Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study

by Thomas Sowell

In this important book, an eminent authority presents a new perspective on affirmative action, investigating its actual consequences in the United States and in other countries where it has been in effect. Evaluating his empirical data, Thomas Sowell concludes that race preference programs worldwide have not met expectations and have often produced the opposite of what was originally intended.

“A delight: terse, well-argued, and utterly convincing.”—Economist

“Among contemporary economists and social theorists, one of the most prolific, intellectually independent, and iconoclastic is Thomas Sowell. . . . Enormously learned, wonderfully clear-headed, he sees reality as it is, and flinches at no truth. . . . Sowell’s presentation of the data is instructive and illuminating—and disturbing.”—Carl Cohen, Commentary

“Another brilliant, bracing achievement by Thomas Sowell. With characteristic lucidity, erudition, and depth, Sowell examines the true effects of affirmative action around the globe. This book is compelling, important, mind-opening.”—Amy Chua, author of World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability

“A masterpiece that deserves to be one of the most influential books of our time. Any honest reader will be informed and enlightened.”—Donald Kagan, Yale University

“A gem of a book. A brilliant and learned analysis of the negative effects of racially preferential policies both in the United States and in several other countries around the world.”—Stephan Thernstrom, Harvard University

Genres: Politics, Economics, Nonfiction, History, Sociology, Race, Education

256 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

About the author

Thomas Sowell is an American economist, social philosopher, and political commentator. He is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. With widely published commentary and books—and as a guest on TV and radio—he became a well-known voice in the American conservative movement as a prominent black conservative. He was a recipient of the National Humanities Medal from President George W. Bush in 2002.
Sowell was born in Gastonia, North Carolina and grew up in Harlem, New York City. Due to poverty and difficulties at home, he dropped out of Stuyvesant High School and worked various odd jobs, eventually serving in the United States Marine Corps during the Korean War. Afterward, he took night classes at Howard University and then attended Harvard University, where he graduated magna cum laude in 1958. He earned a master's degree in economics from Columbia University the next year and a doctorate in economics from the University of Chicago in 1968. In his academic career, he held professorships at Cornell University, Brandeis University, and the University of California, Los Angeles. He has also worked at think tanks including the Urban Institute. Since 1977, he has worked at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, where he is the Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy.
Sowell was an important figure to the conservative movement during the Reagan era, influencing fellow economist Walter E. Williams and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. He was offered a position as Federal Trade Commissioner in the Ford administration, and was considered for posts including U.S. Secretary of Education in the Reagan administration, but declined both times.
Sowell is the author of more than 45 books (including revised and new editions) on a variety of subjects including politics, economics, education and race, and he has been a syndicated columnist in more than 150 newspapers. His views are described as conservative, especially on social issues; libertarian, especially on economics; or libertarian-conservative. He has said he may be best labeled as a libertarian, though he disagrees with the "libertarian movement" on some issues, such as national defense.

Reviews

[Nicole · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was a fantastic book. A truly well-researched empirical study of affirmative action. While I've also read McWhorter and so have read some tough love for the black community, this is the first book I've read on these types of issues that isn't mostly anecdotal. Things that struck me the most were the link between preferences and rising racial tensions; that minority students mismatched with schools too difficult for them tend to become activists at the school and blame the school's discrimination for their failure; observations on the "creamy layer" (more privileged minorities getting the lion's share of preferences); the fact that women who don't interrupt their careers for childrearing make more money than men; and that Asian minorities in the US have gone from the bottom to the top without preferences. Aside from the fact that affirmative action hasn't worked, and the stigma it places on us in schools and in the workplace; it also starts getting ridiculous if you really think about it. At this point, everyone is just hating on white men. EVERYONE's presence is considered preferable to white males. Every non-white-male group has their own exclusionary organizations. Actually, with the gay rights movement, we've carved it down to straight white males. As Dr. Sowell says, these politics are great for people who want to make a living as activists, but there is no incentive to ever STOP being an activist when goals are met. And curricula cater to these activists. Women's Studies, Black Studies, Queer Studies--whatever happened to History, Sociology, Psychology, Anthropology, Literature? It seems like these majors are more journeys of self-discovery than they are training people for careers.

Anyway, I loved this book, but I had to take off a star because they stopped editing somewhere after the middle of the book. Suddenly there were so many typos, wrong words, repeated words, etc. Also, the end was a bit long and repetitive and could have used a little tightening up (editing). Still, definitely worth reading.

[William Dicks · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent book by Thomas Sowell on what I would call the myth of affirmative action. One of the points highlighted by Sowell is the fact that affirmative action is implemented based on good ideas, but never on empirical evidence. And, it is because of this that affirmative action (AA) has never proven to be successful anywhere in the world. In fact, AA has been very successful in helping the upper crust of the demographic supposedly in need, and never the truly poor and destitute of that demographic.

If you ever wondered about the successes or failures of AA, then you should read this book. It has been well researched and is easy to read.

[Furciferous Quaintrelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was so good I read it twice. Once going through and highlighting passages, rereading chapters and just absorbing it all; then once again right through because it was just a perfect summation of the factual repercussions of Affirmative Action in various countries and cultures, which never once had to retreat to polemic or conjecture. Sowell is utterly readable, managing to keep the content succinct and straight-forward, whilst still imbuing it all with his wry, personable wit. Loved every bit of it. Will probably read it again in a couple of months as a refresher and have already got his follow up book on the same subject ready to go on my Kindle. Just read it and get ready to disabuse yourself of any preconceived notions that Affirmative Action policies do anything other than extra harm to the communities and individuals they claim to be trying to help.

[Alan Nair · Rating 5 out of 5]

The only issue I have with this book is that it is short. Thomas Sowell has a style that manages to be free-flowing, fun to read and easy to understand without in any way sacrificing the clarity and insightfulness of the arguments presented. This book is easily the most sane, logical and profound expoundings on affirmative action and its results I have ever encountered. The best thing about this book is that Sowell stays away from moralistic judgements and rationales and analyzes affirmative action policies purely on the basis of the results observed in countries where such policies were tried.

Facts are indeed stubborn things. They bend neither to passion nor do they yield to dialectics. They do not disappear when sheathed, nor refuse to persist when one turns their gaze. The longer they are not acknowledged, the louder they scream.

[Philip Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating. I reckon he's right.

