Affirmative action needs pragmatism

Politicians treat affirmative action like it's either going to save or destroy this country, depending upon what side they stand on.

Affirmative action policies have made great steps in improving opportunities for people who have been historically excluded throughout history in the United States. What is often left out of the debate is that many people -- individuals -- who have benefited from affirmative action haven't done it without self motivation.

When President Clinton stands up to a podium and says he believes in and supports affirmative action, what does that mean? It is empty, political rhetoric. He bases his stance on the votes he needs.

SF State's President Robert A. Corrigan does too. This institution is having, because of a lack of resources, trouble meeting the standards of its diversity goals in faculty hiring. Admit it.

SF State is advanced in its diversity -- both students and faculty -- but it has vast holes that won't be filled by telling people that affirmative action is "here to stay."

It is misleading to speak about affirmative action in such general terms.

Affirmative action is "here to stay." But diversity is not distributed evenly on this campus. That is the truth.

Affirmative action needs to remain a top priority in education and in the workplace. Undoubtedly, the progress that has been made in the fight for equality has been extensive, but now it's time to look at the issue and understand that it's not perfect, many misconceptions exist, and affirmative action policies need to change with the times.

Political speeches make great headlines, but affirmative action supporters are in for a long battle with a large group of California voters next year. The only way to fight for affirmative action is to be armed with facts and the truth, not emotions and rhetoric.

Remember Prop 187?

[ Golden Gater Online November 14, 1995 ]

[ back to top ]