I Have a Solution to the Affirmative-Action Issue, but It Might Not Work and Everyone Will Laugh at It
Okay: the first two paragraphs or so of this post, you will think are really stupid, but please bear with me.
I can't say how it would work, but I think the only hope for the whole racial affirmative-action debate might be to actually try hiding the racial identities of job/school applicants as much as possible before they're approved.
How to do this? How the hell should I know? But since I'm being stupid and unreasonable, let's brainstorm: First, of course, there'd have to be an end to any "race" box to check on the application sheet. In this I agree with the anti-affirmative-action folks. Second -- and this is where I might start losing people -- it might be necessary to stop having personal, face-to-face interviews, or maybe (and I know this sounds ridiculous when I say it), put up some kind of wall between the interviewer and the applicant, maybe even with voice-modification technology. Again, I know this sounds like a terrible idea that would cost too much and everything, but what else are we going to do?
This is where you tell me whichever you believe: That we should just get rid of affirmative action but forget the walls thing since it's obvious there is no systemic racism to keep that from being fair, or that we should keep affirmative action since systemic racism against non-whites obviously exists.
Well, I don't know what is or isn't an obvious fact in this case, but I know about the strength of people's perceptions, which are basically like this: A white person and a black person with the proverbial "same qualifications" apply for a job. If the white person gets the job, the black person is sure that it was only because the other was white. In the same way, if the black person gets the job, the white person is sure it was only because the other was black. Oddly enough, this will most likely be the case whether or not the institution being applied to actually has an affirmative-action policy.
How to do this? How the hell should I know? But since I'm being stupid and unreasonable, let's brainstorm: First, of course, there'd have to be an end to any "race" box to check on the application sheet. In this I agree with the anti-affirmative-action folks. Second -- and this is where I might start losing people -- it might be necessary to stop having personal, face-to-face interviews, or maybe (and I know this sounds ridiculous when I say it), put up some kind of wall between the interviewer and the applicant, maybe even with voice-modification technology. Again, I know this sounds like a terrible idea that would cost too much and everything, but what else are we going to do?
This is where you tell me whichever you believe: That we should just get rid of affirmative action but forget the walls thing since it's obvious there is no systemic racism to keep that from being fair, or that we should keep affirmative action since systemic racism against non-whites obviously exists.
Well, I don't know what is or isn't an obvious fact in this case, but I know about the strength of people's perceptions, which are basically like this: A white person and a black person with the proverbial "same qualifications" apply for a job. If the white person gets the job, the black person is sure that it was only because the other was white. In the same way, if the black person gets the job, the white person is sure it was only because the other was black. Oddly enough, this will most likely be the case whether or not the institution being applied to actually has an affirmative-action policy.
This is most important because this means that if a black person is chosen over a white person, the white person is still likely (and who knows if it's correct?) to feel discriminated against in the name of informal political correctness. To paraphrase one white person I talked to, the company (this person believed) is simply afraid of being seen as racist if it doesn't hire the black applicant.
I'm a white male who has never personally been reverse-discriminated (although I've talked to people who say they have), and I don't know whether there exists either widespread systemic racism or reverse discrimination in the abscence of formal affirmative action. The point is that race relations in this country will only get worse (as working people have to tear each other to shreds to stay afloat in our current "race to the bottom") if something is not done to satisfy BOTH whites and non-whites that they are not being discriminated against by either white racism or by institutions' fear of looking racist.
I oppose affirmative action as we have it now because I believe that, among blue-collar working-class whites, affirmative action and the threat of reverse discrimination are the biggest things keeping racism alive. That is, I oppose affirmative action not because I believe one way or the other that reverse discrimination against whites is true, but that the perception of reverse discrimination is pretty much the only thing fanning the embers of the racists fire among blue-collar working whites (among my native white-collar, upper-middle-class honkies, of course, racism is still alive as a part of classism-- which the pencil pushers also extend to working-class whites).
Needless to say, if either systemic white-supremicist racism or reverse discrimination against whites really does exist -- and perhaps both do, in different institutions -- then such discrimination of either type would be a travesty of justice. I am not downplaying the importance of factual truth. I am just saying that what we believe to be the factual truth can lead us to kill each other, and it's factually true that this is bad, especially because it's also likely to be factually true that we cannot convince each other of what's true.
You're not going to convince the applicant who wasn't picked (from my white-vs-black scenario above) that he/she was not discriminated against, as long as the institution knew both applicants' races.
That's why, however dumb my vague ideas may sound, I'm afraid that people who should be brothers and sisters will turn more and more against each other unless we can take race out of the applicant process as much as possible. Which leads me to my stupid ideas.
Largely to keep this whole analysis simple, I have avoided talking about gender-based affirmative action. I think such gender preferences should be eliminated, but I hesitate to offer the same "hidden-identity" solution to this because (a) it might be even harder to disguise the gender of an applicant; (b) some jobs may actually have good reasons to require a particular gender, such as home providers for a female MRDD group home; and (c) men and women are not quite as likely to start lynching and shooting each other over jobs and colleges -- I would assume. However, it might not be a bad idea to extend the hidden-identity thing to gender as well as race, at least wherever it can be.
I'm a white male who has never personally been reverse-discriminated (although I've talked to people who say they have), and I don't know whether there exists either widespread systemic racism or reverse discrimination in the abscence of formal affirmative action. The point is that race relations in this country will only get worse (as working people have to tear each other to shreds to stay afloat in our current "race to the bottom") if something is not done to satisfy BOTH whites and non-whites that they are not being discriminated against by either white racism or by institutions' fear of looking racist.
I oppose affirmative action as we have it now because I believe that, among blue-collar working-class whites, affirmative action and the threat of reverse discrimination are the biggest things keeping racism alive. That is, I oppose affirmative action not because I believe one way or the other that reverse discrimination against whites is true, but that the perception of reverse discrimination is pretty much the only thing fanning the embers of the racists fire among blue-collar working whites (among my native white-collar, upper-middle-class honkies, of course, racism is still alive as a part of classism-- which the pencil pushers also extend to working-class whites).
Needless to say, if either systemic white-supremicist racism or reverse discrimination against whites really does exist -- and perhaps both do, in different institutions -- then such discrimination of either type would be a travesty of justice. I am not downplaying the importance of factual truth. I am just saying that what we believe to be the factual truth can lead us to kill each other, and it's factually true that this is bad, especially because it's also likely to be factually true that we cannot convince each other of what's true.
You're not going to convince the applicant who wasn't picked (from my white-vs-black scenario above) that he/she was not discriminated against, as long as the institution knew both applicants' races.
That's why, however dumb my vague ideas may sound, I'm afraid that people who should be brothers and sisters will turn more and more against each other unless we can take race out of the applicant process as much as possible. Which leads me to my stupid ideas.
Largely to keep this whole analysis simple, I have avoided talking about gender-based affirmative action. I think such gender preferences should be eliminated, but I hesitate to offer the same "hidden-identity" solution to this because (a) it might be even harder to disguise the gender of an applicant; (b) some jobs may actually have good reasons to require a particular gender, such as home providers for a female MRDD group home; and (c) men and women are not quite as likely to start lynching and shooting each other over jobs and colleges -- I would assume. However, it might not be a bad idea to extend the hidden-identity thing to gender as well as race, at least wherever it can be.
posted by jlhart7 at 4:49 PM
1 comments