The stuff on Sri Lanka was super interesting — I had never heard of their race relations problems that culminated in a civil war. I need to get out more apparently.

[Douglas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Had reason to refer back to this recently when making notes on The New Jim Crow, and decided that, for a book which I think back on and recommend often, I wasn't very happy with the review I wrote years ago so am updating it. This book is a good example of why, for all his biases, I adore Thomas Sowell. It is a remarkably thoughtful and nuanced case study in how a well-intentioned idea can have detrimental results on the population that it is designed to help. It also provides a lesson in why, when discussing racial power dynamics, a parochial examination of the issues can be very limiting.

Examining instances where preferential policies have been enacted in a variety of countries worldwide, Sowell finds that the results have ranged from not helping at all to societal collapse. The key insight is that the majority of benefits are generally captured by those who are already doing well, since they are best positioned to take advantage of them. But there are other lessons. Spillover is politically hard to check, so that ever-expanding concentric circles of population are included. Policies that give preferential treatment on the basis of identity have led to disincentives for independent action (see: Singapore/Malaysia). In the case of university admissions, individuals are removed from institutions where they are well prepared to succeed to be placed in places where they were not, resulting in a decrease in total graduates. The legitimate achievements of target group members are undermined in the eyes of prejudiced onlookers as being due to quotas. All of this, meanwhile, creates a sense of persecution among the majority, undermining attempts at reconciliation.

The book is not perfect, and unfortunately Sowell can be rather dogmatic in his politics. He has a bad habit, which seems to have accelerated in more recent years as he approached the age of 90, of taking cheap pot-shots at the left. This serves as something of a harbinger for the fact that he frequently does not give competing ideas full consideration. As I get older and learn more, I increasingly appreciate the unquantifiable benefits of representation, and I do not think that Sowell gives this argument any respect. On other side of the ideological spectrum, the book is a bit weak on the what-do-you-do-instead side of things. A devout believer in the free market*, he overestimates the ability of natural shifts in societal views to get the job done.

Nonetheless, Sowell is a deeply accomplished black man, and with careful selection and reading of his best work a reader of any political leaning will benefit from his incredibly broad knowledge. My original review referred to him ignoring "political correctness" - an expression I have since come to avoid, it having become a) its own form of political correctness and b) being used all too frequently as a cover for hate. What I was getting at back in 2017, rather, was that Sowell takes nothing for granted, and avoids all sacred cows in his analysis.

I began this review by referencing my recent reading of The New Jim Crow, a generally excellent book but in which its author insists on referring to opponents of affirmative action as racists. Affirmative Action Around the Worldwill teach you why that view is misguided, and as with all of Sowell's best work will show you the limits of good intentions. It is not enough to want to help, or worse: to look like the kind of person who wants to help. Policy goals have to be tested against their actual results, or we will get nowhere in bringing about the sorts of societal improvements we all desperately seek.

5/5

[Juliana Petito · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Um povo que não conhece a sua história está condenado a repeti-la.” - Edmund Burke

“Os fatos são obstinados, e quaisquer que sejam nossos desejos, nossas inclinações ou o imperativo de nossas paixões, eles não podem alterar o estado dos fatos e da evidência.” - John Adams

Thomas Sowell nasceu na Carolina do Norte na década de 30 no auge da depressão americana. Sexto filho de uma família negra, de origem bastante humilde, seu pai falecido antes mesmo de seu nascimento, e sua mãe sem condições de criá-lo, Sowell foi entregue para adoção.

Sowell foi criado por uma tia-Avó, no Harlem, bairro tipicamente negro em Nova Iorque, em uma época em que a segregação racial ainda era bastante forte nos EUA.

Por problemas pessoais e familiares, abandonou os estudos antes de concluir o ensino médio e saiu de casa, passou a trabalhar em horário integral, tendo sido lavador de carros, entregador e carteiro.

Foi convocado para a guerra das Coréias, e ao retornar, usou o soldo de dois anos que esteve na guerra, para concluir seus estudos. Graduou-se em Economia na Universidade Harvard em 1958 - com Magna Cum Laude ("com grandes honras") -,  fez mestrado em economia pela Universidade Columbia e finalmente, em 1968, recebeu seu doutorado em economia pela Universidade de Chicago. (Tudo isso, sem cotas.)

Feita essa breve introdução, para evidenciar o “lugar de fala” do autor, vamos ao livro.

Segundo palavras do autor, o objetivo do seu livro é “esclarecer o que de fato acontece, uma vez que as políticas de ação afirmativa se tornam realidade. [...] quais foram os resultados quando as políticas de ação afirmativa foram adotadas no passado...” 

Os debates em torno das ações afirmativas são acalorados, muitas vezes deixando de lado a razão, dando vazão à paixão. Thomas Sowell realiza uma viagem ao redor do mundo,  e através de estudos empíricos, busca entender quais os impactos dessas políticas em uma sociedade. Ao finalizar o livro, o leitor atento poderá discorrer se, as cotas servem para ascensão dos desfavorecidos, ou são apenas instrumentos de proselitismo político. Rufem os tambores, façam suas apostas!

Em sua pesquisa, Sowell  pôde constatar que existe “um padrão de consequências surpreendentemente similares que se segue à introdução de políticas de ação afirmativa''.

Embora tenha visitado vários países, o autor traz uma perspectiva internacional e destaca principalmente os resultados na Índia, Malásia, Sri Lanka, Nigéria e Estados Unidos. 

Dentre as consequências similares que o autor menciona, podemos destacar: 

A) durabilidade e objetivo dos programas de cotas (ação afirmativa) - o estabelecimento das políticas de cotas sempre vem acompanhado de afirmações que as cotas serão temporárias e limitadas, mas a realidade mostra que elas se tornam permanentes e muito mais abrangentes do que o projeto inicial. Um clássico exemplo é o da Índia, onde algumas políticas de ação afirmativa que deveriam ter se encerrado em 1969, permanecem em vigor até os dias atuais. "Chegada ocasião do encerramento dessas preferências, pleitos foram feitos para prorrogação e expansão do prazo." ;

B) ampliação dos programas, para abarcar mais grupos, além daqueles a quem as cotas se destinavam - diversos países implementaram políticas de ação afirmativa para inclusão dos negros nas universidades, empregos na área do governo e etc, contudo, tais programas foram ampliados para mulheres, comunidades LGBT entre outros. Quando todos são considerados preferenciais, então de fato ninguém tem preferência! 

