Affirmative Action continues to enhance diversity in all aspects of society
Furthermore, Affirmative Action continues to enhance diversity in all aspects of society. The central role of the policy is to ensure tolerance and encourage everyone to embrace the different cultures and ideas in our society (Alon, pp30). Diversity creates opportunities for society to augment development in all its sectors. Similarly, presently, there is a desire among communities to connect with like-minded persons since technology has made it possible. In some instances, if a person differs with the view of the majority, they are isolated. Therefore, Affirmative Action policies are significant since they seek to show the society that different views, opinions and perspectives are reasonable and of equal value. That the differences are what makes society more robust and better. Additionally, Affirmative Action has encouraged and still encourages those individuals from disadvantaged groups to continue working hard towards achieving their dreams (Alon, pp31). The systemic structures which have been in place for years have made it challenging for the minority groups to break their cycle of dependence and poverty. The system still limits the opportunities for these groups to succeed. When some of these individuals lack opportunities, they turn to criminal activities such as the selling of drugs or robbery to make money. But, the affirmative Action policy has offered and still offers many opportunities to these groups in a positive way. For instance, they help make sure that the wag of the minority workers is similar to that of the majority. Also, the policy offers equal educational opportunities to all persons in society (Alon, pp31). Further, even those who are against the Affirmative Action policies because they are discriminatory acknowledge that the regulations have aided in making the lives of the minority groups better by offering them opportunities that the system would deny them.
Similarly, Affirmative Action policies compensate those families that have experienced oppression and racial injustices in the past (Kuykendall, pp505). For example, in the United States, the institutionalization of slavery has created deep problems for numerous families. The issues are varied, and some of them are deprived of access to health and education services and racial discrimination (Kuykendall, pp505). The Affirmative Action cannot change what has occurred in the past but these guidelines aid those families adversely affected by the pass to move on. They offer compensation to some of these families and the economic benefits as a result of the policies have helped improve their living standards. Affirmative action policies still create more opportunities for students from minority groups to get advanced education (Kuykendall, pp507). Presently, race and ethnicity still have a significant role when it comes to admission into undergraduate and graduate programs in the United States. The Supreme Court even acknowledges that the racial structures put in place have made it difficult for individuals of all races and ethnicities to have equal education opportunities (Kuykendall, pp509). Recent research done by Harvard shows that minorities are still very much disadvantaged in higher education and without Affirmative Action policies, the disadvantage would be more evident. Thus, despite the complaints from the majority that the policies favour the minorities; it is the only chance for minorities to have more access to advanced education.
The Affirmative Action has helped to significantly decrease the unemployment rate among the minority communities (Wise, pp15). Similarly, according to the research done yearly by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it has helped in augmenting workplace equality. For example, in the National Football League of the United States, there is the Rooney Rule which is a guideline that mandates teas to interview candidates from minority groups for either senior football operation position or the head coaching position. The guideline was implemented in 2003, and it is against preferential hiring (Wise, pp15). Since its execution, more African American persons have been hired into the position of the head coach and the league has become more diversified. Therefore, policies like the Rooney policies guarantee workplace equality and more importantly helps decrease the unemployment rate among minority groups.
Arguments against Affirmative Action
In 2017, the Trump administration justice department decided to start a project that would recognize and sue those colleges that are considered t use affirmative action policies to discriminate against whites in their admissions (Combe, pp1123). Over the years, affirmative Action has been losing support in the United States, and people argued about why the practice is still needed. Yet, racial inequality is no longer an issue. One of the reasons as to why affirmative Action has been losing support is because it tries to solve previous discriminatory practices by developing rules that discriminate. Without, a doubt, the goal of affirmative action policies was good, but because it reverses the notion of discrimination, the policy has to be made illegal. For instance, the policy forces school institutions, employers and government institutions to favour the minority communities and dismiss the needs of the majority (Sterba, pp20). According to some policymakers and historians, the creation of different rules for the various demographic groups’ only leads to further problems since the two groups will be in constant conflict with each other. For instance, when there are two students whereby one is an African American and another s a white, and they have both high scores in their high schools but come from poor backgrounds, it is more likely that the African American will get an acceptance letter from their school of choice. Therefore, the white student will feel that it is the affirmative action policies that have led to the schools discriminating against him.
Furthermore, affirmative action policy reinforces the ideas of racism and oppression, and yet it was meant to ensure their eradication (Sander, and Stuart, pp45). The policy automatically implies that a person who is from the minority group is inferior to the majority and that the person needs the help of a policy to become equal to the majority. Therefore, the policy creates a situation whereby there will always be a conflict between the majority and minority hence leading to racial tensions. (Sander, and Stuart, pp45) Therefore, to reduce the racial tensions, the society is seeking the eradication of quota systems and irrational rules of prejudice that want to enhance equality in society.
