Affirmative action has always been a very bad bill of goods – sold (by force) as a remedy to our alleged inherent racial discrimination. Under this oppressive regime everyone everywhere is mandated to take race into account – to make up for somebody somewhere maybe taking race into account, or for somebody fifty years ago doing so.

Affirmative action convicts and condemns everyone as guilty of racism – without any opportunity to prove otherwise. You’re here – you adhere. No explanations allowed, no waivers granted.

Left unanswered by affirmative action’s proponents – because we are not allowed to ask – is how we get to the righteous goal of a colorblind society by… paying attention to color.

As obnoxious and pernicious as affirmative action is, the one thing we are always told is that it absolutely does NOT mean quotas and race-based set-asides. No way, no how. Race is only supposed to be one of a myriad of criteria to be considered when making your hiring and admissions decisions. They would certainly NEVER demand you arrive at certain melanin-delineated tallies.

“…(N)umerical goals do not create set-asides for specific groups, nor are they designed to achieve proportional representation or equal results….The Executive Order and its supporting regulations do not authorize OFCCP to penalize contractors for not meeting goals. The regulations … specifically prohibit quota and preferential hiring and promotions under the guise of affirmative action numerical goals. In other words, discrimination in the selection decision is prohibited.”

United States Department of Labor


“Affirmative action plans do not impose quotas; they simply seek to increase the pool of qualified applicants by using aggressive recruitment and outreach programs, setting goals and establishing training programs, among other measures.”

University of California, Davis


“Affirmative action does not require, and does not mean, quotas or preferment of unqualified over qualified individuals.”

Stanford University President Gerhard Casper’s October 4, 1995 statement on affirmative action

Of course, Reality dictates that affirmative action inexorably leads to quotas – and set-asides to reach said quotas.

How do the pro-affirmative action forces measure the results of their work? Numbers – the before and after of the hiring/acceptance processes they force feed affirmative action.

They are looking for what they deem to be the appropriate changes in the melanin and gender-based ratios of the staffs and freshman classes over which they are lording. Of course, very few if any enterprises will naturally achieve the goals they have had foisted upon them. Every human being is different – and I’m not talking about (just) race and gender – so their differing skills and abilities will always lead to disparate outcomes.

So artificial quotas and set-asides inevitably follow – to ensure we properly “reform” the system.

To wit, let us look at the Comcast/NBCU merger – the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approval of which has been DRAAAAAAAAAGGGGGED out well beyond all reasonability. The reasons for this excruciatingly long delay are twofold – both of which are Leftist-induced.

One is the Leftist fear that the merger will lead to Comcast/NBCU’s monopolistic dominance of the marketplace. To which the response is: Has anyone yet showed these people the Internet and/or cable and satellite television? The myriad media choices we now have has been likened to trying to drink from a fire hose. To say that two (admittedly large) players joining forces threatens to wipe out consumer choice and freedom via monopolistic dominance is patently absurd.

The other reason for the painful wait is to allow the various grievance groups – including the racial ones – to exact their pounds of flesh from the respective sitting ducks. I mean companies.

To wit, there was Monday’s National Coalition of African-Owned Media (NCAAOM)’s full page Washington Post advertisement. Which reminded everyone that they vociferously oppose the Comcast/NBCU merger – and reminded us of their ongoing protest of Comcast. Which they say will continue unless and until the cable company knuckles under to NCAAOM’s demands to set aside 50 channels, or 10% of its capacity–to channels wholly owned by African Americans.

Why, that sounds like thugishness-induced quotas and set-asides. How could this be?

We tried something similar to this in the latter half of the 1980s. We set aside broadcast spectrum for minorities – who in many cases had no intention of using it to broadcast. They simply squatted on it for a bit – and then sold it, took the money and ran. In other words, it was a racial payoff.

Which sounds a lot like what NCAAOM is now seeking.

Here’s what isn’t – but should be – the question: Why are two private companies, who have arrived at mutually agreeable merger terms, delayed beyond all reason by a federal regulatory agency from executing the deal – so as to allow Leftist grievance groups time to vigorously shake them down? Including NCAAOM’s demands for racial quotas and set-asides?

This isn’t affirmative action – this is FCC negative inaction that subjects private industry to tremendous uncertainty and loss of business and revenue – and the loathsome demands of the likes of NCAAOM.