0
As it stands today in the US, affirmative action policies are not a main point of discussion. There are several reasons why. One is that the programs did not work very well. The other is that, aside, from recessions, discrimination in hiring practices is rare and against the law. The topic is controversial.
What else can I help you with?
Opponents of affirmative action have argued that the policy?
Opponents of affirmative action have argued that the policy actually promotes "revers" discrimination. This is because affirmative action favors people based on race instead of ability.
What is the affirmative action program?
it is to prosecute victims of hate crimes based on race or gender
Should Affirmative Action be eliminated?
Affirmative action, otherwise known as "reverse-discrimination", is a policy that effectively discriminates against certain groups for the benefit of other groups. The intent of such a policy is to "even the playing field." The actual result, however, is that less qualified individuals unfairly gain access to employment, education, groups, etc at the expense of more qualified individuals. But this does not even begin to address the true underpinnings of discrimination. The result of affirmative action, or discrimination, is that those in the "target" groups that affirmative action is supposed to help might obtain credentials that are then questioned (fairly or unfairly) but others who wonder if their success was a product of talent and hard-work or of government-sponsorsored discrimination - ie affirmative action. So, the result is that affirmative action actually LEADS to stereotyping, the underpinning of discrimination. Affirmative Action should absolutely be eliminated. Fairness is not unilateral - the only way to address problems of discrimination is by even-ing the playing field for all. Education and free markets are the solution.
Is affirmative action needed in the US?
This is a widely debated topic, so you may see conflicting answers below.Answer 1Yes. Affirmative Action allows individuals who would normally be underprivileged the access to the institutions that would fundamentally change their economic situation and break cycles of poverty. However, in my view, Affirmative Action should be economic-based, not race/ethnicity based.
Should companies adopt Affirmative Action to increase diversity?
Companies should consider adopting Affirmative Action as a strategy to enhance diversity, as it can help address historical inequalities and promote a more inclusive workplace. By actively seeking to diversify their workforce, companies can benefit from a range of perspectives, fostering innovation and improving decision-making. However, it's essential to balance Affirmative Action with merit-based hiring to ensure that all candidates are evaluated fairly. Ultimately, the goal should be to create an equitable environment where diverse talent can thrive.
What is Shelby Steele's perspective about affirmative action?
Shelby Steele is a prominent critic of affirmative action, arguing that it can perpetuate dependency and undermine individual merit. He believes that such policies often reinforce racial stereotypes, suggesting that minorities cannot succeed without external assistance. Steele advocates for a focus on personal responsibility and self-determination rather than institutionalized preferences, emphasizing that true equality should allow individuals to rise based on their own achievements.
Why couldn't bakke as a white be required to yield to disadvanteged minorities in the admissions process?
Bakke, a white applicant, argued that affirmative action policies at the University of California, Davis, which set aside slots for disadvantaged minorities, discriminated against him based on his race. The Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that while affirmative action is permissible, rigid racial quotas are unconstitutional. The court emphasized that all applicants should be evaluated on individual merit rather than being subject to predetermined racial criteria, thus affirming that Bakke should not be denied admission solely based on his race.
WHO Was the first to propose that you might need affirmative action for men?
The first person to propose the concept of affirmative action for men was Warren Farrell, an American educator and author. In the early 1990s, Farrell suggested in his book "The Myth of Male Power" that men, too, could benefit from affirmative action policies to address disparities in areas such as education and employment. He argued that gender-based affirmative action could help men who faced discrimination or disadvantages in certain contexts.
Does Sarah palin support affirmative action?
Sarah Palin says, "I do not support Affirmative Action polices because they clearly give an unfair advantage to one individual at the expense of another, based strictly on the color of their skin or gender. It is foolish to attempt to correct the injustices of the past with injustices of the present."
How should an affirmative conclusion always be worded?
An affirmative conclusion should be explicit and straightforward, clearly stating that the argument or proposition is true or valid based on the evidence presented. It should be free of ambiguity or uncertainty, leaving no doubt about the stance taken.
What is an argument against affirmative action?
An argument against affirmative action is that it can lead to reverse discrimination, where individuals from historically advantaged groups may be unfairly overlooked in favor of less qualified candidates solely based on their race or gender. Critics argue that this approach undermines the principle of meritocracy by prioritizing demographic characteristics over individual achievements and qualifications. Additionally, it may foster resentment and division rather than promoting genuine equality and social cohesion.
How is race-based gerrymandering related to affirmative action?
Race-based gerrymandering and affirmative action both address issues of racial inequality and representation, but they do so in different contexts. Gerrymandering involves manipulating electoral district boundaries to favor one racial group over another, often diluting the voting power of minorities. In contrast, affirmative action aims to improve opportunities for historically marginalized groups in education and employment. Both practices seek to address systemic inequities, but they highlight the complexities and challenges of achieving fair representation and equality in society.
