A list of must-read publications and vital discussion topics on affirmative action would fill a book of its own if all perspectives and priorities were to be included. The suggestions below are given as a starting point only.

"Is Sisterhood Conditional? White Women and the Rollback of Affirmative Action" by Tim Wise

from NWSA Journal Volume 10, Number 3 (1998)
http://www.iupjournals.org/nwsa/nws10-3.html
Despite the significant benefits to white women from affirmative action programs in education, employment, and contracting; and despite the likelihood that gender discrimination, like its racial counterpart, would intensify in the absence of these programs, white women have been noticeably absent from the front lines of affirmative action's defense—even in the face of open assaults on such policies, like Proposition 209 in California. This paper will first demonstrate the degree to which affirmative action has benefited white women in terms of education and employment; then focus attention on continuing gender bias facing women in the United States—a reality that one might expect to heighten white women's opposition to ending affirmative action; next, the paper will examine the backlash against affirmative action and demonstrate the degree to which white women have been largely silent in the face of this backlash; and finally, the paper will discuss various theories to explain this silence and complicity—with particular attention to the vote in California—and what, if anything, can be done to mobilize white women to defend affirmative action.

"Playing Our Race Card: Reflections on Reverse Discrimination" by Tim Wise

from zmag/znet daily commentaries (April 19, 2005)
http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2005-04/19wise.cfm
Perhaps it would do us some good to put things in perspective. Although many a white conservative is seeking to make more of it than is justified, the recent "reverse discrimination" case arising from New Orleans--in which the city's first black D.A., Eddie Jordan, apparently fired 53 whites in his office and replaced them with African Americans--does not, in fact, signify some larger social trend. It does not indicate a pattern, whereby persons of color are wielding their power to oppress the white majority. It is not evidence of that much-vaunted social pendulum having swung in the other direction, nor proof of the societal equivalence between anti-white and anti-black discrimination. Not by a long shot.

"A Long History of Affirmative Action–For Whites"

(Background material prepared for use with California Newsreel film Race: The Power of An Illusion)
http://www.newsreel.org/nav/title.asp?tc=CN0149
Many middle-class white people, especially those of us from the suburbs, like to think that we got to where we are today by virtue of our merit – hard work, intelligence, pluck, and maybe a little luck. And while we may be sympathetic to the plight of others, we close down when we hear the words “affirmative action” or “racial preferences.” We worked hard, we made it on our own, the thinking goes, why don't ‘they'? After all, the Civil Rights Act was enacted almost 40 years ago. What we don't readily acknowledge is that racial preferences have a long, institutional history in this country - a white history. Here are a few ways in which government programs and practices have channeled wealth and opportunities to white people at the expense of others.

"Affirming Racial Inequality"

A chapter in Mobilizing Resentment: Conservative Resurgence
from the John Birch Society to the Promise Keepers by Jean Hardisty
http://www.beacon.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=957
When the early architects of affirmative action developed it as a policy to benefit African Americans, who had mounted a strong civil rights movement to demand an end to racial discrimination, the right reacted almost immediately. Later, when other people of color and white women began to benefit from affirmative action, many white people continued to see [it] as a program to benefit African Americans. The right often frames the issue to reinforce that perception, perhaps because, in the United States, African Americans are the principal target of white racism, and benefits for Blacks, especially if they are cast as “special” benefits, are politically unpopular among many white voters.

"Shinin' the Lite on White Privilege" by Sharon Martinas (1998)

http://www.prisonactivist.org/cws/sharon.html
In 1996, progressive activists in California waged a massive, multi-racial and militant struggle to save affirmative action. Though we raised the consciousness of millions of people, voters and non-voters, we lost at the ballot box. Fifty-six percent of California's electorate voted "Yes" on Proposition 209, thus wiping out affirmative action in the public sector: in education, employment and contracting… [The vote to preserve affirmation action included:] Asian Americans 61%, African Americans 74%, and Latinos 76%! But the groups organizing among white feminists did not reach their goals. To defeat 209, 55% of white women needed to vote NO. Instead, 57% of white women voted YES! What happened? Most feminists know that white women have been the major beneficiaries of affirmative action in all its spheres. So why did we white women vote overwhelmingly against our own interest as well as against social justice for people of color? To begin to analyze this problem, I believe we have to understand the history and role of white privilege in this country.

Talking Points

You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader 6.0+ to view the Talking Points. Free Download here.

A. Strategies for Affirmative Action Advocacy
B. Affirmative Action Works
C. The Right's Co-opting of "Civil Rights"
D. Follow the Money (Ward Connerly's Backers)
E. White Males Still on Top