C) classificação e reclassificação - integrantes de grupos não preferenciais conseguem se reclassificar como grupos preferenciais. Como exemplo podemos citar indivíduos louros e de olhos claros que apresentam documentos oficiais comprovando sua relação com algum antepassado distante de uma origem indígena nos Estados Unidos assim como na Austrália em relação aos aborígenes, dessa forma, esses indivíduos conseguem ter acesso às cotas que seriam destinadas aos mais desfavorecidos;

D) relaxamento nos esforços - as pessoas tendem a se esforçar menos. Os preferenciais relaxam nos seus esforços porque sabem ou acreditam não ser necessário o trabalho árduo, pois terão preferência na ocupação de uma determinada vaga. Pessoas pertencentes ao grupo não preferencial, por sua vez, também não se esforçam ao máximo porque acreditam que o seu trabalho será em vão, tendo em vista que sua vaga poderá ser ocupada por uma pessoa com menos qualificação e pontuação;

E) conflitos entre grupos e ressentimento em escala exponencial - os conflitos tem início geralmente quando Indivíduos não pertencentes aos grupos preferenciais se sentem prejudicados quando num processo seletivo, acabam sendo preteridos, para que o indivíduo pertencente ao grupo preferencial tenha acesso a determinada vaga. Como exemplo, o autor apresenta um caso ocorrido na Índia, que se repete em vários outros países: "suponha-se que 300 pessoas se qualificaram para 10 cargos disponíveis. Os nove primeiros são nomeados por mérito, mas a décima vaga é reservada, de modo que as autoridades percorrem a lista dos qualificados para encontrar um requerente SC. Encontram um no 140º lugar da lista, e ele é nomeado. Em consequência, todos os 131 candidatos entre ele e a lista do mérito se sentem prejudicados. Mas o SC não ocupou 131 cargos, ocupou apenas um,  embora as 131 pessoas preteridas se considerem pagando o preço da preferência.” 

Esse é um dos custos mais altos para sociedade, em relação aos programas de ação afirmativa. O relacionamento intergrupo muitas vezes termina em tumultos. Na Índia, Nigéria, e Sri Lanka, vários conflitos entre grupos resultaram em guerra civil com a perda de milhares de vidas.

Ainda nas relações intergrupos, surgem conflitos quando profissionais cometem erros, e são taxados por seus "colegas", como profissionais de cotas, o famoso bullying, cujas consequências podem ser catastróficas, como tem mostrado a história mais recente;

F) judicialização - um custo muito alto referente aos processos que são levados à justiça, pois uma pessoa que deixou de ingressar numa universidade, mesmo tendo tirado uma nota reconhecidamente superior, sente-se prejudicada ao ver uma pessoa menos qualificada ocupar essa vaga. 


Outro ponto interessante destacado por Thomas Sowell, é o fato de que por muitas vezes as políticas de ação afirmativa roubam o mérito de pessoas que são beneficiadas por tais políticas. Por exemplo nos Estados Unidos antes da década de 70 os negros já vinham conseguindo grandes avanços devido aos seus próprios esforços, contudo após a implementação de cotas quase não houve alteração no número de negros que ocuparam vagas nas universidades. Há de se considerar ainda, que muitos beneficiários de cotas, em sua grande maioria, não concluem o curso, seja por se sentirem descolados da turma, ou por não conseguirem se custear na universidade, mesmo que esta seja Federal. É notório que não se trata de um problema em relação à raça, etnia, sexo etc, mas sim um problema social, de base. Com base nos estudos de Sowell, fica evidente que a maioria das cotas acabam sendo "abocanhadas" por pessoas com condições sociais muito superiores àqueles a quem as cotas deveriam ser destinadas. 

Por fim, mas não menos importante, Sowell encerra seu trabalho fazendo uma análise do passado e quais as perspectivas para o futuro: "se o estudo da história é uma das maneiras de evitar repeti-la, existe muito da história das políticas de ação afirmativa ao redor do mundo que jamais deve ser repetido." 

"Inúmeros princípios, teorias, hipóteses e as assertivas têm sido utilizados para justificar os programas de ação afirmativa - alguns comuns a vários países do mundo, outros peculiares a determinados países ou comunidades. Notável é o fato de que raramente essas noções são empiricamente testadas, ou mesmo claramente definidas ou logicamente examinadas, muito menos sopesadas em relação aos dolorosos custos que muitas vezes impõem. Apesar dos pleitos abrangentes feitos em prol dos programas de ação afirmativa, um exame de suas consequências reais torna difícil apoio a tais programas ou mesmo afirmar que esses programas foram benéficos no cômputo geral - a menos que se esteja disposto a dizer que qualquer quantidade de reparação social, por pequena que seja, vale o vulto dos custos e dos perigos, por maiores que sejam."

Não é sobre ser contra ou a favor das cotas, é sobre identificar os reais resultados e benefícios para a sociedade como um todo, principalmente, na melhoria das condições básicas para os menos favorecidos. 

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly researched and thought-provoking book. Though I had always been sceptical of the philosophy underlying affirmative action, Thomas Sowell outlines the ways in which affirmative action has failed by examining its consequences. Despite the rhetoric used in the promotion of preferential policies, such policies have often been expanded to encompass so many distinct groups, that the benefits received by any one group have been minimal, resulting basically in policies that merely discriminate negatively against particular groups (e.g., white males in America or the more productive sub-cultures in India).

Sowell explores what economic effects have proceeded the implementation of preferential policies, and they have invariably been either negative (even for the groups they were meant to help) or too difficult to determine (economies are highly complex). Sowell also shows how preferential policies have tended to favour the most fortunate people within preferred groups, sometimes at the expense of the most disadvantaged people from those groups. He also raises many questions about the consequences of affirmative action that it's advocates never ask, let alone contemplate. For example, Sowell wonders whether businesses may leave areas with large black populations to avoid discrimination law-suits brought forward by people who declare that there aren't 'enough' black people employed by those businesses. Given that the Supreme Court has placed the burden of proof on employers to prove that they are not discriminating, this would be a reasonable concern for business-owners.

