Affirmative Action in the Hunger of Memory Book by Rodriguez - Literature review Example

Affirmative Action In his book d “Hunger of Memory” Rodriguez expresses his dissent with the policy of affirmative action, which is based on the principle that racism is the key to social oppression. He states, “Americans learnt to look beyond class in considering social oppression…..it became easy to underestimate, even to ignore altogether, the importance of class.” (Rodriguez 149). He therefore ascribes differences in class as being the primary reason for division and oppression in society. He favors a policy of assimilation and suggests that the racial divide can be bridged only by true and complete assimilation. Critics have however pointed out that it is only by allowing ethnicity to thrive and be respected, that some measure of equality can be achieved – since it is difficult for people to completely separate themselves from their ethnic roots and take to a foreign culture (Salvidar 27). Rodriguez also links his policy on the Affirmative Action programs to the issue of bilingual education, claiming that it is not necessary at all, rather “all children must abandon the language of origin in order to enter public society.” (Rodriguez 27). In my own view as a Korean bilingual student who is learning English as a second language, Rodriguez’s views appear unrealistic and impractical for everyone to achieve. The difficulties that second language students face in learning English are a function of the differences in their own native tongues. There may be three major aspects that affect a student’s ability to learn English : (a) their low level of understanding and self esteem (b) the different system of sounds in different languages and (c) differences in grammar. When a student has continuously spoken and studied in one language and then tries to learn English, the native language does tend to interfere with the learning of English. However, this cannot form the basis for completely rejecting the native tongue and bilingual education, as Rodriguez suggests. There may be a need to reform teaching and learning methods instead. Similarly, where Affirmative Action is concerned, it is only by allowing diversity to thrive and cultural and ethnic differences to be recognized and celebrated that there can be some measure of equality in society. Achieving this through complete assimilation is a difficult if not downright impossible task. While it may have been easier for European races to assimilate, there are feelings of low self esteem and cultural problems that make it more difficult for races such as Asians and Chicanos to assimilate into American society. According to Rodriguez, “I do not think that all blacks are equally black…all Mexican Americans are not equally Mexican-Americans and the dividing line is class.” (Rodriguez 150). This is not to imply that blacks do not face racism at all; rather in his view, the racism experienced by those in the working class is much worse than what is experienced by the middle class. In explaining his education, he concludes that it requires “a radical self reformation” (Rodriguez 67). He expresses the view that his education in an elite college is the cause of separation from his parents because it has pushed him into a different class - “because of my school I had grown culturally separated from my parents…” (Rodriguez 72). Rodriguez faced a great deal of difficulty in learning English and the process of education was also like an indoctrination into the culture and value systems of the upper middle class. Rodriguez has argued strongly for assimilation rather than the promotion of diversity which is the goal of Affirmative Action Programs, which seeks to highlight and honor the differences between racial and cultural groups. In his book, he declares that he is a fully assimilated “middle class American man” and that it is time the middle class set aside its “pastoral” impulse to “deny its difference from the lower class.” (Rodriguez 6). By this, he is referring to his Mexican American people and he seems to be stating that middle class Mexicans should stop trying to ally themselves with lower class Mexicans, solely on the basis of their common race, because it is class that has created a difference between them. On this basis therefore, he argues that Left parties should not be supporting the policy of affirmative action, because it is not a revolutionary policy and ignores the impact of class as a factor in achieving true equality for everyone in society. The program seeks to affirm racial differences rather than ignoring them and allowing society to push towards assimilation of all races into society. By developing policy and remedial measures addressed purely towards the racial factor and ignore the class factor, Rodriguez therefore believes that affirmative action programs are not revolutionary enough. He suggests that there has already been assimilation in society along racial lines, what needs to be addressed is the class distinctions that set people within the same ethnic group apart from each other. On this basis he argues against diversity. Sanchez however disagrees with Rodriguez and his views on affirmative action, especially in his downplaying of the issue of ethnicity and race as a factor in social prejudice. In fact, she has concluded that Rodriguez’s books is not so much a “disingenuous, cliché ridden, hodge podge of clever sounding, self reflective, self absorbed musings as it is a calculated compendium of manipulations geared, on the one hand, to assuage mainstream fears of diversity and, on the other, to set down directions for a more “effective” incorporation of minority discourses in