Conservative Presents Case Against Affirmative Action

Affirmative action has lost its justification on college campuses and in society in general, conservative author Dinesh D'Souza told an audience of about 30 students at the Kennedy School of Government last night.

The discussion, jointly sponsored by the Harvard-Radcliffe Republican Club, the Harvard Salient and the Intercollegiate Institute, a conservative think-tank, consisted of a half-hour speech followed by an extended question and answer session lasting about 40 minutes.

D'Souza, the author of Illiberal Education and The End of Racism and a current fellow of the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, began by conceding that racism exists in any big country but challenged students to "show me a racism strong enough to prevent me from realizing my potential."

Praising the amount of intellectual debate on affirmative action in the 90s, he cited California's Proposition 209 and the debate in the Supreme Court about the issue as evidence that the conservative view on the issue was gradually gaining wider acceptance.

Citing differences in test scores between blacks and whites from similar backgrounds--even on exams which he believed to be unbiased--D'Souza argued that "it is not discrimination but merit which is producing inequality [in higher education]."

"Using race as a proxy for being disadvantaged is very dubious [in America today]," D'Souza said.

Supporting the idea of merit even if it resulted in "an unfortunate and embarrassing situation," D'Souza gave the example of the NBA as a non-controversial organization based on merit which still "does not look like America."

D'Souza claimed that affirmative action in present day America goes "[against the] basic principle of justice [which is] to compensate the person who has been harmed and punish the persons who have been the aggressors."

D'Souza said his own view on reasons for the differences in achievement among different ethnic groups juxtaposes both the genetic view--which argues that ability is genetically determined--and the liberal view, that differences in achievement are due to a history of societal deprivation.

Attributing inequality to behavioral and cultural patterns, D'Souza gave the example of black students studying less, and therefore under-performing in school, as evidence of a weak family structure rather than societal discrimination.

Such situations do not justify the implementation of affirmative action, he said.

Replying to a question, D' Souza argued that the decline in black enrollments in branches of the University of California system due to the abolition of affirmative action was a "problem only for the 15 to 20 elite colleges" and over-all enrollment of minorities had not been adversely affected.

Summing up, D' Souza said the "moral case for affirmative action has become weaker [as more groups have come under it]" and therefore "while affirmative action might have done some good in the 60s, [it] has become increasingly problematic."

Students at the discussion had mixed feelings about D' Souza. Alexander T. Nguyen '99, a Crimson editor, said he "thought that D' Souza was able to outline just precisely what most people today feel is wrong with affirmative action" and he wished "[the discussion] had been publicized better."

Disagreeing with D' Souza's views, Franklin J. Leonard '00 said "[his is] an unrealistic view of our society that excludes 400 years of history."

Jacqueline A. Newmyer '01, vice president of the Republican Club, who is also a Crimson editor, said she came to the discussion because "D' Souza is one of the most articulate conservative thinkers on the issue of affirmative action on campus."

She added that she was also "interested in seeing who else would come."

Nguyen, describing himself as a liberal, said "it was refreshing [for him] to see conservative thinkers on campus."