Should affirmative action for colleges and universities be continued - Research Paper Example

Affirmative Action for Colleges and Universities Should Be Continued Minorities, specifically people of color, were routinely denied an equal opportunity to attend the school of their choice until relatively recently. The ideology that sanctioned and imposed racial segregation is the very reason affirmative action is necessary. Those of that same ideology make claims of reverse discrimination in reference to affirmative action. Without this contentious legal remedy to help ensure equality, the imbalance of opportunity in the U.S. would remain greatly on the side of the ethnic majority and discrimination would continue in much more obvious ways, more so than it does today. The evolution of cultural perceptions relies on concepts being widely accepted, a progression that doesn’t appear to happen naturally without the assistance of affirmative action policies. Since its beginning, affirmative action has proved successful in balancing the scale of educational access equality. The quota system instituted by a school usually reflects the region’s ethnic demographics therefore allowing for actual educational opportunity that are not discriminatory towards any specific race. Although some in the majority racial group, Caucasians, may now perceive they are not being treated justly, the scale of justice is only now adjusted back toward to the middle thanks chiefly to the utilization of affirmative action which underscores the need for this system to continue. The U.S. government began affirmative action measures during the Civil Rights era of the 1960’s, in an effort to eliminate institutional racial discrimination. Starting with an executive order authored in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, these programs were sanctioned in an effort to equalize racial inequality. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) “prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin” (US Equal Employment Opportunity, 1997). The Supreme Court held in the 2003 University of Michigan case that “the University of Michigan’s use of race among other factors in its law school admissions program was constitutional” (History of Affirmative Action, 2003). This decision was a significant milestone in shaping the way we, as a society, will development. From its beginnings in the mid 1960’s, affirmative action has helped many thousands of formerly disadvantaged persons who, because of the law, have since earned previously denied access to a higher education. This includes persons of color, other types of minorities and women who were previously denied educational opportunities or were not given opportunities for advancement within the institution after given access. These advances have led to noticeable changes not only in the individual person’s life but in the significance society values the concept of justice for all. Affirmative action agendas do not have the capability to eliminate racist attitudes, but it mitigates some of the effects caused by it. The concept of affirmative action has suffered its critics and its implementation has not been without issues, but to eradicate this guiding principle of equal treatment would be to reverse the hard fought advancements of the Civil Rights Movement and turn back the time to the regretful days of overt racism prior to the mid-1960’s U.S. Arguments involving affirmative action policies are well more far reaching than the legal matter alone. It is the ethical responsibility of every person and institution in this nation to use all strategies of ending racial discrimination. However there is a segment of society who does not acknowledge and have passionately challenged affirmative action on both legal grounds and as a social cure for bigotry. They say that affirmative action is a case in point where two wrongs do not make a right and claiming reverse discrimination has actually been the eventual result. Of course this faction does not challenge traditional means of discriminatory practices and favoritism that continue to advantage the rich and powerful people of society. Debates regarding affirmative action are often divided down racial boundaries because many kinds of selection procedures continue to show favoritism. An example of this is the system of giving special consideration to university admission for children of alumni thus excluding more deserving applicants. This one custom duplicated over many years and generations have led to an enormous over-representation of the conventional upper and middle class background in our colleges therefore also in well-paid professional jobs upon graduation. These positions of influence in our society permit this group to continue its repression of the blue-collar working class. Affirmative action helps to balance the playing field for people of all backgrounds, not to discriminate against any person or group but even with these policies, the scales remain tipped toward the white, wealthy segment of society. Reverse discrimination resulting from affirmative action policies is scarcely a rational conclusion because inequalities obviously continue due to racial bias still present within the nation’s economic hierarchy. Due to the fact that even with affirmative action policies the system still benefits white people invalidates the reverse discrimination argument and indicates that resistance to affirmative action are indicator of the majority’s backlash against equality. In 1991, Prime Time, an ABC news program filmed overt examples of misplaced race perceptions thereby supporting the continued need for a impassioned government and citizen position supporting affirmative action. The Diane Sawyer documentary, ‘True Colors,’ filmed two friends, one white and one black, equally educated males of the same age as they dealt with numerous circumstances that take place in normal daily life. The men, pretending they were new in town, independently attempted apply for the same job, rent the same apartment and shopped. “The documentary recorded the troubling disparity in the way the two similar men were treated in identical situations.” (Horne, 1992, pp. 40-41). In general, the white man was welcomed by the community but the black man encountered substantial obstructions and apparent attempts of social repression at every turn. This somewhat surprising display of racism took place more than quarter of a century after the Civil Rights Act. Affirmative action alone does not completely address the needs of the continuing racial bias apparent in this country but this very fact proves the need for affirmative action. Still, in today’s more progressive society, now nearing half a century removed from the Civil Rights era, minorities are blatantly discriminated against in educational opportunities by the use and misuse of improper qualification standards. Latent segregation remains a major component in standards of education for people of color. Criterions for higher education are established for a particular segment of society and are imposed unfairly and unjustly on another. These imposed obstacles to advancement, whether intended or not