The manifestations of racial discrimination against black Americans now.

Who discriminates against whom in America today?

Some people may say, is this question worth mentioning? Naturally, whites discriminate against blacks and other ethnic minorities. However, many white Americans believe that according to the affirmative action act promulgated by the American government, it is actually white people, not blacks and other ethnic minorities, who suffer racial discrimination in American society today. This complex problem involving "reverse discrimination" is the case of the Board of Directors of the University of California v. Allen? The origin of Becky's case.

(1) tried and tested white gifted students

Allen? Alan Barker 194 1 was born in Florida. His father is an immigrant from northern Europe and Norway and works as a porter in the post office. Allen? Becky was smart and studious since she was a child and made outstanding achievements. She once entered the final of the National Honorary Scholarship Competition for Middle School Students. 1959 was admitted to the university of Minnesota, majoring in mechanical engineering. During his college years, his GPA was 3.5 1.

After graduating from college, Allen? Becky 1963 joined the US Marine Corps and participated in the war of aggression against Vietnam. Because of his agility and bravery in the battlefield under heavy artillery fire, he was promoted to several ranks in the four-year military career and was promoted to captain officer. During the Vietnam War, Allen? Becky's ambition to be a doctor began to come true.

1967 Allen? After retirement, Becky worked as an engineer at the Advanced Research Center of NASA near Stanford University in California. During the work in the center, funded by NASA, Allen? Becky was admitted to Stanford University for further study and got a master's degree in engineering. However, with the increase of age, Allen? Becky gradually realized that her greatest wish in this life was to become a doctor and go to the bloody battlefield to save her dying comrades. Therefore, he began to study pre-medical courses after work, and began to review and prepare for the Medical College Entrance Examination (MCAT).

Everyone knows that doctors and lawyers in America are not so easy to be. First of all, the tuition fees of famous medical schools and law schools are extremely expensive. Because students earn much after graduation, medical schools and law schools basically do not offer scholarships. Secondly, the admission rate of famous medical schools and law schools is extremely low, and the competition is fierce. The elimination rate of candidates and the cruelty of competition have exceeded the college entrance examination in Chinese mainland to some extent. Take the Medical College of the University of California, Davis as an example. 1973, the college only admitted 100 students, but the total number of candidates was as high as 2464.

But Allen. Becky just chose the University of California Medical College as one of the key institutions to apply for. The reason can be explained by California residents' quips about state universities:

"If you study well, your father will study at Stanford University while holding money;

If you study well, your father will go to the University of California without taking advantage of money.

If you can't read, your father will study at USC and use the money.

If you can't study, your father will go to a community college instead of using the money. "

The secret of this is that although Berkeley, Los Angeles, San Diego and Davis managed by the board of directors of the University of California are all famous American universities, unlike Harvard, Yale and Stanford, all branches of the University of California are public universities. Because public universities have government subsidies and subsidies, tuition fees are much cheaper than those of private famous schools. Say like Allen? Residents like Becky who have lived in California for more than two years and paid state taxes according to law will also enjoy the special treatment of greatly reducing tuition fees for students in this state.

After completing the pre-medical course with honors, Allen? Becky got good grades in the medical college entrance examination again. In the scientific knowledge part of the exam, his correct rate is 97%; In the part of language ability, the correct rate is 96%; In mathematics, the correct rate is 94%. This achievement is excellent.

1972 end, Allen? Becky formally submitted an application for admission to the School of Medicine, University of California, Davis 1973. I didn't expect the University of California to give Allen, who was determined to win? Becky was locked out.

As usual, for Allen? Becky should be a very competitive student, with GPA and MCAT scores, a master's degree from Stanford University and comprehensive quality. Allen? At first, Becky thought that the reason why she lost her name in Sun Shan might be that she was in her thirties. But Allen. Becky later learned from Peter, assistant student affairs at Davis. Stoian discovered an inside story that surprised him. It turns out that among the 100 admission places in medical schools, 16 places were specially allocated to black and other minority students. What's even more surprising is that most of the enrolled 16 minority students' GPA and MCAT scores are far lower than their own.

Allen? Becky was very angry when she learned about the admission quota and different admission standards. He put pen to paper and wrote a complaint letter with quite a policy level to the Admissions Office of Davis University. The letter wrote: "In order to meet the requirements of future medical and health undertakings, the medical industry needs the most capable and dedicated talents. I know that the quota for ethnic minorities is to make up for the evil consequences of racial discrimination in the past. However, this measure of caring for ethnic minorities has actually created new racial prejudice. This is not a just solution. "

After some complaints, Allen ended at 1973? Becky applied for admission to the Medical College of the University of California, Davis on 1974. But, Allen? Becky's answer is still a bitter medicine that will not be accepted.

