Affirmative Action : Discrimination And Ethnicity Essay

There are many supporters and opponents of Affirmative Action. The focus of Affirmative action is meant to be an attempt at equality throughout society. Every sector in America would be equal and unprejudiced. On the other hand, adopting affirmative action would force many employers to replace hard-working employees with those possibly less qualified simply due to their gender or ethnicity. Throughout history, people have been categorized into different groups. These groupings were based on certain characteristics people shared, whether it was their ethnicity, race, gender, or religion. Society is notorious for distinguishing among different groups and favoring one or two of them. Undoubtedly, this separation of peoples, led to increased tension between various groups. As time progressed, the conflicts intensified, and it became apparent that a change was necessary. So I intend to educate the reader on the origin of Affirmative Action; how it impacted the American society; is it still needed in today’s environment; what are some of the drawbacks or issues that came from implementing Affirmative Action, and finally what is the most beneficial aspect from Affirmative Action. One of the most famous quotes about Affirmative Action comes from President Lyndon Johnson who explained the rationale behind the use of affirmative action to achieve equal opportunity in a 1965 speech: “You do not take a person, who for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring

In the reading “At the Elite Colleges” by Peter Schmidt the nature of admissions in top colleges was discussed in relation to class and race status. Schmidt states that affirmative action is often serving white populations of upper middle class females rather than those in minority races and ethnicities. This was a great relevant point, especially when considering why affirmative action was proposed and enacted in the first place. Affirmative action was created to serve those who are part of groups who had been quashed in some way by oppression. This stands in stark contrast. Colleges often make excuses for these undeserved admissions because, they are looking for future donors or are aiding an athlete. However, this is still inexcusable. On

Proponents of affirmative action believe that it is a necessary step toward racial equality. Opponents argue on the basis of “reverse racism,” which claims that affirmative action keeps certain members of the majority ethnic group out of jobs or other positions that they deserve solely because of quotas that must be filled. The positive effects of affirmative action are the basis behind the arguments of those who support considering ethnicity and race as a part of admissions.

Presenting the understandings of the mechanisms that created affirmative actions in order to change the common misconceptions and “reposition the direction that we think, talk and act about affirmative action” (xi). His intention is to shift the focus of the readers in three different ways, The first way is to change how we view the history of affirmative action. The second shift in focus is how we understand affirmative action and what we think about when we hear those words. Katznelson points out that when we hear affirmative action we only think about it in terms of top jobs and higher education. While poverty and inequality are not as prevalent in our discussions of affirmative action. The last of the three is “placing affirmative action on more secure ground by binding new deal and fair deal history to the argument about when, why and how should count in crafting todays policies” (xii). Katznelson is focused on the history and our perception of affirmative action. As stated in the book he believes many different authors have covered the subject of affirmative action in relation to moral, constitutional and practical issues, nor is it an attempt to perform a historical analysis on affirmative

The revered civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” In other words, don’t discriminate people because of their race. This should hold true in all aspects of life. Every American deserves an equal opportunity to succeed, which is why affirmative action is inherently racist. Affirmative action refers to various government policies that aim to increase the proportion of minorities and women in jobs and educational institutions historically dominated by white men. The policies usually require employers and institutions to set goals for hiring or admitting minorities. It is responsible for colleges discriminating against Eastern Asians and whites and for employers hiring workers based off of skin color rather than skills or experience. People can’t change their race (except for former president of the Spokane N.A.A.C.P. chapter, Rachel Dolezal, apparently), yet many colleges and employers favor certain races over others by using quotas, or a fixed number of people of each race.

Is affirmative action in higher education needed? This question provokes a myriad of emotions. Is affirmative action antiquated and unneeded in 21st century America? Or are the racial boundaries of this country’s ancestors still in effect? America’s Declaration of Independence states, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” yet quotas, check marks, and plus factors give minority students advantages in the admission processes of the country’s universities and colleges (NARA).

Affirmative Action began in 1965 when President Johnson signed the Executive Order 11246 in to law. The Executive Order prevents federal contractors from discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The phrase “affirmative action” was first coined, when federal contractors were required to take affirmative action to ensure that applicants were not discriminated against in anyway. When affirmative action was created, it only included minorities. In 1967, Johnson decided to expand the program to include women because women were discriminated against much like minorities. In the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s, affirmative action was a method used to stop

Affirmative action in higher education should be abolished. College admissions should be based on what the admissions board is looking for, not what the government says should be required. In this paper, I will present evidence to support that position.

