Brenden Nemeth-Brown Nemeth-Brown is an
international economics and political science student who can be
reached at [email protected].
Click Here for more articles by Brenden Nemeth-Brown
Affirmative action is unfair, right? In California, we have
already had a referendum mandating the end of affirmative action.
Many claim that it is “reverse discrimination” and that
it only impedes justice instead of granting it. The idea, however,
that college admissions is fair without affirmative action sounds a
little too naïve to be true. Is it true that the UC system
grants acceptances only on merit now?
And with this issue as controversial as it has always been, why
do both Al Gore and George W. Bush shy away from it? They may
bicker over prescription costs and their tax cut plans, but I
don’t believe I’ve ever heard either of them utter the
words “affirmative action.”
To verify this hunch, I went to both Gore and Bush’s Web
sites (www.algore.com and www.georgewbush.com). Bush has a small
caption at the bottom of his “issues” page which
basically says he’s against quotas and racial preferences.
The words “affirmative action” are nowhere to be found
on Gore’s Web page. Why is it that neither of these
candidates take affirmative action seriously? Maybe both candidates
are afraid to tackle explosive issues. Maybe both candidates are so
afraid of screwing up that in the process nothing worthwhile gets
said.
I might have completely forgotten about the issue if it
wasn’t for my sister. A different kind of affirmative action
became apparent to me after hearing about her first day of school.
My sister is a high school senior and attends a private school just
north of San Francisco. Obviously, this is a stressful time in her
life because she wants to go to a respected college. She came home
from school infuriated, one day, ranting that something was
unfair.
I asked her what the matter was, and she responded that her good
friend had been admitted into Princeton without so much as an
application on his part, but with a verbal confirmation from the
director of admissions. Another friend of hers received a similar
letter from Stanford, also offering admittance. She felt worthless,
for her friends and peers were being guaranteed admittance into the
top universities without the same academic achievements that she
felt she had garnered.
Now, I will admit these cases are rather rare, for one would
need a substantial amount of money and power to have those kinds of
connections. But that does not take away from the fact that these
rich kids are not playing by the same rules that you and I play by.
There will always be cracks in the college admissions process. I
don’t expect it to be perfect, but I do expect it to
recognize its flaws.
This “white” affirmative action grants
already-privileged students an unmerited break. I don’t blame
the parents of these students, for I’d do the same thing.
What parents wouldn’t want to do anything for their child?
It’s just that some parents are more capable of pulling these
admission strings than others. Schools like Harvard do not achieve
$4 billion endowments by accepting underprivileged students.
With this flaw in mind, how can one doubt the good intentions of
affirmative action? Even opponents of it believe something has to
be done differently. But I am dissatisfied by just toeing the party
line and doing nothing. By doing nothing, the gap between the rich
and the poor will only loom larger. Education is the only way out
for lower class students, and to hold them to the same standard as
a privileged student is ludicrous.
Money provides security and a superior education that poorer
students can’t afford. In a capitalist society there will
always be gaps in wealth, but that does not excuse the wealthy from
not aiding the poor.
A compromise has been offered by some scholars that promote a
socioeconomic affirmative action. It would give aid to needy
students, but not based on race. I first heard this idea two years
ago when I attended a speech given by Dinesh D’Souza, a
best-selling author who attended Dartmouth College. It made sense
to me at the time, for D’Souza rejected the idea that
American society is racist ““ he believes individuals are
racist and the media has propagated the fallacy that the entirety
of society is racist.
The logic follows that a poor white, Hispanic, black or Asian
student should have an equal right to aid. But this idea is
contingent on the fact that there is a commonality with being poor.
Is this really true? Does a poor white student in San Bernardino
County have a lot in common with a poor black student from south
central Los Angeles? I don’t just mean what kind of music
they listen to, but do they face the same social pressures? It
would be completely subjective to determine which race has more
hardships to overcome than others do, but something still needs to
be done.
A consensus will probably never be reached that a poor white
student is less needy than a poor black student, for there is too
much gray area to surf through. How does one define need? How can
you weed out prejudices from the individuals determining need? Or
is this all too confusing? Isn’t there an easier answer to
this problem? Maybe not.
So where does this leave us? What are we to do when we
can’t live with or without affirmative action? I would
suggest this: even if you don’t believe in affirmative
action, you must grant me that the college admission process is not
completely based on merit. Simply to even out the corruption, one
could support affirmative action.
As a white male, this hurts me but at the same time it helps me.
I may attend the 25th best university instead of the 15th, but my
social education will be all the greater. I realize now how foolish
I was when I applied to colleges. I applied to many schools that
were not as racially diverse as UCLA. I found myself caught in a
white bubble of sorts where I didn’t realize not everybody is
a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant. In the end, I couldn’t have
chosen a more diverse and academically stimulating place than
UCLA.
But as I see minority admissions decline over the last few years
and the amount of white and Asian students increase, I feel
saddened that my real learning is waning. Most of you who read this
right now would concede that the best discussions you’ve had
at this school have come outside of class. Books can teach you a
lot of useful information, but they can’t teach you how to
relate to someone from a different culture.
Assimilation is a gradual process that needs to be propagated by
college admissions. Although people of the same race will always
feel more comfortable with one another, overlap with other races is
needed to promote general social concern. GPAs and SATs are
imperfect, but still are important criteria for college
admission.
More attention needs to be drawn to the human element of the
student. I believe that the college application essay should count
as much if not more than the preceding items mentioned. The risk
here is greater subjectivity in admissions, but the upside is that
disadvantaged students will get a break.
There is a human element missing from the admissions process,
and if it continues to neglect minorities we will be living in a
two-tiered society where the rich will mean well but won’t
put their money where their mouth is ““ unless it means
getting their own children into college.