I've done everything I have to do, but I can't get into medical school because I'm not dark enough. Allen, who grew up in a society that preached "white superiority"? Becky, this is the first time in my life that I have encountered such a strange thing as "reversing black and white". China people may think of beating that bastard when they are wronged. When Americans encounter injustice, their first thought is to sue that son of a bitch. Allen? Of course, Becky is no exception. He brought the University of California to court with a complaint, accusing the University of California of engaging in reverse racial discrimination, which violated the equal protection clause in the US Constitution 14 amendment.

(2) The Supreme Court is in a dilemma.

In the American society, which has always advertised equality and fair competition for all, why does the School of Medicine of the University of California, Davis reserve 16 admission places for ethnic minority applicants? It's a long story, this special care measure is actually directly related to the "affirmative action act" promulgated by the US government.

The term "affirmative action bill" comes from the executive order 10925 signed by Democratic President Kennedy in 196 1. This executive order requires government contractors to take affirmative action to provide more employment opportunities for ethnic minorities. After President Johnson took office, the federal government promulgated a series of more extensive "affirmative action bills", also known as the Equal Rights Act. In short, the "Affirmative Action Act" is actually an affirmative action measure developed on the basis of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, aiming at helping ethnic minorities and women who have been discriminated against for a long time in American history to change their inferior positions in politics, economy, education and society more quickly. Specifically, when studying, obtaining employment, awarding scholarships, accepting government loans and distributing government contracts, blacks, Indians, Hispanics, Asians and women have the right to be given priority in admission, employment or accepting loans and government contracts when their competitiveness and qualifications are basically the same or similar.

After President Nixon, a conservative Republican, took office, it was through a higher level that the "affirmative action bill" was promoted. Schultz, who later served as Secretary of State in the Reagan administration, was Secretary of Labor in the Nixon administration. During his tenure as Labor Minister, Schultz created a hard quota system that caused great controversy. The Federal Ministry of Labor stipulates that public universities must recruit a certain proportion of minority and female students, government departments must employ a certain proportion of minority and female staff, and a certain proportion of government commercial or engineering contracts should give priority to minority and female bidders. In addition, all private enterprises that receive government funding and sign commercial or engineering contracts with the government must submit an "affirmative action" plan, indicating how long the enterprise intends to make minority and female employees reach a certain proportion, otherwise the contract will be impossible. In the United States, a capitalist country with private enterprises as the main body, this is the first time that the federal government has intervened in the internal operations of private enterprises on a large scale and publicly restricted the free rights of private enterprises to hire employees. The federal government has trillions of dollars in commercial and engineering contracts and is the largest customer of private enterprises. Therefore, private enterprises have to be obedient and have no temper at all.

In the 1960s, when the civil rights movement was huge, the "Affirmative Action Act" received a positive response from American public institutions of higher learning. American university campuses have always been the base camp of liberalization and radicalization, and the University of California was one of the most violent universities in the movement against the Vietnam War and for equal rights in the 1960s. In this context, in order to correct the harm caused by racial discrimination and unfair treatment to ethnic minorities, increase the diversity of medical students, and set an example for ethnic minorities to study hard and strive for success, Davis Medical College has set up a preferential and caring admission quota system for ethnic minority applicants, which led to the Allen? Becky's lawsuit.

1975, the district court sued Allen? In Becky's case, the judge declared the admission quota system set up by the University of California illegal, but did not rule that Davis Medical College must admit prickly Allen? Becky. As a result, both parties refused to accept the appeal and continued to appeal to the California Supreme Court. 1976, the California Supreme Court ruled against the University of California. However, the board of directors of the University of California refused to accept it and hired Cox, a professor at Harvard University who had served as a special prosecutor in the Watergate investigation, as a lawyer. 1978, litigation to the federal supreme court.

Allen? Becky's case is actually a very thorny issue in the US Supreme Court. There is a simple reason. The issue involved in this lawsuit related to "affirmative action" is not a simple legal issue, but a highly complicated political issue. Racial issues have always been a time bomb in American politics. If you are not careful, it will explode in the social center, causing unprecedented social unrest. In China, all kinds of legal issues usually focus on political issues, but in the United States, as the French political scientist Tocqueville said a hundred years ago, all kinds of political issues usually focus on legal proceedings. The legalization of political issues unique to American society has caused headaches for the justices of the Supreme Court.

