Pang Ying:Hello, I’m Pang Ying. Welcome to the debate in episode 34 of Think Like a Debater. Today’s motion is:Is preferential treatment for disadvantaged groups a form of discrimination?。

Ms. Zhan takes the affirmative and says no; I take the negative and say it is.

This continues the subject of earlier episodes devoted toequality, fairness, and justice, while also reminding you of those programs.

Zhan Qingyun:When did we discuss equality and justice?

Pang Ying:You clearly did not listen. I discussed them.

Zhan Qingyun:Sorry. (Humbly.)

Pang Ying:Fine, nothing happened. Ms. Zhan, please begin.

Zhan Qingyun:Sorry—and thank you.

Familiar examples of preferential treatment include bonus points for ethnic minorities in China’s college entrance exam and, in the United States, a country shadowed by racial discrimination,affirmative actionaffirmative action. It appears in different forms around the world.

India has preferences for certain castes; Ireland, with its history of religious conflict, reserves proportions of government jobs for Roman Catholics and Protestants.

Ever since they appeared, people have debated their effects on groups and social integration. China debates college admissions; in the United States, courts repeatedly ask whether affirmative action is constitutional. I should first introduce views tested by public consensus and litigation.

Supporters favor assistance to disadvantaged groups defined by gender, religion, caste, and especially race, through university admissions, public contracting, government jobs, and other measures.

They usually make two arguments:one looks backward and one forward.。

The backward-looking case says society should compensate groups historically denied justice because of sex or race.

Courts seldom accept this vulnerable argument, and it is now less often used. If Ms. Pang prepared to attack me there, she prepared in vain.

The more rational approach looks forward and asks:What kind of society do we want?。