That's what AA does. That's what it's designed to do. It's somewhat bizarre that anyone is even arguing about this. AA is *not* about equal opportunity. It is about artificially putting more minorities into college, or more minorities into a given workforce. You're kidding yourself if you think it's about equality at all.
That is not the point of AA. The intention of AA is to prevent employers from exclusively hiring people in certain areas (or not hiring them at all) purely based on their skin color, nationality or sex.
And it attempts to accomplish this by "artificially putting more minorities into college, or more minorities into a given workforce". You're looking at why it's being done. I'm looking at how it does it. The method really does matter here IMO.
Also, the goal isn't as clear as you made it out to be. AA policies do not do anything to prevent minority business owners from employing only their minority. It only acts to ensure a fair distribution of a select set of minorities are hired/accepted in white owned establishments. I guess my problem with it is that if we think it's wrong to base hiring/acceptance decisions based on skin color, nationality, or sex, then how does creating a program that bases hiring/acceptance decisions on skin color, nationality, or **** do anything but perpetuate the problem?
The reality, rather you agree with it or not, people are hired and positioned based on sex, skin color, age, looks, being family or friends, etc. AA is to combat that, but the biggest downfall for AA is the assumption that they are qualified people of those groups being discriminated against. As a result, you have less qualified people being hired.
I agree. That's the problem with AA. The only case in which it "works" is when a qualified person is being discriminated against based on race/sex/whatever. But how do you measure this? How do you even know it's happening? Unfortunately, most of the time the justification for the need of AA programs is simply by looking at the statistical outcomes. Which gets us back to the same kind of failure to see other causes of those statistical differences that I spoke of earlier.
We've created this boogeyman of racism, absent any significant evidence other than statistics. And in our haste to tell people that the reason their group doesn't succeed as well as another is because of race, we also tell them that they're not as responsible for their own outcomes. Surely you can see how when this is done on a large scale it will actually affect the "true" outcomes of that group and possibly even cause the very statistical differences used to justify the whole mess in the first place?
That is the main reason why AA is not an effective overall solution. It doesn't address the problem of people of a certain sex, religion, height, look, skin color,etc. not being qualified for the job.
Correct. It treats people as a generic member of their race, sex, etc. It does *exactly* what it's supposedly supposed to be fighting against. We want employers to treat each applicant as an individual and judge them on their own merits, right? But we create a system which forces employers to treat people differently based on the color of their skin. How does that make sense? IMO, it doesn't.
A better AA solution IMO (for everyone) is to have a government ran "Linked-In" type social network where applications are kept on file. When Joe applies for Wal-mart, he puts his application online, if he's not hired, he is told exactly why he wasn't selected. If he's hired then fired or promoted, same deal with an annual "report".
That way, an organization can be randomly audited for unfair treatment
That's better, but not really a solution. No one's going to put "he's a darkie" down as the reason they didn't hire someone. Why not just stop trying to fiddle with the social statistics and let society deal with things naturally? Most employers aren't going to hire or fire people based on their race. And those that do will tend to fail to compete against those who are just hiring the best and firing the worst. Why do we need big government programs to "fix" a problem that should fix itself? Doubly so when the programs themselves may actually be perpetuating the problem.
Trust that most people aren't going to **** someone because of their skin color. Move on. I honestly don't understand why those who argue the hardest that we need to end racism seem to work the hardest to institutionalize it into our social fabric. We can't end racism as long as we have racist government policies reminding us every single day of just how racist we all are. That just seems like the opposite direction to go.