In the history of American constitutionalism, there was a precedent that the Supreme Court tried to solve political problems by legal means, but the result was social unrest. Before the Civil War, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of 1857 Scott v. Sanford (Scott v). Sandford) made a judgment in favor of slavery in the South, so that the Missouri compromise bill passed by Congress to limit the expansion of slavery in the South was cancelled because it was unconstitutional. Although from a purely legal point of view, the Supreme Court's judgment on Scott's case is understandable, from a political point of view, this judgment has intensified the already sharply opposed dispute between the North and the South, blocked the way to solve the problem of slavery in the South by peaceful means, strengthened the determination of southern States to defend slavery in accordance with the constitutional convention, and put the North and President Lincoln in a passive position of "breaking the law and discipline", which played a bad role in fueling the outbreak of civil war and plunged the United States into the inevitable North and South. The Scott case has always been regarded as the worst case in the history of the Supreme Court by later generations.

As a lesson from the past, the Supreme Court had to tread on thin ice when trying such "political cases". In Allen? Before Becky's case, a man named Kyle? As early as 197 1, the white students of MarcoDefunis once challenged the affirmative action. The white student scored much higher in the law school entrance exam than most black students who were admitted to the law school of Washington University, but he was not admitted. In a rage, he sued the University of Washington in the district court. The district court ruled against the University of Washington 197 1, Kyle? Devnis then entered law school. However, the University of Washington refused to accept the verdict and continued to appeal. 1February, 974, the lawsuit went to the Supreme Court.

However, to people's surprise, the cunning Supreme Court Justice put Kyle? Devnis will graduate from law school in May of that year, and there is no significant legal significance in hearing this case, so he refused to appeal to Devnysov. Odegaard) made a judgment. In fact, the justices found an excuse to deliberately avoid this political issue, which greatly disappointed the two factions who strongly supported and strongly opposed the "affirmative action" policy. However, you can't hide from the first day. A few years later, Allen? The Becky case came to the door again, forcing the Supreme Court, which was in a dilemma, to give a clear statement. The US ruling and opposition parties will wait and see how the Supreme Court decides the case.

1In June, 978, the Supreme Court ruled against Allen by five votes to four. Becky's case made a rare double judgment in the history of American constitutionalism. The judgment presided over by Judge Powell consists of two parts. The first part ruled that the admission quota system established by the University of California violated the civil rights law, and that the University of California Medical School must admit Allen? Becky; The second part judges that the University of California has the right to implement some policies to diversify students, and racial factors can be considered when enrolling new students. In this way, on the one hand, the Supreme Court ruled that the number of places set by the University of California in accordance with the "affirmative action" policy was illegal, on the other hand, it stipulated that race could be used as a factor in applying for further studies, which essentially affirmed the "affirmative action" policy of the federal government. This extremely smooth double judgment is a blow to both the prosecution and the defense, leaving both the supporters and opponents of affirmative action confused and at a loss. Although the decision of the Supreme Court is a legal decision, careful consideration of the political consequences obviously has a very important influence on the judge's decision.

From institutional discrimination to "affirmative action"

In the United States, a society dominated by whites and white men, it is no accident that the President of the United States and the federal government have introduced a series of special policies and bills to take care of blacks and other ethnic minorities on two issues that have a vital impact on people's lives.

The United States is an immigrant country composed of more than 200 different races, nationalities, ethnicities and cultural traditions, and is known as the melting pot of the nations of the world. However, in American history, the myth of "national melting pot" is mainly aimed at white immigrants, while the American experience of ethnic minorities (mainly so-called "colored people" such as Indians, blacks and Asians) is full of pain and bitterness. The early economic development and prosperity of the United States, accompanied by the brutal slaughter of defenceless Indians and the cruel slavery of millions of slaves, caused racial contradictions and hatred that have continued to this day.

Although1the civil war in the 1960s destroyed slavery in the south, slaves who had been enslaved for two centuries became free men. However, taking advantage of the federal democratic system of the United States and the advantages of white majority and strong political and economic power, southern States passed a series of laws of apartheid and discrimination through legal democratic procedures, and continued to deprive blacks of their rights. In 1896, the Supreme Court of the United States recognized the constitutionality of the apartheid system in the South in its judgment on Plessyv. Ferguson made blacks suffer legal discrimination and persecution for a century after the Civil War. It should be mentioned that the apartheid laws passed by southern States are also aimed at other ethnic minorities. The segregation facilities in the southern States are only divided into whites and colored people. The laws of southern states not only prohibit black-and-white marriages, but also expressly prohibit Asians (Mongolians) from marrying whites, and offenders will be sentenced to more than two years' imprisonment.