Still, affirmative Action has for long encouraged mediocrity and incompetence in our society. For instance, some years back, Reverend Jesse Jackson, a prominent black figure in the United States politics, joined protestors who wanted the Harvard Law School demand that the institution hires black women (Antonovics, and Backes, pp297). The Reverend dismissed the claims of the dean of the Law School when he said that the institution didn’t hire persons based on their race or gender but rather their competence. He called the statements of the dean’ Cultural ‘anaemia. He insisted that qualifications of persons should not be solely based on academic skills of persons but their race and societal backgrounds. Arguably Jackson was correct since Harvard had been widely criticized for not hiring persons from the minority groups. Still, some blacks who were against Reverend Jackson wanted the blacks to create and support their own law schools and leave institutions like Harvard to continue to practice their archaism (Antonovics, and Backes, pp300). Harvard was sceptical about hiring persons just based on their race because several universities had been forced to recruit members from the minority communities when far superior candidates were available hence leading them to have incompetent staff. Research has proven that government programs that encourage the implementation of affirmative Action tend to appeal to the unqualified candidates. It is because the revised affirmative action expectations for preferential hiring state that neither minorities nor female personnel has to be required to have higher qualifications than those of the lowest qualified incumbents (Antonovics, and Backes, pp301). Presently the United States hiring standards are lower than that of countries like Japan and Korea and these can be attributed to the affirmative action principles of diversity and sufficiency that have proven to be an enemy of excellence.
Similarly, it is challenging for the Affirmative Action to deal with the rules that were in place before it became law (Darling-Hammond). The 1960s were very different from the present day since, in the 1960s, society was the middle of the Civil Rights movement. In the 1960s, the world still had businesses, schools and institutions that separated people based on their colour. The buses even had specific seats for people based on their physical appearance hence the need for laws such as the Affirmative Action (Darling-Hammond). However, the rules have a disadvantage since they are not as effective as they were thought to be before, and legislators have not found a way of making them more useful. Times have changed, and the agenda for creating Affirmative Action policies has been outdated. Therefore, the policies are no longer necessary.
Moreover, affirmative action policies disregard the achievements that have been made by the minority groups in our society, and they tend to suggest that they need the minority groups to need the help of the government since they are not good enough on their own (“Pros And Cons”). In 2009, after the election of President Obama, a significant number of persons argued that the Affirmative Action was no longer required in society since the election was a signed that the policy had achieved its objective. The election of President Obama into the oval office was a significant change in American politics since he was the first black man that had overcome historical challenges such as racial segregation to hold the highest office in the land (Zamani-Gallaher et al., pp23). However, the achievements of President Obama were minimized since some person argued that it is the policies of the affirmative Action that have put him in office.
Additionally, when the government gives preferential treatment to one social group, it shows that they aren’t good enough to attain their success on their own. The suggestion is insulting to the social group, and it can lead to further discrimination and even conflicts among social groups (Paiva, pp93). The society needs to understand that their skin colour or gender is not a reflection of their competencies, intelligence and skills. Also, for so long, the world has believed that the highest positions in our society need to be given to those persons that are best qualified. Rewarding excellence promotes effective competition and ensures efficiency. Also, the most fruitful acts of racial integration were done according to merit. For example, in the 1940s, the Brooklyn Dodger recruitment of Jackie Robinson was done according to merit despite him belonging to the minority groups (Heath, pp19). Therefore, it is a problem when we weakened the system and standards to hire persons or admit persons to college because of their skin colour. In the end, it is better to ensure racial integration while at the same time, enhancing excellence. Society needs to make sure it enhances equal opportunity while at the same time, rewarding persons based on their merit.
Conclusion
In conclusion, affirmative action policies were instituted by the government to ensure an equal playing field for those who have been traditionally underprivileged because of factors like race, sex, colour, religion and even national origin. The law aims to guarantee equal opportunities for all persons in the employment, business and education sector. However, the laws have not been without disapproval since the initial discrimination and unequal treatment that led to the development of the policies have faded. According to those against Affirmative Action, the selection or favouritism of someone based on their membership to a particular class or race in a society can be counterproductive to society as a whole. Even those persons whom affirmative action policies have helped them over the years are calling for the abolition of the policies because the society assumes that the preferential treatment is because they lack qualifications. Over the years, the policies have robbed the minorities the respect of their peers. Without a doubt, Affirmative Action has served its purpose. It has made the minorities have access to education, decrease differences in wage and unemployment rates between the minority and majority and has made sure that the minority have the same opportunities as the majority in society. But, it is a time for society to re-evaluate the policies and suggest ways that the policy can be implemented so that they can be effective in the present society. Research shows that if these policies are not changed, they are undermining the objectives that they were to enhance. Observers are predicting that eventually, the court will abolish the Affirmative Action’s ad legislators need to act before this is done. One way that Affirmative action policies can be enhanced is by creating a way to limit the racial preferences and encouraging transparency at the institutions that want to utilize the policy. Finally, inevitably, Affirmative Action is now a controversial and ineffective tool of social policy, and there is need to make sure that the society comes up with social policies that are agreeable by almost all social groups when dealing with social problems