If we want to have reasonably equal representation by groups who seem to want to be considered as a group–and as an example, the group self-described as blacks in America–we have to set group-based AA quotas. We can’t get there by providing equal opportunity, because equal opportunity does not produce equal outcomes. As the thread above shows, the reason for this is debated endlessly in circles, with some of us holding that the reason for this immutability of disparate results is underlying genetic differences at a group level, and some of us holding that it is simply disparate nurturing–environmental influences–of some type.
I hold that the primary explanation for performance differences between the average of all blacks and the average of all whites–and pretty much any two population groups–is genetic and therefore permanently immutable until we manage to mix our gene pools a good deal more thoroughly. (I note that even within the phenotypically “white” population, the differences among intra-white groups with varying levels of societal success are still largely underpinned by genetic differences, but it is not a sensitive issue because they look more phenotypically the same.) High-income, high-academically-performing and high-sports-performing groups are genetically blessed with a different maximum potential than are low-income, low-academically-performing and low-sports-performing groups.
In simple terms, smart and athletic groups succeed more often than less-smart and less athletic groups in our society, and the same basic rank-ordering results across all populations.
The dilemma with which we are faced is that some groups self-identify–and are identified by society–into a population and wish to be considered as members of that group, and the history of this country has created grave injustices toward some of those populations, most notably our black population.
I believe that, over the next couple of decades, we’ll see a shift away from color-based self- and societal-identification. We’ll see successful and professional blacks, for instance, identify with that class more than an appearance-based classification. Until that happens, though, we are stuck with a disparate distribution of color/race-based populations.
I see no workable remedy for this besides race-based AA quotas. We can argue ad nauseum if this is fair or not; life is unfair. But because I think there is a greater good for a society in which large-scale self-identifying populations have broad representation at all success tiers possible, and because I think those same self-identifying populations are differently enabled at a genetic level, we won’t get to more mixed society without a deliberate and specific effort to overcome what mother nature has screwed up.
We have done this for 40 years by law and by back-door machinations. We do it every day on an ongoing basis across educational institutions and at the level of corporate employment. While I am more blunt than many of my colleagues about the “real” reason we need AA, I basically don’t care whether someone thinks the real reason is historical injustice and its consequence or genetic differences.
The greatest good in my mind, for right now, is a diverse society, as free as possible from the tremendous strain incurred by a perception of unfairness, even if the reasoning underlying the cause for the disparate distribution is wrong.