I'm going to post one example I've been able to find bearing upon the question of whether or not the most qualified person is being hired or admitted. It's from
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal ... /case.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Do a search on "Raudenbush."
You will find this paragraph:
Dr. Stephen Raudenbush, the Law School's expert, focused on the predicted effect of eliminating race as a factor in the Law School's admission process. In Dr. Raudenbush's view, a race-blind admissions system would have a "'very dramatic,'" negative effect on underrepresented minority admissions. App. to Pet. for Cert. 223a. He testified that in 2000, 35 percent of underrepresented minority applicants were admitted. Ibid. Dr. Raudenbush predicted that if race were not considered, only 10 percent of those applicants would have been admitted. Ibid. Under this scenario, underrepresented minority students would have constituted 4 percent of the entering class in 2000 instead of the actual figure of 14.5 percent. Ibid.
That pretty much tells you which way the practice of selecting those less qualified has been going. I have no doubt that one could probably find some individual circumstances in which a more qualified Black was denied a job granted to a less qualified White. But the overwhelming majority of circumstances involve a less qualified Black getting preference. There is absolutely no reasonable doubt about that. Above you see, for example if you do the math, that only 29 percent of the "underrepresented minority" applicants accepted would have been accepted if they had not been given preference due to their race.
And I think all of us who have been out there in the world know that the same kind of thing happens throughout. People have to be concerned about making sure they have sufficient "diversity" in their workforces. If they just pick the best person for the job and they all turn out to be White, they're screwed. And i they all turn out to be White Males...THE HORROR.