In the field of education we can once again notice how affirmative action becomes a failure over time. At the very beginning of affirmative action we did believe that it was something fair since it would have helped the country to give the ability to people from the minorities to have access to education and show their real value, since we need to notice that due to ignorance, some whites men used to think that black people for instance could not be educated and be able to ask critical questions. By the way, we do not blame them since actually maybe that this idea of the intellectual black man was strange to them. But when a policy helps one group to catch up the other group’s level of education due some discriminations going on before like the Brown v. the board of education case, we can agree with it at the beginning, however doing the same thing over and over for 50 years can become problematic. Tell us what do we actually want to catch up? The number of educated people within the minorities or we just need to have some well educated people among them who may be raised before the others as examples of success. I think if we want to be fair, the second option is the best. Rather than that affirmative action, tends up to today to privilege a group over the other. As a consequence of that, we must know that it may sooner or later lead to the protest of some of the people discriminated who have
Recently, there has been much debate over an athlete's right to stand or kneel during the national anthem. The
Al Sharpton radio host, and minister once said, “We have defeated Jim Crow, but now we have to deal with his son, James Crow Jr., esquire.” (cite) He then goes on to say that his “son” is smarter, slicker, and more cunning than him. This metaphor describes that even though the Jim Crow Laws have been ratified, there is a new racial discrimination in America that is growing and is harder to defeat than the last. The Jim Crow Laws were the set of laws that set the whites and blacks separate from each other in the 1900s, although they have been defeated, America today may be equal lawfully but not on an individual level. With the beginning of the Jim Crow Laws in the 1900s to their abolishment in 1965, and even today, America has yet to resolve the issue of “separate but equal.”
In The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in The Era of Colorblindness by Michelle Alexander, she begins by points out the underlying problem in our Criminal Justice system. The problem being prioritizing the control of those in this racial caste rather than focusing on reasonable punishment and efforts to deter crime. Alexander begins by speaking of her experience as a civil rights lawyer and what soon became her priority after seeing a poster that mentioned how the war on drugs is the new jim crow when it comes to the application and outcome of it. As Alexander points out the correlation between the war on drugs and it being the new jim crow, she discusses the mass incarceration that is prevalent in our society and the number of African American
By the 1950’s, America’s illusively plaid appearance was being disrupted by a growing multitude of problems: increasing visibility of poverty, rising frustrations from African American communities, and a growing angst concerning America’s position in the world. In response, the United States’ leaders sustained their constitutional promise to promote the general warfare of society, by confidently indorsing policies that directly attacked these problems-to the best of their ability. When President Lyndon Johnson, Kennedy’s successor, sworn into office, he believed in the active use of power and legislation. “Between 1963 and 1966, he compiled the most impressive legislative record of any president since Franklin Roosevelt” (Brinkley 784). Among
“You can’t delete racism. It’s like a cigarette. You can’t stop smoking if you don’t want to, and you can’t stop racism if people don’t want to. But I’ll do everything I can to help” ( Mario Balotelli)
“Affirmative Action may not be a perfect system, but there should be no doubt that it has endangered many successes. It has opened the doors of America’s most elite educational institutions to minority students, granting them unprecedented opportunities” (Ogletree 12). Thanks to Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson a policy that prohibits employment and education discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, and sex is offered today to those who suffer from said discriminations (A Brief History). Affirmative action has opened abundant openings for minorities, allowing the cycle of going to college to be passed down generations and provided job opportunities that otherwise would not be considered by most. Affirmative
Weak affirmative action which is just an effort to ensure that all qualified minority groups are considered whereas the strong one is when some sort of preference is given to the minority candidate. Later the author concludes that he will focus on the strong affirmative action because it is the most controversial one. Then the author gives us many arguments of different people and critics for and against affirmative action. Later on, David Boonin gives us his own arguments in favor of affirmative action which are 1) the unfair disadvantage argument; 2) the (other) compensation argument; 3) the appeal to diversity; 4) the need for role models; 5) the bias-elimination argument; 6) race as a qualification. “I conclude that while affirmative action may prove to have some desirable features and some beneficial consequences, there’s no reason to believe that it’s morally obligatory. As far as morality and justice are concerned, if a school or business or government declines to practice affirmative action, that’s okay” – says the
African Americans have systematically been deprived of equal opportunities and fundamental rights in America since the establishment of slavery. Although the Civil Rights Act banned the implementation of segregation and racial inequality over 40 years ago, the overall concept of racial and cultural hierarchy still lingers at the forefront of today’s society. White America’s history of racially oppressing, isolating, and segregating African Americans have led to present-day issues surrounding the political and economic forces that intentionally limits Blacks access to and opportunity from social, economic, educational, and political advancement through the institution of structural racism.
