|
if oppurtunities are accessed largely via education and education is unevenly distributed, then why would it not make sense to address that uneven distribution? school funding should not be controlled at the local level--it should be distributed equally across all communities by the state.
without something like that, there is no plausible "level playing field" argument to be made.
without some kind of "level playing field"--at least in terms of educational opportunities---the idea of eliminating one of the few legal attempts to address anything about systematic racial and economic discrimination seems a poor one.
aa addresses effects without addressing causes.
i think it was a weak compromise that at once addressed the history of the treatment of african-americans but as it did so effectively split that treatment away from the question of class--which that history of discrimination is tightly intertwined with.
class stratification remains the great unaddressed problem in the states.
no-one--least of all the right--wants to address it.
specific proposal--maybe undertake a national-scale rethinking of how education is funded--keep aa in place while the "level playing field" becomes something that could plausibly be seen as real, and once that begins to happen, consider the question democratically of whether aa is or is not still required.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|