Sowell also examines the dubious legal basis upon which affirmative action is founded in the United States. Whilst such policies clearly promote discrimination, and thereby ought to be rendered unlawful by the Civil Rights Act (1964), affirmative action policies have been touted as 'anti-discrimination policies' aimed at addressing 'inequality' and promoting 'diversity'. They are discriminatory policies masquerading as anti-discrimination policies. Despite this, Sowell outlines how affirmative action policies were given a pass in 1979, when the Supreme Court deemed them to be within the 'spirit' of what was 'purpose' of the Civil Rights Act (1979), despite the fact that reverse-discrimination and quotas were explicitly condemned by those who passed the Act in 1964. It was promised that the passing of the Act would not lead to preferential policies. The Supreme Court Justices in the majority ignored this and further betrayed their post by disregarding the written law (e.g., Section 703 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the 14th Amendment), so as to enshrine their own political preferences (Justice Brennan being the most egregious among them).

This is a great book for anyone who does not want to content himself/herself with merely disputing the rationale of affirmative action. This book offers an insight into where affirmative action policies come from and how they develop. It also explores the many consequences of affirmative action, and how they are all but impossible to view positively, even for those who may have advocated such policies (namely because they tend to backfire).

[Marluce · Rating 4 out of 5]

Li em português o "Ações afirmativas ao redor do mundo" de Thomas Sowell. Ele traz 5 estudos de políticas públicas implementadas em cinco países: Malásia, Sri Lanka, India, Estados Unidos e Nigéria. Em todos os estudos, as políticas implementadas são alvo de crítica do autor por não passarem de palanque político daqueles que querem o poder, por não atingirem seus objetivos, e promoverem desavenças entre pessoas de uma mesmo país, por levarem em conta a pretensão da igualdade em detrimento da eficiência e do saber. A tese de Sowell é a de que somos diferentes e a busca da igualdade, mesmo que pela igualdade de oportunidades é inatingível e uma utopia daqueles que desconhecem que os verdadeiros ascendentes são pessoas anônimas, não pessoas públicas. Para Sowell, o "dogma de que as discrepâncias estatísticas demonstram discriminação supõe uma igualdade de desempenho praticamente impossível de encontrar no mundo real." Indico para quem busca uma leitura que não se indica no ambiente universitário, cercada de fatos e poucas opiniões.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was my longest read this past year, just because each page has so much information in it that I need to devote my ENTIRE attention span to it and some days that was too heavy of a lift for me, based on whatever reason. Bringing it home this year with a strong one though. Sowell, THE GOAT, strikes again. A very detailed and fact-based review of the introduction of "affirmative action" and group identity politics with five different countries as case studies. Sowell breaks down how it all worked in India, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Nigeria, and finally here in our very own United States. I've NEVER been disappointed when digging into Sowell's detailed breakdown of progressive ideology and there's a reason he's not front and center in each policy discussion; he's correct nine times out of ten on each issue and people don't want to face his arguments head-on. He's in his 90s now and has spent DECADES researching and refuting bad ideas with both common sense and facts. It will never not be a source of aggravation to the thinking man (and woman) that more people don't take a look at his studies prior to coming up with more pie-in-the-sky government "solutions". As one of his most famous quotes of all time said, "there are no solutions, only trade-offs".

Chockful of knowledge nuggets, these are only a few that I snagged either directly copy/paste of summarizing due to the voluminous amount of text;

- Equality of opportunity might be achieved within some feasible span of time, but that is wholly different from eliminating inequalities of results.

- People differ - and have for centuries. It is hard to imagine how they could not differ, given the enormous range of differing historical, cultural, geographic, demographic and other factors shaping the particular skills, habits, and attitudes of different groups.

- ...black education rose substantially, both absolutely and relative to white education, in the decades PRECEDING the civil rights legislation of the 1960s and the affirmative action policies that began in the 1970s. What economic changes accompanied this rise in black education? As of 1940, 87% of black families had incomes below the official poverty line. By 1960, this was down to 47% of black families. This dramatic 40-percentage-point decline came at a time when there was no major federal civil rights legislation. But this was a time not only of rising black education, but also a time of a massive exodus of blacks out of the South-more than 3 million people-escaping both the Jim Crow laws and the substandard Southern black schools. In short, this was a time when vast members of blacks lifted themselves out of poverty - "by their own bootstraps", as the phrase goes.

- The first President to use the term Affirmative Action in a racial/ethnic context was JFK during Executive Order 10,925 in 1961. The next major development was in LBJ's Executive Order 11, 246 in 1965. It wasn't until Nixon's administration, however, that "results-oriented procedures" and "goals and timetables" were added to the language, setting the stage for the full quantifiable movement toward affirmative action.

- The word "qualified" essentially homogenized applicants who met whatever minimum standard might be arbitrarily set by third parties. If that standard were to be set as correctly answering half the questions on a test, then someone who answered 51% correctly was just as much a part of the "qualified" pool as someone who answered 99% correctly.

- Here, as in other countries, affirmative action tends to be discussed and debated primarily in terms of its rationales and goals, rather than its actual consequences.

- Although men are 54% of the workforce, they account for 92% of job-related deaths. (discussing women's workplace statistics)

- Discussions of college admissions policies often proceed as if the issue is the distribution of benefits to various applicants, when in fact the issue is selecting those applicants who can best master the kind and level of academic work at the particular institution. Arbitrarily focusing on different groups of applicants ignores those who have the largest stake of all - in this case, people needing medical attention.

- While affirmative action policies are often thought of, by advocates and critics alike, as a transfer of benefits from one group to another, there can also be net losses of benefits when both groups do less than their best. What might otherwise be a zero-sum game can thus become a negative-sum game.

- In short, it was not the disparities which led to intergroup violence but the politicizing of those disparities and the promotion of group identity politics (Sri Lanka)

- Politicians conveniently leave out the statistics of Asian-Americans as well, who typically outperform "Whites" on most metrics; didn't want to copy/paste in here but it's worth digging into. Sowell dedicates a large amount of text to this breakdown as it works in birthrates, loans, and education.

- The most chilling results of affirmative action gone sideways are in India and Sri Lanka; again too much text to drop in here but it's abundantly clear that "affirmative action" is counterproductive, and downright dangerous, when taken too far. For instance, the amount of Sri Lankans killed as a result of affirmative action is higher than all the Americans killed in the Vietnam Conflict and Sri Lanka is SUBSTANTIALLY smaller than the entire US.

- False beliefs are not small things, because they lead to false solutions.

