The Failures Of Affirmative Action Essay Research

The Failures Of Affirmative Action Essay, Research Paper

The Failures of Affirmative Action

Once upon a time, there were two people who went to an

interview for only one job position at the same company. The first

person attended a prestigious and highly academic university, had

years of work experience in the field and, in the mind of the

employer, had the potential to make a positive impact on the company’s

performance. The second person was just starting out in the field and

seemed to lack the ambition that was visible in his opponent. “Who was

chosen for the job.” you ask. Well, if the story took place before

1964, the answer would be obvious. However, with the somewhat recent

adoption of the social policy known as affirmative action, the answer

becomes unclear.

After the United States Congress passed the Civil Rights Act

in 1964, it became apparent that certain business traditions, such as

seniority status and aptitude tests, prevented total equality in

employment. Then President, Lyndon B. Johnson, decided something

needed to be done to remedy these flaws. On September 24, 1965, he

issued Executive Order #11246 at Howard University that required

federal contractors “to take affirmative action to ensure that

applicants are employed . . . without regard to their race, creed,

color, or national origin (Civil Rights).” When Lyndon Banes Johnson

signed that order, he enacted one of the most discriminating pieces of

legislature since the Jim Crow Laws were passed.

Affirmative action was created in an effort to help minorities

leap the discriminative barriers that were ever so present when the

bill was first enacted, in 1965. At this time, the country was in the

wake of nationwide civil-rights demonstrations, and racial tension was

at its peak. Most of the corporate executive and managerial positions

were occupied by white males, who controlled the hiring and firing of

employees. The U.S. government, in 1965, believed that these employers

were discriminating against minorities and believed that there was no

better time than the present to bring about change.

When the Civil Rights Law passed, minorities, especially

African-Americans, believed that they should receive retribution for

the years of discrimination they endured. The government responded by

passing laws to aide them in attaining better employment as reprieve

for the previous two hundred years of suffering their race endured at

the hands of the white man. To many, this made sense. Supporters of

affirmative action asked, “why not let the government help them get

better jobs.” After all, the white man was responsible for their

suffering. While this may all be true, there is another question to

be asked. Are we truly responsible for the years of persecution that

the African Americans were submitted to.

The answer to the question is yes and no. It is true that the

white man is partly responsible for the suppression of the African-

American race. However, the individual white male is not. It is just

as unfair and suppressive to hold many white males responsible for

past persecution now as it was to discriminate against many

African-Americans in the generations before. Why should an honest,

hard-working, open minded, white male be suppressed, today, for past

injustice. Affirmative action accepts and condones the idea of an eye

for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Do two wrongs make a right. I

think mother taught us better than that.

Affirmative action supporters make one large assumption when

defending the policy. They assume that minority groups want help.

This, however, may not always be the case. My experience with

minorities has led me to believe that they fought to attain equality,

not special treatment. To them, the acceptance of special treatment is

an admittance of inferiority. They ask, “Why can’t I become successful

on my own. Why do I need laws to help me get a job.” These African

Americans want to be treated as equals, not as incompetents.

In a statement released in 1981 by the United States

Commission on Civil Rights, Jack P. Hartog, who directed the project,

said: Only if discrimination were nothing more than the misguided acts

of a few prejudiced individuals would affirmative action plans be

“reverse discrimination.” Only if today’s society were operating

fairly toward minorities and women would measures that take race, sex,

and national origin into account be “preferential treatment.” Only if

discrimination were securely placed in a well-distant past would

affirmative action be an unneeded and drastic remedy.

What the commission failed to realize was that there are

thousands of white males who are not discriminating yet are being

punished because of those who do. The Northern Natural Gas Company of

Omaha, Nebraska, was forced by the government to release sixty-five

Внимание, отключите Adblock

Вы посетили наш сайт со включенным блокировщиком рекламы!
Ссылка для скачивания станет доступной сразу после отключения Adblock!

Скачать