Affirmative Action Help or Hinder

¶ … affirmative action help or hinder minorities. Why?

Affirmative action is regarded as the set of preferences and quotas, which are offered within prescribed limits of time and scope, with the purpose to 'benefit the least advantaged or to achieve a certain proportionality of benefits between the more advantaged and the less advantaged in society'. Affirmative Action is also considered to be 'a policy of favoring qualified women and minority candidates over qualified men or non-minority candidates with the immediate goals of outreach, remedying discrimination, or achieving diversity, and the ultimate goals of attaining a color-blind and a gender-free i.e. no sexual discrimination society' (Johnson, 2004) the color-blind society is termed as the society in which the 'race has no more significance than eye color has in most societies'. The ultimate objective of the Affirmative action is to provide racial justice and sexual justice to the minority in particular, and public at large. The set of immediate goals and relief are adjoined with the Affirmative Action. The Affirmative Action has the 'goal of outreach', as per which 'one seeks out qualified women and minority candidates who would otherwise not know about or apply for the available positions, but ultimately hires or accepts only those candidates who are actually the most qualified' (Stefan, 1992). The impact of the discriminatory forces can also be diluted through the implementation of the Affirmative Action, and which support the creation of 'truly equal-opportunity environment' (Stefan, 1992). The Affirmative Action swiftly 'compensate for past discrimination and the effects of that discrimination' (Stefan, 1992) which have previously generated violence and social chaos. A particular form of the Affirmative Action is based on innovating diversified range of sequences and development, where 'the pursuit of diversity is justified either in terms of its educational benefits or in terms of its ability to create a more effective workforce in such areas as policing or community relations' (Johnson, 2004) the terminology of Affirmative Action was initially used when the National Labor Relations Act was promulgated in 1935. In that particular context the Affirmative Action was interpreted as 'an employer who was found to be discriminating against union members or union organizers would have to stop and take affirmative action to place those victims where they would be without the discrimination' (Randall, 1987).

According to the observers and critics, it is important for different countries and regions to 'redress its long history of racial and sexual discrimination' (Weisberg, 1985) and the matter of grave significance can only be achieved through exercising 'the nation's most ambitious aspect' which is affirmative action. The Affirmative Action has incited internal divisions between nations and regions, and therefore it has further complicated the present. The opposition movement has expressed their concerns towards the struggle for the provisions of equal rights for all the citizens, and have argued that sufficient provisions have been introduced and incorporated, as per which 'favoring members of one group over another simply goes against the American grain' (Weisberg, 1985). However, the particular representatives of the Affirmative Action has responded that provisions have not been fully incorporated, and any such move to introduce such provisions has been boycotted, and believe that 'grant of modest advantages to minorities and women is more than fair, given hundreds of years of discrimination that benefited whites and men'. Affirmative Action is based on the primarily principle of human rights, as per which each and every segment of the society should be provided with equal right and status, in particular the minorities and the women population. The concept of Affirmative action originated after the evolution of the civil rights movement, the action has given enough consideration towards the employment, education and contracting decisions. The human rights and organizations which are considered to be the torch bearers of the Affirmative Action have establish certain timeframe for the achievement of goals which emphasis on 'increased diversity, and use recruitment' (Steele, 1997), and has denounced the practices based on preferences, which were previously adopted for the achievement of such those goals. In its contemporary form, the Affirmative action can be regarded as the call for an admission or preference of the applicant having affiliation with the minority segment, based on racial, gender or ethnic divisions. The actions and policies initiated and approved as per the injunctions of the Affirmative Actions are not based upon quotas, biased attitude, preference to the unqualified candidates, and the purpose of the Affirmative Action is not to 'harm or damage the interest of any individual or party through reverse discrimination' (Stefan, 1992). According to Bill Clinton, the former President of United States, there is always a need for the assertion towards reforms which can end the practices based on discrimination, and such practices have remained unfinished, therefore there is a need to mend the ongoing system, instead of putting an end to it. On the other side, the Conservatives associated with the American politics believe that the complete cease of Affirmative Action is 'a powerful political issue' (Johnson, 2004) the ruling of the American Supreme Court in 1996 on California ballot have abolished the practices of sexual and racial preferences, therefore the affirmative actions are on the verge of decline, the trajectory of which is based on the ruling authority of the country (Young, 2003).

