John Skrentny (2004) author of The Minority Rights Revolution published in 2004, writes about disadvantaged minorities who were then settled to different Title Acts and movements for the protection of their rights; at times without even being told what they were being given. The main points given out by Skrentny is about affirmative action, Title XI bilingual education. Skrentny firstly starts off by acknowledging how the EEOC spent most of their time focusing on Black individuals without realizing that there were many other minorities that suffered in some of the same ways as Black individuals. Many of the other minorities at this point where making many “complaints” about why they weren’t protected for their rights either, this mostly …show more content…
Affirmative action allows individuals of all backgrounds and cultures to enter the workforce. The only one issue I would really have with this is getting a job because of my race and sex and not because of my qualifications to actually have the job. I also think that this somewhat hides the act that there is still a big issue with discrimination and its disappointing that there would need to be a policy to ensure everybody gets treated equally. This brings me back to when we created Zines which is described as politics from an alternative culture, I created a Zine called “Social Construct” which was basically about how everything made up in our society isn’t real because we’ve made it this way in this zine I say, “The decisions we make are due because of the system simple things as religion and race are constructs of society deemed to separate and join others together (Tarango, 2018, p.2).” It’s odd to have a hierarchy but I suppose it’s just scientifically how humans would be in order to get somewhere but I don’t see why it would have to do with race and
This book was published in 1981 with an immense elaboration of media hype. This is a story of a young Mexican American who felt disgusted with being pointed out as a minority and was unhappy with affirmative action programs although he had gained advantages from them. He acknowledged the gap that was created between him and his parents as the penalty immigrants ought to pay to develop and grow into American culture. And he confessed that he was bewildered to see other Hispanic teachers and students determined to preserve their ethnicity and traditions by asking for such issues to be dealt with as departments of Chicano studies and minority literature classes. A lot of critics criticized him as a defector of his heritage, but there are a few who believed him to be a sober vote in opposition to the political intemperance of the 1960s and 1970s.
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.
The institution of public education has been one of the most controversial establishments in the United States since its inception. More specifically, equality in the conditions and the opportunities it provides has been sought as one of its major goals. There is little doubt that minority ethnic groups have struggled to achieve educational equality, just as they have struggled for equality in other aspects of life. One way that minorities have tried to achieve equality in education is through lobbying for help in college admissions for their respective groups. This social practice has been debated on many grounds, including necessity and ethical permissibility.
Although most ethnic groups do not like to be thought of as different, they do come to enjoy the benefits that come with being labeled as a minority. Affirmative action is a program initiated to try and bridge the gap between white Americans and the minorities that reside in America. In addition, bilingual education is constantly an issue in Southern California, especially when choosing political candidates. In the two books I will be examining, Hunger of Memory by Richard Rodriguez and Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison, both characters in the stories are criticized by their own ethnic groups for not following the path that their parents have laid out for them. Protag, the main character in Invisible Man, chooses to join an organization called the Brotherhood, instead of a similar organization which is made up of all black men. Rodriguez decides to take a stand against affirmative action and bilingual education, two issues which Hispanics have almost always been in favor of. However, the decisions by these two characters to go against the values widely held by members of their ethnic groups causes a great deal of tension. People want to question how devoted the characters are to the cause. Both characters went against the norm and made choices which brought criticism from members of their ethnic groups, but their choices ultimately led to the strengthening of their groups culture in society. First we will look at what may have influenced the character’s choices, followed by the designation of being labeled a scholarship boy may have played in their decisions. Finally we will look at what exactly they did for their ethnic group and some of the differences that exist between the two characters.
Affirmative action, while a great idea in the beginning, is no longer needed to make up for the past discrimination of women and minorities. It does not get rid of discrimination, but rather creates it towards whites and men. Any form of discrimination is wrong, whether intentional or unintentional. Businesses and universities will set aside a separate pool for minorities and women so they don’t have to originally compete against the whole pool of applicants. A person’s qualifications and how they got to where they are should not be questioned because of affirmative action. The only reason some people are still questioned or considered undeserving is because affirmative action still takes place. Getting rid of affirmative action in universities and businesses will eliminate reverse discrimination and ensure that their qualifications, along with achievements, will not be questioned based on the skin color or gender of a
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.
"Minority Rights." Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 11 Mar. 2013. Web. 5 May 2014. .
From its points of origin, the intended use of affirmative action is to ensure that employees and applicants of jobs are treated equally regardless of their race, religion, and national origin. There is no question about this being the right approach. But, as mentioned in the article, when a company qualifies for government subsidies just for selecting a minority over equally qualified non-minorities, it's difficult to argue that affirmative action is working the way it's supposed to be.
According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, affirmative action is “an active effort to improve employment or educational opportunities for members of minority groups and women.” However, despite its well-intentioned policies, it has been the source of much controversy over the years. Barbara Scott and Mary Ann Schwartz mention that “proponents of affirmative action argue that given that racism and discrimination are systemic problems, their solutions require institutional remedies such as those offered by affirmative action legislation” (298). Also, even though racism is no longer direct, indirect forms still exist in society and affirmative action helps direct. On the other hand, opponents to affirm...
The 1960’s were a time of freedom, deliverance, developing and molding for African-American people all over the United States. The Civil Rights Movement consisted of black people in the south fighting for equal rights. Although, years earlier by law Africans were considered free from slavery but that wasn’t enough they wanted to be treated equal as well. Many black people were fed up with the segregation laws such as giving up their seats on a public bus to a white woman, man, or child. They didn’t want separate bathrooms and water fountains and they wanted to be able to eat in a restaurant and sit wherever they wanted to and be served just like any other person.
African Americans have a history of struggles because of racism and prejudices. Ever since the end of the Civil War, they struggled to benefit from their full rights that the Constitution promised. The fourteenth Amendment, which defined national citizenship, was passed in 1866. Even though African Americans were promised citizenship, they were still treated as if they were unequal. The South had an extremely difficult time accepting African Americans as equals, and did anything they could to prevent the desegregation of all races. During the Reconstruction Era, there were plans to end segregation; however, past prejudices and personal beliefs elongated the process.
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...
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.
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” This was a speech by Martin Luther King Jr. Even one hundred years after slavery was banned, African Americans were still being treated unfairly. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the most famous leaders of the Civil Rights movement in the 1960’s. The Civil Rights movement was a movement of African Americans who felt that they were not being treated equally. There were also many other famous leaders and inspirations during the Civil Rights Movement. This movement was very important to the freedom of African Americans.
Affirmative action is not the source of discrimination, but the vehicle for removing the effects of discrimination. The Labor Department report found less than 100 reverse discrimination cases among more than 3,000 discrimination opinions by the U.S. District Court and the Court of Appeal between 1990 and 1994. Discrimination was established in only six cases. The report found that, “Many of the cases were the result of a disappointed applicant…. erroneously assuming that when a woman or minority got the job, it was because of race or sex, not qualifications.”(SF Chronicle, March 31, 1995) Job discrimination is grounded in prejudice and exclusion, whereas affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does.