In Defense of Affirmative Action

Rating:
Summary: Deeply troubling
Review: Bergman does an admirable job of detailing much of the blatant hypocrisy surrounding much of the anti-Affirmative Action movement. Conservatives (I am a Libertarian) expend much energy blasting racial, ethnic, and gender preferences, yet remain placidly silent when other manifestations of preferential treatment occur i.e. 'legacy' appointments to universities, subsidies to farmers and manufacturers (transfer of tax money to preferential groups), import quotas and tariffs(reducing the supply of goods for consumers by strangling competition for the benefit of manufacturers), etc. Some of the preferences she describes ('legacy' quotas at universities) are acceptable when practiced by private institutions (freedom to engage in contracts by individuals). Other preferences, such as subsidies, quotas, and tariffs, are the result of the extensive governmental interference in the economy and should be halted immediately. Bergman's socialism leads her to the erroneous conclusion that if a society tolerates some preferences (reduction in liberty), then the enactment of further preferences is desirable and beneficial. Wrong. In a truly free society, NO preferences should be assigned to ANY group, regardless of their status. As a sidebar, most of the arguements Bergman uses for racial preferences were already advanced by members of the NSDAP in Germany in the 1930s.

Rating:
Summary: Deeply troubling
Review: I am a great and consistent supporter of A.A. However, as an Indian-American, I have seen serious problems which A.A. presents to Asian-Americans, which economically and educationally priviledged white women pay lip service to but do not confront directly. As a feminist I found most of Bergman's book compelling. Nevertheless, she is so glib in speaking of 'women and minorities', conceptually in tandem, that she feeds the stereotyping conducted by conservative critics of the Left's position on A.A. At some point we, as women of all races, have to confront the genuine problems of classism within the ranks of feminism, especially the white feminist elite. Prop 209 could have been defeated in California, were it not for middleclass white women pre empting the much more urgent protests conducted by minorities. 'Women and minorities' is a useful construct, particularly when addressing political unfairness. But Affirmative Action should *never* be an excuse for the feminist elite (especially academic feminists, who hardly speak for all of us!) to use discrimination as a soap box for their own interests. White women, as well as Asian-American women, are well represented as students in most of prestigious academia; it is in teaching jobs that there are still problems of representation.

Rating:
Summary: Specious arguments and omitted ones
Review: I must agree with the Nashville reviewer. I'm constantly floored by the reference (only ocasional, which itself raises questions) to "legacy" preferences. These are wrong, wrong, wrong. (If anything, an applicant with parents who attended that university -- especially a prestigious private one -- should be held to a *higher* standard. They'd damn well *better* do well, given their myriad advantages in life.)

Overall, not a terribly convincing book, and I did try to read it in the spirit of being convinced.

Rating:
Summary: One of the best for her side of the argument
Review: This book is a must read for those preparing to defend affirmative action. If you are anti-AA, I suggest you read this, you might find some of your previous conclusions reversed. In all, a good analytical study and conclusion on what AA is and should be.