While I support the concept of affirmative action, I disagree with the recent editorial supporting a federal court of appeal’s decision to uphold current affirmative action policies at the University of Michigan (“Positive Action,” SN 5/15).
The goal of affirmative action is to assist disadvantaged groups in selection procedures in order to further equality.
This goal is entirely worthy and justified, but the process becomes harmful when we continue to assist groups that are no longer disadvantaged in the specific situation at hand.
Most educated people, that is the sort who sit on admissions boards as major universities, are not overtly racist.
I’m as cynical as the next person, but I think we have progressed to the point where individuals are not going to be sorting through thousands of applications and disregarding all of the minority candidates because of their skin color.
Simply put, the impersonal nature of the admissions process used for undergraduates at large universities prevents the interference of the type of racism that is likely to exist today.
What we are really trying to do is level the playing field for students who came from poor schools.
Why, then, don’t we do just that? Assuming that someone came from an underfunded school just because they are a minority is clearly passive racism in all of its glory.
Race-based affirmative action at universities should deal more with the student’s individual experience on campus, like the recent Black Celebratory, instead of overcorrecting to the point where the solution becomes an affirmation of the very behavior that we are trying to prevent.
Sarah Conklin
history and philosophy senior
Support student media! Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.
