perpetuates stigmatization and reinforces negative stereotypes. Again, there is no data to support these spurious claims.
Moreover, in perhaps the best example of flawed circular reasoning these critics contend that affirmative action creates the perception - NOT THE REALITY - that individuals from underrepresented groups (read Black and Latino people) are less competent or achieved success solely due to "preferential treatment." What they mean is that Black and Brown students cannot compete on a level education or job-entry playing field because of some kind of "racial impediment," and so can only gain access by virtue of "preferential race quotas," and considerations. This reasoning is PRECISELY and OBJECTIVELY racist at its core. And that by itself affirmative action "discriminates" against "other races."
Finally, some critics claim that affirmative action addresses the symptoms rather than the root causes of inequality. They argue that focusing on equal opportunity in education and addressing socioeconomic disparities would be more effective in promoting long-term equality. How can you address equality when one race has a 250-year head start, with generational wealth, privilege and access to capital, and the other's labor was stolen and uncompensated during that time, and speak about an equal and level playing field?
Is Affirmative Action Relevant Today?
By the United States Supreme Court's recent ruling this might be a moot point. So, now I suspect that the relevance of affirmative action will continue to remain a subject of ongoing debate. While significant progress has been made, disparities and inequalities persist in many domains. I am of the opinion that when all is said and done, affirmative action has played a major role in opening doors for marginalized groups and challenging the status quo. Just ask Justice Clarence Thomas who would not be one of the sitting justices had it not been for this policy.
Finally, I do not hold a rigid, unchanging position on affirmative action. After all, as they say: the only thing permanent is change. So, it is logical, reasonable and important that the implementation of affirmative action programs should evolve over time to ensure effectiveness and address new emerging socio-economic and political challenges. And yes, policies need to be flexible, targeted, and transparent, considering intersectionality and the evolving nature of discrimination. But it did not need to be exterminated.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
