There is no doubt that equals should be treated equally. “It is wrong, always and everywhere, to give special advantage to any group simply on the basis of physical characteristics that have no relevance to the award given or the burden imposed”( Fullinwider, Robert). It would be wrong to give preferential treatment to a certain race now, if no preferential treatment were given to any other race historically. But the fact that certain groups were deprived of many privileges and opportunities in the past justifies a certain degree of preferential treatment granted to them today.
That is the core focus of Affirmative Action: to correct historic wrongs. But the question is: how long does Affirmative Action need to be in place to completely reverse the historic wrongs? And will minorities’ positions be secure once Affirmative Action is lifted?
Although Affirmative Action does grant a certain degree of fairness and opportunities to minorities, it does not, and will never bring complete racial equality in America. Complete racial equality has to come from people’s heart, and as long as most Americans still have a slight degree of personal racial preference, racial inequality will always persist in this country.
For example, Affirmative Action can impose quota system on corporations and universities, forcing them to have a certain percentage of minorities in their workforce or student body, but Affirmative Action can never impose the quota system on average citizens, forcing them to purchase a certain percentage of products or services from a minority owned business. Take an example of two doctors, a black and a white, both graduated from the same university with same academic performance and professional competence. They both open their own clinics. The white doctor is going to acquire a far larger clientele than the black one, as the majority of this country’s population, whites, still prefer to do business with their own kinds. And as a result, the white doctor is going to gain far more social recognition, professional advancement, fame and wealth than his black counterpart, regardless of their personal or professional competence. Similar career limitation will apply to minorities in other professions such as in business and politics. America is a free society and people can exercise their freewill. And if this freewill is racially biased, America will never be equal.
So the real question to address racial inequality is: where does this deeply rooted personal racial preference in average Americans come from, and how can we get rid of it? To find answers to this question, we have to look at how America society was formed and developed.
Since its birth, “America has always favored white European immigrants. In the 1920's, quotas designed to maintain our original ethnic and racial immigration origins became the basis of our new laws. And while the quota concept was finally abolished in the mid 1960's, the numbers admitted to this country continued to favor white Europeans and their descendants. This prejudicial attitude was particularly evident in the Popenoe eugenics movement in 1924 which took the view that certain races were in character and intellect superior to others” (Maurice Waters). Other racial groups, regardless of merit or qualification, were barred or tightly restricted from coming into this country. “In 1882 Congress passed the first immigration statute, barring Chinese immigrants. Prejudice, formerly just vocally expressed, now became part of American law as it applied to immigration” (Maurice Waters).
It is very obvious from American immigration history that this country was built on the concept that white race was a deserving race to live in here and all others were inferior and thus were only relegated to professions that whites had no desire to perform. After over 200 years, this racial concept became so hard-wired in most Americans’ mind that a few decades of Affirmative Action had very slight effect on it.
So is America beyond hope? Are we forever condemned to live in a society with racial prejudice and inequality? Do minorities have to depend perpetually on Affirmative Action to rise to prominence, at the expense of some other equally qualified whites? Not if we are willing to take a more effective action to fundamentally change America’s prejudicial racial concept.
This very effective action is: a more open immigration policy aimed at bringing in immigrants based on their skills, qualifications and merits, not on their race. If the current prevailing bias was caused by a historical unjust and racially biased immigration practice, the only way to cure it is to implement a reverse immigration policy that is merit based. Because of the U.S. immigration history, blacks and Hispanics in this country do not represent a complete picture of their respective racial population. Both groups were not allowed to immigrate into this country freely: blacks were brought here for their ability to work in the cotton fields as slaves, and Hispanics were barred from coming in so only the most disfranchised ones crossed the border to enter illegally. Educated classes of both groups were not allowed in, and as a result, those in this country fare less well in areas were education is desired.
But a merit based open immigration policy will increase numbers of highly skilled and educated minorities in America, thus increase minority presence in various professions traditionally occupied largely by whites: medical, legal, business and politics. Society will be stronger and more just if the ranks of its leading citizens include a racially and ethnically broader range of people than it does now.
However, the U.S. currently does not allow large number of skilled immigrants into this country. “Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually”, and “Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visa in 2003 from almost 200,000to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct.1 is already exhausted” (Gary Becker). “The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. Although that opposition is understandable, it does not make it good for the country as a whole” (Gary Becker), as this protectionism eventually will erode competitiveness of U.S. workforce. Large numbers of skilled and educated immigrants will be crucial for U.S. to maintain its current technological and economical leadership in the world, as other developing nations such as China and India are churning out more engineers and scientists every year.
