Dear Daily Northwestern and Sydney Zink,

I was all-together concerned and dismayed by the con opinion of the affirmative action case. While the pro opinion laid out clear facts and points of opinion that support the legality and benefits of affirmative action processes in college admission and the work force, Zink’s column contained little facts of merit, if any. Her claims to the so-called attack on “merit” and her lament to the labeling of some as “RWP” are socially ignorant and precarious statements. While I don’t know of Zink herself, I personally appreciate the diversity of Northwestern’s campus and hope all campuses in the U.S. are similar to the wealth of ideas, races, and personalities we have here. Yet, sadly this is not the case. Most college campuses in the United States are homogeneously white, excluding many minorities the opportunities that these so-called “RWP” take for granted. How dare Zink reference Martin Luther King as an opponent to affirmative action. Yes he argued for an egalitarian society, but a just society also includes giving help to the disadvantaged and creating the building blocks for those in society’s lowest socioeconomic ranks to rise to the top.

I recommend that Zink take a look around her. She is at a predominantly female school with a large LGBT community. Yet according to her these are the groups suffering and not enjoying the breaks that affirmative action provides. Her word choice of “insidious” and “damned” are deplorable as they fail to get at the heart of the issue and only create a facade of anger in which she bases her argument. Zink’s perspective as a white female at one the top universities in the nation complaining about affirmative action does not help her credibility in the least. She comes off as a whiny, spoiled, and insecure member of this community with little to add to the larger debate concerning affirmative action. While I applaud The Daily for attacking an issue this large and so relevant to our community as college students, there is a fine line to walk when arguing against affirmative action. Zink crossed it many times and I’m sure I’m not the only one who believes this is so.

Jonathan Kamel
WCAS 2016
[email protected]