> First, you are implying that affirmative action is unjust, which it is not. Affirmative action does not mean that an unqualified worker replaces a qualified w

> First, you are implying that affirmative action is unjust, which it is not. Affirmative action does not mean that an unqualified worker replaces a qualified worker because of race. Affirmative action means that equally qualified workers are then selected to be as representative of the population as possible. I've never heard of that idea (which means it's interesting, not wrong). But, I also think it's wrong. For example, at my university, where a pretty small proportion of applicants actually get in (it's highly competitive), you can't get a sizeable proportion of blacks using the method you suggest. You have to use the method that you don't suggest, which is what they do. I appreciate your referencing actual reasearch. I think there are tangible but non-quantifiable effects that are not measured by that kind of thing, though. For example, people know that affirmative action (as I have seen it practiced) is ubiquitous and unfair, and that in itself makes it harder for prejudices to be dissolved. This even applies to the people who are supposed to directly benefit from affirmative action.