By Atilla Azami –

Yes, it has. Although it is impossible to conclude that the significantly higher numbers of minorities in professional positions previously held by white males only is solely because of AA, the correlation is irrefutable and it is reasonable to say AA has played a big role.

The social construct of an industrial society is a complex one; therefore its policies must employ pluralist approaches in solving its problems rather than the monist, black and white argument of “merits.”

What is merit as argued by AA critics? The so-called merits of acceptance into an occupational position or educational institution are based upon test scores; tests that favor the already privileged class.

Is it by merit that the Caucasian male, who grew up speaking formal English to his professional parents in his affluent, suburban town with an exceptional school system scores higher in his reading/writing section of an entrance exam than the first generation immigrant girl, who grew up speaking her parents’ native tongue at home of her resource deprived inner city?

Is it by merit that our social infrastructure has been devised by men whom are the progeny of men that happened to be born in latitudes and natural resource abundant regions that favored their technological advances, thus their dominion over less fortunate societies lacking these advantages? An arbitrary genetic and circumstantial lottery is hardly an argument for merit or social justice.

Read Monir Khilla’s opinion of Affirmative Action.

Setting all handicaps aside, let’s analyze the likelihood of undoing millennia-long inequality without policies like AA. Within this hypothetical trope, suppose we are to play a game of tag and the team captains who select players to join their respective teams are comprised of a specific, homogenous demographic.

The prospective roster all has undergone a series of tests to demonstrate their qualification to be tag players. Will the captains choose players solely based upon their test scores, or will there be inherent, subconscious factors that affect their decision? Any social psychologists will lean towards the latter.

Unless we implement policies to ameliorate the errs of human intricacies by allowing the minority tag player to penetrate the playing field, prove to everyone that he/she is just as capable of playing tag, and finally become a team captain to make more balanced decisions, we will continue to have unfair, homogenous tag games.

Of course, the metaphorical example I’ve given may seem mundane at first glance in the context of social justice, however it illustrates my point well.

Without policies like AA that even out the playing field of our society, will we have had Sonia Sotomayors, Sheryl Sandbergs, or Cornel Wests? Speculation is limitless, but reason should prevail. 50 years of a single policy isn’t going to remedy 10,000 years of patriarchy, 700 years of eurocentrism, and 400 years of WASP exceptionalism.

AA shouldn’t be thought of as a band aid to a deep and complex social problem, rather as one of many physical therapy exercises of a handicapped society.