America and its people have worked hard to create a home in which everyone is treated, and feels equal. We’ve fought wars, held protests, and lost many lives in situations where we were fighting for fair treatment. After all of these sacrifices, it's safe to say that Americans have the right to love, and cherish the equality that their home presents them with, but to an extent. Equality in society, government, and basic human interactions should always be kept, and held with great importance. However, we also need to keep in mind that we are not the same people. This is where the government in the story, ‘’Harrison Bergeron,’’ gets out of hand. They tried to make their citizens equal by making them the same which prevents
The United States is home of many diverse ethnicities that come here to live the American Dream. Although they are legal immigrants, white americans still treat them as a minority group. There is still racial bias here that is causing tensions between ethnic groups despite all the efforts to stop it.
The history of America is as much the history of freedom and triumph as it is the history of the segregation and oppression of African Americans. The acquisition of Civil Rights was not just contained in the movement of the 1960’s, but was a road that had spanned the entirety of the era after the end of Southern Reconstruction. If President Hayes had not agreed to remove Federal soldiers from the South, the Civil Rights movement would not have happened during the 1960’s, but would have happened much earlier. During the time of reconstruction, the rights of the newly freed African Americans was constantly in jeopardy, and it was an ongoing struggle for the fair treatment that was promised by the Constitution. When the North lost southern influence,
Ira Katznelson is the author of When Affirmative Action Was White, a historical analysis of the history of affirmative action and racial inequality in the United States of America. Katznelson takes a definitive approach to the history of legislation and inequalities and prepares the reader initially with his title. Katznelson’s argumentative position and approach to the title of his book makes the reader question about affirmative action for white Americans, but in reality what Katznelson means by his title, When Affirmative Action Was White, is more based on the social programs and federal grant opportunities that were created and provided to Americans during the Roosevelt and Truman administration. Katznelson argument encompasses historical
Critics of affirmative action frequent describe the policy as being unfair, asserting that it contravenes a conserved system of meritocracy in the country by basing selection decisions on demographic characteristics at the expense of ability and achievement (Thernstrom & Thernstrom, 1997). Defenders take a different position that can be explained by two facts: racism and sexism are still present in the United States society and affirmative action is the most efficient and effective way of reducing discrimination than the present alternatives. However, affirmative action increases fusion and fairness in employment and in education because it works as a proactive observing system. As Crosby and Smith (2005) consider, “such policies may help ensure that patterns of bias—including selective system bias— are uncovered and
We have seen in the past four decades race-based affirmative action programs that have arisen and fitfully developed through judicial challenges. As in most case, the best of intentions do not always lead to positive outcomes. Nothing could be more apt in describing the perilous position we have bestowed upon millions of minority students who have been admitted to higher learning institutions under the auspices of diversity. As illustrated by the standardized test and GPA numbers in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the students admitted to the medical school of UC-Davis under their affirmative action policy were extraordinarily less qualified when compared to the student body as a whole. This not only unfairly displaced white and Asian students who would have otherwise been admitted to those spot on merit but also places those underperforming students in an environment in which they are destined to fail. As perfectly illustrated in Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor’s book Mismatch, underqualified students admitted to more prestigious institutions on the grounds of providing diversity results in a marked increase in those same students struggling in their field of study and even dropping out when compared to their peers who attend schools more closely aligned with their previous