Last night at the Wealthy Street Theatre, Frank Wu, Dean of Wayne State University Law School and noted scholar on race, spoke to a small crowd as part of the Legacy 2006 Series. Wu, who contends that affirmative action is one of the most controversial but valuable policies in the United States, spent most of his talk advocating for affirmative action which he said was essential to defend if people really believe in equality and civil rights. Wu's comments were particularly timely in light of the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative ballot proposal that would ban affirmative action in the state.
Wu began his lecture by describing how his parents, both of whom emigrated from China, were subject to a variety of forms of racism. Wu described how his parents felt that their treatment was due to their difficulties with language rather than racial prejudice. He talked about how racial prejudice function in the extreme sense with “cranks” on margins such as white supremacist groups but also described how racism continues to function in the mainstream in less overt ways. Among these he described how children come up to him and make karate poses or how white Americans will walk quicker if an African-American male approaches them at night. He also explained that unlike people of color, white Americans never really have to think about race because they benefit from their race in terms of everyday privileges. He also described how offhand remarks and jokes about race, while seemingly not that serious, reveal an underlying racism that likely affect hiring and admission practices.
Perhaps the most interesting portions of Wu’s speech were his contention that “reasonable people” could disagree on affirmative action “without malice in their hearts.” He went on to say that he would not attack Ward Connerly, the California businessman backing the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, or his motives. Instead, Wu advocated for a higher level of discourse that would move beyond “angry slogans” and debate and instead address the real issue underlying affirmative action—racial prejudice. Wu argued that the current debate over affirmative action is a distraction from that issue and that people consequently focus too much time on the minutia of how affirmative action works rather than on racial prejudice. Moreover, the current “debate” has been one that has been conducted with simple slogans rather than dialog and action, essentially functioning as political entertainment rather than a serious discussion. Instead, Wu argued that the question that we should be asking ourselves is when will the need for affirmative action end, not when will affirmative action end.
Wu concluded by describing how the abolition of affirmative action has had detrimental effects in states where it has been abolished. For example, in California, racial hostility towards people of color on college campuses has increased. He also described how the elimination of affirmative action would not affect people of color but also women and those from rural areas, pointing out that rural white Americans would be the most disadvantaged if colleges switched to a pure grade and test score admittance system. Wu argued that race is important for admission to colleges if it is considered as one of many factors, not just by itself. Similarly, he argued that affirmative action has benefited corporations and other institutions, a contention that he supported by referring to Friend of the Court briefs filed in the University of Michigan affirmative action case by Ford Motor Company who supported affirmative action because it meant increased profits and the US military who supported it because it meant a more effective fighting force. Wu ended by encouraging the audience to act and fight racial prejudice in the institutions of which they are a part.
