Very few people will argue against the unethical nature of the racial segregation that existed in the United States during the early 20th century, and far less so of that which existed in the antebellum South. However, affirmative action can often occupy a moral grey-area for some people, as a form of benign racism or sexism. After all, if its intentions are good, what harm could it do? This is where supporters of affirmative action get it wrong. By giving in to this circularly validated mentality, we are allowing the ends to justify the means. In order to eliminate racial prejudice, affirmative action advocates promote a system that adheres to racial discrimination as a solution. Simply replacing one form of discrimination for another. …show more content…
Affirmative action does not help many members of the lower-class at all, but instead it is most beneficial to the people who do not need the help. A report by the government found that “Economically disadvantaged [minority] students are 25 rimes less likely to be found on selective college campuses as economically advantaged [minority] students . . . 86 percent of black students at the selective colleges studied were from middle or high socioeconomic backgrounds” (U.S. Dept. for ED, Office for Civil Rights 26). Affirmative action not only fails to help the intended group, but also create a stigma around qualified minorities that questions the validity of their achievements. Racial minorities with the appropriate qualifications are often seen by others as charity cases of affirmative action and as needing a handicap in order to get to their position. A position that they reached by displacing other, theoretically more qualified, individuals that did not receive aid based on their race. This create an increase in hostility between minorities and their peers, furthering the development of racial tension instead of eliminating it. This new found animosity has been termed “new racism” (Little 22). Affirmative action has not helped integrate racial minorities into our communities, but instead has given people new means with which to …show more content…
“A racially diverse community needs a racially diverse police force . . . [so] one part of the community is not to feel dominated by the other part" (Bergmann 9). This is a simple, yet effective, illustration of the argument. This sentiment is correct in expressing the importance of diversity and that it is something that should be embraced and respected. However, this argument gains fault based on the fact that it places a priority on diversity over equality and fairness. “Americans value diversity. But they value fairness more” (Leonhardt nytimes.com). Individuals should not receive preference when being considered for a position simply based on the diversity that their presence will bring, but instead on their qualifications, experience, and skill. As Supreme Court Judge John Harlan wrote after the infamous Plessy v. Ferguson ruling in 1896, “Our Constitution in color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens” (14). These are the words that were famously used as a sort of moto by civil rights advocates during the mid-20th century in order to fight against segregation and oppression. Although, now it would seem that affirmative action has brought upon our society somewhat of a devolution, to the point where race, ethnicity, and sex are once again factors when determining one’s
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.
law enforcement agencies. The underrepresentation of Asian-American officers will affect how the Asian community view law enforcement in terms of building credibility and improving community relations (Dempsey & Frost, 2015). As previously stated, the cause of such underrepresentation is due to the fact that law enforcement agencies do not understand the cultural and historical distrust, which Asian immigrants have with law enforcement back in their native countries and here in the United States (Zhao et al., 2013). Underrepresentation of Asian police officers will create conflicts between police and Asian communities (White et al., 2010). The lack of diversity in police departments will also show Asian communities that a police organization does not reflect its community racial
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.
According to Dr. Carl S. Taylor, the relationship between minority groups and police in the United States has historically been strained. Some cities have a deep and bitter history of bias and prejudice interwoven in their past relationships. The feeling in many communities today is that the system pits law enforcement as an occupying army versus the neighborhood. Dr. Taylor wrote about easing tensions between police and minorities, but stated “If there is any good news in the current situation, it is that the history of this strain has found the 1990’s ripe for change.
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...
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.
The government thinks that implementing affirmative action will repair inequality, but it cannot. In the midst of tying to promote equality, they are promoting discrimination. Discrimination is the violation of one’s human rights based on gender, sex, race, ethnicity and/or relation. President Johnson felt that blacks being free and able to go to the same school as Caucasians were not just enough for the past discrimination and turmoil the African Americans went through. Affirmative action was used as a cure to remedy lost times. Sandal made some valid points; he noted that th...
The justice system is in place in America to protect its citizens, however in the case of blacks and some other minorities there are some practices that promote unfairness or wrongful doing towards these groups. Racial profiling is amongst these practices. In cases such as drug trafficking and other criminal acts, minorities have been picked out as the main culprits based off of skin color. In the article “Counterpoint: The Case Against Profiling” it recognizes racial profiling as a problem in America and states, “[In order to maintain national security] law-enforcement officers have detained members of minority groups in vehicles more than whites”…. “these officers assume that minorities commit more drug offenses, which is not the case” (Fauchon). In relationship to law enforcement there has also been many cases of police brutality leaving young blacks brutally injured, and even dead in recent years, cases such as Michael Brown, Dontre Hamilton, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and Freddy Gray just to name a few. Many of these young men were unarmed, and the police involved had no good justification for such excess force. They were seen as threats primarily because of their skin color. Despite the fact this nation is trying to attain security, inversely they are weakening bonds between many of its
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...
Racial bias evolves from generation to generation, and we as citizens are supposed to be protected against such actions of discrimination especially by law enforcement, but such actions as stop and frisk, to include automobile and body searches for no other reason than the color of one’s skin is a violation of our civil rights. Instead of being violated in an inappropriate matter as openly as it was done while fighting for our civil rights, it’s now done through law enforcement. The Constitution is supposed to guarantee equal treatment under the law for everyone, but blacks and Hispanics are disproportionately victimized by police and other front line law enforcement officials. Racial disparities affect both innocent and guilty minority citizens, and are broken down into explanations such as; People of color commit more crimes, The Criminal Justice System is racially bias, and America is a racially bias society (Weich and Angulo, 2002). All of these explanations have been proven true by the actions of law enforcement and society, by using racial profiling as a means to target minority communities. Although, there are efforts
The discrimination against Caucasian and Asian American students a long with the toleration of lower quality work produced by African American students and other minority students is an example of the problems caused by Affirmative Action. Although affirmative action intends to do good, lowering the standards by which certain racial groups are admitted to college is not the way to solve the problem of diversity in America's universities. The condition of America's public schools is directly responsible for the poor academic achievement of minority children. Instead of addressing educational discrepancies caused by poverty and discrimination, we are merely covering them up and pretending they do not exist, and allowing ourselves to avoid what it takes to make a d... ... middle of paper ... ...
Our society has become one that is very diverse. Law enforcement agencies (local, state, and federal) for our changing society need to include an increase representation of women and minorities, definite improvement in leadership skills, and to strengthen community policing. These are all issues of great importance, which are no longer going to be pushed aside.
A police officer is a law enforcement official whose job is to protect and serve all people, not to ignore racial equality. Because the U.S consists of many different races and ethnic groups, the ongoing conflict between police officers and citizens of color is constantly rising. Although police officers today are no longer allowed to have racial bias, which can be described as, attitudes or stereotype used against individuals of color to define their actions and decisions, officers sometimes abuse their authority going around racial impact tools and policies. This results in citizens viewing it as discrimination and mass criminalization. By changing the way laws and regulations unfairly impact Black and Brown communities can improve the justice
Affirmative action policies were created to help level the playing field in American society. Supporters claim that these plans eliminate economic and social disparities to minorities, yet in doing so, they’ve only created more inequalities. Whites and Asians in poverty receive little to none of the opportunities provided to minorities of the same economic background (Messerli). The burden of equity has been placed upon those who were not fortunate enough to meet a certain school’s idea of “diversity” (Andre, Velasquez, and Mazur). The sole reason for a college’s selectivity is to determine whether or not a student has the credentials to attend that school....