[present tense]

2003.03.21: In Defence of Affirmative Action (part 3)

(Note: This post was originally intended to be a comment in response to Jim's comment on my post from two days ago. Due to its length and my difficulties with commenting, I've decided to post instead of commenting.)

Jim - it sounds like you are in favor for Affirmative Action for jobs, but not for schools. Correct?

If this is the case, then you at least agree with me in principle -- compensating for institutional racism is ethical. I would go so far as to say that it is not racism (even by the definition that you state in your comment), but merely recognition of an unlevel playing field and an effort to compensate for it. You might disagree on this point.

At any rate, there are two types of institutional racism that must be overcome. First is the bias of the admissions officer/interviewer. The second is the additional hardships that come along with being a member of the underrepresented minority (getting shot at more, going to worse schools, being part of a lower SES [Socio-Economic Status]). You seem solely focused on the first type.

If only that were the only institutional racism to combat. That one would be relatively easy to fix. But if that were all, and if the admissions officer are truly as biased in favor of minorities as you say they are, then why are the underrepresented minorities still underrepresented, even after affirmative action. The combination of bias + affirmative action should make them overrepresented. But the numbers just don't bear that out.

The reason why not, of course, is that the underrepresented minorities have lower grades/SAT's/recommendations than the majority. Why is this? It is either that 1) they are inherently less qualified for school (a position which I do not hold), or 2) Some outside factor has made them less qualified for school (a position which I do hold). I identify this outside factor as the second kind of institutional racism that I noted above (having eliminated inherent deficiencies, there aren't too many other options to choose from).

This second from of institutional racism is bigger than the first, as it is essentially the sum total of 17 years of repeatedly inflicting the first kind of institutional racism. This needs to be compensated for in the admissions process. The bias of the admissions officers needs to be corrected for too. If they are truly biased in favor of underrepresented minorities, then the underrepresented minorities should get penalized. But somehow, I doubt that there is a bias in that direction (as I said before, if this is the case, then why are they still underrepresented?). I would love for some studies to be done on this topic so that we can get some real data on this. Does anyone out there know of any study that can confirm or deny either of our positions?