It is interesting to observe that the previously experienced political violence, which mainly took place due to the failure on the part of the majority groups, or the their vested interests have urged them to practice such a violent course of action which has been responsible for further agitation and chaos, in actual such actions were purported to condemn and urge the withdrawal of plans and regulations which provided enough safeguard to the minority groups, and such chaos by those, ' whose only real problem has been their inability to compete with more skilled and more diligent minorities' (Randall, 1987). Such situations have been experienced widely across the world, in different places including Asian countries like Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and the Indian states, and the African country of Nigeria. The comprehensive overview of the Malaysian past and present has revealed that the 'politically dominant native Malays voted for employment and educational preferences for themselves over ethnic Chinese who had emigrated to Malaysia during the recent colonial period and, without discriminating against anyone, had generally become better educated and more prosperous than the native Malays' (James, 2004) Taking an account of Sri Lanka, the rights of the Tamils have been ignored, and the Sinhalese have mainly stressed over the need to achieve preferences in different sectors, which is possible due to their political dominance, the fear and concerns of the Sinhalese were based on the fact that the Tails are more educated and prosperous, the hatred and jealousy was responsible for supporting hatred between the two groups, which has resulted in the civil war. In the cases of Nigeria, the Ibo tribe has access to education and government during the colonial rule, therefore the Hausa-Fulani, political force of the country launched strong movement for the additional preferences of their tribal people in employment and education sector. Eventually, the introvert approach of the respective tribes was responsible for the freedom movement in the Southern state of Nigeria, although with the collapse of the civil war the freedom movement was diluted, but he political concerns of the respective tribes were unresolved, and the agitation and violence still prevail in the region. In India, the ethnic and tribal prejudice has been responsible for the violence and agitation, and the Indian state of Assam and Maharashtra has observed intensified riots and chaos due the Affirmative Action which were taken to compensate and provide ample opportunities to the migrants and other habitants from different states (Steele, 1997).

History of affirmative action and its future within particular country (United States of America)

The major studies have revealed that Affirmative Action is to be considered reverse discrimination, which has provided preferential treatment to the particular class of people on racial and sexual grounds. The interpretation of the Affirmative Action has been condemned, and different elements of the civil society have insisted that, 'Affirmative action has been mislabeled preferential treatment for certain members of society' (Randall, 1987), and have regarded the Affirmative Action as 'a kind of social restitution and an attempt to create a more democratic society' (Thompson, 1974). According to Mr. Johnson, the former President of United States, 'You do not take a person who for years has been hobbled by chains, liberate him and bring him to the starting line of a race and say, 'You are free to compete with others,' and still justly believe that you have been completely fair' (James, 2004) the access to the opportunities is not the only requirement for the minority, rather it is important for the state and the public institutions to provide and encourage the potential and abilities within the minorities to benefit from the available opportunities, in this regard 'Affirmative action is an attempt to facilitate a more level playing field, Affirmative action recognizes the interconnectedness of race, class, gender' (Schmidt, 2001). It has been reported that due to the economic disparity the available opportunities have been inaccessible for the minority groups, and therefore such initiatives are important to be formulated which facilitate the minority groups in their quest to reach the mark. Affirmative Action is incorporated once the society has failed to materialize the society value equality and fairness. Affirmative Action are installed only to regret the failure on the behalf of the state to ensure equality and justice to the people irrespective of the racial, sexual, ethnic and religious divisions, therefore the Affirmative Action has diluted the heavily concentrated ethnic and racial vigor, and has subdue the negative fallout of such practices. Affirmative Action has brought ultimate relief to those particular elements of the society which were previously ignored, and whose existence was previously deplored in the society. The American society has although benefit from the implementation of the Affirmative Action, but the common understanding has revealed that the Affirmative Action has delivered limited gains, and the element of discrimination and ignorance towards the people with diversified backgrounds is evident. It was the Affirmative Action which influenced the National enrollment figures, the enrolment of the people with diversified ethnic and racial background rose from the negligible figures, during the period when the 'schools were segregated to about 20% of the nation's post-secondary education students' (Schmidt, 2001). During the period of 1993, the statistics revealed that African-Americans comprised of more than nine percent of the enrolment, whereas the state of Latino reflected the enrolment percentile of Asian-Americans at five percent, and the American Indians recorded less than a percent of the total enrolments. The progress was gradual, and the 'yearly gains were minimal' (James, 2004) and it took more than two decades to reach the improved level of the enrolment figures. The Affirmative Action provided leveled field to the minorities having affiliation with different regions and divisions, including Latinos, Chicanos, Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and women. It has been wrongly interpreted that the Affirmative Action has suppressed and diluted the concentration and representation of the majority groups into different sets of activities of the affairs, the white men previously hold the structural power in the society, and even after the lapse of more than two decades, when the Affirmative Action has been implemented the white men has the authority in their control. According to the study conducted by the Washington Post, more than ninety five percent of the corporate executives of the leading organizations are white males. The Asians have been successful to achieve the remaining percentile 'from affirmative action by making use of services provided by programs such as the Educational Opportunity Program, Upward Bound, and different such initiatives launched to facilitate the minority groups (Randall, 1987).