further advance the justification for assisting the scales of justice to tip back to the actually disadvantaged persons by means of affirmative action laws. Due to white people getting preferred treatment from before the beginnings of the nation, the Federal law directs that when administrators face an option between qualified applicants of different racial background, the choice should be the minority. A position endorsed by the courts which have also ordered affirmative action hiring quotas so that those scholastic institutions and other types of employers begin to replicate the racial mix of the citizens of that general area. Those opposed to affirmative action argue that it is disproportionately advantageous for upper and middle class minorities, not the people of color, working and poor class who need it most. The facts do not bear out this criticism and shows that affirmative action policies have actually benefited considerable numbers of poor, working class and people of color. “Access to job training programs, vocational schools, and semi-skilled and skilled blue-collar, craft, pink-collar, police and firefighter jobs has increased substantially through affirmative action programs. Even in the professions, many people of color who have benefited from affirmative action have been from families of low income and job status” (Ezorsky, 1991, p. 64). Because of their skin color, middle and lower economic class persons and minorities have undeniably benefited from affirmative action policies. However, people of color and in all socio-economic classes other than upper-class have experienced the negative effects of racial discrimination for their entire lifetime. Though experiencing financial success from affirmative action programs and policies buffers some of the most severe effects of racism, it doesn't insulate minorities from racial discrimination on a daily basis. Opponents also say that affirmative action policies are clearly unfair to white men because they are being punished for the past discriminations of white men of a different time period and attitude. White men are not getting the educational opportunities they could be more qualified for. The opponents are right in that some white persons may be overlooked for some educational opportunities because of affirmative action programs and that they and their bank accounts suffer as a result. The lack of educational opportunities is regrettable and its specific causes are what the discussion should revolve around but not whether or not affirmative action should exist. Millions of minority persons have also lost specific educational opportunities because of racial discrimination. Affirmative action is the response to racism, to remedy of societal repression – not simply an effort to rectify what did existed in the past but also to offset the continued discrimination that still exists. Those who make the opposition’s case seem to be concerned only with white applicants, that the more privileged of society don’t get an opportunity due to their race but they are not as concerned that the underprivileged who don’t get an educational opportunity for the same reason. That in itself is a demonstration of biased racial preference. If their argument that white men are losing educational opportunities to affirmative action policies is legitimate, it surely has not materialized into ethnic equality. “If one looks at the organization of various professions such as law, medicine, architecture, academics and journalism, or at corporate management, or at higher-level government positions or if one looks overall at the average income levels of white men one immediately notices that people of color are still significantly underrepresented and underpaid in every category” (Sklar, 1995, p. 115). Research has shown what common sense reproves, that many educational institutions whether intentionally or not continue to practice discriminatory policies while publicly supporting the concepts of equal opportunity and affirmative action. “There are so many subtle and not-so-subtle ways to eliminate people of color from the job application process it is not surprising that employers have found ways around affirmative action unless it is tied to visible hiring and promotion targets” (Chideya, 1995, p. 110). It is essential to set mechanisms in motion that monitor and enforce affirmative action standards which will help ensure that conformity can be measured. This will help to guarantee that the law as well as the spirit of the law is more than an obscure ideology. The government should mandate numerical targets to assure compliance with affirmative action policies therefore ensuring equal access to education. Affirmative action policies allow opportunities for factions of society who would not otherwise have them and has been demonstrated conclusively to be a sensible choice for all. Affirmative action was not meant to be and will never be a panacea because it will not eradicate racial discrimination. History has conclusively demonstrated that racism is never self-correcting, it is self perpetuating. The psychological and economic obstacles to minorities as well as the negative effects to society are passed on to each succeeding generation unless corrective measures are employed. If people became more aware to the immeasurable benefits affirmative action presents us all we, as a society, could make sure that every citizen has an equal and fair opportunity for the pursuit of their dreams and ambitions. Both sides of the argument should be asking why there not enough room in the universities for all. Until education is fairly distribution and an equitable opportunity of advancement for all citizens, affirmative action will be necessary to counter and correct the many years that comparable actions had been used in favor of the majority race. Affirmative action is the legal representation of the ruling class’ recognition of and responsibility to the eradication of racial discrimination. It is essential for the benefit of all of society. If we are truthfully dedicated to American ideals of equality and justice, than we cannot abandon programs that compensate for the immorality that results from racial discrimination. References Chideya, Farai. Don't Believe the Hype: Fighting Cultural Misinformation about African-Americans. New York: Plume/Penguin Books. (1995). Ezorsky, Gertrude. Racism & Justice: The Case for Affirmative Action. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (1991). History of Affirmative Action Policies (The). “The Supreme Court handed down its decisions in Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. and Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. (2003). Horne, Gerald. Reversing Discrimination: The Case for Affirmative Action. New York: International Publishers. (1992). Sklar, Holly. Chaos or Community?: Seeking Solutions, Not Scapegoats for Bad Economics. Boston: South End Press. (1995). US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. “Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” United States Code. (January 15, 1997). June 16, 2011 < http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii.html> Read More