(Oppression) Olympics Winter 2022: A Blasian Woman’s Manifesto

Recently, a major question in college admissions has resurfaced with a vengeance: “Is affirmative action lawful?” And in the forefront of this recent ethical dilemma? Our very own UNC.

Affirmative action has always been a major source division ever since its inception. However, in January of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court Case decided it was time to finally address this question once and for all. Harvard University and U.N.C. are currently under national scrutiny for their affirmative action admission policies. The allegation stems from an Asian American outcry that such prestigious schools are deploying affirmative action in a way that oppresses the very people it claims to uplift. According to anti-affirmative action believers, the process 1) enforces unfair expectations Asian Americans endure as model minorities (in other words, it stipulates that the bar of achievement is higher for Asian applicants) and/or 2) reduces applicants to their marginalized identity rather than considering the merit of individuals. Particularly, allegations of injustice have focused on the perception that exceptional Asian candidates are being overlooked for less-qualified Black or Hispanic applicants.

When examining this case in the recent spotlight of national anti-Asian violence and anti-Black sentiments, the political gravity of this case heightens. The Supreme Court seems to be hosting an Oppression Olympics. Who has it worse? Black or Asian students?

Being half-Black and half-Asian, my racial allegiances are torn down the middle.

On one hand, the stereotype of the model minority leaves me sorely unsurprised by the excessive qualifications expected of Asian Americans. And, until late, the issues that the Asian American community has historically suffered often go overlooked due to their model minority identity. Because anti-Asian hate is often not as explicitly violent, directly fatal, or documented as that of those with darker complexions, our issues aren’t often considered to be “valid” or “real.” In fact, anti-Asian hate that doesn’t directly intersect with xenophobic microaggressions (ex. Mimicking Asian FOB accents) is often expected to be received by Asian people as compliments. Without considering how this lays the foundations for systemic racism by setting the emotional and intellectual bar for Asians to be impossibly high—almost superhuman in the levels of perfection we are expected to casually obtain.

However, when acknowledging the ongoing role of melanin and colorism (a form of racism that focuses on a hierarchy of skin tone gradients), I find it naïve to assume that predominantly white institutions possess a natural preference for Black people. This idea is contradicted by our very existence here. From the refusal of U.N.C. to acknowledge the scholastic qualifications of the McArthur grant (also known as the “genius grant”) winner, Nikkole Hannah-Jones, as she fought for tenure. To the consistent failure of this institution to issue any official comment when Black students commit suicide on campus. To assume that Black students have done anything other than fight tooth and nail to get into, and continue to survive within, predominantly spaces is nothing short of laughable.

The Supreme Court’s examination of the legality of affirmative action serves the same purpose as Toni Morrison passionately declares of racism: it is “a distraction.” Rather than focusing on dismantling the system of racism, we are fiddling with the band-aid we’ve placed over the bullet hole. I’m not saying that affirmative action is pointless. To me, that’d be like assuming the dehumanization that has arisen from centuries of colonialism and chattel slavery can be undone within a few years of positive admissions incentives—it simply isn’t logical. However, I do agree that affirmative action isn’t, and was never meant to be, a permanent solution. Yet, we treat it as such. As if this is the end-all, be-all statement of our racial progress as a society.

We’ve taken a hyper-focused, microscopic view on a macroscopic issue. And the result is a battle between the dregs of society. Marginalized people are left arguing over who has it worse in a sort of oppression Olympics, but we’re failing to notice that we’ve been pitted against each other in the attempt to stave off the potential of our imminent coalition. The fact that this case arises amidst movements of Black and Asian people banding together in the name of anti-racism almost seems to prove my point.

The expectation that I will declare my allegiance to any one party is counterintuitive to my biracial existence. Just as America’s attempt to divide its racially marginalized is counterintuitive to our ‘melting-pot’ title.

Reference:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/24/us/politics/supreme-court-affirmative-action-harvard-unc.html