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. At this time, places all around the world began experiencing revolutions of people that were working towards earning their rights. Consequently, governments around the globe began enacting a system of affirmative action, in other words, a system that would give minorities certain advantages in society in order to achieve level the playing field (Hanmer 7). Although affirmative action was established as a means to promote equality, it can prove to have adverse effects, such as discrimination against minorities and whites, and harming society.
Affirmative action in the United States has a long and complicated history. At first, it was developed to promote a more egalitarian society. The goal of this system was to give everyone an equal opportunity. It was intended to change the discriminatory times that led up to its development. As a result, employers, colleges, and universities, had to consider applicants based on merit as opposed to the prior standard of judging people by their appearances (Hanmer 7-11). However, as time progressed, affirmative action began to change and institutions had to have a certain amount of diversity. The system became more specific and organizations had to have a predetermined number of African-Americans, Hispanics, Asians, w...
... middle of paper ...
...elsea, 2004. Print. Point-Counterpoint.
“One Nation, Indivisible.” New York Times 27 Jan. 2011: n. pag. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 4 Nov. 2011.
Puddington, Arch. “Affirmative Action Should Be Eliminated.” 1995. Affirmative Action. Ed. Bruno Leone, et al. San Diego: Greenhaven, 1996. 70-83. Print. Opposing Viewpoints Series.
Raskin, Jamin B. “Society Needs Affirmative Action to Fight Discrimination.” 1995. Affirmative Action. Ed. Bruno Leone, et al. San Diego: Greenhaven, 1996. 22-37. Print. Opposing Viewpoints Series.
Steele, Shelby. “A Negative Vote on Affirmative Action.” 1990. Debating Affirmative Action: Race, Gender, Ethnicity, and the Politics of Inclusion. Comp. Nicolaus Mills. New York: Dell, 1994. 37-47. Print.
Webb, James. “Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege.” Wall Street Journal 23 July 2010: n. pag. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 4 Nov. 2011.
Affirmative action, the act of giving preference to an individual for hiring or academic admission based on the race and/or gender of the individual has remained a controversial issue since its inception decades ago. Realizing its past mistake of discriminating against African Americans, women, and other minority groups; the state has legalized and demanded institutions to practice what many has now consider as reverse discrimination. “Victims” of reverse discrimination in college admissions have commonly complained that they were unfairly rejected admission due to their race. They claimed that because colleges wanted to promote diversity, the colleges will often prefer to accept applicants of another race who had significantly lower test scores and merit than the “victims”. In “Discrimination and Disidentification: The Fair-Start Defense of Affirmative Action”, Kenneth Himma responded to these criticisms by proposing to limit affirmative action to actions that negate unfair competitive advantages of white males established by institutions (Himma 277 L. Col.). Himma’s views were quickly challenged by his peers as Lisa Newton stated in “A Fair Defense of a False Start: A Reply to Kenneth Himma” that among other rationales, the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action (Newton 146 L. Col.). This paper will also argue that the Fair-Start Defense based on race and gender is a faulty justification for affirmative action because it cannot be fairly applied in the United States of America today. However, affirmative action should still be allowed and reserved for individuals whom the state unfairly discriminates today.
To sum everything up, we as a human race are not perfect, nor will we ever make solutions that will satisfy both side of arguments. One lesson we can learn from this research paper, however, is that everyone should have the ability to fully enjoy their Equal Protection Clause under the Fourteenth Amendments. Nonetheless, the development of reverse discrimination, the creation of stigma against women and minorities, the buildup of racial tension, and the fact of attempting to solve a racial problem that no longer exist all contributed to the danger of affirmative action. It may be created with good intentions, but certainly not applicable to our society now if all of us wish to be treated equal.
Fryer, Roland G. Jr., and Glenn C. Loury. 2005. "Affirmative Action and Its Mythology." Journal
Subconscious prejudices, self-segregation, political correctness, reverse discrimination, and ignorance all wade in the pool of opinions surrounding affirmative action and racial animosity. With racial tensions ever present in this country, one might question whether the problems can be solved by affirmative action.