Every year, millions of students apply to colleges and universities in the United States. The status of their application, whether they get accepted to or rejected by the school of their dreams, may ultimately be determined by two words: affirmative action. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines affirmative action as an effort to correct past injustices, means to right the wrongs of the past, positive steps to correct past discrimination (Affirmative 1). However, for those exceedingly qualified members of a majority group who do not get accepted while less qualified minority members do, affirmative action begins to insinuate reverse discrimination, the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities (Reverse 1). Affirmative action is a topic of contention that has been disputed in the court systems for roughly four decades. It is now time that affirmative action in college admissions be abolished because it erroneously implies that diversity is more imperative than merit and unjustifiably discriminates

On a personal level, society needs a shift in its approach to race. Instead of creating divisions, Americans should try to understand their biases. Recently, initiatives with this goal have sprung up in universities. Soon after the Civil Rights Act, many universities in America implemented affirmative action initiatives, which sought to level the playing field between white and minority applicants, the latter traditionally having a disproportionately low acceptance rate. Doing so increased the minority population on campuses and brought the issue of discrimination to the forefront of national attention. By acknowledging historical patterns of discrimination and taking explicit action to reverse that trend, a peaceful method to decrease racial inequality emerged. However, white applicants have protested affirmative action, labeling it “reverse discrimination.” Yet this only emphasizes the faults in racial understanding – members of traditionally privileged groups recoil at the notion of elevating minorities, not realizing that their lower starting place necessitates a boost later. For unity, both groups must reach a mutual understanding about race’s role in modern society.

College is a privilege that is now accessible to many people. It has not always been this way though. Lack of money, being deprived of representation, or racism hindered one’s chances in to getting into higher education, especially a minority’s chance. In order to raise against the barriers, President John F. Kennedy created the affirmative action program to provide equal opportunities for everyone, whether in education or in the workforce. Even if this was a program created in the 1960’s, problems continue to present itself as shown through the many court cases, such as Brown vs. Board of Education, Fisher vs. University of Texas, Grutter vs. Bollinger et al, and Hopwood vs. State of Texas. Thus, racial inequality and affirmative action

As a testament to the next discussion point of opportunities, especially within the realm of college admission, I have experienced firsthand the opportunities presented by affirmative action. As a low-income, first-generation college student, Virginia Tech had offered me a full scholarship based solely on merit and financial need. As a “minority” according to Virginia Tech, I had an

Affirmative Action has been an issue of contention since its inception during the Civil Rights struggles of mid 20th century America. Discrimination could no longer be tolerated and the Unites States government had an obligation to encourage equality at all levels of the social infrastructure. The main type of discrimination being addressed by Affirmative Action programs was racial discrimination. The Merriam Webster dictionary defines racism as: ‘a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.’ The Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibited discrimination of any kind, laid the foundation for the introduction of Affirmative Action

A major controversy encompassing the country is the issue of affirmative action. Many believe that the abolition, or at least restructure, of affirmative action in the United States will benefit the nation for many logical reasons. Originally, affirmative action began as an attempt to eliminate discrimination and provide a source of opportunity; affirmative action did not begin as an attempt to support just minorities and women. In addition, affirmative action naturally creates resentment when the less qualified are preferred instead of the people actually deserve the admission or job. Another reason that has existed since the abolition of slavery is the myth that women and ?minorities? cannot compete

The idea of Affirmative action was first brought up by JFK to ensure equality in employment for all people regardless of their race, creed, color, or national origin. However, Many institutions such as college took advantage of “equality” as an excuse to admit students based on their race rather than their merits. AB 1726, also known as the Accounting for Health and Education in API Demographics (AHEAD) Act, was first proposed by California Assemblyman Rob Bonta (California Legislative Information). It is a data disaggregation bill that intends to help better address the disparity in public health and education among API(Asian Pacific Islander)group by adding additional major Asian groups, including Bangladeshi, Hmong, Indonesian,