It seems to me that OUR Nation loses sight of the forest while lost among the trees when it comes to race. This applies to everything else as well but the focus of this discussion is affirmative action and more specifically race as one of the barriers to becoming a forest.
Affirmative action refers to policies that take factors including "race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin" into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group "in areas of employment, education, and business",usually justified as countering the effects of a history of discrimination.
The fundamental reason for the racial stratification of America and the world at large is rooted in economics. That separation based on physical differences is reinforced by religions and social history at a geo-social level.
Education and social programs act as a human "rake" spreading the charcoal remains of the disadvantaged and breathing life into those few burning embers that survive the fire of social neglect.
WE are arguing about rules that shouldn't exist in the first place when it comes to affirmative action and education.
Access to education is the problem although racism is always one of the factors.
Given 100% access to education all other prejudicial factors are rendered mute.
And so I must ask why aren't we giving 100% access? when it comes to a quality education for everyone?
Why is money an issue? Why, is affirmative action needed in the first place?
Access to education consists of individual funnels.
When it comes to disadvantaged students they are stuck in the wide mouth of a public funnel and the narrow end of that funnel is perpetually clogged.
The wealthier students in their own funnel simply use money as draino to keep their own private funnel flowing.
The result over time is a "fuzzy" two class society when it comes to education.
Thus if you want to get ahead you should go to college.
Arguments in the Supreme court over rules or laws are meaningless to the majority of prospective students who are denied access for a myriad of reasons.
Access to education must be 100% and education should never end during the lifetime of all human beings.
There is no other solution for un-natural or artificial inequality amongst humans on earth.
As a society we are distracted by arguments over laws that are inadequate.
OUR obsession with laws is fostered by lawmakers and lawyers who profit from laws.
Health is the second most import example of our misguided priorities as a nation; and once again money plays the dominent role.
Preventative health care should allow for 100% access as well as 100% access to health care maintenance.
The concept of freedom enslaves those humans who are denied education and health care.
Individual freedom is directly and incorrectly attached to wealth in a capitalistic "for profit" society. This isn't apparent.
The concept of affordability creates an inherent weapon of class warfare, which is a battle that those who are wealthy and powerful are guaranteed to win.
On the surface no one can argue that because you can afford education that it is unfair to me.
However when it comes to education access should be the only defining factor.
Without access to education you can never be truly free of the burdons that the wealthy place upon the general population.
To be practical not everyone is capable ... but everyone must be allowed to scale the ladder of life using what ever capabilities they find that they have. In that respect education is like a self administered CAT Scan .. whereby you determine your place on a human career ladder.
Most are born at the bottom of that ladder while a few are immediately placed at the very top .. without any inherent justification other than wealth.
Everyone child should start at the top and settle at whatever level genetics has dictated for them.
All of this raises many questions and the applicability of fairness many will argue is not practical or feasible.
This is true when it comes to universal fairness about all things.
Is it fair that I must drive a less expensive yet less safe automobile because of my personal net worth?
I might argue that all cars should be the same for all human beings that drive them ... thus making them 100% safe at a much lower affordable cost.
But the word freedom immediately is shouted .... and so the freedom of the few to have what they can afford trumps the freedom of everyone to drive the safest most affordable vehicle.
Cars take on importance that we don't attach to lives, including OUR own.
So where do I start and where do we begin as human beings to correct the flawed implementation of "freedom"
Why should my freedoms deny your freedoms?
Are equality and freedom and justice one and the same?
We say they are ... but then look at what we practice, and not at what we preach.
The SCOTUS for me consists of self-important demagogues who are confined in a bubble that renders them incapable of understanding the truth.
They are word masters who are so focused on the meaning of words that they cannot ascertain the meaning of life.