Jones, Ed. “Is affirmative action necessary? NO: It’s time to judge on merit.” Denver Post 24 July 2003: B,07.
Nacoste, Rupert W. (1987) Affirmative Action in American Politics: Strength or Weakness? Political Behavior, Vol. 9, No. 4, 291-304.
Skrentny, John David. The Ironies of Affirmative Action: Politics, Culture, and Justice in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Pojman, Louis P. "The Case Against Affirmative Action." Csus.edu. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2014.
McKenna, George, and Stanley Feingold. "Does Affirmative Action Advance Racial Equality?" Taking Sides. 18th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2013. N. pag. Print.
3.The term Affirmative action has played a huge role in the past one hundred years of American politics. It is simply defined as an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer. Civil Rights of American citizens have drastically changed because of Affirmative action. With almost anything in politics, there is a debate for and against Affirmative action. Supporters of this say that this helps encourage e...
After long years of suffering, degradation, and different sorts of discrimination which the disadvantaged group of people had experienced, the “Affirmative Action Law” was finally passed and enforced for the very first time on September 24, 1965. The central purpose of the Affirmative Action Law is to combat racial inequality and to give equal civil rights for each citizen of the United States, most especially for the minorities. However, what does true equality mean? Is opportunity for everyone? In an article entitled, “None of this is fair”, the author, Mr. Richard Rodriguez explains how his ethnicity did not become a hindrance but instead, the law became beneficial. However, Mr. Richard Rodriguez realized the unfairness of the “Affirmative Action” to people who are more deserving of all the opportunities that were being offered to him. Through Mr. Rodriguez’s article, it will demonstrates to the reader both favorable, and adverse reaction of the people to the Affirmative Action, that even though the program was created with the intention to provide equality for each and every citizen, not everyone will be pleased, contented, and benefit from the law.
Tairo, Mario. "A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal." A Critical Look at Affirmative Action - Panorama - TakingITGlobal. Taking It Global, 05 Apr. 2005. Web. 01 May 2014.
Today there is considerable disagreement in the country over Affirmative Action with the American people. MSNBC reported a record low in support for Affirmative Action with 45% in support and 45% opposing (Muller, 2013). The affirmative action programs have afforded all genders and races, exempting white males, a sense of optimism and an avenue to get the opportunities they normally would not be eligible for. This advantage includes admission in colleges or hiring preferences with public and private jobs; although Affirmative Action has never required quotas the government has initiated a benefits program for the schools and companies that elect to be diversified. The advantages that are received by the minorities’ only take into account skin color, gender, disability, etc., are what is recognized as discriminatory factors. What is viewed as racism to the majority is that there ar...
Affirmative action has been a controversial topic ever since it was established in the 1960s to right past wrongs against minority groups, such as African Americans, Hispanics, and women. The goal of affirmative action is to integrate minorities into public institutions, like universities, who have historically been discriminated against in such environments. Proponents claim that it is necessary in order to give minorities representation in these institutions, while opponents say that it is reverse discrimination. Newsweek has a story on this same debate which has hit the nation spotlight once more with a case being brought against the University of Michigan by some white students who claimed that the University’s admissions policies accepted minority students over them, even though they had better grades than the minority students. William Symonds of Business Week, however, thinks that it does not really matter. He claims that minority status is more or less irrelevant in college admissions and that class is the determining factor.
The focus of this paper is on the history of affirmative action and its relevance to our society. Affirmative action focuses on the importance of equality and equal opportunity among all people in terms of education and employment. In coordination with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunities Act of 1972, the affirmative action policy was submitted by federal agencies. Is it not true that ethnic minorities do not have the same opportunities in life as whites, and that women should be entitled to the same opportunities as men? This act is only a means to help the less advantaged members of our society. In this case the less advantage would be those of color and women (www.infoplease.com).