The success story of the minority groups in particular the Asian community is widely based on their struggle and quest to achieve the mark, it is their hard work which has definitely make them achieve the mark and success, therefore the policies and the initiatives launched through affirmative actions have only supported the participation of the Asians and other minority groups, the success has lot to do with their personal motivation, hard work and devotion. The particular segments of the American society has widely condemned the Affirmative Action, and has held such practices responsible for the failure of the friends and relatives in different institutions. The approach and understanding is widely considered to be biased, and has a logical error. The statistics revealed that the current system forces have been successful in keeping the participation and involvement of the people with racial and ethnic divisions at disadvantage, 'for example, Asians and Pacific Islanders who on average have higher percentages receiving bachelor's degrees i.e. forty percent, compared to all other Americans i.e. twenty percent, are not proportionately represented in the job market, specifically in areas of management and executive positions' (Schmidt, 2001). It is therefore misleading and inaccurate to blame the participation of the minority into workforce for the failure of the majority group, instead injustice is being done to the people with different ethnic and racial background, who despite of being meritorious are not ignored or sidelined, 'the reality does not accurately reflect the numbers of qualified Asians and Pacific Islanders that enter the job market'. The implementation of the Affirmative Action has although provided relief to the people with ethnic and racial background, but the preference is far more diluted than the preferences and advantages enjoyed by the white people. A report published by Berkeley's Institute for the Study of Social Change in 1991, observed that many white people have been successful in getting admission into the elite institutions of the United States through the alumni preferences, which is more than 'the combined number of all the Blacks, and Chicanos entering through affirmative action'. During the period of 1980s, the admissions awarded to the students in Harvard University on the basis of the alumni preference or legacies, have been more than 35%, and even then 'no attacks or criticism were made on these century old preferences based on family ties and perpetuating the old-boy networks. The study by the public institute revealed surprisingly data which has proven the concerns of the white men fallacious, it is not the reality but the lost position which as angered the white men, 'In 1973 approximately 18 million of white Americans between the age group of 18-24 graduated from their respective high schools, whereas due to the significant declination in the birth rate reported in 1993, the number of students who graduated from the high school dropped to 16 million. During 1973, more than thirty percent of the white high school graduates entered university; however the admission of the white men during 1993 significantly rose to the mark of forty percents, although there was sharp decline in the number of students going to the high school. The pattern of increased college participation holds true for every ethnic group. Nearly 15 million students are now enrolled in college, and participation by every racial group has increased. That is partly what the anger on campuses is about, not that people of color are taking white places, but that white men demand more spaces and vacancies for themselves. Despite the fact that the participation of the racial and ethnic divisions has improved with the passage of time, white's nationally constitute seventy five percent of the student body, earn eighty eight of the PhD's awarded to U.S. citizens, are ninety percent of the college administrator, and hold 875 of the full time faculty positions'. During the subsequent years, the number of the admissions of the students, having affiliation with minority groups has been at reasonable rate. Unfortunately, it has been the conservative elements within the democratic forces which in an attempt to gain privilege from the interest of the majority groups 'have seized upon and irresponsibly whipped into frenzy' (Young, 2003), and therefore the entire debate with reference to the 'dispassionate discussions about affirmative action' have been difficult. It is evident that although different representatives of the majority and minority groups have expressed their opinions with reference to the Affirmative Actions, and have experienced differences, but the representatives of both the sides have expressed their desire to workout for mutual resolution and adoption of Affirmative Actions with special emphasis on he diversified operations (Young, 2003).

It is important to realize that the Supreme Court of the United States of America has on different instances adopted varying stands, and 'as always held that it is permissible for an institution to adopt remedial affirmative action in order to compensate for identifiable acts of purposeful discrimination committed by that very institution' (Weisberg, 1985), although such laws and regulations were considered to the be reflection of the discriminatory attitude of the Supreme Court towards minority group, and 'it was rare for an institution that is engaged in Affirmative Action to make a confession that the judiciary has committed identifiable acts of purposeful discrimination, or at least to admit that it did so in the recent past' (Weisberg, 1985). The reluctance to publicly make a confession was expected to indulge the judiciary and the state into vulnerable situations including 'further claims of compensation from other victims' (Ronald, 1985). Therefore the concept of the remedial Affirmative Action was launched by the state and supported by the judiciary, which was based on different situations related to 'when they have been found guilty of discrimination, or, more likely, when they have been forced into accepting a legal settlement' (Jed, 1997).

Diversity Affirmative action is based on the propagation of diversified forces in different profession and other social activities; the idea of such an act is not to encourage the practice of remedial affirmative action, which is precisely aimed at derailing the discrimination. The purpose of such a Affirmative Action plan is to propagate diversity and pluralism, 'which in turn is justified either in terms of its educational benefits or its ability to create a more effective workforce in such areas as policing and community relations, the legal roots of this form of affirmative action in the United States are found in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke' (Jed, 1997).