They say the first step toward changing attitudes is
self-acceptance.
My name is James, and I am Korean American. That is my heritage
but not nearly all of who I am.
As I watched a screening for “that Asian movie,”
“Better Luck Tomorrow,” the thing that hit me the
hardest, besides painful flashbacks of SAT cramming, was how little
race had to do with it. The characters were deep and had their own
personal motives. Minimal importance was placed on ethnicity. Yet,
outside the theater, in a country renowned for its melting-pot
ideology, the prominence of one’s race easily overshadows all
signs of individualism.
Specifically, policies like affirmative action segregate society
into black or white terms, not human ones.
I am against any policy that will quantify people within
stereotypical depictions of race. By necessity, affirmative action
overlooks individuals out of “fairness” to races.
This system forces admissions or job decisions to be based on
issues other than relevant qualifications. Minorities with less
than suitable credentials are chosen because of their ethnicity.
Based on credentials, this person should have been rejected, but
because of race and this controversial legal practice, he or she is
accepted. The applicant is generalized as “the Asian
American” or “the Latino” who was accepted
because of affirmative action.
This program robs the person from going far as a result of
personal struggle. Minorities are stigmatized and treated as
charity cases because it’s become public knowledge they need
help and can’t make it on their own. The individual uses race
as one uses a pair of crutches. They help you get around, but they
don’t really solve anything in the long run.
Their positions can never be legitimate because they only
succeeded due to their affiliation with a race. The dignity of
those admitted based on merit is undermined by those admitted to
meet quotas. Looming over the heads of those admitted through quota
is the mark of government intervention in what is supposed to be an
individual’s struggle.
Inequities are a part of life, and things are far from fair.
Affirmative-action supporters point to quotas as a means of
leveling the playing field but do not understand the lingering,
destructive effects they have on minority groups as a whole. These
groups can never reach a level playing field if they rely on race
affiliations instead of personal accomplishment.
In the University of California system, the student body is
woefully inconsistent with the demographics of the state.
Admissions of blacks, American Indians and Latinos numbered only
9,935 in 2003. In contrast, 18,744 whites and 16,466 Asian
Americans were admitted.
If the state wants to correct this racial inequality, it should
center on improving the existing schools in urban areas. Giving
minorities a chance from a young age will allow them to succeed
without handouts.
Believe it or not, there is a right and a wrong way to
incorporate ethnicity into your life. The right way is to stand by
your race while letting personal convictions and characters
determine your persona.
The wrong way is to stand behind race and let that group’s
voice speak for you. In the case of the latter, the person becomes
trivial. By putting yourself into the crowd, you are invariably
expected to share the same ideology and conform to the
group’s model. You will be judged accordingly.
If the goal of minorities, in the words of Dr. Martin Luther
King Jr., is to “be judged on the content of their character
and not on the color of their skin,” individual
qualifications must be seen as more significant than race.
That isn’t to say race cannot be a proud and important
part of your life. It can. But when you check that little box
marked “other,” do not expect it to help you, and have
faith that one day it won’t hurt you either.
Moon is a first-year economics student. E-mail him your comments
at jmoon@media.ucla.edu.