Discrimination against Chinese Americans in American society has a long history. /kloc-In the second half of the 9th century, after the completion of the transcontinental railway in the United States, which was exchanged for the blood, sweat and lives of countless Chinese workers, affected by the economic depression, there appeared a wave of large-scale exclusion and persecution of Chinese workers by whites in western States. In order to win the votes of white immigrants, officials and congressmen in western States ignored the protection of individual rights in the US Constitution and adopted a position of discriminating against China immigrants, which led to the exclusion and discrimination of China workers by laws in various states. At the beginning of the wave of Chinese exclusion, the federal court ruled that the state laws that discriminated against Chinese workers were invalid because they deprived individuals of their rights without due process. However, since 1882, under the pressure and promotion of members of the Senate and the House of Representatives in western states, the US Congress has successively promulgated a series of Chinese exclusion bills, stipulating that Chinese in the United States should not be naturalized as American citizens, prohibiting Chinese who have returned from overseas to visit relatives from returning to the United States, and then simply prohibiting all kinds of China immigrants. After the Civil War, the former slaves were naturalized as American citizens according to law, but the isolated immigrants from China were reduced to the tragic situation that they could not be naturalized as American citizens for life and could not return to the United States after returning home to visit relatives. The Chinese Exclusion Act passed by the US Congress was the most blatant racial discrimination law in the history of American constitutionalism.

After the 1950s, the voice of abolishing apartheid and establishing social justice is growing. 1954, the US Supreme Court finally overturned the principle of "separation but equality" in Brownv's judgment. Topeka Education Committee, and ruled that the apartheid education system in southern states was unconstitutional. However, the southern States boycotted the Brown decision on a large scale. Ten years after the announcement of Brown's verdict, in 1 1 southern states, only 2% of black students actually entered black-and-white schools. In response to the resistance of southern States to Brown's judgment, the federal government had to send troops to protect black students from entering public universities in southern States.

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, in order to completely overthrow the apartheid system in southern states, African Americans launched an earth-shattering civil rights movement. This movement has received sympathy and active support from the news media. Major television stations in the United States often temporarily interrupt normal programs and broadcast live scenes of police violence against black demonstrators in southern States. Television, newspapers, magazines and other news media constantly appear large-scale black demonstrations and scenes of police brutality, which shocked all walks of life in the United States and even the entire international community. White people from the northern states gathered and demonstrated one after another, demanding that the federal government and Congress immediately intervene and abolish the apartheid system in the south. Under the great pressure that the social situation may be out of control and the civil rights movement may turn to large-scale violence, the US Congress finally passed three civil rights bills, 1964, 1965 and 1968, which completely ended the system of apartheid and racial discrimination in law.

Although the passage of the Civil Rights Act has made blacks legally equal, it is by no means easy to completely eradicate the legacy of racial discrimination and realize real racial equality. Of course, racial discrimination has brought countless negative consequences to black Americans, but the serious consequences caused by the backwardness of black people in the field of education are the most harmful. Unlike millions of immigrants who came to the New World with the "American Dream" to seek a better life, black Americans are slaves bound in the New World by chains and fetters. Millions of slaves come from more than a dozen countries and hundreds of tribes in Africa, speak hundreds of different tribal languages and have a low education level. During two centuries of slavery and suffering, slaves were completely deprived of the right to education, and even the Bible was forbidden to read. White planters know that once slaves can read and understand the truth that all men are created equal, the end of slavery will come. After the Civil War, although blacks were nominally free, they continued to suffer from segregation and racial discrimination in various fields of education and society, which made a considerable number of blacks fall into the abyss of poverty and ignorance.

Thurgood, the first black justice of the US Supreme Court? Marshall (term 1967- 199 1 year) was in Allen? Becky's point hit the nail on the head: "The experience difference between black Americans and other ethnic groups lies not in degree, but in essence." Black Americans have long been enslaved, discriminated and excluded from the mainstream American society. When blacks finally strive for legal equality, they are faced with the challenge of high-tech and highly competitive modern society. The mainstream American society flaunts the so-called "all men are created equal" principle and advocates personal struggle and competition to win success, but this kind of value ignores the huge inequality caused by historical reasons. This is like letting an ordinary person who is bruised by chains and a well-trained and strong athlete stand on the same starting line and compete in the track and field according to the same rules. This seemingly equal competition completely covers up the substantive inequality.