what promises to be a time of increasing upheaval.” (Sanchez 171). Therefore, Sanchez goes directly to the root of the weakness she perceives in Rodriguez’s argument. She implies that he has eschewed his Mexican heritage and his roots in favor of allying himself more closely with the higher class and with their perspective on the race issue. Therefore, he offers a false assurance that affirmative action programs do not really need to address the factor of race so much as they need to address the factor of class, which is an integral part of society. Sanchez however argues that there is a deep seated racial bias that exists in society and this is the reason why the diversity that is advocated through affirmative action programs is so disturbing to the races that are in a superior position. Sanchez also argues that such disturbances along racial lines are likely to be a prominent feature in society, demanding a resolution through such programs as Affirmative Action programs to address the injustice meted out to the minority races. The existence of such divisions along racial lines cannot be ignored or avoided by pointing to the class factor as being the dividing line, or that the Affirmative Action program is not revolutionary enough. Therefore, she is of the view that Rodriguez is merely trying to pander to the white races and assuring them diversity in affirmative action is not something they need to fear, because the real division lies along class rather than race lines. Salvidar also offers criticism of the views offered by Rodriguez and according to him, suggest that the author has sought to distance himself from the ethnic bonds that tie him to his family and race. In his book., Rodriguez writes about those of his own race who assume that he remains unchanged, despite his education and reformation - "Perhaps because I am marked by indelible color they easily suppose that I am unchanged by social mobility, that I can claim unbroken ties with my past. The possibility!" (Rodriguez 4). However, as Saldivar puts it, Rodriguez feels “himself capable of functioning only as an isolated and private individual, deprived of any organic connection with his ethnic group, his social class and finally even his own family.” (Salvidar 27). Salvidar’s view is a reflection of much of the Chicano criticism that has been extended, of Rodriguez’s work and his arguments on the Affirmative Action programs. Most of such criticism takes a stronger stand on the issue of ethnicity, arguing that any move to bring about a measure of equality in society must address the issue of race. It is only ethnicity that can form a viable focus point for any discussions on identity, while the reality of the existence of class is not a significant factor that can be incorporated into diversity programs. Therefore Rodriguez’ attempt to ignore race and focus upon class in Affirmative Action Programs is an ill advised and wrongly directed policy. In particular, he has argued against bilingual education on the same basis that it tends to perpetuate the divisions in society and therefore he suggests that the native language should be given up by students if they wish to enter public society. However, not all Chicano authors support the notion of giving up one’s own language, even while they are able to criticize elements of their native culture. For example, Anzaldua (1987) criticizes the patriarchal nature of Chicano society, but this does not become a basis for her to allege that the culture must be abandoned. Instead she tries to find redeeming elements in it. In a similar way, bilingual education address the need for students to learn English while also maintaining contact with their own native language. Affirmative action programs that focus on diversity show a respect for national cultures, which cannot be reached by demanding that total assimilation take place. In conclusion therefore, I agree with Rodriguez in some aspects, in the manner in which he demonstrates all the difficulties that arise in learning English and understanding the culture that goes with it. International students tend to think in their native language and then translate into English, which is one of the reasons for the difficulties they face. In order to learn other subjects in English effectively, ESL students need to develop fluency in English because they need more time to understand, but do not have such time available. The low self esteem of ESL students also hampers their efforts to learn English. But this cannot support the position put forth by Rodriguez, that the native language must be given up altogether. While it is necessary for an ESL student to work extra hard and do more practice exercises to develop fluency in English, bilingual education preserves native culture and ethic, which is also the aim of the Affirmative Action Programs. These programs allow individuals from cultures which suffer from low self esteem due to their minority status, to also advance and progress in society, just as Rodriguez himself benefited from such a program as a scholarship student. On this basis therefore, Rodriguez’s criticism of Affirmative Action programs and bilingual education appears unjustified. References: * Anzaldua, Gloria, 1987 “ Borderlands / La Frontera: The New Mestiza”. San Francisco: Aunt Lute * Rodriguez, Richard, 1982. “Hunger of Memory: The education of Richard Rodriguez.” New York: Bantam * Saldivar, Ramon. 1985. "Ideologies of the Self. Chicano Autobiography." Diacritics, 15(3): 25-34. * Sanchez, Rosaura. 1995. "Calculated Musings: Richard Rodriguezs Metaphysics of Difference” IN “The Ethnic” ( ed. David Palumbo-Liu). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Read More