It's Time to End Affirmative Action

Next Debate Previous Debate
affirmative action

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Debate description coming soon.

  • John H. McWhorter

    For

    John H. McWhorter

    Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and weekly columnist for the New York Sun

  • Terence J. Pell

    For

    Terence J. Pell

    President of The Center for Individual Rights (CIR)

  • Joseph C. Phillips

    For

    Joseph C. Phillips

    Actor, Social Commentator and Syndicated Columnist

  • Khin Mai Aung

    Against

    Khin Mai Aung

    Staff Attorney at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund

  • Kimberlé W. Crenshaw

    Against

    Kimberlé W. Crenshaw

    Professor of Law at UCLA and at Columbia Law School

  • Tim Wise

    Against

    Tim Wise

    Writer and Educator

More about the Panelists
See Results See Full Debate Video Purchase DVD Read Transcript
Listen to the edited radio broadcast

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Listen to the unedited radio broadcast

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Subscribe to the Podcast
John H. McWhorter

For The Motion

John H. McWhorter

Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and weekly columnist for the New York Sun

John's academic specialty is language change and language contact. He is the author of 11 books, including Losing the Race, an anthology of race writings, and Winning the Race: Beyond the Crisis in Black America. He has written for many publications including the New Republic, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and the New York Times.

Learn more
Terence J. Pell

For The Motion

Terence J. Pell

President of The Center for Individual Rights (CIR)

Prior to joining CIR in 1997, Pell worked as an attorney with the firm of Arent, Fox, Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. From 1985 to 1988, he was a deputy assistant secretary for civil rights in the U.S. Department of Education. He later served as general counsel and chief of staff at the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Learn more
Joseph C. Phillips

For The Motion

Joseph C. Phillips

Actor, Social Commentator and Syndicated Columnist

Joseph has written articles for many newspapers and magazines, and his syndicated column appears in papers across the country and online. He was a 2005 Lincoln Fellow through the Claremont Institute and is the author of He Talk Like A White Boy (2006). Phillips is probably best known for his roles on NBC's The Cosby Show and ABC’s General Hospital.

Learn more
Khin Mai Aung

Against The Motion

Khin Mai Aung

Staff Attorney at the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund

Aung works on educational equity and youth rights issues, including access to bilingual education and affirmative action. In fall 2006, she worked with some 15 Asian American education and youth advocacy groups to file an amicus brief in two cases before the United States Supreme Court concerning voluntary desegregation plans in Seattle, WA and Louisville, KY.

Learn more
Kimberlé W. Crenshaw

Against The Motion

Kimberlé W. Crenshaw

Professor of Law at UCLA and at Columbia Law School

Writing in the areas of civil rights, black feminist legal theory, and race, racism and the law, Kimberlé's articles have appeared in the Harvard Law Review, National Black Law Journal, Stanford Law Review and Southern California Law Review. She is the founding coordinator of the Critical Race Theory Workshop, and the co-editor of a volume, Critical Race Theory: Key Documents That Shaped the Movement.

Learn more
Tim Wise

Against The Motion

Tim Wise

Writer and Educator

Tim has trained teachers as well as corporate, government, media and law enforcement officials on methods of dismantling institutional racism and has served as a consultant to plaintiffs' attorneys in federal discrimination cases. He has contributed essays to 15 books and is the author of White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son and Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White.

Learn more

Declared Winner: Against The Motion

Online Voting

About This Event

3 comments

0|-
  • Comment Link Eric Friday, 29 November 2013 08:04 posted by Eric

    Aron,

    You well state the demagoguery that has made AA so successful for so long. If I do not agree with it, then I, myself, must be a racist. Analogous to the McCarthyism of the 1950s, this forces the masses to not question the policy for fear of being branded this terrible and career-altering label. I can advocate for a policy in our schools and institutions whereby all "will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character" (ring a bell?!) and yet, regardless, I am somehow, almost magically--a racist who should be ashamed of [myself]."

    Yes, blacks were long ago disenfranchised from many things like the Homestead Act; however, AA is not narrowly tailored to address that. Is it? It does not seek compensation from those persons or their offspring who profited from that Act, it just requires all white males to pay now and forever. One could be a poor first-generation American whose family never profited from the Act, but with the unfortunate attribute of white skin and male genitalia--regardless, he must pay for the harms committed by others. . . forever.

    You state that there is "ONGOING, systematic biases" that require this overly broad policy, but where is the evidence? That's another beauty of AA. You have no burden of proof to show ongoing systematic bias to support the policy. It is assumed; and, if I dare question it, then I simply have my eyes closed and am, again--a racist. It does not matter that a black was duly ELECTED to the highest office of the land, "ONGOING, systematic biases" is assumed and if I know what's good for me I had better not question it.

    The "ONGOING, systematic bias" I see is one where universities and governments awards opportunities and contracts based on the color of one's skin and whether one has the preferred genitalia.

    You are correct in pointing out that the advocates of AA are less intensive in their punishments than the KKK, but that is, as far as I can tell, the only intellectual difference. They both judge people by their race and thus are both, definitively--racist.

  • Comment Link Aaron Thursday, 29 August 2013 13:10 posted by Aaron

    Dude, did you watch this debate? There are so many claims being made here. It is not "manifestly simple" as you claim.

    Affirmative action is being used to reverse the effect of ONGOING, systematic biases that continue to disadvantage many people, and particularly those of color.

    If you want to say affirmative action is wrong, then go out in the streets and demand that the government give blacks their share of the Homestead Act that they missed out on. To compare Wise and Crenshaw to Klansmen is utterly abhorrent and you should know better. I beg you to listen to what they are saying. Just because there are two black people arguing against them, does not mean your repulsive comment is justified.

    The affirmative action of today to correct for institutional biases in favor of legacy graduates or prestigious high schools is not at all equivalent to the public lynchings of the KKK. You should be ashamed of yourself and embarrassed to tout such public racism because only an actual racist could make such a blatantly ludicrous comparison.

  • Comment Link Eric Saturday, 13 July 2013 17:17 posted by Eric

    "Affirmative Action" is nothing more than institutionalized racism/sexism. Those arguing for it should be ashamed of themselves--they are just as ugly and wrong as the Klansmen they profess to detest and differ. Klansmen chose to judge people based on race and so do AAs proponents. it's just that manifestly simple.

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated. HTML code is not allowed.