School Choice More Effective than Affirmative Action
If America is to become an equal society, then the direction of affirmative action must be changed. Rather than continuing to focus the brunt of our efforts on helping those individuals near the top succeed, we must implement policies designed to provide opportunities to those individuals at or near the bottom. Specifically, affirmative action must return to its original purpose--helping minorities move into the middle class through programs based upon equality of educational opportunity and job creation.
Affirmative action is still needed, but its efforts must be redirected. The truth is that minorities poised to break through the glass ceiling will do so, based upon sheer ability, but minorities on the bottom rungs of society need help to break through the cellar ceiling. These are the individuals for whom affirmative action can do the most good, consequently, these are the people upon whom our efforts should be focused.
When affirmative action was first instituted, the majority of Americans supported its goal of moving the poorest members of minority groups to an improved position in society. Over time, however, affirmative action proponents have lost sight of this goal. Affirmative action programs have ceased to function as a rising tide designed to lift all boats and have instead become preoccupied with helping those near the top. Too little attention has been paid to helping those at the bottom, as a result, the lives of minorities living in poverty have become increasingly bleak. Today, our inner-cities more closely resemble a war zone in Bosnia than they do an American suburb, and conditions continue to deteriorate. This is wrong, an...
... middle of paper ...
...lem's economy would come to resemble Hong Kong's. True "opportunity zones" would attract the capital needed for job creation, and increased employment will be the engine that transforms our inner-cities from war zones back to hospitable places to live.
Today, the need for affirmative action remains strong, but the current programs must be replaced with programs that help the poorest minorities. Affirmative action programs must return to their original purpose. Instead of advocating programs that benefit individuals already poised to succeed, proponents of affirmative action must fight for those individuals who are suffering the most. We, as Americans, have a responsibility to help our Nation's poorest minorities. Policies of school choice and "opportunity zones" will help us meet this responsibility by increasing educational and employment opportunities.
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...
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...
Why would anyone wish to withhold support for a program that has the potential to revolutionize the, often, insufficient American education system? This question has undoubtedly entered the mind of proponents of education voucher systems across the country. However, despite the pressure placed on legislators everywhere, close scrutiny of the real issues should not be clouded by public fervor. It is my belief that, after a thorough examination of the merits of such programs, school vouchers would be a gross detriment to both the American education system and the nation itself.
Affirmative action programs may or may not have been appropriate in times past where inequalities were prevalent and programs to build diversity were mandated. In the United States today, where law bars discrimination, I feel employment opportunities should be based on merit and not on race, sex or any other preconceived notion. Actively recruiting candidates that do not meet minimum requirements or standards is counterproductive to any agency that strives to serve the public in an efficient and effective manner and further erode confidence in government.
School Choice: Followed the ruling on compulsory education. Parents have a right to choose whether their children go to a private, parochial or public school, or they may choose to home-school. Parents must accept any responsibility for their choice.
...Mill does not implicitly trust or distrust man and therefore does not explicitly limit freedom, in fact he does define freedom in very liberal terms, however he does leave the potential for unlimited intervention into the personal freedoms of the individual by the state. This nullifies any freedoms or rights individuals are said to have because they subject to the whims and fancy of the state. All three beliefs regarding the nature of man and the purpose of the state are bound to their respective views regarding freedom, because one position perpetuates and demands a conclusion regarding another.
...not undermine the conclusion made because Mill is claiming the use of freedom of expression, allowing the nature of man to express ideas that do not need censorship to limit a person’s thought process.
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...
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...
Whenever I look at John Locke’s political view, it surprises me that he was able view government the way he did because he grew up in the renaissance. During the renaissance period, people were not interested in protecting property; their focus was on their position on the hierarchical social ladder. So the fact that his political views so closely resemble a premature form of democracy amazes me. John Locke understood that in a government there needs to be sovereign authority but he realized that sovereign authority should not have absolute power. With that in mind, John Locke constructed a blueprint for a government that provides for the pursuit and securing of life, liberty, and property.
Introduction 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. What is Affirmative Action?
(C1) Many agree with Summer on his stance of high-pollution industries in lesser-developed countries. They claim that it is economic logic to fill the countries with low wages with profitable industries. By doing this, it would cause more people to want to live in a less populated area and work for higher wages. A sudden increase in population would also increase the number of the labor force. By doing this, more workers and industries would rapidly affect the growth of the economy.
With John Locke we start to see an idea that the rights of man are limitless unless they are freely given up. Locke states, “Man being born, as has been proved, with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrolled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature…” (Locke - Second Treaties of Government - 46). According to Locke the rights of man are limited only by the laws of nature. This statement leads us to the realization that, in Locke’s beliefs, man has the allowance to do anything. We see that Locke believes that personal protection also follows as a right when he states, “…hath by nature a power, not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men…” (Locke – 46). With this understanding a person has unlimited rights, even as they pertain to preserving his or her self or family.
Sport and aggressive behavior, Do sports create aggressive behavior, or simply attract people who are already aggressive? Aggression and sport have gone together as long as sports have been around, be it the players themselves, to the parents, coaches, or spectators, they just seem to be an inseparable part of each other. The term violence is defined as physical assault based on total disregard for the well being of self and others, or the intent to injure another person (2. Coakley). Intimidation usually does not cause physical harm, but often is designed to produce psychological consequences, enabling one person to physically over power or dominate another. These statements as defined by the author, Jay J. Coakley, is what people today have made a must part on sport. Pleasure and participation sports absolutely cannot be grouped with power and performance sports when in relation to aggression. Pleasure sports are simply played for pleasure. Score is usually not kept. The athletes participating are usually on occasion doing it for fun and exercise. A majority of athletes who have been playing sports since they were little, have probably been pounded into their heads that to be successful in sport, you need to be aggressive, and at some times, unnecessary. Also that to get what you want, you have to go at it with all force. Not that this is wrong but, this attitude in today's society has been a major problem factor to the athletes when they get older, to get into trouble with the law. Those long-term effects of so-called discipline, patterns develop these destructive behaviors. (9. Montague) Although some people are still in belief that aggressive behaviors in all forms are grounded into instincts, but they also relate these actions to sports. Their parents played, who were known for their aggressive behavior, so the child feels that they have to live up to that expectation.( 6. Storr) Athletes do have to be aggressive to a point, so that the team can form a strategy to win. There is also a limit to aggression when it turns into violence. People might say that it's not aggression or violence, its just adrenaline pumping. Adrenaline isn't even similar to violence. Aggression, maybe, but nothing that would be harmful to anyone else. This might be a factor to why contact sports are so popular. For example, football, hockey, rugb...
What is socialization? Socialization is the process in which we as people become members of society. As individuals our sense of belonging is shaped through the agents of socialization. The agents of socialization that contribute to the shaping of an individual’s sense of belonging to a group consist of educational institutes, peers, Mass media, family, and religious institutes. The five agents of socialization play a large roles in an individual’s perspective on the way of life, behavior, social interaction and how the communicate with other members of the group. Socialization not only makes us aware of ourselves as being part of a group but also deeply affects ones understanding of norms, beliefs, desires