The paradox is that as long as there are things like affirmative action or scholarships that target specific groups based on ethnicity there will be a need for them. Choosing people based on race rather than merit or need breeds dependence and also sends the message that it's ok for them to be less skilled, knowledgeable or hard working because of "past injustice".
As long as people keep on believing that they're owed something due to their race it's impossible for them to be equal. That belief is the definition of inequality.
I both agree and disagree. I think it is important that merit is the only thing to be considered amongst all things, but I don't see how
scholarships, which again--are generally based on private entities--foster dependence and encourage class status above merit.
The problem is within selection--Once you choose the candidate based on these issues above merit, you foster dependence to this notion. Scholarships, however, simply insure that if the candidate is selected, they will have a means for support. Whatever person or group a private organization chooses to represent, that is their business. It is a fact that blacks and other minorities are underrepresented, and at a very real economic disadvantage to white Americans. This is completely undeniable. Extra support is indeed necessary.
Admissions/selection vs. support are different issues.