There should be no doubt that the intention was to help minorities against discrimination. And don't forget that the historical background was segregation in the 1960s. Also, any good intention must be implemented with an effective action, otherwise they will remain as talk. AA is such an action that gives the minorities a practical better opportunity in employment and education. It also sets a role model for other social progress movement.
AA is not perfect, and people see that. Here is what Bill Clinton says about it:
Let me be clear about what affirmative action must not mean and what I won't allow it to be. It does not mean – and I don't favor – the unjustified preference of the unqualified over the qualified of any race or gender. It doesn't mean – and I don't favor – numerical quotas. It doesn't mean – and I don't favor – rejection or selection of any employee or student solely on the basis of race or gender without regard to merit…
AA can be mended and improved. But AA as an institutional protection should not be taken away, just like PC should be kept all time.
To Chinese, AA does not cause that much damage as we were imagining in high education. Californian, Michigan and several states don't apply AA in college admission. It is also volunteer based in many universities, not mechanically applied as a percentage. UC have >40% and the ivy leagues have >20% Asian students, and we are still complaining. Also in employment, Asians actually are hurt by the glass ceiling in management jobs. AA really has not a lot to do with Chinese, and complaining against AA is absolutely a mistaken reason to support Trump.