Ah, moving goalposts. Now affirmative action is not done when it fixes the US, it's only done when it fixes the
world.
May I humbly suggest that screwing around with hiring policies or college acceptance policies in the US is extremely unlikely to have this effect? If the US refused to employ anyone but black women in any position, anywhere, I do not see how that will solve your problem with the world.
You're still not engaging with my point, either. When is it enough? Give me a criterion for when I know we're done. And since we're not talking about "the world" but the US, when are we done in the US? Now you want 50/50 parity in politics, specifically, to add to all the places where "they" are ahead and still gaining? Can we finally stop if we actually get there, can we finally stop if male-WASPs are underrepresented in all parts of the job market and in all degrees, or will that not be enough either?
I really hate to say this, but this is the sort of argumentation we get on this topic. You refuse to engage with your opponents because you're used to just winning. Wave the flag of racial discrimination and watch the opposition just melt away. You don't have to engage. When discrimination in the US was rampant and it showed in the job market and college degrees, that was probably reasonable. But if you want to explain why we need these policies when we've exceeded proportional representation and are still trending away from proportional representation, you're going to have to actually engage. Why aren't we done here?
(And I don't care about fixing the world for the purposes of this argument. I'm pretty sure that being an American and believing that I must solve the world's racism with my policies is not generally acceptable, rightly so. Now we shouldn't dismantle affirmative action policies because that wouldn't be sufficiently culturally imperialist?)