Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Manx
#1 is not even close to what you said the first time. Which was this:
Certain races would still need a leg up at the expense of other races
I take exception to the phrase "a leg up" and to the phrase "at the expense of".
|
The purpose of AA is to give a particular race or gender assistance. If it doesn't provide any assistance, then it is not doing anything. Assistance is the "action" in "affirmative action." A synonym for assistance is "leg up".
If there is only a finite number of positions (students accepted or jobs offered by a company) then members of the group that is not receiving assistance is placed at an immediate disadvantage; i.e. their probability goes down of getting approved for that limited number of openings (at Harvard or at Microsoft, etc.). Thus they are at a disadvantage, because not receiving the job or spot in the university is an immediate disadvantage.
Now you may argue that overall, AA is just, and that's fine, but that's a completely different point. The fact is that in any instance in which AA actually performs an action, it increases the probability of socioeconomic advancement of one group, and decreases the probability of socioeconomic advancement of another group.
If it did not do that, then what would it ever accomplish?