Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Affirmative action and its role in modern world
Arguments for and against affirmative action
Arguments for and against affirmative action
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Affirmative action and its role in modern world
Affirmative action, an idea which began in the 1930s but truly kicked off in the 1960s, consists of a wide variety of programs meant to help level the playing field in both universities and the workplace by making race and gender a consideration in the selection process. While supporters believe affirmative action must stay an active policy so that the United States can continue to strive for proportional equality in higher level jobs and education, opponents argue positions should be awarded on an individual basis based on merit alone. Although affirmative action policies have done impressive work creating these opportunities, it is now time to question if, after 40 years, this method is working and should be continued, if the current policies are no longer effective and the negative costs now outweigh the possible benefits and a new approach should be put into place. Affirmative action is a label for a large range of programs, but all of these methods began for one reason: as a way to fight racism. There were voluntary efforts and mandatory laws enacted in order to accomplish this feat (Wu par 6). It was begun under President Johnson with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and was followed by his Executive Order 11246, both of which emphasized the fair treatment and employment of minorities. Two years later, women were added to the list. Today affirmative action benefits women, racial and ethnic groups, and the physically, mentally or emotionally disabled to the detriment of white males (“affirmative action” par 1). Due to affirmative action’s efforts, doors have been opened allowing for the equalizing of opportunity in the United States, seen in the types of people working in places such as police and fire departments, as w... ... middle of paper ... ...05 Sep 2009. . Sitkoff, Harvard. "Affirmative action." Postwar America: A Student Companion. n.p., Oxford University Press. 2000. n.pag. eLibrary. ProQuest LLC. HAYFIELD SECONDARY SCHOOL. 05 Sep 2009. . Wolfe, Alan. "Most Americans Want to Revise Affirmative Action." Opposing Viewpoints: Interracial America. Ed. Mary E. Williams. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2001. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. HAYFIELD SECONDARY SCHOOL. 5 Sep. 2009 . Wu, Frank H. "A new thinking about affirmative action." Human Rights. 01 Jul 1999. 19. eLibrary. ProQuest LLC. HAYFIELD SECONDARY SCHOOL. 05 Sep 2009. .
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...
Another article titled “The Painful Truth About Affirmative Action” (Source B) by Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor Jr. takes a similar stance, but walks the reader through an alternative route in reaching a conclusion by discussing the negative aspects of AA on minority students. A third article by the name of “Actually, we still need affirmative action for African Americans in college admissions. Here’s why” (Source C) by Valerie Strauss provides input from the other side of the spectrum by arguing that AA is still needed. While source A provides an extremely biased perspective on affirmative action and does little to persuade the audience with its weak language, source B presents a slightly stronger argument against affirmative through its descriptive language and academic tone, which appeals to the reader but fails to address the opposite side of the dispute. However, source C offers the most compelling argument through its thorough analysis of affirmative action that considers both sides of the spectrum with strong diction and formal tone to effectively convey its ideas to the
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.
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
Affirmative action is perhaps the political hot potato of the decade. Its divisiveness has escalated racial tensions all across the nation, in forums political and academic. It also creates problems on a daily basis for millions of Americans in the workforce, education, housing, and so forth. Affirmative action, by its very definition, uses discrimination to attempt to create equality. Its ultimate goal is to make everyone equal to everyone else- intellectually, ability-wise, and (dare I say?) socially. What the proponents of this racial and gender communism do not realize is that society can only function in the absence of complete equality. Society is always in need of someone - be it a nationality, religion, or gender - to look down on. This point is most clearly made in the short story Those Who Walk Away From Omelas, a 1973 work by Ursula K. Leguin. The central message of Omelas is that society needs a pariah- someone to look down on in order to maintain its own happiness.
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.
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.
For many years, people have presumed that Affirmative Action has played and continues to play a vital and important role in the lives of most minorities . However, some people have raised questions about the effectiveness of Affirmative Action. Since it's conception, it has been believed that in some instances, Affirmative Action has been more harmful then helpful. One may ask the question, is Affirmative Action really worth fighting for? Some may argue, that if it had not been for Affirmative Action, the minority unemployment rate would be much higher.
Nacoste, Rupert W. (1987) Affirmative Action in American Politics: Strength or Weakness? Political Behavior, Vol. 9, No. 4, 291-304.
Pojman, Louis P. "The Case Against Affirmative Action." Csus.edu. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 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...
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 ... ...
Tanabe, C. (2009). From the courtroom to the voting booth: Defending affirmative action in higher education. Philosophy of Education Yearbook, 291–300.
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.
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....