Instead, the opposite appears to have happened. When the emphasis is placed on aiding people with certain skin colors or ethnic backgrounds, affirmative action sets the races further apart than before. Could this be just another form of segregation? The attempts at boosting minorities to the level of the others have grotesquely failed. To raise minorities the government has pushed down the majority group, fueling racial conflicts. In addition, lowering the bar for minorities for admission into jobs or schools has created a harmful atmosphere for them. Because some of them could not originally qualify on merit and skills, many face failure or extra hardship when they get ushered into their job or school. As Charles T. Canady said in his speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D. C., "Preferences do nothing to help develop the skills necessary for the economic and social advancement of the disadvantaged" (43). Meanwhile the majorities receive punishment because of their lack of a specific skin tone or origin. "Entitlements by race, sex, ethnicity and sexual orientation-categories that in no way reflect merit-" Shelby Steele described, "are at the root of the great social evils in American life" (175). It is unfair to reward or turn away applicants because of something that is only theirs by ascribed means. When prospective college students or job applicants are considered, the competition should be solely based
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.
Not only does Affirmative action prevent discrimination, but also this legislation implemented by the national government can diversify and improve the overall well being of businesses and schools. Sometimes individuals of a minority group are rejected for a position or declined acceptance to a university not because they are inept, but due to outdated stereotypical assumptions that cause an employer or official to reconsider that person. The ideas behind affirmative action prevent unfair labeling from those whose
Affirmative action has a huge negative impact on our economy; it is costly and could destroy the legitimacy of minorities. In the business world, the main concern of an employer should be to hire the most qualified person that will increase productivity. The concern should not be to hire a racially diverse workforce. How can the
Another kind of employment opportunity seeks the best possible applicant for the job. This category includes engineering jobs, management and professorships. In order to keep away from the appearance of racism, consultancy groups may unwillingly employ an analyst who they know will not produce as many good ideas, hospitals may grudgingly employ a surgeon who they know will not be as effective in the ER, and universities will admit students who they know will not be as hard-working. (Daniel Golden, from the Wall Street Journal pg 1)
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.
Systematic exclusion directly relates to affirmative action in a multitude of ways. Affirmative action addresses systematic exclusion of certain individuals based on several different elements including talent, gender or race, all in an attempt to promote each individual to develop, perform and contribute to the best of their ability ("AAAA" 2). This includes abilities in a myriad of fields, including the job market, education, and community. Affirmative action addresses systematic exclusion by opening opportunities to individuals with limited experience and talented backgrounds who have endured constant and persistent discrimination from members of other races and genders ("AAAA" 2). Directly opposite of systematic exclusion is the idea of social utility. This concept says that an increased population of specific minorities or genders would certainly create a balance, resulting in better communities. In addition, members of that minority will be inspired to succeed, for they will see how people of their own race have excelled. One example of social utility is when communities of racial diversity require a diverse police force, for it aids in acquiring trust and dedication of an entire communities populace ("Affirmative Action" 5). Even though equal opportunity and systematic exclusion are, without a doubt, important to the understanding of affirmative action, the most important principle is yet to be discussed.
Affirmative action is an idea that greatly benefits one while providing losses to another group. This is a cause-and-effect relationship, a recurring theme that occurs with these attempts for equality. As either a student or worker gets hired for a job for simply in the case of their skin color or certain superfluous traits, a student may either be admitted to a college in which the coursework is too difficult to handle, or for a job where they have no knowledge of what to do. There exist cases in which students
The lifelong dream of a virtuous student, acceptance into a prestigious college of choice, crushed by the prejudice of a single law. Hopes upon hopes of attaining one’s dream job, demolished due to the same impassive law. Affirmative action, a national dilemma, continues to crush the dreams of many across the country; although meant with noble intentions, affirmative action offers an ineffective, impractical, and useless rectification to correct a historical social evil, the growing imbalance of different ethnicities. Instead of augmenting this common problem, affirmative action plays a critical role in reverse discrimination, equating race to diversity in opinion, and destroying the idea of meritocracy.
When addressing legal issues of diversity in the modern day era, one main topic is brought to discussion, affirmative action. It was put into place by the federal government in the 1960’s and was initially developed to close the gap in relation to the privileged majority and the unprivileged minority in America (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). While it has been controversial since its origin, it remains controversial as critics argue it tries to equalize the impact of so many
Moreover, I doubt very much that individuals who reach top positions through affirmative action are effective models for younger members of their race or sex. What, after all, do they model? A black vice president who got her job through affirmative action is not necessarily a model of how to rise through the corporate meritocracy. She may be a model of how affirmative action can work for the people who find or put themselves in the right place at the right time (Thomas, Jr, 1990).
Discrimination is nothing new to our society or is it something that should be taken lightly and for many decades our Nation has endured many conflicts that have tested the will of Americans over the decades and it is evident that as we have become more diverse so too has our workforce. Although, we are in the twenty first century the goal is to understand why prejudice and discrimination is still so prevalent and how we can do better while trying to bring together our different backgrounds, skills, and experiences still has proven to be an issue that minorities are constantly fighting as they struggle to find there place in society. Through an array of well-educated researchers showing how diversity is nothing new to our society, but if we are to continue to grow and move forward we must be able to understand that with diversification we can foster a strong and inclusive economy that is built to last and nurture a nation that will continue to lead the world as standard setter.
Many critics of affirmative action believe it has failed to achieve its stated goal of equal employment opportunity. A few even believe that it has done more harm than good. A review of the statistics, however, shows
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
Affirmative action supporters make one large assumption when defending the policy. They assume that minority groups want help. This, however, may not always be the case. They fought to attain equality, not special treatment. To some of them, the acceptance of special treatment is an admittance of inferiority. Some would include me. I believe I can become successful on my own. I don’t need laws to help me get a great job. I along with many others who are against affirmative action want to be treated as equals, not as incompetent. Although discrimination is not placed in a well-distant past, affirmative action is an unneeded and drastic remedy for today’s world (Farron, Steven, 2005)