Difference between revisions of "Affirmative Action"
m (clarification) |
Feebasfactor (Talk | contribs) (might this be more accurate...?) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Affirmative action''' means giving someone a preference or advantage based | + | '''Affirmative action''' means giving someone a preference or advantage based their race, ethnic background or gender. [[Quotas]] are an extreme form of '''affirmative action'''. |
The original concept of affirmative action, when introduced by the [[President Johnson|Johnson]] administration, was that it is desirable to not merely act on non-discrimination passively (i.e., saying "this job is open to any applicant", but then making no efforts to find minority applicants), but should also be done ''affirmatively'', by taking definite actions to find applicants from minorities. | The original concept of affirmative action, when introduced by the [[President Johnson|Johnson]] administration, was that it is desirable to not merely act on non-discrimination passively (i.e., saying "this job is open to any applicant", but then making no efforts to find minority applicants), but should also be done ''affirmatively'', by taking definite actions to find applicants from minorities. | ||
Revision as of 04:51, January 9, 2008
Affirmative action means giving someone a preference or advantage based their race, ethnic background or gender. Quotas are an extreme form of affirmative action.
The original concept of affirmative action, when introduced by the Johnson administration, was that it is desirable to not merely act on non-discrimination passively (i.e., saying "this job is open to any applicant", but then making no efforts to find minority applicants), but should also be done affirmatively, by taking definite actions to find applicants from minorities.
This would be, in its way, admirable. However, in current use, affirmative action goes beyond this, often mandating the use of quotas for setting aside jobs or a portion of college entrance positions for each minority (including also some "minorities" which are actually majorities). In effect, this means selecting applicants by the color of their skin, precisely what the original concept of non-discrimination forbids. This is sometimes called "reverse discrimination," although this term is rather contradictory - discrimination remains discrimination.
Regents v. Bakke effectively outlawed quotas but allowed affirmative action as long as there are considerations other than race. This is sometimes called reverse discrimination.
Dinesh D'Souza wrote:
| “ | Many whites have become increasingly scornful of black demands, and vehemently reject racial preferences. Most blacks, by contrast, support affirmative action as indispensable to fighting the enduring effects of white racism.[1] | ” |
On August 28, 2007 the United States Commission on Civil Rights released a report that determined that affirmative action can be harmful to minority law school students due to the fact that many students admitted through affirmative action programs are unprepared and are thus being set up for failure.[2]
