As my old editor D’Souza says in the tweet below, you cannot control disparities in individual performance with government programs. Thus, affirmative action was doomed from the gitgo. Writer David Marcus tells us more.
Affirmative action policies are bathed in lies for a simple reason: there are large, enduring differences in academic preparation and achievement between racial groups, and these remain even when you control for socioeconomic factors. pic.twitter.com/qV8mZaFzew
— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) February 11, 2022
Marcus: The Supreme Court is set to take up two cases challenging the use of race based admissions, or affirmative action, in our nation’s top colleges. At issue are policies that make it far more difficult for applicants from some racial groups, specifically Asian Americans, to gain entry to competitive schools, while other groups, such as blacks and Hispanics, face a lower academic bar.
Given that affirmative action has been used by colleges since the 1960s the first question we should ask as a society is, how well has it worked?
To answer that question we have to have some understanding of what the goal of affirmative action was when the term was coined by the Kennedy administration in 1961. Here is what Executive Order 10925 had to say, government contractors should “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.”
But in 1965 Lyndon Johnson, with his own executive order, tweaked the intent of affirmative action to promote full realization of equal opportunity. That’s where things got confusing. It was no longer enough for governmental systems, including in education, to be color-blind, they had to actually produce diversity. Suddenly race had to be taken into account in order for race not to account for discrimination in jobs and admissions.
There was a logic to this half a century ago. In 1965 the belief that certain racial groups were inferior was much more widespread, and more importantly, some Americans such as some black and Hispanic citizens, really were starting with structural disadvantages. These included poverty, lack of parents with college education, and lack of access to a quality of education needed for higher learning advancement. It made some sense to kick-start participation in universities for these groups.
The idea here was that positive discrimination in the short term would level the playing field over time and render affirmative action no longer necessary. Surely, the quotas and set aside programs were not meant to go on forever, but rather to contain the seeds of their own obsolescence.
By this measure there is simply no way to look at affirmative action as a success. It has been 50 years. Yet, proponents of race based admissions seem to still cling to the hope that if we do it just a little longer it will work. Or do they? A key question for proponents of affirmative action, one we don’t hear a lot of answers to, is whether they think the need for it will eventually end, or whether they think it should go on forever.
By the old rubric, the one in which affirmative action’s success is measured by not needing it anymore, it has been an abject failure, nobody argues that disadvantaged minority groups have overcome the education gap in America. But for supporters of race-based admissions the goal seems to have changed, it is now more akin to reparations. That is to say that affirmative action has morphed into a permanent racialized benefit not tied to the goal of equal opportunity, but rather its own reward.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
Hasnt worked day 1 since debut, END it now
Not only has affirmative action failed but it has killed opportunities for poor and disabled white men. I’ve been a veterinary assistant since I was 16 and 15 years later haven’t been taught how to draw blood or many other things not because I’m incapable of learning but because employers believe white men who aren’t already successful in their careers shouldn’t be taught advanced skills and shouldn’t be taught how to do anything more than janitorial duties. And we wonder why young white men have the highest suicide rates and why marriage rates are declining. Women want to get paid the same as men and they want opportunities taken from men and handed to them and then they complain that they can’t find a man who’s of equal status to marry. They made their bed and refuse to lie in it instead blaming their inability to find a partner of equal socioeconomic status on male laziness
“… nobody argues that disadvantaged minority groups have overcome the education gap in America.”
I’m assuming, Mr Kamioner is saying that minorities have not achieved education parity on a percentage population basis. How true. And there are substantive reasons for this. The main reason they haven’t achieved parity based on their percentage of the population… in looking at Afro-Americans… is that that group has lower average IQs than Whites.
The average IQ of an American White is 100, or near that. The average IQ of a Black in the United States is 85. The average IQ of a Black in England, where we might assume better public schools exist (?), is 86.
Well, a pusher of critical race theory might chime in at this point: “The reason for lower IQs among Blacks in America and England is because Whites have held Mr Black down, and not allowed him to flourish, to develop intellectually… so there.”
But the counter that negates that is to simply state the truth that : “The average IQ across black African countries is 75… so there, back.” Since Blacks in Africa have led lives much more isolated from Whites than have their brethren in the US or England, the onus can’t be shifted to the Whites. What happens in Africa stays in Africa, so to speak.
Admitting to facts allows us to formulate a solution. The question is: “How does a society increase the General Intelligence of a group of citizens? In a nutshell the answer is three-part : Attitude, Behavior and Nutrition. Reparations isn’t in there.
Was one of the most stupid things ever done, half of the federal offices are filled with them and when asked a difficult question they have to go to the boss to get a answer. Social Security offices are all messed up along with many other offices
It has worked. It has placed 100s of thousands of smart black kids into higher ed academic settings where they are far more likely to flounder rather than flourish. Minimizing the success of smart black people is a founding tenet of the kkk.
Affirmative action IS racism – no matter how the question is constructed or stated. Lyndon Johnson WAS a racist all his life, and got to where he did by being a racist. Joe Biden is also a racist – the same in every way, as Lyndon Johnson. The Democrat Party is racist in every way – all the way from Jim Crow to the “new” racism of Marxist, anti American CRT.
The Founders all thought that Caucasians and African blacks would not be able to live together as equals in a peaceful society, and sought to send the American negroe slaves back to Africa. Many WERE returned, Liberia was the result, and James Monroe was honored by those ex-patriot negroes for causing it to happen. They, themselves understood clearly that they (the negroes) could NOT compete with American caucasians on a level playing field. The American leadership in the 1960s also understood this truth, and tried to slant the playing field to the advantage of American negroes – hoping to be able to “change” them for the better over time. This has NOT worked, and it will never work. Blacks are intellectually inferior to whites, and always have been. (Look at Africa)! This critical intellectual difference cannot be changed! Equity is a racist chimera. The ONLY way whites and blacks can ever live together peacefully is in a society in which the government (in all its operations) is color blind, but in which individuals ALWAYS have the freedom of choice – including those with whom they wish to associate. Self segregation is and always will be, absolutely moral. It IS a human right!
Government forced integration is as bad and immoral as government forced segregation, and for the same reasons – the use of unanswerable government force against the innocent. Forced association is as immoral as forced segregation..
CENSORS! Why did you censor my comments?
Lifezette censors its commentary!!! You are Crooked!