Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Affirmative action impact on society
Affirmative action arguments for and against
Martin luther king jr and equality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Affirmative action impact on society
Indeed, Affirmative action is a highly debatable topic that is sought to cover many employment factors favoring all groups in society, including those classified by race, religion, gender and national origin. Supported by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, and Rev. Jesse Jackson, Affirmative Action was designed in the 1960s to benefit racial/ethnic minority group members and women, and particularly black Americans” (Oppenheimer, 2016). While it might encourage minority success against institutional racism in employment, Affirmative Action can be perceived as highly controversial because it “challenges fundamental American beliefs” (Skerry, 1998). For this particular reason, I am convinced that Affirmative action is categorically unnecessary as it …show more content…
Meritocracy implies that individuals ought to succeed in life by working hard through ability and determination, “not on who they are or whom they know” (Peterson, 96). In ‘Profession’, Richard Rodriguez believed that Affirmative Action labeled all minority individuals, including him, as “more socially disadvantaged than the white graduate students in my classes.”. (Rodriguez, 157). For him, Affirmative Action was defined as favoring “the presence of conventionally qualified nonwhite students like me” who needed a social ‘boost’ to keep up with the majority students. (Rodriguez, 156). However, Rodriguez was afraid of portraying himself as a minority student who gained success with the assistance of Affirmative Action. After all, mentioned that the political activists utilized his success, accompanied with his race, to present lower-class Hispanics. “I was the minority student the political activists shouted about at noontime rallies,.A dean said he was certain that after I graduated I would be able to work among ‘my people’ ”(Rodriguez, 157, 158). It is safe to note that Rodriguez was against affirmative Action due to the idea that it would devalue the hard work that nonwhite students put in to represent their individuality in the midst of the disadvantaged minorities in the …show more content…
For instance, “Inequities by race/ethnicity have long been a problem in U.S. society” (Zamani-Gallaher, 32). Despite the controversies that may occur, Affirmative Action searches to “promote the redistribution of opportunity” (Kellough, 8). To provide an example, African-Americans have long encountered disparities and institutional racism. In Howard University, 1965, President Lyndon Johnson addressed that “ You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, "you are free to compete with all the others," and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.” (Katznelson, 541). In respect to this, Affirmative Action was designed to provide equal treatment between African-Americans and white during the beginning of the 1960s. However, I am not convinced that this particular program is necessary today, Richard Rodriguez, in ‘Profession’, stated that “Many were so culturally alienated that they never thought to apply; they couldn’t even imagine themselves going to college”(Rodriguez, 154). He implied that many minorities, despite the privileges that exist in favor to them, never utilize the opportunity to succeed, thus viewing Affirmative Action as
... discriminatory practices were directed against blacks as a group. ...Preferential treatment programs are meant to offset the disadvantages imposed by racism so that Blacks are not forced to bear the principal costs of that error. ...To condemn policies meant to correct for racial barriers as themselves erecting barriers is to ignore the difference between action and reaction, cause and effect, aggression and self-defense...”. He concludes by stating that “Affirmative action is directed toward empowering those groups that have been adversely affected by past and present exclusionary practices. Initiatives to abolish preferential treatment would inflict a grave injustice on African Americans, for they signal a reluctance to acknowledge that the plight of African Americans is the result of institutional practices that require institutional responses. (Pg.218) [10/12]
The backlash that Sotomayor experiences because of her decision to apply to and her acceptance into Princeton reveals how most Puerto Ricans experienced forms of racialization, or racial classification, by Caucasian Americans. Sotomayor experiences the culmination of years of racial discrimination and oppression when her school nurse asks with an “accusatory tone” and a “baleful gaze” how she got a “likely” and the “two top-ranking girls in the school only got a ‘possible’” (Sotomayor 102). She expects Sotomayor to experience “shame” under her gaze because her “perplexed discomfort” in answering her question is “clearly not enough” (102). The nurse demonstrates society’s common expectation for Puerto Rican and other minority students to not be at the same intellectual level as Caucasian Americans.
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, 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.
In his essay called "Affirmative Action Encourages Racism", Thaddeus Watulak argues that affirmative action is a racist policy, which relies on racial stereotypes and reinforces racist attitudes in the society. I mostly agree with him because I believe he touches some very important points, which are not taken to account in the first place.
Some feel that affirmative action in universities is the answer to the end of racism and inequality. If more black students get into and graduate from good colleges, more of them will go on to even out the lopsided numbers in the work force. Prejudice secretly slips through everyone¹s thoughts. Or so Barbara Ehrenreich believes when she writes of a quiet, subliminal prejudice that is caused by statistics that prove the fewer numbers of blacks in high profile jobs. When we see ninety percent of leadership roles in the corporate world held by white men, we begin to doubt other¹s competence in that field. With so many minorities in menial roles, people begin to believe the white man is best for ...
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...
Affirmative action has been the topic of debate for many years. It has been controversial because it has been said to be a form of reverse discrimination. This paper will discuss the purpose behind affirmative action, as well as, its various strengths and weaknesses. Also, this paper will look at the following issues surrounding affirmative action such as the incompetency myth ( are companies hiring less qualified people?), the impact on employment (what has changed in the work place?), the impact on women (how have their lives changed?) and the impact on employment law (what documents back up affirmative action?). Lastly, a discussion of affirmative action on an international scale, and what international documents have to say about the topic. The purpose of this paper is to bring to light all the issues, and then make an educated statement of whether affirmative action is a worthwhile activity or if there is a better solution.
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...
Meritocracy, unlike aristocracy, is the system in which talented people are rewarded and promoted to leadership positions based on their merit. According to James Whitehurst, meritocracy “now refers to organizations where the best people and ideas win.” However, as true as it may sound, meritocracy in America is still a myth and is not a certainty. In the article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack,” McIntosh’s disdain of meritocracy when she described as “I must give up the myth of meritocracy.” She mentioned the meritocracy myth because in reality, many people who lack talents and experience can still climb the upward mobility ladder and become wealthier while the rest of
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 ... ...
Signed in an executive order by President John F. Kennedy in 1961, the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity was created to ensure that hiring and employment practices are free of racial bias. Three years later, President Lyndon Johnson presented the Civil Rights Act in 1964 prohibiting discrimination of all kinds based on race, color, religion, or national origin (Wang & Shulruf, 2012). Later that same year, President Johnson gave a commencement speech attempting to give an ethical response to the losses both materially and mentally to the African-Americans in slavery in the United States (Chace, 2011). Within the later years of the 1960s, higher education institution administrators, in an effort to boost under-represented groups of minorities, introduced the affirmative action concept into the admissions processes (Wang & Shulruf, 2012). What has been the effect of these monumental milestones for minorities and under-repre... ...
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....
It is not surprising that affirmative action is under attack: along with welfare, it benefits a section of society with very little political clout. It is a convenient place for the displaced anger of working-class white men who have seen their real wages decrease for the past thirty years. It stirs up feelings of racism that politicians are quick to publicly denounce but even quicker to exploit. There is, however, very little serious discussion about affirmative action underway; more often it is supplanted by buzzwords such as "quotas," "set-asides," and "reverse discrimination." A serious discussion of affirmative action must begin by addressing the question of collective responsibility.
In the years following the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s, the United States has struggled with balancing race relations. Affirmative action was implemented in order to combat racism in academic and work environments. Definitively, affirmative action is “the practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their race, sex, etc,” (Merriam Webster). Overwhelmingly, affirmative action creates diversity in education and neutralizes racial advantages. That being said, opponents of affirmative action believe it creates less qualified society all the while advocating for reverse discrimination. These individuals may argue