Affirmative action, racism, other things

So something has been bothering me a lot recently. I have been reading on several messege boards and affirmative action has come up a lot, and for good reason. This is a controversial issue with fair points to be made on both sides and educated people capable of making logical arguments for either point. Despire all of this however it appreas that there are two arguments that any discussion of affirmative action seem to fall into and both of which lack logic and bother me deeply. Here is the one that bothers me the least. "Affirmative action is unfair because it gives people a bonus for the color of their skin and nothing else." I believe this to be true some of the time and I honestly feel the motives cited in the Supreme Court cases recently is not always working at law schools. When the Supreme Court says it should be considered as one of many facts if it demonstrates a unique background that will contribute to the learning environment, I do NOT think this means "if you are underrepresented you get to go to a school at least one and probebally two levels above what you could normally get into no questions asked" as it sometimes works out to. Specifically, I have seen SEVERAL URM's with 162 lsats and average gpa's that have gotten into University of Chicago. One or two I could understand, but five or six? That far under the median? That said, I think people that view it as simply "you get in for being a minority" are missing a big point. Often times this is a way to compensate people for overcomming disadvantages (economic or social) that made their path harder. Also, there have been some studies that have demonstrated discrimination in the application process (though probebally not intentional) so some program is a good offset to that.
On the flip side I AM SICK of hearing "you are just a racist" whenever anybody opposes affirmative action. Believe it or not you can oppose affirmative action and not be racist, in fact, only if you oppose it because you do not want to see minorities succeed are you a racist. This is similar to a problem I have with Jessie Jackson and similar leaders in general, they try to claim if you disagree with them you are racist. On a related tangent, I have to share this quote I found today from a 1L at Georgetown.

"How can you say affirmative action is not fair? To say that is to say that the years of suffering black people suffered is meaningless. To say that is to claim that in a word that pushes blacks down a push up is discrimination. Most importantly, to say that is to say that the work that started with MLK was in vain. You people are probebally the same people that ruined Jessie Jacksons life and reputation for an innocent mistake. You people make me sick. It is one thing to be ignorant and argue against a policy that has tried to restore fairness to an unjust system. It is far worse to tear down a great leader, a figure to look up to, and a strong force in the black community simply because he was getting ahead. Cheating on his wife is not a big enough problem to ruin his life."

Ok, read that slowly, the errors are numerous. This is what I am talking about by the way. A Georgetown 1L with a 159 LSAT score, that has no logical ability. Ignoring the fact that she reduces all affirmative action to African Americans though Hipanics are an even more under represented group there are several flaws. Lets look, she starts by claiming affirmative action supporters are racist (an attack on the person not the argument they offered up). After that she tries to create three strawmen in a row (claiming it is denying MLK, claiming it is X claiming it is Y, without showing that it does any of those things). She then launches into an off topic rant about people bashing Jessie Jackson. I will be honest, I cannot stand the man. He is a poor leader and a racist. She is angry because of the way people treated him for cheating on his wife. He is a minister! He cheated on his wife! We should look down on him, and we certainly should view him and his church through lenses that understand what he has done. Also, if you fight enough silly battles (ie defending a pro athlete for committing an assult the player did not deny on the grounds that "the game is racist" or saying seven kids that started a brawl at a high school football game and were expelled should not be expelled because it "is unfair to the black community" ) you start to become a joke. This is neither here nor there, but it is certainly a quote I found oddly stupid from a Georgetown student.

So now that I have bashed both sides of affirmative action, I will offer my view. I think aid to those from underprivlidged backgrounds is in order, however I do not think being a minority makes you underprivildged. A poor white kid deserves more of a boost than a rich black kid. It is economic circumstance, not race that handicaps applicants to the point of needing help. Remove race and name from applications. Identify people by their LSDAS number only. Have LSDAS create some system for analyzing and grouping people into certain "underprivlidged" groups. This would take into account the type of schools you recieved when younger, family income, family worth, exc. This way, children who have excelled in poor circumstances would be rewarded. The result would be much the same, except URM's that grew up in the same situation and middle class non-urm's would no longer receive benefits while deserving people under the poverty line that are not URM's would.

In looking at this it is important to remember: everybody is looking for their own advantage this is why they take an attack on a system that helps them as a personal attack and why they take a system that hurts them as oppressive. This is an emotional issue, I just wish that didn't stop educated discussion.