Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!bloom-beacon!ora!daemon From: turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Affirmative Action is Temporary Summary: Affirmative action is NOT a cure which solves its problem and then goes away. Message-ID: <7052@cs.utexas.edu> Date: 17 Oct 89 00:20:35 GMT References: <1058@uvaarpa.virginia.edu> Sender: ambar@ora.ora.com Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas Lines: 50 Approved: ambar@ora.com In article <1058@uvaarpa.virginia.edu>, scl@uvaarpa.virginia.edu (Steve Losen) writes: > Most opponents of affirmative action don't seem to realize that > AA is a temporary measure. A kluge, a hack, a patch. In an ideal > society jobs, college admissions, etc., would be granted purely on > the basis of merit. There would be enough qualified women, men, > minorities, etc., that all groups would be proportionately represented > with no statistical differences in pay or GPA. The hope that affirmative action is a temporary remedy that will disappear once it is no longer needed is naive in the extreme. The major though by no means only error in the above reasoning is the mistaken assumption that it is only racial discrimination that prevents the proportional representation of the races in various measures. It is simply false that a "meritocracy" -- where jobs, entry into school, opportunity to form businesses, etc, are all granted on the basis of perfectively objective qualifications [1] -- would result in proportional representation. The reason is that cultural groups, such as the Amish, the Vietnamese boat people, and Haitian immigrants, are characterized not just by race, but also by different values, customs, and desires [2]. Such differences would prevent all the various groups that comprise our society from being proportionately represented in schools, jobs, and income, even in a perfect meritocracy. And because some of these groups are racially correlated, proportional representation would also be absent at the racial level. In short, the need for affirmative action will continue forever -- or at least until our society becomes perfectly homogenized. Don't hold your breath. Russell [1] The idea of a perfect meritocracy where objective criteria determine who is selected for various jobs, entry to school, and so forth, is chimerical. For example, popular entertainers have a leg up in their career if they display "sex appeal". How, pray tell, would this be objectively measured? Lest one think that this pertains only to a few jobs, consider all the other jobs whose objectively measured success depends on the very subjective reaction of other people to those who hold the job, from waitstaff in restaurants to salesmen. [2] It is possible to recognize the obvious truth that a person is not determined by the groups in which one falls and at the same time realize that a person's values, habits, and social knowledge are largely influenced by these groups. The statistical nature of this tie is sufficient for the argument made above, but far from sufficient to knock down the 'voluntarist paradigm' so naively attacked in recent postings here.