Who affirmative action helps, and who it hurts....

Conservative science blogger Brown Gaucho has a post about affirmative action which I might have written years ago. It is basically the standard argument that affirmative action hurts (some) minorities because by lowering the bar of entry to encourage "diversity" it creates stigma and also does not do anything to address the underlying issues (e.g., poor secondary schools). But a few years ago I concluded that there was a problem with this narrative.


Stigma is a problem for those who are capable and competent and are tarred with the brush of association. But, as a matter of empirical fact I think affirmative action has been great in generating a black middle class, for every black doctor whose self-esteem is underminded by the reality that his colleagues probably assume his medical school admission was a bit easier than their own, there are a dozen who wouldn't have gotten into medical school without lower GPA & MCAT requirements. Though I think there might be some negative effects on the black working & underclass, who aren't really helped by diversity slots at University of Michigan law school, it has been a Good Thing for most of the "talented 10th" within disadvantaged minority groups. I asked John McWhorter about the subpar performance of black American students in academics despite the fact that more than half of said ethnic group was in the "middle class," and McWhorter responded that "you don't need to be that bright to be in the middle class." Fair enough. I think an argument can be made that the black middle class of today, which is heavily dependent on government jobs, is a product of affirmative action. In that way, uplift and economic security have been a beneficial byproduct.

But, I also think that conservatives are right that affirmative action generates a stigma. Ultimately, it treats those who benefit as victims in the tide of history who lack their own agency. Additionally, I think it allows society to mask the difficulties of the lower and underclasses of color by pointing to the presence of upper middle class faces of color at elite institutions of higher education. Where I think those on the Right, where I generally place myself, are wrong is to assume that abolition of affirmative action will not cause mass distress, and possibly dispossession, of the middle class generated by it.

We've made our bed, now we need to face the consequences. There are no easy choices. Both the Left and the Right dodge the structural problems that resulted in the need for affirmation action, and the problems which are now facts of life which necessitate the maintenance of affirmative action.

Addendum: As a person of brown complexion my reason for opposing affirmative action in most forms (which includes government contracts) for those who "look like me" is simple and selfish: I don't want to be perceived as a victim without agency for whom the white man's handout is necessary for success. Yet the reality is that I live a life with many choices enabled by the fact that I can generate a decent income doing things which come rather easily to me. If I was a more marginal fellow I might sing a different tune when it comes to handouts and the importance of pride! The point of this post is that the Left needs to acknowledge that many competent minorities are slighted by the perception of implicit inferiority that affirmative action generates toward them, and they live their whole life being the objects of pity or patronization from their inferiors. But, the Right needs to acknowledge that revoking affirmation action might have dire consequences for those who simply have come to depend on training wheels as a fact of life. There is no free lunch here. And we don't live in Lake Wobegon, where all the children are above average....