Yeah but the point that is trying to be made is that, on average, minorities DO NOT have the access to that "stack of LOR's", or are otherwise positively networked, as whites. And that's a fact supported by the demographics.
That is the real point that needs to be stressed. It is also the reason why affirmative action doesn't sit well with people, nor works effectively for that matter. For the record, I oppose affirmative action, but for a different reason than most people disapprove of it.
Calling it for what it is, affirmative action intends to circumvent the biggest subjective factor that differentiates the bulk of whites and non-whites: social connection. The outcome of this circumventing is an obvious distaste for what is perceived as "shortcutting" and giving people things they didn't earn, when measured by an established metric. (although the objective values of the metrics themselves can be argued as well..but that's another thread)
The problem is that you just can't have the cake and eat it too. If people are going to throw a fit about affirmative action they also have to come to terms with the impending reality that in a white-dominated aviation culture it is fundamentally less likely that minorities will be able to: 1)have access of entry (money and sponsorship, both economical and vocational) and 2)culture support (i.e. support by the culture of aviation, which is white by default, from the mom and pops FBO to the major 121 operators).
Most of the bigger anti-affirmative action loudmouths I know happen to also be of the disposition to deny that there is any fundamental disparity in access and social reach between whites and non-whites, therefore labeling minorities inmoral in their choices, hence why they can't reach goals in aviation ('don't work hard enough' argument), or other fields. I don't think that view is necessarily the prevailing view on the part of whites, but I do suggest it is the prevailing view among whites who benefited more than average from their socio-racial position. So when people argue about affirmative action, the real issue gets lost in the "you didn't deserve that" yelling match. The real question is "what are we going to do about the culture?"
The US Air Force is a great example of the prevalence of the fundamental lack of access to the culture of aviation. The demographics are just blatant. However, I don't have a problem with that when you consider the rationale. They just do not have a need to exercise affirmative action, or any other direct hiring isolation practice, in their pilot selection pool, nor should they. The basis being that they are not going to lower the standards of entry to fulfill their manning needs. And they don't need to. There are sufficient white applicants to fulfill their need. Are they the best? No. But they are good enough. The problem we encounter then is, once again, one of institutional culture. Should the Air Force invest in changing the institutional culture so to foster the aspiration of minority pilots? Unfortunately, the Air Force's answer is NO. Why? Because they don't need to. That and a little bit of they want to keep the cockpit, as opposed to other fields in the Force, white, but that's my soapbox and it would take another thread to tackle that one.
I'll add some comments on the topic of tokenism. I am Hispanic for the record, and in one of my Guard unit visits I encountered a pilot who was also of the same particular Hispanic persuasion as I was. The dialogue went like this:
White-pilot-X: "Yo "John", this kid is (insert ethnicity here) just like you"
"John": "Sorry kid, there's only enough space for one (insert ethnicity) in this squadron"
And deep down inside he wasn't kidding. The biggest detractors to upward mobility to a minority, within a white-dominated culture base is, you guessed it, another minority that shares the same background. And the reason for that is tokenism.
Tokens are NOT the product of affirmative action, tokens are the 90th percentile of the minority group that was able to break through and adapt to the culture, therefore it is a challenge to the standing of a token to have another one come in and devaluate his value in the culture (simple economic case of number of members entering a particular market). And the problem is that the pilot world, both in the civilian and military side, cater to a status quo culture that only is able to induct the top specimens of a particular ethnicity, satisfying both the need to 1) have applicants who can do the job and earned it in their own right (appeasing the whites who argue it was a hand-out), and 2) keeping the culture white as a function of the inherent small numbers of minorities that possess the ability to break through and adapt on their own.
So once again, I too disagree with affirmative action, but not for the "he didn't deserve it" reason that most shout about. I don't think affirmative action tackles the cultural question that is the real culprit in the inability of minorities to make the pilot ranks have a representative percentage of what the demographics of this country are. The unwilligness of people to change, or even feel as though the culture needs changing (this is the most common one), is the real issue. I will never advocate the lowering of safety and standards to appease our social shortcomings (hence my opposition to affirmative action) but I also recognize the unwillingness of the base to change the culture, which ironically is what brings on "fit the d$mn square thru the round hole" measures like affirmative action.
We can't have the cake and it too folks. You have to acknowlege the problem before you can do anything about it. Taking the tangent about affirmative action is reasonable (I agree with you), but just a mere distraction from the real issue.