- and finally.... Too often, sweeping assumptions about the past and sweeping assertions about the future have served as substitutes for the difficult task of analyzing hard facts. There has also been a moral dimension to these illusions-namely, the assumption that we can compensate individuals today for what was done to groups in the past, that we can make right among the living the wrongs done to people long dead. Galling as it may be to acknowledge, every evil of past generations and past centuries will remain indelibly and irrevocably evil, despite anything we can do now. Acts of symbolic expiation among the living simply create new evils.

[Andre · Rating 4 out of 5]

There aren't many books on the topic of comparing the different cases of affirmative action around the world and it was a good experience.
The book starts with pointing out that disproportionate group involvement is quite common if not normal. For instance, once half the pilots in the Malaysian air force came from the Chinese minority and in czarist russia 40 % of the army's high command came from ethnic Germans who were only 1 % of the population.
Sadly, which is also very common, is the trick of picking out some distant ancestor to get special treatment. It is depressing how long this has been going on by now. And apparently for American Indians, the numbers had a significant rise that can only be explained by people reclassifying themselves.
In addition, I think the author makes a good point of how affirmative action can lead to the incentive of not putting in the work necessary because of the belief that certain rules will simply be put aside for you.
And apart form using rules to get special treatment being old, what apparently is also old is the "angry white males" excuse. Furthermore, he is right, barely anyone had problems with Asian Americans being often so successful and it is probably because there was no affirmative action for them, of course today activists are offended about the model minority myth.
But that was only part of the introduction and the author takes a look at several cases of affirmative action around the world. The first example was India and oh man, this discrimination against outcaste Hindus was really severe. He mentions a case were one put her pot on the pot of a caste Hindu and a riot broke out because of it and in other cases much more violence and even deaths occured. And according to him classifying them as Hindus despite being outside of the caste system was solely due to political reasons. He compares the Shiv Sena group, who operated much like the paramilitary forces who brought Mussolini and Hitler to power. And what happened in India was extreme, if the article shown is true, Hindus even attacked Muslims that had been their long-term friends. And several cases were way more gruesome and on a much bigger scale than what has been featured in American history.
When the book goes from India to Malaysia, I could only ask myself whether what India has been through due to affirmative action would come in other countries as well, since India has been doing it the longest. In fact, affirmative action in India started under British rule and has been part of its constitution since 1945.
Malaysia had its own inter-ethnic strive, which led to the expulsion of Singapore to solve said strife. And just like in India, this Malaysian affirmative action policy was supposed to be temporary and yet was extended respectively replaced with a new one. And in Singapore, despite lack of affirmative action, they had similar results to Malaysia and even some Malay parents sending their kids to primarily chinese schools so that their learning habits might rub off. And both countries avoided most racial strife due to severe restriction of freedoms of speech.
The portrayed Tamil Tigers also sound pretty damn horrible. A lot of what was shown here about India, Sri Lanka etc. from the 1990s etc is pretty damn horrible, the West hasn't seen anything like this for decades.
In Nigeria the British basically created a western educated class that became critical of indigenous African institutions and authorities and eventually also critical of British authorities and their colonial rule. Furthermore, the Ibo people wanted to seceed from Nigeria and built their own nation Biafra but the Nigerian government didn't want this even though this might have solved at least some of the many ethnic strives in the country. And even in 1899 early colonizers recommended breaking the territory of Nigeria into two seperate provinces because of all the tribal differences and in the years following independence in 1960 several regions threatened secession like the Ibos did. According to the author the USA avoided Nigeria's fate because the polarizing political tactics have for so long been confined to one region of the country and that disapproval of many other Americans limited how far such tactics could go. Concerns over polarization or violence directed against other ethnic groups did not exist in Nigeria. E.g. outbreaks in northern Nigeria had killed tens of thousands of Ibos in 1966. And due to all the intergroup strife there have been several states created in Nigeria, up to 36 in 1996.
Meanwhile in the USA, after a while affirmative action was decisively transformed into a numerical concept, whether called goals or quotas, this was a product of the 1970s. And even back then the definition of discrimination expanded in the 1960s in ways that seem shifty, no wonder, there had been incentive. In general, what this book mentions is pretty similar to what is seen today, the same problems, very similar language.
In addition, according to him, the number of women in higher jobs is correlated to birth rates. It makes sense, in those times more births means more kids per woman who then has to stay home more. If that it is true than the feminist movement had no impact on women working during those days.
But back to affirmative action. Apparently there have been cases like an entrepreneur who was 1/64th cherokee Indian and won a set-aside contract in Californaia... yeah, I am not surprised. And back in the 60s, a man called Summers already warned that affirmative action would create a nationwide mismatching of minority students and looks like he was right, including in regards to the negative effects. These are exactly the problems you see today. Back then and today there are "relevant courses", black studies departments, hiring quotas without regard to "irrelevant" academic credentials ... sounds familiar, including the disruptions and violence. In fact even assessing black students differently from others and letting them get away with more is familiar.
According to the author, between 1996 and 2002, despite concerns over the change in affirmative action, there was no net decline of black students in the california university systems, the black students simply redistributed themselves between the colleges instead of all trying to get into the elite institutions. So the mismatch was in decline not student numbers. And if his chapter on affirmative action in the USA is anything to go by, and considered that what he presented here is still an issue today, it gave me a very grave outlook.
And his reasoning is solid, when you see that cerain groups are less likely to repay loans... why bother? That risk just looks too great since you can't afford to trust everyone no matter what. And just like today, Asian Americans embarass affirmative action advocates and are still subsumed in larger groups of non-whites or AaPI etc. And look at that, other countries have that as well. I think here in Germany "immigration background" is used similarly... albeit in everyday usage it usually refers to middle easterners.
According to the author there is some empirical evidence on the consequences of preferential admissions of individuals from privileged groups....At Harvard, back during the era when more than half of all alumni sons were admitted, those special admittees were disproportionately represented among students who flunked out.
And Americans need only look back to the beginning of the twentieth century to see what enormous social and economic progress has been made by some of the poorest and apparently least promising segments of the population...The situation of Chinese Amercans looked so hopeless back then that a popular expression of the time described someone facing impossible odds as having "not a Chinaman's chance."
In additon, according to him, another way in which affirmative action can be a negative­ sum process is by a withdrawal of members of non­-preferred groups and the loss of their contributions to the society at large. Those on the wrong side of preferential policies have likewise emigrated from other places where the skills and experience of these emigrants were sorely needed. Despite sweeping claims made for affirmative action programs, an examination of their actual consequences makes it hard to support those claims, or even to say that these programs have been beneficial on net balance unless one is prepared to say that any amount of social redress, however small, is worth any amount of costs and dangers, however large.