“Foreign talent has helped make the U.S. economy the world's most productive and innovative. Time spent in the U.S. by foreign citizens has also been a crucial means by which American values and institutions have been transferred around the world. Raising barriers to talented foreign students and workers might yield short-term political gains, but the long-term economic consequences will be much less salubrious” (Devesh Kapur & John Mchale).
All in all, besides the economic gain we can obtain for masses of skilled immigrants, an merit based open immigration policy that favors large numbers of skilled and educated immigrants, regardless of their racial or ethnic background, will be instrumental in bringing in a more diverse population into this country, increasing interaction between different ethnic groups, and fostering a society that values people on their talent and merit rather than racial background or physical characteristics. People living in a more ethnic diverse environment will less likely to be racially prejudiced since frequent encounters of different groups dissipate their natural unease and hostility towards strangers. In California where population is very diverse, racial and ethnic tension is far less significant than in other places where diversity is uncommon. Our wedding in Sacramento was well attended by people of all ethnic backgrounds. But in Arizona, where I attended my graduate school, none of my white classmates accepted my invitation to parties I hosted. The only attendees of my gatherings were Asian students, although I always sent out invitations to everyone in my class.
It is a loss suffered by the American public at large in its failure to fully realize civil society—extensive social spaces in which citizens from all origins exchange ideas and cooperate on terms of equality—which is an indispensable social condition of democracy itself.
Democratic governance draws nurture from inclusion rather than exclusion. If the leaders who frame the political agenda and shape public opinion remain uniformly white, the common good gets shortchanged; it isn't really common. Finally, racial and ethnic comity are harder to achieve when whites see a black or brown face in a position of leadership or power as a novelty rather than a commonplace. (Fullinwider, Robert)
Hence in conclusion, in eradicating Americans’ deeply rooted racial bias, Affirmative Action falls way short. The ultimate solution is a merit based open immigration policy that favors skilled and educated labors in large numbers. Only when a whole spectrum of different ethnic groups are well represented in America can Americans learn to appreciate a person solely based on his/her talent, skills, merit and content of his/her character, not on his/her physical appearance. And if America is not willing to accept large numbers of skilled non-white immigrants regardless of their current and future contributions to this country, America is not willing to give up the concept that white is the superior race, and racial bias will always persist in this country.
References
Fullinwider, Robert. Affirmative Action, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Spring 2005 Edition
Maurice Waters. Social Trust and Foreign Policy: Immigration and Law Enforcement Issues, Secretary's Open Forum, May 25, 1999
Gary Becker. Give Us Your Skilled Masses, The Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2005, page A18
Devesh Kapur & John Mchale. Are We Losing the Global Race for Talent? The Wall Street Journal, November 21, 2005; PageA17
That is the core focus of Affirmative Action: to correct historic wrongs. But the question is: how long does Affirmative Action need to be in place to completely reverse the historic wrongs? And will minorities’ positions be secure once Affirmative Action is lifted?
Although Affirmative Action does grant a certain degree of fairness and opportunities to minorities, it does not, and will never bring complete racial equality in America. Complete racial equality has to come from people’s heart, and as long as most Americans still have a slight degree of personal racial preference, racial inequality will always persist in this country.
For example, Affirmative Action can impose quota system on corporations and universities, forcing them to have a certain percentage of minorities in their workforce or student body, but Affirmative Action can never impose the quota system on average citizens, forcing them to purchase a certain percentage of products or services from a minority owned business. Take an example of two doctors, a black and a white, both graduated from the same university with same academic performance and professional competence. They both open their own clinics. The white doctor is going to acquire a far larger clientele than the black one, as the majority of this country’s population, whites, still prefer to do business with their own kinds. And as a result, the white doctor is going to gain far more social recognition, professional advancement, fame and wealth than his black counterpart, regardless of their personal or professional competence. Similar career limitation will apply to minorities in other professions such as in business and politics. America is a free society and people can exercise their freewill. And if this freewill is racially biased, America will never be equal.
So the real question to address racial inequality is: where does this deeply rooted personal racial preference in average Americans come from, and how can we get rid of it? To find answers to this question, we have to look at how America society was formed and developed.
Since its birth, “America has always favored white European immigrants. In the 1920's, quotas designed to maintain our original ethnic and racial immigration origins became the basis of our new laws. And while the quota concept was finally abolished in the mid 1960's, the numbers admitted to this country continued to favor white Europeans and their descendants. This prejudicial attitude was particularly evident in the Popenoe eugenics movement in 1924 which took the view that certain races were in character and intellect superior to others” (Maurice Waters). Other racial groups, regardless of merit or qualification, were barred or tightly restricted from coming into this country. “In 1882 Congress passed the first immigration statute, barring Chinese immigrants. Prejudice, formerly just vocally expressed, now became part of American law as it applied to immigration” (Maurice Waters).
