The Pros And Cons Of Affirmative Action

Before the idea of affirmative action came into existence, there was the President’s committee on Public Contracts which was designed to oversee federal agencies’ efforts to ensure nondiscrimination in firms with government contracts, the committee could receive complaints of discrimination, conduct educational campaigns, make recommendations to agencies on how to combat discrimination, receive agency enforcement reports, and establish ties with private and public organizations working on equal employment issues.

When the PCGC was first introduced, it was not well received because it endured criticism from various scholars because it was ineffective. The PCGC did not effectively provide African Americans with jobs. In response to the PCGC’s ineffectiveness, Affirmative Action was introduced. When it began, it received criticism because “affirmative action’s focus on ‘color consciousness’ and ‘equal results’ contrasted sharply with earlier models based on ‘color blindness’ and ‘equal

opportunity.’” Even though affirmative action does not help people to be color blind, it is still needed to help ensure diversity. Sadly, we do not live in a color-blind society. People still see color; it is one of the things that factors into first impressions people make. Sometimes people need to become color conscious because it helps them realize if their establishment, specifically law schools, are truly diverse. Affirmative action also stemmed from a mass movement led by Phillip Randolph who in 1941 had called for an all-black march on Washington. The most telling omission in the history of affirmative action was white labor’s refusal to share the benefits of the first law to contain ‘‘affirmative action’’ provisions: the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA; also known as the Wagner-Connery Act, or simply the Wagner Act)” Because African Americans were not granted the same benefits or even opportunities Phillip Wagner decided that a change needed to be made. After the actions of Philip Wager, affirmative action was set as a law.
In the late twentieth racial segregation was a huge issue. There were laws in place that prevented African Americans from gaining equal access to education institution and employment opportunities. In an article titled Affirmative Action from Below: Civil Rights, the Building Trades, and the Politics of Racial Equality in the Urban North, 1945-1969, the author, Thomas J. Sugrue discussed the history of Affirmative Action; particularity how the Philadelphia plan was the blue print for Affirmative Action. He States
Just a little over six years after the Philadelphia protests, on June 27, 1969, the administration of Richard M. Nixon announced the Philadelphia Plan, an administrative order designed to open jobs in the white-dominated construction industry to members of minority groups. The Philadelphia Plan, first applied to construction contractors in the City of Brotherly Love, became the blueprint for federally mandated affirmative action in employment.
The Philadelphia plan was designed to help African Americans have the same opportunities and benefits as their white counter parts. Because all states wanted equal opportunity in aspects including education and employment opportunities, the Affirmative Action plan was adopted.
The Affirmative Action plan came from the civil rights era and has been disputed and not received by some ever since.

Some accuse the New Deal of being associated with black racial awareness. Surgrue contends Affirmative action has been the most fiercely contested legacy of the civil rights era […] The conventional narratives about affirmative action emphasize its role in the fragmentation of an interracial New Deal coalition, its entanglement with growing black racial consciousness, and its challenge to an allegedly long-standing policy of "color blindness”. Even though Affirmative Action was created in the civil rights movement, it still is receiving backlash. People assert that instead of making people “color blind”, it makes people “color conscious”. What people who disputed affirmative action fail to realize is people are always going to be color conscious. Affirmative Action was designed to make sure people’s color consciousness does not get in the way of equal

opportunity.
Section II: Opposition of Affirmative Action
One thing that stemmed from the Brown v. Board of Education to prevent discrimination is Affirmative Action. When it comes to Affirmative Action, some people agree with its purpose and some people disagree with its purpose. People particularly do not agree with the diversity aspect. Some people think that some of the aspects of diversity are unreachable. In an article titled Against Diversity, the authors Clegg and Rosenberg assert
The idea is that if a bigot or potential bigot is forced to see that people of other colors are really not so different from himself he will conclude that bigotry is wrong. But this plan will work only if the bigot is surrounded by students who really are similar to him in ability. If the preferentially admitted minorities are less qualified than the nonminorities, the bigot’s attitudes will be reinforced, not eroded.
Clegg and Rosenburg are arguing that in order for people who are racist to accept people who are not the same race as them is if they have the same academic ability as them. If they do not have the same academic abilities as the nonminorites, then they will continue to look down upon the minorities. The authors of this article are also saying that people will not be color blind to minorities is if they have the same qualifications as them. They are saying that affirmative action allows unqualified people into schools. According to the authors, when affirmative action allows underqualified people in, it reaffirms racist peoples’ beliefs. I must disagree with the authors beliefs. I do not think affirmative action reaffirms bigotry beliefs. Affirmative action was not created to allow underqualified minorities into work places or institutions. Affirmative action was created to make sure minorities have an equal opportunity as non-minorities.