Evaluating Affirmative Backlash

In light of rising backlash against affirmative action and the recent Supreme Court decision on the matter, it is becoming clear that discourse on inequality in America is in a poor state. A program aimed at equalizing opportunity is too frequently misconstrued as unfair advantage or “reverse racism.”

I have had several friends tell me with no qualms that they thought it was “unfair” that “more qualified” members of (insert their own demographic) were “disadvantaged” by affirmative action policies that benefit “less qualified” women of color. Arguments against affirmative action range from “It hurts minorities because they receive a boost and are unable to keep up with the academic rigor” to, “It hurts minorities because they will be perceived as less qualified in the job market” to “Isn’t racism over?” (The last probably being closest to the real argument at hand, which is “This policy hurts me”).

First off, let’s be clear about one thing: The reason affirmative action even exists is because of a past that has obstructed the access of just about everyone but wealthy, white men to education opportunity. Affirmative action does not hurt non-beneficiaries. It is an attempt, however incomplete, to rectify pre-established power imbalances in society. Past systems of inequality do not just disappear because our laws no longer explicitly mandate them. Stereotypes of women and minorities already exist and continue to be perpetuated by popular media, dating etiquette, seemingly harmless jokes, and probably in every single New York Times piece on hookup culture (is it just me or are those published every other week?). To assume that race or affirmative action is the defining characteristic of one’s admission is naïve and arrogant.

Affirmative action is a policy that has opened up doors for women, working class men, and a variety of ethnic and racial minorities. The fact that most affirmative action debates generally focus on black-and-white arguments (literally and figuratively) speaks volumes about where we stand as a society in terms of racial progress. Even with regard to arguments for class-based affirmative action, no one argues that only women of a certain socio-economic status face obstacles to overcoming social barriers. The greatest philosophers, thinkers, inventors, and political leaders outlined by our selective history are for the most part white men, and this is not by chance or the innate characteristics of a demographic just as diverse as any other. Affirmative action is by no means a comprehensive solution to addressing racial or gender inequality, but it is an important element not because it gives “unfair” advantage to one demographic but because it takes away “unfair” advantage from another.

We have expanded our definition of what it means to be worthy of an education in America, but the metrics we use for measuring and understanding this have not adapted accordingly. People often have a terrible tendency of putting their own experiences and emotions at the center of all truth and standards of fairness. For this reason, many will continue to consider themselves disadvantaged by affirmative action or view it as an unfair policy. We view gender and racial inequality as distinct social problems that have no bearing on what we hold as a sacred and unbiased educational meritocracy.

Despite the weight of evidence showing that when all qualifications are the same, minorities and women are less likely to receive job offers due to stereotypes (often unconscious), we continue to dismiss inescapable subjective elements involved in achieving success. There are still concentrations of black Americans in poor neighborhoods due to past segregation policies, our education system is still tied to socioeconomic status, old money networks still allow historically favored demographics access to internships, job opportunities, and cultural awareness that enhances scholastic aptitude. It is easy for some to hear of affirmative action and feel like a victim. It is not easy to see how lack of access to nutritional food affects productive capacity or how struggling to pay the bills affects mental health, and it is not easy to see how preconceived notions of race and gender inhibit one’s abilities to succeed. Arguments for and against affirmative action would be better off considering these realities rather than continuing to focus on tired and misguided rhetoric about fairness.

There is nothing wrong with being "privileged," especially since we cannot control the circumstances we are born into. The problem is failing to recognize our privilege and abusing or denying that privilege to hold others back.

Shazmin Hirji ’15, a Crimson editorial writer, is a government concentrator in Currier House.