I begin with an excerpt from the article, which provides the most prominent example of this statement:

“One of the underlying purposes of Affirmative Action is to make amends for slavery through money… So I do not understand why my taxes are being put into programs to make amends for something that happened to someone’s great-great-great-great-great grandparents.”

I find a number of things interesting about this. First, I have to consider the idea that the author did not take the time to truly think about this statement before they wrote it. It appears as if, at the risk of taking their words out of context, they equate Affirmative Action to retribution for slavery.

Considering the social history of our nation, I’m certain that Affirmative Action was created to combat the discriminatory and unconstitutional practices by American whites for the one hundred years following the emancipation of African American slaves. Additionally, it was not just the black Americans from the southern United States that were excluded because whites refused to hire “coloreds” or didn’t want “n-words” in their institutions of higher learning. Also, I consider the groups that are not descendants of slaves who are also protected by Affirmative Action (women, Latinos, people with physical/mental disabilities, Native Americans, etc.) and benefit from its existence. Though I might not have been in the shoes of my “great-great-great-great-great grandparents,” I’m sure my grandmother, who grew up in Jim Crow era North Carolina, or my friends with the “stereotypically black” names who have knowingly been passed up for jobs would definitely disagree with the notion that Affirmative Action is not necessary. I hope that the young opinion writer gets a chance to take an African-American history or Social Problems course in the future, which I believe would broaden their perspective on several issues, not just those concerning race.

Next, I consider the root of the position that the author uses to further their argument. There are two sets of ideologies that I think create the foundation of their rationale. The first (which I hope isn’t the case, but since this is a nation built on the premise of individual rights, everyone is entitled to their beliefs), is the white nationalist perspective which tends to downplay the social injustice that raised the need for Affirmative Action by highlighting often hypothetical, yet occasionally occurring phenomena that appear to be forms of “reverse discrimination.”

The fact remains that whites are still the social, economic, and political majority, and a privileged class in our nation. For every one occurrence of “reverse racism,” I could point to the hundreds of thousands of inner-city children suffering from the cycle of poverty that plagues neighborhoods comprised mostly of people of color due to poor-quality education and few job opportunities.

The second set of ideologies seems to be the most common among people of many races and classes, i.e., the incredulous idea that racism, prejudice and inequality no longer exist in America. I often liken social injustice to that annoying relative that always seems to be around during the holidays; you might not talk about them directly, or acknowledge their existence, but the truth is that they are still in the room, eating all of the good stuff from the buffet. I believe that we are just as far now from reaching equality as we were in 1964, but now inequality exists in limited access to opportunities as opposed to being given them in the first place.

Yes, we no longer have to pass literacy tests, or aren’t required to prove that our grandfathers weren’t slaves, but there is still a $21,000 disparity between median household incomes. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, $55,530 for white non-Hispanic households and $34,218 for black households, which doesn’t reflect equality by any means. To go beyond the data from the U.S. Census Bureau that shows the median for black households is 61.6 percent of that of white households, the poverty rate is more than twice as high (2.7percent of whites vs. 7.8 percent of blacks) and women in our workforce only earn 77 percent of what men earn. Nothing about these numbers reflect social justice to me.

No related posts.

In the past few years there have been a number of court cases contesting the constitutional grounds of Affirmative Action. In 2003 a Supreme Court decision concerning Affirmative Action in universities allowed educational institutions to consider race as a factor in admitting students, but ruled that strict point systems are unconstitutional.

Alternatively, some colleges use financial criteria to attract racial groups that have typically been under-represented and typically have lower living conditions. Executive Orders 11246 and 11375 prohibit federal contractors and subcontractors from discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, skin color, religion, gender, or national origin.

Some states such as California and Michigan have passed constitutional amendments banning affirmative action.By its proponents, it is seen as a foundational principle of democratic societies, and seeks to redress imbalances in society, which makes sense.

However, others feel that Affirmative Action devalues the accomplishments of people who work hard and are qualified. It also devalues the accomplishments only of those it is intended to help, because there are always going to be people that someone only made such accomplishments because they were handed opportunities due to their race or gender, ect. For these reasons, Affirmative Action is very counterproductive.

I believe that Affirmative Action promotes racism rather than discouraging it. By trying to satisfy a quota of admitted or hired persons that “promote diversity,” doesn’t that discriminate against people who are qualified or have worked hard? It is almost as though these policies, in some way, promote laziness and receiving handouts.

I also think that Affirmative Action has failed to achieve its desired effects. It replaces old wrongs with new wrongs and has done nothing for reconciliation among the people. It encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. I also believe that it increases racial tensions and benefits the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups (such as lower-class whites).

It is truly frustrating that businesses and schools with equal opportunities and high diversity are given government money for going out of their way to fill a quota. We should not be discriminating against the qualified people or the people who have tried to make something of themselves.

It does not matter how much monetary rewards we hand out, there will always be ignorant people who feel it is their right to discriminate. That should not be a place where you want to work or go to school anyway.

One of the underlying purposes of Affirmative Action is to make amends for slavery through money. First, I did not enslave anyone, nor did my parents. In fact, my grandparents did not either. No one who is alive today was enslaved, with the exception of those who are over 140-years old. So I do not understand why my taxes are being put into programs to make amends for something that happened to someone’s great-great-great-great-grandparents.

Affirmative Action promotes unfair treatment in this country. For example, in 1978, Allan Bakke, a white applicant, was rejected twice from Regents of the University of California, a medical school, even though there were minority applicants admitted with significantly lower scores than his. Bakke maintained that judging him on the basis of his race was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The Supreme Court ruled that while race was a legitimate factor in school admissions, the use of such inflexible quotas as the medical school had set aside was not. The Supreme Court, however, was split 5–4 in its decision, ruling in favor of Bakke, and imposed limitations on affirmative action to ensure that providing greater opportunities for minorities did not come at the expense of the rights of the majority.

In theory, Affirmative Action is great. There is nothing wrong with trying to promote equal opportunities. However, the policies implemented by the United States seem to promote reverse discrimination, and that should leave us asking ourselves if these policies are outdated and unfair.

We all have the right to vote, free speech, work, live, and pursue happiness, but not at the expense of deepening the wounds and roots of discrimination. We will never live in a place free from ignorant beliefs, but we can work toward it. To do so, I believe that we first need to reconsider the constitutionality of Affirmative Action, and try to find a better way to promote diversity and equality without being unfair.

No related posts.