[Letitia Todd Kim · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sowell examines and critiques affirmative action programs in various nations, including the US, Sri Lanka, India, Malaysia, and Nigeria. He presents persuasive data that these programs do little to improve the condition of the intended beneficiaries, end up benefitting primarily those who are already doing well, and lead to racial resentment. I wish Sowell had examined a greater variety of nations (including European and South American countries, to the extent any of them has such programs), but otherwise it is well done.

[Rafael Sales · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excelente livro sobre a realidade das cotas. Dados impecáveis e imprescindíveis para um bom debate sobre as políticas de privilégios.

[Scarlett Castleberry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not as in-depth as some of his other stuff and it’s a bit dated now, but it’s always an honor to learn from Thomas Sowell.

[Nathan Albright · Rating 5 out of 5]

In order to understand this book and the author's approach, you have to know that Sowell is not addressing the subject of affirmative action and "racial" preference and identity politics from the point of view of political analysis but rather from the point of view of economics.  Sowell, a man of color who has achieved great success in his professional life, might be expected on identity grounds to support affirmative action that would benefit his people, but as a rigorously minded economist he realizes, and demonstrates firmly in this book, that affirmative action politics politicizes identity problems and has not served to effectively address the need of societies for well-trained people, instead leading to corruption of a very particular sort and to a failure on the part of privileged minorities to develop the skills and approaches and success that are resented in other, more successful people.  The author's rigor allows him to make a point that is not well appreciated, and certainly can be considered as politically incorrect, but truthful in a larger sense that deserves to be recognized.  Whether or not you will be able to appreciate this book will depend largely on whether you prefer to focus on empirical matters or on the "good intentions" of affirmative actions policies.

This particular book is a relatively short one at about 200 pages, and it is focused on affirmative action around the world and the results of that.  The book begins with a preface and a chapter that gives the international perspective of affirmative action and introduces the approach of the book (1).  After that the author explores affirmative action in India (2), where dalits and tribes and "other" groups have managed to have for decades privileges that have led to a high degree of resentment.  The author then looks at Malaysia and the way that Malays have sought to enshrine privilege as opposed to the more successful (and harder working) Chinese and Indians (3).  The author discusses the affirmative action in Sri Lanka that sought to favor the Sinhalese against the Tamil that led to an immense and deadly politicization about identity (4).  After that the author explores the similar problems where the Fulani-Hausa were favored over Ibo and Yoruba in Nigeria, also with tragic and deadly effects (5).  The author at least turns to the American experience and the way that intersectionality has led to a majority of people being viewed as oppressed minorities, but without the statistical rigor that other countries have had (6), finally ending with a look at the past and the future of affirmative action, as well as notes and an index.

What is it that makes affirmative action so harmful?  For one, it politicizes identity and encourages those who are not at all disadvantaged classes from enshrining their sense of privilege with the protection of law.  It also creates a widespread feeling in a given society that some people for reasons of identity are given undeserved blessings and taking places that should belong to those who deserve it more.  Affirmative Action also creates a perverse set of incentives that inspires the Ali-Baba sort of corruption where a privileged person lends their name and identity to an effort that is actually run by a disadvantaged but more motivated and talented group, like a Chinese business manager in Malaysia or a white American who wants to use a token minority owner in order to obtain scarce government contracts.  The desire to help those who have historically had less success than others often leads to perverse situations where people seek to claim identities they may not really deserve in order to gain from the politicized identity that receives privilege, and moreover a privilege that demeans the achievements of those who have received it, because there is the awareness that it is done with lower standards than others have demonstrated in achieving their own success.

[Leandro Texeira · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thomas Sowell deveria ser mais lido no nosso país. Esse livro que agora resenho é um estudo bem detalhado sobre ações afirmativas em diversos países do mundo. O que o autor pretendeu foi avaliar quais foram os resultados daquelas ações quando retiradas do mundo das ideias e aplicadas no mundo real. A conclusão obtida foi que medidas afirmativas são julgadas e continuam sendo aplicadas por causa de suas intenções, e não por causa dos seus efeitos.

Primeiro, as ações afirmativas nem sempre são criadas para beneficiar minorias. O que ocorre é que há grupos mais preparados do que outros e possuem vantagem sobre os demais, e isso não tem tanto a ver com quantidade.

Segundo: quando se estabelecem cotas, há migração de pessoas de um grupo para outro, especialmente para usufruir das vantagens concedidas àquela cota. Assim, se há cotas para negros ou índios, pessoas vão se declarar dessa forma para obter o benefício que não teriam se se declarassem de outra forma.

Terceiro, há existência de muita fraude. Em alguns países onde há cotas que exigem determinadas etnias em determinadas posições na sociedade - como por exemplo na administração de empresas -, muitos representantes daquelas etnias são usados como "testas-de-ferro", servindo apenas de fachada para o verdadeiro dono e administrador. Em geral isso é feito para obter vantagens em contratos com o governo.

Quarto, uma ação afirmativa é, em tese, de aplicação temporal delimitada. Na prática, os programas são continuadamente renovados e ampliados para abranger outros grupos distintos e com justificativas bem diferentes daquelas usadas para implementar a ação.

Quinto, a ação afirmativa pretende dar oportunidades a todos os elementos de determinado grupo social (raça, etnia, sexo, etc), mas na prática só beneficia os membros mais abastados e preparados dentro daquele grupo. Em resumo, a cota beneficia apenas aqueles que, em geral, não necessitam dela.

Sexto, ações dentro da esfera universitária não aumenta a representação dos grupos sociais, quando analisado o quadro completo (país todo), apenas há uma migração, um deslocamento de alunos de um lugar para outro. O autor traz o exemplo americano, onde muitos beneficiados com a ação afirmativa estão 'descasados' com a universidade onde estudam. Os alunos da cota poderiam entrar, tranquilamente, por méritos próprios, em outras universidades do país; contudo, por causa das cotas, entram em universidades mais rigorosas, embora com notas menores do que aqueles que entram sem o benefício. O resultado é que mais de 40% destes estudantes 'descasados' não consegue terminar o curso, e os que conseguem tem desempenho inferior aos seus colegas. A sociedade como um todo acaba prejudicada com a formação de profissionais em menor número e com qualidade inferior.

