Merit and Preferences

The observation that merit is not always the sole factor in hiring, promotions and university admissions obscures the real issue underlying the opposition to preferential policies (“Belief in Meritocracy an Equal-Opportunity Myth,” Fairness or Favoritism?, series, April 30-May 2). State mandates of racial preferences are an abrogation of our freedom, and should not be tolerated in a free society.

In a free society, however, wrong choices tend to be self-correcting. The business that hires and promotes employees on the basis of merit will out-compete the one that forgoes the best people because they belong to the “wrong” group. The profit motive, not government preferences, is the best guarantor of fair treatment of all individuals.

RON M. KAGAN Los Angeles

Harvard grants preferences to alumni children, at the risk of fielding an inferior class whose lifetime accomplishments will pale beside those of a merit-only criteria, advisedly. Government-imposed racial preferences bind everyone, chastening no one for sacrificing merit--no one but America itself. In this competitive world, we must devote our educational resources only to those who can gain the most from them. We must hire and promote based only on who can do the best job.

No large, complex society like ours will ever be a perfect meritocracy. Acknowledging this does not grant to the government the right to mock and trash the ideal. Seizing opportunity and believing that merit counts have enabled many formerly despised groups to enter the American mainstream. Affirmative action (i.e., quotas) is a rejection of our proud history. It elevates government to the role of society’s moral tutor, a role nowhere envisioned in our Constitution. NED McCUNE Costa Mesa

Regarding “Brain’s Use of Shortcuts Can Be a Route to Bias,” May 1:

If it is true that “people see what they expect to see and reject any information that would challenge their already established point of view,” then it follows that individuals who believe, perhaps even unconsciously, that extensive racial and sexual discrimination exist also will interpret all information in such a way as to confirm this belief, despite evidence to the contrary.

SUSAN M. STALZER MD Newport Beach

* What is affirmative action? Isn’t this a A program that gives everyone an equal opportunity regardless of their gender or race, when you are admitted to college, hired for a job and promoted through the ranks? I looked up a definition in the Merriam-Webster dictionary. It says:

“First appeared 1965: an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women.”

Then who are minority groups? Aren’t they people who are a small part of population? Aren’t they people who are less than half of all population, at least? I was wrong again. According to (a March 28 article in this ongoing series):

“Racial and ethnic groups officially counted as ‘minorities’ make up roughly a third of the U.S. population--up from just over 10% three decades ago. Since women are included in most such programs, ‘when you add it all up, about two-thirds of the American population is eligible’ for one form of affirmative action or another, said Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.).”

Times have changed. It’s time to end the program. It’s time to change the definition of minority. THOMAS CHUNG North Hills