It is very obvious from American immigration history that this country was built on the concept that white race was a deserving race to live in here and all others were inferior and thus were only relegated to professions that whites had no desire to perform. After over 200 years, this racial concept became so hard-wired in most Americans’ mind that a few decades of Affirmative Action had very slight effect on it.
So is America beyond hope? Are we forever condemned to live in a society with racial prejudice and inequality? Do minorities have to depend perpetually on Affirmative Action to rise to prominence, at the expense of some other equally qualified whites? Not if we are willing to take a more effective action to fundamentally change America’s prejudicial racial concept.
This very effective action is: a more open immigration policy aimed at bringing in immigrants based on their skills, qualifications and merits, not on their race. If the current prevailing bias was caused by a historical unjust and racially biased immigration practice, the only way to cure it is to implement a reverse immigration policy that is merit based. Because of the U.S. immigration history, blacks and Hispanics in this country do not represent a complete picture of their respective racial population. Both groups were not allowed to immigrate into this country freely: blacks were brought here for their ability to work in the cotton fields as slaves, and Hispanics were barred from coming in so only the most disfranchised ones crossed the border to enter illegally. Educated classes of both groups were not allowed in, and as a result, those in this country fare less well in areas were education is desired.
But a merit based open immigration policy will increase numbers of highly skilled and educated minorities in America, thus increase minority presence in various professions traditionally occupied largely by whites: medical, legal, business and politics. Society will be stronger and more just if the ranks of its leading citizens include a racially and ethnically broader range of people than it does now.
However, the U.S. currently does not allow large number of skilled immigrants into this country. “Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually”, and “Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visa in 2003 from almost 200,000to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct.1 is already exhausted” (Gary Becker). “The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. Although that opposition is understandable, it does not make it good for the country as a whole” (Gary Becker), as this protectionism eventually will erode competitiveness of U.S. workforce. Large numbers of skilled and educated immigrants will be crucial for U.S. to maintain its current technological and economical leadership in the world, as other developing nations such as China and India are churning out more engineers and scientists every year.
“Foreign talent has helped make the U.S. economy the world's most productive and innovative. Time spent in the U.S. by foreign citizens has also been a crucial means by which American values and institutions have been transferred around the world. Raising barriers to talented foreign students and workers might yield short-term political gains, but the long-term economic consequences will be much less salubrious” (Devesh Kapur & John Mchale).
All in all, besides the economic gain we can obtain for masses of skilled immigrants, an merit based open immigration policy that favors large numbers of skilled and educated immigrants, regardless of their racial or ethnic background, will be instrumental in bringing in a more diverse population into this country, increasing interaction between different ethnic groups, and fostering a society that values people on their talent and merit rather than racial background or physical characteristics. People living in a more ethnic diverse environment will less likely to be racially prejudiced since frequent encounters of different groups dissipate their natural unease and hostility towards strangers. In California where population is very diverse, racial and ethnic tension is far less significant than in other places where diversity is uncommon. Our wedding in Sacramento was well attended by people of all ethnic backgrounds. But in Arizona, where I attended my graduate school, none of my white classmates accepted my invitation to parties I hosted. The only attendees of my gatherings were Asian students, although I always sent out invitations to everyone in my class.
It is a loss suffered by the American public at large in its failure to fully realize civil society—extensive social spaces in which citizens from all origins exchange ideas and cooperate on terms of equality—which is an indispensable social condition of democracy itself.
Democratic governance draws nurture from inclusion rather than exclusion. If the leaders who frame the political agenda and shape public opinion remain uniformly white, the common good gets shortchanged; it isn't really common. Finally, racial and ethnic comity are harder to achieve when whites see a black or brown face in a position of leadership or power as a novelty rather than a commonplace. (Fullinwider, Robert)
Hence in conclusion, in eradicating Americans’ deeply rooted racial bias, Affirmative Action falls way short. The ultimate solution is a merit based open immigration policy that favors skilled and educated labors in large numbers. Only when a whole spectrum of different ethnic groups are well represented in America can Americans learn to appreciate a person solely based on his/her talent, skills, merit and content of his/her character, not on his/her physical appearance. And if America is not willing to accept large numbers of skilled non-white immigrants regardless of their current and future contributions to this country, America is not willing to give up the concept that white is the superior race, and racial bias will always persist in this country.
References
Fullinwider, Robert. Affirmative Action, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Spring 2005 Edition
Maurice Waters. Social Trust and Foreign Policy: Immigration and Law Enforcement Issues, Secretary's Open Forum, May 25, 1999
Gary Becker. Give Us Your Skilled Masses, The Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2005, page A18
Devesh Kapur & John Mchale. Are We Losing the Global Race for Talent? The Wall Street Journal, November 21, 2005; PageA17
选择“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
选择“don't run on pages on this domain”