Sétimo, as ações afirmativas para grupos étnicos têm sido usadas como ferramenta de uso político. Ou seja, se determinado grupo social é subrepresentado em alguma instituição, políticos com interesses particulares manipulam esse grupo para alçar vantagens políticas (i.e. voto), pouco importando o resultado prático da ação (casos narrados no livro mostram que a ambição política levou a guerra civil em diversos países). Há, portanto, motivações políticas na implementação das cotas que só na sua nomenclatura se indica o propósito de representação e igualdade.

Oitavo, ninguém quer fazer perguntas sobre os resultados das ações afirmativas com medo de sofrer represálias ou ser chamado de racista. Mesmo os professores de universidade pensam assim: particularmente, não gostam das cotas, mas, publicamente, afirmam que são boas. Grandes debates têm sido feitos sobre a possibilidade de fazer votações secretas ou não nos conselhos universitários, justamente pela percepção de que um escrutínio secreto traria respostas diferentes para questões relacionadas às ações afirmativas.

Nono, em muitos países onde havia grupos com grande desigualdade de renda não havia muitos conflitos intergrupos, o que mudou drasticamente conforme foi se politizando essa diferença. Em busca da suposta igualdade, ressentimentos foram instalados de parte a parte com as ações afirmativas implementadas. Embora o discurso seja o de estabelecer uma 'unidade nacional', o que se vê é que os grupos cada vez mais estão se isolando uns dos outros, a ponto de retirar pessoas do grupo contrário de ônibus e tacar fogo nela (caso narrado no livro).

Dez, os resultados obtidos conforme as intenções propaladas são pífios. Entre os diversos exemplos mencionados, está o dos negros americanos. Quando a escravidão foi abolida, +-80% dos negros estava na linha da pobreza e miséria. Em alguns poucos anos, antes do aparecimento de qualquer tipo de ação afirmativa, tal porcentagem reduziu para +-40%. O autor acusa que esses números são ignorados pelos advogados das ações afirmativas. A melhoria de vida dos negros após a implementação dos programas afirmativos não chegou a 10% após várias décadas, e isso se desprezarmos as diversas manipulações estatísticas feitas para provar o funcionamento das cotas, também mencionadas no livro.

O livro é, enfim, muito bom, recheado com dados e faz as perguntas que ninguém quer fazer.

[Chris McCartney · Rating 5 out of 5]

Doing what he does best. Easy to read as per usual, nicely backed up with that seemingly forgotten
little thing we have these days, good ol fashioned facts.

[Monty · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this if you really want to learn how the world works. Mr Sowell is a genius!

[Bruce · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sowell is one of our very best authors on social science and race in particular. In this 2005 examination, he looks at the intentions and consequences of AA in India, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Nigeria, and the US. The US is different than most of these other nations in that the groups trying to be assisted in our country are in the minority of the population, as opposed to Malaysia, for example, where AA is a reaction to minorities having gained an outsized share of wealth and prominence than their share of the population. Also, the US is a relative late-comer to the application of AA.

Common elements to AA programs around the world are that they start as temporary means but become permanent (no defined endpoint and a class of politicians and administrators who benefit from the programs); the primary benefits going to the wealthiest members of the defined class, with little benefit to the most needy; a lack of data or measures on what constitutes success, instead being evaluated by anecdote; and a growing resentment among those who are negatively impacted. The range of that pushback varies greatly, with the worst instance mentioned here the long and bloody civil war in Sri Lanka.

Sowell focuses his US analysis primarily on the application of AA to black people, although he posits that it is women (of any race) who have gained far more from the programs here. He shows how the original intention of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to ensure that all members of society were treated equally, over time got used for the creation of AA programs, which are in practice the exact opposite of the language and intention of the 1964 legislation. This evolved primarily in the 1970's, as the focus of Federal legal administration, with all good intentions, changed from equality of opportunity towards equality of outcomes. The author presents evidence that much or all of the improvement of black families social measures (income percentiles, e.g.) pre-dated AA programs as that group lifted itself up 'by its bootstraps' before the advent of AA.

[Carl Buckfield · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another masterpiece by Sowell. A tour-de-force of examining affirmative action policy outcomes from different countries around the world. This book is not concerned with the theoretical pros and cons and reasoning for affirmative action. It deals with how effective the policies have been and what material outcomes they produced. Sowell looks at India, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, Nigeria and compares them to the USA. He looks at what happens when the minority and majority groups in these regions get preferential treatment. Patterns emerged time and time again; history repeating itself.

1) Affirmative action policies expand in duration and scope of who they are meant to help.

2) in cases where employment of the prefered group increases after policies are enacted, that group already had substantial increase prior to policy.

3)The most disadvantaged on the SES scale often do not benefit and the most privileged of the prefered group get benefits they do not need.

4) Affirmative action often leads to mediocrity either by underqualified people getting jobs. Or people in the prefered group not preparing as much as they need because they know they'll be successful regardless or the disadvantaged group not trying hard because they know there is no point.

5) social resentment between groups. This can be slight such as believing someone only get the job because they are a diversity hire. Mild strife between groups or protesting. Or severe riots and intergroup violence.

Sowell makes a compelling case that affirmative action has failed everywhere it has been tried. The solution for tackling group disparities is not at the university admissions or job recruitment level, but much earlier in childhood. This book was published in 2004. I would love to read an updated version for modern day madness.

[Felipe Costa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thomas Sowell deixa claro, desde o início do livro, que seu objetivo não é analisar as ações afirmativas segundo as intenções das políticas, mas segundo seus resultados.

Sowell já havia afirmado que os fatos o haviam distanciado na esquerda, espectro político que ele já havia se identificado, o livro dá algumas motivos empíricos para nos distanciarmos das cotas e rejeitá-las.

A análise do economista americano leva a algumas conclusões, dadas no próprio livro, que são: as ações afirmativas atingem apenas os mais afortunados dos grupos preferenciais; os atritos entre etnias não são fruto da desigualdade, mas da politização dessa desigualdade; uma vez que uma desigualdade seja politizada dificilmente a situação de paz entre as etnias voltará; períodos que antecederam a criação de ações afirmativas em países como Malásia, Índia, EUA, Sri Lanka e Nigéria foram mais proveitosos para as minoriad que após a sua criação; os graduados pelas cotas, que são poucos com relação aos que entram nas universidades, dificilmente conseguem passar em exames de ordem.

