Motivation Over Money

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

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.

Among the citizens of America affirmative action is a sensitive subject with some seeing it as a necessity to help those who have been repressed and others seeing it as reverse racism. Many Americans may also be conflicted about affirmative action, because it is such a complex issue. People fervently debate affirmative action, because it is a complex issue revolving around one’s own race, experiences, and desires.

This case shows how men and women of all races can be affected by the two headed monster called affirmative action. Affirmative action was established so that members of society such women, minorities or those with handicaps would be guaranteed an honest opportunity to achieve goals, professions or pursue higher education without discrimination. However, when a person’s sex, nationality, social settings and race compete against one another even those the act is intended to protect become

The purpose of affirmative action is to ensure equal opportunity for minorities. But it has strayed from its original intent and has become largely a program to achieve not equal opportunity but equal results. It is a system of quotas forced upon American businesses and working class by the federal government. A law which forces people to look at race before looking at the individual cannot promote equal opportunity. Affirmative action continues the judgement of minorities by race; it causes reverse discrimination, and contradicts its purpose.

On face value, affirmative action accomplishes its’ goals of helping minorities attain opportunities that were once blocked, or still would be blocked due to gender bias, racial discrimination and other injustices. So in that sense, I applaud the policy, because it adequately provides “equality of opportunity”. Personally, I am for affirmative action, but I do not want to benefit from it at all. As contradictory as this sound, I have my reasons as to why personally hold this belief.

Affirmative Action has been around for a very long time, as time progress so have the people of this nation. The people we were in the 50’s and 60’s are significantly different from who we are today. I think that Affirmative Action is a good contribution and should be kept around. When I think about all the great things that minorities can do I don’t see were any harm is being done.

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

In order for there to be unity among the groups that make up America, certain aspects of the “Liberal Individualist” Model and the “Politics of Difference” Model must be used to ensure racial equality. The “Liberal Individualist” Model suggest we remove unjust laws that hinder individuals while the “Politics of Difference” Model wanted to create programs to help disadvantaged minorities. In a sense, both plans will benefit racial groups. When unjust laws are revoked than it eliminates the injustices that the minorities had to face in America. The programs that helps minorities can help give an even playing field to compete with white Americans. Laws concerning affirmative action gave people the opportunity to allow people of color to overcome

Affirmative action is the current method for combatting the systematic racism and general bigotry that has long plagued American society. It is a source of much debate, both from the legal and moral perspectives. When it comes to higher education, it has been the subject of serval Supreme court decisions and many philosophical papers. Affirmative action’s stance makes a statement about how American society intends to handle its problems of bigotry; if it wants to ignore them, or if it wants to choose to face them, and recognize that previsions must be made to rectify the past, and those issues that haunt it in the present.

Affirmative action is actually dividing the country into two different racial categories: all minorities against the majority. This causes severe resentment towards those minorities who are less qualified yet are preferred because they feel sympathy or pity towards them. When trying to apply and qualify for scholarships an applicant will find that the majority of the scholarships are for minority or specific race only descendants. This disqualifies everyone who needs the scholarship, but was not born under a certain type of ancestry.

Affirmative action in theory and in thought is intended to promote the welfare of this country’s minorities by supporting the idea that individuals are equal and should not be judged by race or sex. Therefore, in situations like job and university applications, we should consider minorities to be as feasible a choice for hire as a white male candidate, taking into consideration their background. In short, it tries to give minorities that have been at a disadvantage their whole life, an advantage they have never been open too All things considered, this does not happen. Instead, “quotas” are established and the discrimination that was once placed on the minorities now turns the other way. Let’s make

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)

Some people argue that money is a main motivator through business and job opportunity, but is not always completely true as there are others factors to considers such as working conditions, environment and the peoples we work with. This essay discuss the arguments that are both for and against money being the key motivator in Singapore.