1In June, 965, President Johnson, who is famous for putting forward the slogans of "building a great society" and "fair governance", delivered a speech at the graduation ceremony of recent graduates of Howard U., which was founded by blacks, stressing that it is not enough for blacks to only strive for legal equal competitive status, and the federal government should take special measures to help ethnic minorities in order to achieve the ultimate goal of substantive equal competition. President Johnson's speech is the first time that the federal government has publicly announced that it will give special care and preferential treatment to ethnic minorities, which has taken an important step on the road to achieving real racial equality. The essence of this special care policy is to ask the powerful groups in American society to make concessions, so that the weak groups can run a long way at the starting line of fierce free competition before the formal competition, so as to change the unfair phenomenon of extremely unequal starting point of competition caused by historical reasons and achieve the final result of racial harmony and social justice.

In short, the affirmative action policy, as the core of affirmative action, is actually the thankless role of the federal government as the coordinator of race relations. Through the policy of providing more opportunities for blacks and other ethnic minorities to improve their political, economic and social status, we can make up for the harm caused by slavery and institutional discrimination to blacks and other ethnic minorities for hundreds of years, and correct racial discrimination in various fields of American society that deeply shames and embarrasses modern civilized society. Eliminate the evil consequences left by racial discrimination, lubricate the tense racial relations in American society, adjust the contradictions and conflicts of interests between ethnic groups, and promote the development of American society in a more just direction. This policy is not to modify the permanent legal norms of American social competition rules, but to compensate the interests of vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities and women who were discriminated against in the past. This is a compensatory and temporary national policy.

In a democratic society where the majority vote determines everything, most people can protect their own interests in most cases, while a few people can hardly protect their own interests in most cases. However, the true meaning of democracy lies in accommodating and protecting minorities. Over the past 200 years since the founding of the People's Republic of China, American society has moved from racial slavery to slave liberation, from apartheid to civil rights movement, and from legal abolition of apartheid to deliberate protection of the interests of ethnic minorities. Especially since the 1950s, due to the pressure of the black civil rights movement and the intervention of the Supreme Court and the highest federal administrative department, a series of policies and bills giving priority to vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities, women and the disabled have finally been passed in a country with a white majority, which is a great historical progress.

Rule inequality and reverse discrimination

However, from a strict legal point of view, the "affirmative action" policy is an "unequal" policy. Generally speaking, the equality of human society can be divided into three kinds, one is the equality of starting point, the other is the equality of rules and the other is the equality of results. History has proved that it is impossible to achieve real equality of starting point and result, and the only thing that can be achieved is equality of rules. However, the "affirmative action" policy temporarily revised the principle of equality of rules on the playing field.

For the administrative department of the federal government, in order to correct the disadvantages of racial discrimination in the past and ease social contradictions, in a certain historical period, the principles of substantive equality and social justice can be temporarily higher than the principle of equality of rules. One of the main characteristics of affirmative action policy is that it does not stick to the principle of equality of rules, but compensates and takes care of the interests of vulnerable groups in a special form of overcorrection, so as to achieve the final result of equal and fair competition at the starting point.

However, due to the inequality of rules, despite good intentions and sufficient reasons, the result is actually institutional reverse discrimination against whites, which makes whites have to pay a heavy price for the "evil created by their ancestors" in the competitive field of social survival competition. From the perspective of employment, the United States is a country with a constant unemployment rate, and it will face fierce competition no matter what level of job it applies for. From the perspective of further education, whether a student can be admitted to a famous law school or medical school often determines his life's fate. From the commercial point of view, whether the government can win the commercial and engineering contracts is often related to the life and death of an enterprise or company. However, according to the "affirmative action" policy, whites will undoubtedly lose if their abilities and achievements are the same or similar, and they may also lose if their abilities and achievements are significantly higher than those of ethnic minorities.

According to the statistics of college entrance examination, the SAT scores of black students admitted to UC Berkeley 1992 are 228 points lower than the average SAT scores of students of other ethnic groups. Judging from the distribution of government contracts, according to the Law on Work and Employment of Federal Public Companies promulgated by 1977, at least 10% of federal public project funds should be reserved for minority enterprises. In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal bill was not unconstitutional in the case of Fullilove v. Klutznik(full ilove v. Klutznik), because it was a compensation measure aimed at correcting the unfair treatment of minority enterprises when bidding for government contracts.

