Pro-Minority Affirmative Action

First, I'd like to reply to my opponent's summary of the background. My background certainly doesn't do much justice to African-Americans. It hardly depicts the horrors they had to suffer for over 300 years. It doesn't show how dignity was completely taken from many of these African-Americans. It was just a simple summary. What I was getting at is this: The oppression and discrimination against African-Americans over such a long period has largely led to their socioeconomic status today. We need to undo those wrongs, if we are to protect races equally, as our Fourteenth Amendment demands. [1] I just want to correct some small parts. African-Americans tend to be more poor and more uneducated and other races. Not all of them are poor and uneducated. Hispanics clearly haven't been entirely integrated into American society. Many work very low-paying jobs. They tend to make much less money than any other race. Affirmative action will help integrate them into society by giving them more jobs in which they're qualified, and it will help by providing them with better-paying jobs. Asian-Americans currently tend to fare better than any other race in America. They are employed at a higher rate and tend to make more money than other races in America. There is no distinguishable discrimination against Asian-Americans as a race, while there is distinguishable discrimination against Hispanics and blacks. If you look at college enrollment rates, Asians outperform every other race. Affirmative action has been taken to ensure they are not discriminated against. In 1976, only 1.8 percent of people of Asian ethnicity attended institutions of higher education. In 2005, 6.5 percent attended college. [2] They only make up about 4.4% of the population. [3] There's no sufficient evidence to show that they are being discriminated against in colleges or in the workplace. It's clear that Hispanics and blacks have improved much in college enrollment as well. But their enrollment rates still lag behind the actual makeup of their population in America. Calculating the black population of the U.S. at 13.4%, their enrollment rates only lag behind their actual demographic by .7%. [3][2] Calculating the Hispanic population of the U.S. at 10.8%, their enrollment rates lag behind their actual demographic by 4.0%. [3][2] Frankly, I find it disgusting that my opponent would justify slavery in any way. The ends do not justify the means. The fact that many African-Americans can have more opportunity here than they could in many other countries does not make the oppression of them right. This really just appears to be an attempt to minimize slavery's wrongs. I think Andrew J. Sebok put it well: "The argument that African-Americans are better off in America than they would have been in Africa sounds like justifying a brutal kidnapping on the ground that the victim's children will end up in a country with a higher standard of living." [4] This argument is somewhat irrelevant, but my opponent doesn't analyze why the standard of living is lower. Imperialism and colonialism led to countries in Europe controlling almost all of Africa. Colonialism exploited places like the Congo and Algeria for its resources. Slavery exploited Africa of its people, and devastated different regions. These countries didn't get much in return, and you can see what has resulted today. My analysis is simplified, but it would take hours to describe the effects. Also, saying African-Americans hate the European colonists "for bringing them" here is not an entirely founded claim. America is also not the best country in the world because two message board posters on the Internet say so. My opponent's analogy to my second argument is not valid at all. The reason for affirmative action is because these races are being discriminated against. I fail to see how the kid is being discriminated against in your analogy. Affirmative action is not "spoiling". It's giving minorities more opportunities to raise themselves up. Blacks and Hispanics clearly make less and are employed less than other races. There is no good reason for this, and affirmative action helps end discrimination like that. I don't ignore that ending affirmative action will help European-Americans. It just doesn't matter because there's not much evidence to suggest that they are being discriminated against, as a race, in colleges or the workplace. In responding to my third argument, my opponent seems to confuse races with cultures. Seeing as cultures aren't people, I don't understand how they can do better than European-Americans. I agree that there are numerous cultures among whites, but that doesn't refute the point. African-Americans will likely bring different perspective and different cultures to the environment. Different races in an environment have shown to have important benefits. Gurin found that students in classroom with greater diversity reported higher scores on tests regarding complex thinking, greater intellectual self-confidence, a greater understanding that group differences are compatible with societal unity, and a higher level of motivation to understand the perspectives of other people. [5] Con's hypothetical culture doesn't necessarily bring the same benefits, and it's not the same situation at all. I know there is discrimination because of the statistics I have used over and over again. There is no legitimate reason there should be such inequality. It puzzles me why my opponent would bring up "economic standing", as if that somehow refutes my point. That only makes my point. Why is there such economic inequality? That was a statistic I used to back me up. There's no legitimate reason there should be such economic inequality. Race should be irrelevant, and race and class should not intersect. But as I have shown, race and class continue to intersect. My opponent proceeds to refute one of my statements with a Mark Twain quote. I said that the inequality is apparent with the statistics of unemployment and wages. The quote says that statistics are a kind of lie. Besides being a huge generalization, the quote does not refute what I said at all. As for the arguments that Con didn't even make, but had to quote, affirmative action law requires proper qualifications. As for Thomas Sowell's arguments, there are several claims in it that you did not back up. The problem with my opponent's proposal is that it really doesn't address the problem at hand. There are clearly problems across races. If you're attempting to say that the lower employment rates of blacks and Hispanics are entirely due to economic standing, you have to prove that. I haven't seen you prove that, and it's an impossible claim to prove. I have shown how the oppression and discrimination against African-Americans helped cause much poverty and lack of education. Simply attributing all their problems to "economic standing" does not solve the problem. They are being employed at a much lower rate than whites, and they are being paid much less than whites. The same is said for Hispanics. The way to help this is to tackle the race issue and make sure more qualified Hispanics and African-Americans are hired. But what we're talking about is race, and there continues to be a problem in regards to enrollment, employment, and wages with race. The statistics do not show that just poor blacks or poor Hispanics are affected. We have to address the problems of the entire race, and not just part of it, in order to tackle the problems. Help should be provided for the lower class, but that doesn't suddenly cure the inequality between races. More action needs to be taken than just that. [1] http://topics.law.cornell.edu... [2] http://nces.ed.gov... [3] http://tinyurl.com... [4] http://archives.cnn.com... [5] http://www.apa.org...