perfidy

Mike, it occurs to me that the one arena where your argument about class being more important to Americans than race is affirmative action. I was partially mistaken in arguing the contrary, and I apologize. 

In fact, affirmative action illustrates your point perfectly. If it weren't for class, AA would not be as widely considered as necessary because class-derived performance issues (including those attributed to the legacy of segregation, i.e. race) would be less of a concern. In fact, I remember writing something to that effect a while back, so I am doubly remiss in contradicting you. 

Ahhh... here it is. On April 1, I wrote (slightly edited):

[W]ithout dismissing several hundred years of history and systematic repression, there are many social, cultural, economic, and geographic factors aside from race that determine how a child's education goes. [In fact], affirmative action stands in its own way [by focusing the discussion solely on race rather than other related matters]. Now, when we want to talk about race-based issues in education, we talk about affirmative action. Unfortunately, AA doesn't even address the [real educational questions attributable to lingering racial issues]. 

For example, take the high incarceration rate among young black men. A felony rap means not being eligible for federal student aid, a Clinton policy that cut off a large swath of society from easy access to higher education. Affirmative action can't touch that, though it's partly a race-based education issue. It's my sense that economic factors influence more about a person's educational path than does race, yet colleges do not consider economics[ that is, class differences] when deciding admissions policy. . . . Public schools are in [deep trouble] all over the place, and students advance grades without learning basic skills. Affirmative action can't compensate for that either, even though that's what it was meant to do. Instead, the debate remains narrowly confined [and cuts] the real problems out of the picture.