Another criticism of the affirmative action policy is that it may make innocent people bear the adverse consequences brought by the compensation policy, and it may also benefit some people who have never been harmed by racial discrimination out of thin air. Different from other public policies in social relief and welfare, "affirmative action" is a "one size fits all" policy, which simply takes race, skin color and gender as the standards for implementing care measures. As long as you are a minority or a woman, no matter what kind of minority or woman you are, you can get some care in the competition. On the contrary, as long as you are white, no matter what kind of white you are, you will be born unlucky, and no one will feel bad because of discrimination.

For example, a wealthy black businessman is an investment immigrant who immigrated from South Africa to the United States in the 1990s. His distant ancestors had nothing to do with slaves sold to North America hundreds of years ago. A white worker is descended from Irish immigrants living in northern Pennsylvania. His ancestors immigrated to the United States after the American War of Independence. During the civil war, he fought in the northern army to safeguard national integrity and abolish slavery. His family members have always been supporters of the abolition of slavery and the civil rights movement. In addition, because Pennsylvania had legislated against slavery long before the end of the War of Independence, no one in this white worker's family ever enslaved slaves. However, in the competition to apply for admission to the medical school of Pennsylvania State University, although the white worker's family has lived in Pennsylvania for generations and paid a lot of money to the federal government and the state university in the form of taxes, and although the white worker's son is diligent, excellent in his studies, and has higher test scores and comprehensive ability than the daughter of a wealthy black businessman, he may still lose to the daughter of a newly arrived wealthy black businessman in the competition for admission. This policy of asking only about skin color and gender, without analyzing specific problems, is obviously extremely unfair.

In addition, the "ethnic minorities" in American society are not monolithic, and the situation among ethnic minorities is very different. The "affirmative action" policy has different effects on different ethnic groups in different fields, especially on Asians in the field of education. Asian immigrants are mainly made up of China, Indians, Koreans, Japanese and Vietnamese. Due to the pressure and promotion of the black civil rights movement, the Immigration Act promulgated by the United States Congress in 1965 revised the discriminatory provisions and quotas for people of color. At present, the main body of Asian immigrants is mainly high-tech talents who immigrated to the United States by 1965 and 1992 immigration laws. According to statistics, the vast majority of Asian skilled immigrants have received high-level higher education in their countries of origin, among which there are many scientific and technological elites who have gone to study in the United States after thousands of selections, and they have high academic qualifications and comprehensive abilities far higher than the average education level of citizens in their countries of origin. This is unmatched by other ethnic minorities.

Because they have a high starting point for education and a cultural background that attaches importance to their children's education, if colleges and universities cancel the "affirmative action" policy, the interests will be mainly damaged by blacks and Hispanics with poor foundation and low starting point, while Asians will benefit from the cancellation of racial proportion restrictions. However, Dr. Tian Changlin, a Chinese-American and former president of the University of California, Berkeley, believes that although the abolition of the affirmative action policy is beneficial to Asians from the perspective of applying for universities, it will cause disadvantages to Asians from a broader political and economic background. Asians were basically bystanders of the civil rights movement in the 1960s, but "free ride" became one of the biggest beneficiaries of the historic achievements of the civil rights movement. If Asians are short-sighted in maintaining the "affirmative action" policy, a major issue involving the overall interests of ethnic minorities, it may have a negative impact on the future political and economic status of Asians.

Wald, a black director on the board of directors of the University of California? Ward Connery believes that "affirmative action" policy actually provides special convenience for a few black and white women who enter the upper class. In addition, some special care measures in this policy are actually tantamount to publicly announcing that ethnic minorities can't compete with whites with real weapons at all, and they can only lead by race and skin color, which is essentially degrading to ethnic minorities. This accusation has now become a very sensitive political issue in the United States. In May, 20001,representatives of Asian American Chamber of Commerce met with President Bush at the White House, thanking him for promoting China Zhao Xiaolan and Japanese Akio Toyoda as cabinet ministers. George W. Bush immediately replied seriously that Zhao Xiaolan and Akio Toyoda joined the cabinet entirely because of their outstanding ability and moral character, and had nothing to do with their ethnic background. The news media in the United States and other countries like to say that President George W. Bush has no brains and knows neither diplomacy nor internal affairs. In fact, this is not necessarily the case. If President George W. Bush somehow followed the Asian generation,