in

New York Times Proved Eliminating Affirmative Action Is the Solution, Not the Problem

There's an article in the New York Times today, which is one that they would probably believe proves the need for affirmative action even though the Supreme Court is signaling they may indeed decide against the practice in the near future.

Affirmative action can be described as basically the practice of putting one race over another when it comes to approving or hiring someone for your institution or job. It is believed that it provides the opportunity for racial equity at a time where diversity and overcoming America's past of discrimination are the main concerns of a lot of activists.

The issue is that the usage of affirmative actions is, by definition, problematic, since you're making decisions that are based on race, which is precisely what the activists have been fighting for a long time. It's not just negative for whites, it's negatively affecting an enormous number of Asian-American college candidates.

The Times article, however, is very light on the application process and acceptance process. The focus is on recruiting.

A lot of experts in education say that such a move could not just result in modifications in admissions; however, it could also undermine the long-standing strategies used by colleges to establish diverse classes which include programs that aim to appeal to specific racial and ethnic groups with scholarship, honors, and other recruitment programs.

One thing to note: It is true that the Supreme Court case is only about admissions. There's nothing in the case, or in the arguments in the case, which suggests that there is any indication that the Supreme Court is going to claim that a school can't reach out to different organizations for recruiting. Therefore, if changes to the way colleges recruit occurs, this isn't because of an appeal to the Supreme Court – that's the result of colleges becoming lazy.

The court could stop colleges from buying lists of prospective applicants that concentrate on race and ethnicity. This is a practice commonly used to recruit for admissions, Perez said. 

“Fly-ins,” in which students receive expense-paid trips to universities are also in the process of being eliminated. Also, scholarship programs that are specifically designed for students of color that many depend on to cover tuition are up for debate.

“Fly-in programs, scholarship programs, partnerships with churches and community-based organizations, where does it end?” Dr. Perez asked.

At the University of Connecticut, Mr. Granger said that a diversity leadership program, UConn Summer Lead, which is a popular program for students from groups that aren't well served, could need to be redesigned.

This is essentially the stuff of  panic. It is also not clear if there is any evidence of whether this Supreme Court would write a decision that is so broad that the recruitment process is affected. It is clear that the Supreme Court seemed very open in bringing the issue before them. The majority of conservatives don't appear to be happy with the decision determined by race, rather than merit. In no instance did anyone in the Supreme Court seem to suggest that the recruitment of different groups was unsuitable.

But that won't stop the left – or their main messenger The Times, from being apprehensive about the country's most important court decision on affirmative actions. They'll almost certainly be louder and more vocal about the injustice of the decision and how it will negatively affect the lives of people of color.

It's worth noting, of course, that they don't consider Asian Americans as people of color in this case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Joe Rogan Calls George Soros a Batman Villain

NFL Playoffs Are Wild This Weekend