Anyone involved in antiracism work will tell you that built into White Culture is denial. Those who oppose Affirmative Action often rely on denial as a cornerstone of their argument. I can already hear the counterarguments that Affirmative Action unfairly benefits black and brown folks who would not otherwise qualify for certain opportunities.
Affirmative Action was conceived as a program to combat and alleviate discrimination in employment, admissions, and other positions of authority that can profoundly affect applicants’ livelihoods. It aims to create a fair and equal opportunity for all. We can debate endlessly about whether its implementation ever truly achieved the goal of anti-discrimination. Both sides may argue that there is corruption in the decision-making processes. Some claim it is corrupt to select someone based on their skin color, while others argue that discrimination based on skin color is the real corruption.
Today, there is little dispute about the corrupt nature of our systems. The debate lies in determining which direction the corruption flows. I contend that discriminatory practices are designed into the very fabric of the systems on which our societies are built. I assert this based on personal observations and the experiences of my friends and their families. If Affirmative Action was instituted as a corrective measure, it must mean that repairs are necessary.
Without rectifying the damage caused by racism, we perpetuate a society where discrimination based on skin color continues to be the norm. It is hidden in making qualifications for decisions of who gets what access. The consequences of years of discrimination are evident, as disparities in meeting these qualifications to gain access to resources and opportunities disproportionately favor the dominant “white race” culture. This dominance is not rooted in genuine superiority. If that were the case, we would not invest so much time fixated on what others are doing, for they would be truly inferior and incapable of keeping up with us.
Instead, we feel compelled to protect the illusion of our superiority by denying access to equitable distribution of resources and fair chances to succeed in our game. Denying the denial of access perpetuates our desire to feel superior. Consequently, we find ourselves deeply entrenched in a cycle, defending our denial because the system supports us.
Allow me to illustrate the cycle of denial with an example. Through corrupt lending practices, we discriminated against black communities by redlining them into specific neighborhoods. We then denied them the equal appraisal of their properties, preventing their values from increasing as white communities thrived. Using this devaluation as justification, we subsequently curtailed resources allocated to these neighborhoods through value-based taxation, neglecting the infrastructure and human needs of these communities.
When these individuals sought to relocate for equal opportunities, we denied them the ability to do so—either through coercion or by imposing financial burdens. And to compound the injustice, we deny that any of this ever occurred, choosing instead to indulge in the fantasy that they already possess equal access. We label them as individuals who simply lack the motivation to improve their communities.
Similar dynamics apply to sectors such as banking, which controls access to entrepreneurial endeavors. Or in education, which grants access to knowledge and, more importantly, networking opportunities within the systems promoted by these educational institutions. At every turn, denial lurks within each pillar of these systems, followed by a denial of the very denial itself. Yet, we conveniently fixate on the notion that corruption lies solely in attempts to correct these injustices. Consequently, we deny reparations, allowing these flawed systems to persist. All I am suggesting is that there comes a point when we must acknowledge our actions and take a stand against the injustice of discrimination. We are under the delusion that we are engaged in a competition, where victory requires denying others an equal chance to participate.
About author
Leave a reply