With the affirmative action case gaining new attention in relation to Asian Americans, the debate surrounding whether or not affirmative action should be allowed at all has been reignited.
Arguments against affirmative action center around the idea that it is a form of discrimination, particularly one against white individuals in order to benefit minorities. Opponents might argue that such a practice leads to qualified white individuals with good test scores and excellent GPAs being rejected in favor of admitting minorities with scores and grade point averages of lesser value, in an effort to promote diversity.
However, the fault in such an argument is its underlying assumption: that all students, when applying for college, come from equal playing grounds, come from equal chances of success.
That couldn't be father from the truth. Although legal segregation has ended, disparities among races are prevalent. Black people have a poverty rate nearly twice as high as white people do. Hispanic people and black people have consistently had higher poverty rates than other racial groups, such as Asians, for years.
Black people and Hispanic people are far more likely to come from impoverished homes and school districts, in which schools are less than adequately funded, and are thus less likely to provide quality education to its students.
If a student comes from such an environment, they have a greater chance of having lower test scores and grade point averages. (Although obviously, this is not always the case. Communities are not, by any sense of the word, monoliths).
Now, we've established the racial disparities in playing fields, and thus, a reason for the existence of affirmative action. Affirmative action does not (or at least, should not), exist to decrease the success of qualified individuals. It's about leveling the playing field, allowing all people to have an equal chance for success, regardless of background but still based on merit. Despite its flaws and imperfections, that should be the underlying goal.
And if we are touting affirmative action as discriminatory and against a merit-based system, where is the outrage against children of alumni having an increased likelihood of getting accepted than non-alumni related individuals? Isn't that too, against the idea of a merit-based system?
The problem with the affirmative action debate is simple: it is the assumption of an equal playing field to begin with, the assumption that every individual is born with a fair chance at success.
Although we all should be, we aren't.