Affirmative Action: A Counterproductive Policy The term affirmative action was first introduced in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy but was imposed by President Lyndon B. Johnson. Kennedy used it to compensate for the discrimination that people had to endure, even with the help of civil laws and constitutional assurances. These active measures are to help minorities obtain college and job opportunities that are equal to those white’s acquire. These opportunities include promotions, salary increases, career advancement, school admission, scholarships, and financial aid ("History and Debate of Affirmative Action."). Without this special opportunity, these deprived groups may not have been able to surpass the impediments of their minority. …show more content…
Affirmative action should be removed because it is more harmful than beneficial in both academics and careers. Minority groups are given different criteria to meet when applying to college. This is an attempt to compensate for the hardships many minority groups had to face in history. As examined by Hoover Institution’s Thomas Sowell this advantage benefits minority applicants from middle and upper class backgrounds. As a result of admissions using a zero sum game, which is where one person’s gain is another person’s loss, these preferences hurt some applicants who meet admission standards in unequal numbers (Sacks and Thiel). If this predilection were genuinely meant to redress disadvantages, it would not be given on the basis of ethnicity. Supporters of affirmative action claim that affirmative action advocates diversity. But if diversity were the goal, then …show more content…
The problem is determining if a person’s ability and character is devalued due to this preference for minority groups. Affirmative action is often abused when people use their ethnicity rather than workmanship or skill level to receive a job or college opportunity. Through the years after President John F. Kennedy first introduced affirmative action, there has not been significant steps toward equality of the races in the workplace or schools. Therefore, new actions and plans should be put in place to help solve this on-going
Media plays an essential role in shaping the opinions of society. Writers tend to be selective in the information they provide, manipulating the truth in order to support their own perspective. By placing any given topic under certain light, writers have the power to control the audience’s response and lead them to form an opinion based on their experience with the information. On the other hand, readers have a tendency to readily and automatically accept this information without much thought, despite the possibility that the information they are absorbing is false or biased. Thus, the cycle of perpetuation of misinformation continues; the media feeds the masses false information, and they eat it up.This problem is evident in the topic of affirmative
Affirmative Action Question: Newton and Wasserstrom seem to disagree about whether affirmative action is a form of reverse discrimination. Explain how each arrives at their position about whether or not affirmative action is similar to or different from discriminatory laws of the Jim Crow era
Discrimination is still a chronic global issue, and drastic inequalities still exist at the present time. Thus, the Affirmative Action Law is an important tool to many minorities most especially to women, and people of color, for the reason that this program provides an equality on educational, and professional opportunities for every qualified individual living in the United States. Without this program, a higher education would have been impossible for a “minority students” to attain. Additionally, without the Affirmative Action, a fair opportunity to have a higher-level career...
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.
Originally, the term affirmative action had absolutely nothing to do with schools, or many of the things it is associated with today. The term “affirmative action” was first used by President John Kennedy in 1961, in regards to one of the executive orders passed by his administration. Executive Order 10925, the order in question had two major effects, one being the establishment of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the other being a mandate declaring that projects financed with federal funds "take affirmative action" to ensure that hiring and employment practices are free of racial bias.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…." Even before it became a nation, America was heralded as a land of equality. Thomas Jefferson's statement begs more than a few questions, one of which is: "How can we ensure equality to everyone?" Beginning in the late 1960s, the federal government provided an answer to this question in the form of affirmative action. In recent years, many people have called this policy into question. Interestingly, affirmative action is sometimes attacked by the people it helps, and defended by those it hurts. In particular, two recent essays demonstrate that people's race does not necessarily determine their beliefs on the issue of affirmative action. "Why I Believe in Affirmative Action" is by Paul R. Spickard, a white man who is defending affirmative action, while "A Negative Vote on Affirmative Action" is by Shelby Steele, an African-American who is attacking the program. When the two essays are considered as responses to each other, Steele's logical explanations of the effects and implications of affirmative action expose the flaws in Spickard's ethical arguments supporting it.
Affirmative Action is the policies that have been introduced to provide equal opportunities to people who have been historically excluded. The action is implemented by providing equal access to education, salary, employment and respect to the group such as women and minorities. The policies were introduced in 1960’s during the civil rights movement in the belief of providing equal rights to the group that has been ruled out by the society. In 1961 President Kennedy was the first to use the term “Affirmative Action” to make sure that all employees are treated in the same manner without discriminating them with their race, color, and national origin. The main reason to establish affirmative action is to increase the employment opportunities and
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.
During the tumultuous civil rights movement of the 1960’s, President Lyndon Johnson issued a call to action to make up for past discrimination of minorities in American history. This new method of civil rights justice took on the term “affirmative action”. Preceding this was a rise to equality among minorities, mainly African Americans and Hispanics. The breakthrough case Brown v. Board of Education desegregated public schools and opened the door for national equality of all citizens. In 1963 President John Kennedy developed eigh...
Affirmative action was created to allow minorities to have more opportunities in the workforce and in education. It still remains to be a debate whether affirmative action should be a necessary route even though we have made progress towards greater equality. The argument over Affirmative action has been going on for some time with two opposing sides. There is one side who finds Affirmative action as an opportunity to the less fortunate; those who are against have the belief that it promotes less qualified individuals rather than a person own merit.
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 ... ...
Affirmative action should be abolished because the negatives from the program far outweigh the positives. The program is doing a lot of harm to American society instead of helping.
Known as one of the biggest obstacles in higher education to date would arguably be the use of affirmative action within the higher education admission process for both private and public institutions (Kaplin & Lee, 2014; Wang & Shulruf, 2012). The focus of current research is an attempt to either justify or deny the use of affirmative action within current practices through various higher education institutions, and though any one person could potentially be swayed to side with the rationale to maintain its use or disregard, the facts are quite clear that the future of this practice is unclear. Therefore, this essay will present current research in an attempt to determine if affirmative action should continue to be used within college admission decisions.
According to Robert Chrisman, The term affirmative action was brought into to our attention by President John F. Kennedy,in 1981, while giving his Executive Order 10925. In this order Kennedy called for a massive increase in minority populations in the workforce, this call was made prior to the passage of the Civil Rights legislation, which later furthered the idea of affirmative action in the late 1960’s.(Chrisman,p.71) According to the term Affirmative action was introduced by President Lyndon Johnson in his Executive Order 11246 in 1965. Johnsons order stated that applicants and employed are treated the same without regard to their race , color, religion, sex, or national origin(Tatum, p.117). Although there were many sources who disagree upon the origins of this term, we do know that is was introduced by the U.S. Federal Government as a means to create equal opportunity for historically disadvantaged populations. The targeted groups included: white women, men and women of color (defined by the U.s. Government as American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians. Pacific Islanders,Blacks and Hispanics). (Tatum, p.117) In the !970’s legislation was passed to include people with disabilities and Veterans. Specific plans for affirmative actions were not defined by Executive Order 1124, which left room for interpretation throughout the country.(Tatum, p.117)