I've seen questions related to affirmative action being debated on the list, but hadn't participated, due to the overwhelming RL activity I've been involved with. Further, my position is rather complex: indeed I see the discussion as touching on only part of the complexity.
Even though my position is complex, I can give a quick summary: I do not believe in quotas, but I do believe in asking questions about the reasons for the differences after doing statistical analysis. I think there is no doubt that a quota type system (which had been used in the past) has had some very negative results. One of which has been the idea that hard work and ability are not involved in success. I've given the example, earlier, of Neli (the older of my two Zambian daughters) being told that she wasn't black enough because she worked too hard. She need to chill to be authentic. She's told me how angry she gets about African-Americans who show up late and very inappropriately dressed for job interviews expecting to get them because a quota needs to be filled or not get it because "the man" was against them. But, at the same time, I know that Colin Powell stated that he never would have gotten far without affirmative action. The natural prejudice against blacks leading whites was so strong that it took rules to overcome it. I know an extremely capable black man who never reached the level of responsibility that he was entitled to (a white man took it) and was the only manager not to sign the time cards of his subordinates because upper management didn't want to shame his subordinates. Most Republicans/Conservatives see affirmative action only in terms of quotas. Further, they argue that discrimination must be proven on a case by case basis. This seems quite unreasonable to me. For example, take a coin. If one flips the coin 100 times, and it comes up heads 90 times, one knows something isn't kosher. However, if it one cannot, on a case by case basis, determine if it is an honest coin. Each time the odds are even that it will come up heads or tails.so coming up heads is not any evidence of a loaded coin. I've seen this applied in real life, where I worked. The company decided to lay off all people over 50 (actually uncreate their jobs and then create nearly identical ones because layoffs have special rules). One guy was desperately needed for a project, so he was the exception. About 15-20 people were let go, all were over 50. What are the odds on this being a coincidence? Next to zero. It was clearly age discrimination. But, under the Reagan rules, it wasn't provable because it couldn't be proven in each single case, it could only be proven statistically. Well, if you go by those rules, you'd stop all advancement in physics after 1915 or so, because QM is statistical. From But, statistical analysis allows one to ask the question and then expect a reasonable answer. For example, if the position applied for is a professor of computer science, the fact that, while >10% of the nation is black vs. only a few percent Asian, there are many more Asians than blacks who have the basic prerequisites for the job. So, there is a difference between statistical analysis and quotas. With statistical analysis, there is room to have basic critera for acceptance. But, it is reasonable to ask why, if group A and group B both have many applicants that meet the job criteria, and only one token choice from group B is made, why aren't more from group B chosen. Finally, going back to the hardest question: African-Americans; it is clear to me that plain vanilla anti-black discrimination is not the main problem facing African Americans. Neli has found that discrimination is there (she's been pulled over in a DWB incident), but she finds that the internalization of the racist stereotypes by African-Americans a much higher hurdle than simple discrimination. The fact that we appear to be on the verge of electing the first African-American president, and that he has not inherited the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow supports this contention. Given this, I think the nation as a whole should look to the military for the means of implementing affirmative action effectively. From my understanding, goals for diversity have existed for years in the military, and have been achieved without sacrificing quality. The military expects all to meet the standards it sets, and works with young officers to help them meet the requirements to rise in the ranks. This is the model I think we should use: no quotas, no lowered standards, but measure diversity and work with underrepresented groups to help them be successful candidates for higher positions. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