Porém, as principais conclusões do estudo de Sowell são: as diferenças entre etnias são causadas mais pelos descuido das próprias etnias do que por preconceito ou por situação situação passada da mesma etnia; e, como já diria Reagan, emprego (e crescimento econômico) é o melhor programa social.

Ação afirmativa ao redor do mundo é um ótimo livro e ainda tem que ser discutido e analisado antes de qualquer discussão sobre cotas raciais/sociais.

[Rezdar Bakri · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is as straight forward as it can get.

In short, the book argues that the implementation of affirmative actions makes things worse.

How can something that's supposed to heal societies and help the unfortunate, instead lead to Civil Wars?

Thomas Sowell wastes no time with semantics. Instead, he draws from decades of historical evidence, across different cultures from all over the world.

This book could've easily have been told as an eloquent story that plays on your emotional mind which in the end determines how you should feel about it all.

If this would be the case, the book would probably be mainstream.

But here, sentence by sentence, you're just being hammered with facts. What you do with the facts are up to you. And that's the beauty of this book.

Sometimes, I would burst into laughter. My jaw dropped. And other times, I was just shaking my head in sheer dissapointment in our world.

You will discover the many ways that affirmative action has been implented.

You will learn of all the arguments that are used to justitify affirmative action.

And how they collapse in the face of the results.

It will stimulate your mind and raise important questions.

But perhaps most important, you will be equipped with the right foundation to make a positive change in the world.

I was 10 years old when this book was first publish (2004), yet, it's more relevant than ever in todays increasingly polarizing climate.

If anyone wants to make the world a better place by helping the most unfortunate, this is a must read.

[Mr Ogologo · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is my second Thomas Sowell book and he's rapidly becoming my favourite author when it comes to factual data. He forces one (if one has previously lavished on conjecture and anecdotes as their driving forces for perceived societal ills) to consider the empirical evidence at hand. The fact that he draws from numerous sources to support his assertions on these topics makes it difficult, if not impossible, for one to claim that he's observing things from a sole viewpoint/perspective. I had to take some notes from the book while I was reading it as I discovered some very pertinent things that I didn't know to be the case but be useful in my future discussions and decisions of some of the issues that current life has presented to me.
I was particularly interested by the feelings of injustice from those who have affirmative action almost 'flaunted' before them which results in some kind of backlash towards those who were supposed to benefit from it. Thomas also addressed the fact that the ails suffered in the past cannot be readily understood by those who didn't go through it. With that, I felt he covered all bases very well and I'll have to read that book again as every paragraph mattered. Fantastic piece of work.

[David Drummond · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thought provoking critique of supporting affirmative action based on the theoretical rationale rather than the empirical results. While it makes some assumptions I don't agree with, it is consistent with its arguments and provides detailed and rigorous historical and international context.

It's by no means a page turner, but it does present interesting critiques. For example, it shows how the displacement of 10 applicants creates the understandable, albeit irrational, resentment by a much larger group of rejected applicants who think they all would have been one of those 10 displaced. This can easily lead to grievance politics and/or violence, especially when politicized.

It prioritizes rigor over readability, but it challenges the status quo, and implores the reader to focus on the outcomes of policies, not just the moral justifications. I wish it had more on alternatives rather than only history and critiques, but it has interesting ideas worth thinking about.

[Almir Santos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great work by Sowell collating the actual results of affirmative actions around the world, giving us the reality of the country before and after such actions. Sometimes it leaves you baffled with the rationales that motivate some decisions taken by politicians, judges and leaders, even after its overt failure. Everything revolves around what sounds and feels right, scratching that moral itch that demagogues have and showing it to people, regardless of the — sometimes catastrophic — results.

If you're worried and want to really start to help those unfortunate and disadvantaged people, the first thing to do would be to begin understanding reality, and to understand there's no easy way-out and magical solution for a problem that is present since man is man. Be doubtful to anyone that says otherwise, even more if he's a politician.

[Zhou Xiaozhu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Whether you support or oppose affirmative action, this is a worthy read. Snowell elaborated the negative effects of AA around the world based on his empirical analysis but not on ideals. Since I studied and worked in Singapore and knew many Chinese friends from Malaysia, I found the exposition of the presidential quota for bumiputera, son of the soil, quite resonating. The chapter on AA in US is even more relevant as I heard objections and support to AA policy from many friends. Although the author is very convincing and speaking an authoritative tone, it is dangerous to just listen to one side of argument. Nevertheless, you will find this book informative and insightful on what you think of AA.

[Michael Lugo · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a wonderful book on the unintended consequences involved in race bating. This book is very concise, very data driven, and very well structured. Through the book, Sowell brings the readers through the discriminatory quota systems implemented in India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Sri Lanka (with all the atrocities that this involved there) and finally the US. He really shows the regressive nature of these quota schemes, as well as their corrupting power as shown many times, particularly in university admissions in India and the US. This ought to be required reading for anyone thinking on these issues, and even if one disagrees with Sowell, and his biases, one ought to really try to take a disinterested, data-driven look at the issue, much like Sowell did here.

[NCHS Library]

From the Publisher:
This book moves the discussion of affirmative action beyond the United States to other countries that have had similar policies, often for a longer time than Americans have. It also moves the discussion beyond the theories, principles, and laws that have been so often debated to the actual empirical consequences of affirmative action in the United States and in India, Nigeria, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and other countries. Both common patterns and national differences are examined. Much of what emerges from a factual examination of these policies flatly contradicts much of what was expected and much of what has been claimed.

[Matthew]

Opening paragraph:

“Many – if not most – people who are for or against affirmative action are for or against the theory of affirmative action. The factual question of what actually happens as a result of affirmative action policies receives remarkably little attention. Assumptions, beliefs, and rationales dominate controversies on this issue in countries around the world.

This book addresses the empirical question of just what it does and does not happen in under affirmative action – and to whose benefit and whose detriment.”

[Luka · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very well researched, however I found that many of the issues covered in the US chapter he covered before in several books so it was kind of boring having to re-read everything again

The chapter on India was the most interesting by far, as well as the impact on integroup tensions which eventually lead to civil war in Sri Lanka and how they were influenced by affirmative action policies

Sowell is my favorite author of all time, I've read at least 90% of the books he has put out so far