I agree affirmative action began as a way to use "racism" to fix past racism. Because blacks were discriminated against in the past, the idea was we would discriminate in favor of them and once they caught up, it would go away... but it did not work after 20 years, so it made no sense to preserve a racist solution to racism especially if it did not work (there are clear anecdotal examples of it working but statistically it did not narrow the gaps it was supposed to narrow).

Now if Affirmative Action required that once people who passed objective nonracial criteria for acceptance into a school or hiring by a company were selected at random that would not be a racist, since it gave every individual who qualified for a job equal opportunity to get it.

This approach is increasingly used in California by public universities since discrimination of any kind based on skin color is illegal. Except rather than set objective standards and then operate a lottery, the state universities have eliminated objective criteria like GPAs and SAT scores from admission requirements thus making it impossible to claim racism, except a university professor has used statistics to prove it is still going on in the form of affirmative action. And the value of a college education from those institutions is declining... so rather than lifting people up, it has done the opposite.

You seem okay with discriminating against Asians, even though they were also victims of discrimination in the past because they are "making it" based on objective criteria. But Asians are not deceived about their skin color being used against them and they sued Harvard over it. You might feel it is fair at the "identity group level", but is it fair at the individual level? If Asians were getting in over individual blacks using skin color as a criterion, would you still favor it.

For example, if college sports scholarships needed to achieve diversity targets in the same way say medical schools are, would you feel it is fair that black athletes are losing opportunities because of the color of their skin to underrepresented groups including whites? Or do you believe in heads, I win... tails, you lose?

I understand the concept of using racism to fix racism but call it what it is. In a society that embraces as a core value the individual pursuit of happiness, basing success on skin color seems wrong. It was wrong in the past (and yes it happened) and it is wrong today, and it is still happening.

Yet in spite of discrimination against Asians as an identity group they are doing amazingly well. Why do you think that is true? And what makes it impossible for blacks to follow that pathway? Asians were confined to poor urban areas (China Towns) or working as field workers, but somehow, they broke out of that... every social economist I know claims it was their cultural values that provided them a lift... what values do you think these social economists including several who are African Americans are referring to?

I have an idea. My youngest daughter was told by a white friend that she is biologically wired to do better in math and science than white people. My daughter responded if biologically wired means having a mother that pushes you to study several hours every night, then it is true. But she thought that was a cultural value, not a biological "gene".

Let's use a real example... Look at Part 3 in the analysis of the demographics of medical school admissions (link at the bottom). Compare the scores and GPAs. There is blatant racism going, even if the intention is well meaning and designed to fix past racism. Sadly, this type of "admission" racism looks good on paper, until you look at graduation rates and ranks based on skin color. Far too many blacks admitted on the margin, don't thrive and drop out.

Besides the drop out problem, having run physician groups of over 400 physicians, I found it terrible, that black physicians who were equally qualified were assumed to have been the beneficiaries of affirmative action and so avoided by black patients as much as white. Again, when you try to fix racism with racism, you just produce another stereotype, that does not benefit African Americans in the long term.

Regarding legacy admissions, that is tricky conundrum. Legacy admissions exist because they drive "full fare" students and alumni giving. That is critical to keep the doors open at private universities today (every year the number of remaining private universities shrinks by between 30-120). Since 2004, between 9-10% of schools have closed. So, are you arguing, legacy admissions should end, even if alumni donations fund scholarships that are given disproportionately to the minorities? Seems a silly way to cut the nose off your face to make a point.

I knew someone that got his son into an Ivy League school through the legacy admissions carve out... the admission was tied to a $1 million dollar contribution to the school's endowment. Enough to fund a poor student's education. Sadly, this "discriminatory" admission process had the same bad outcome as affirmative action, the son was not up to par and so dropped out and eventually went to a school that matched better with his academic situation. Bottom line, I don't have issues with a backdoor for legacy admissions, unless the student has not got the academic credentials, in that case, legacy admissions are a bad idea, just like affirmative action.

Sports (how I got into college), affirmative action, legacy programs are all discriminatory relative to what other students need to get accepted into a school and so besides any racial discrimination such programs produce, they take a toll on students, who might have thrived at a school geared towards their academic achievement and instead produce worse outcomes. Just more evidence of the negative effect of discrimination based on skin color, parental genes, or athletic abilities. I don't have an issue with minority scholarships, sports scholarships, and other ways to make college affordable to minorities that get accepted based on their academic ability to insure they get access to a college education that they could not otherwise afford.

As an aside, my brother founded a Charter School in Jersey City. Last year 100% of the senior class graduated, 94% got accepted into college, and 75% came from households living below the poverty line. It ranks in the top 1% among "Most diverse schools" and 80% of the school is black or Hispanic. Pretty amazing. Last year was the first senior class (the school has been adding one grade per year since it opened). I am looking forward to seeing where the graduating class is 10 years from now.

Here is the medical school link:

https://www.shemmassianconsulting.com/blog/medical-school-acceptance-rates-by-race#:~:text=The%20average%20stats%20among%20matriculants%20from%20the%20largest,Hispanic%20or%20Latino%3A%20...%204%20White%3A%20White%3A%20