The issues of affirmative action have been intensely debated around the world for nearly two decades now. Numerous people, especially those in civil societies worldwide have supported affirmative action across a range of different areas, such as hiring for public and private jobs, or educational scholarships. Especially for admission to educational institutions. The goal of Affirmative Action is to disintegrate elements of discrimination that can often sideline women, minorities, and other protected groups, in places of education, work, and other places. Although practicing affirmative action requires a fair and balanced environment, it also infringes on the rights of others. For example, Affirmative Actions are often inconsistent with principles of merit, and many times end penalizing innocent people. In addition to that, affirmative action often rewards minorities on the incorrect perception that minorities equate to disadvantaged, making it reverse discrimination.
There have been several arguments among different political parties which have spread throughout the public, on whether affirmative action truly is equality or if it is just reverse discrimination. Different institutions hold differing views on what precisely affirmative action entails. For example, the way many employers view affirmative action is often differing from how politicians presume it to be. Furthermore, the courts have their interpretation of what precisely affirmative action is, which then, is practiced in the rulings of most courts. Affirmative action is an ethical issue as it raises several questions on whether or not it “enhances fairness” in the system during the process of admission.
Also, we must ask the question of the real role that diversity places, both in the workplace and in educational institutes.
Affirmative action is widely believed to be the best, and most impartial way to ensure diversity is achieved and maintained in places of school, and work. It exists to assist in establishing tolerant communities which expose people to numerous different cultures, along with unique ideas and perspectives which may differ from theirs. For many advocates of affirmative action, especially those in educational institutes, they feel it permits for a fair assessment of candidates by examining their current social inequalities. The goal of affirmative action is to raise the admissions rate for minorities which are currently statistically under-represented in different institutions throughout the country. — — — That under-representation can be a result of like communities who only have very few people who pursued and obtained higher education, or those who are the children of immigrants and are a student who comes from a poor background. Affirmative action advocates for a diverse student population, which gives the opportunity to not only learn from books and professors but to also be able to learn from one another. Students also get to understand the different cultural practices and backgrounds of others.
Affirmative action works by reducing the admission standards for particular minority groups by initiating an academic counterbalance for disadvantaged students. It attempts to create a level playing field for everyone regardless of their background and ensures that disadvantaged individuals from particular groups have access to the same opportunities.
Now, in theory, that is what affirmative action is supposed to be. However, it has not been like that. There is no way past the discrimination and injustices against particular minority groups can substantiate the current unfairness amongst non-minority groups. Additionally, our Bill of Rights, which is enshrined in our constitution, states that all individuals are equal in the laws of the land, and we are all supposed to be equal to one another. For this reason, people should be treated equally, and we should not grant exclusive permissions to specific groups.
Those who benefit from affirmative action usually have heftier academic expectations versus their peers, and this expectation can often frustrate them, leading to complicating disadvantaged students lives even more. In addition to that, many times, students or employees who get a position due to affirmative action are often not up to the task. Which can lead to them feeling overwhelmed, and can lead to lower graduation rates as they struggle to compete and keep up with their colleagues (Kolodner). Inversely, they also occasionally end up taking the position for granted as sometimes they have not worked as hard for them, and they struggle to fully appreciate the opportunity they have, which can lead to them performing poorly in college.
The practice of affirmative action in organizations and colleges depreciates the element of meritocracy in college admissions or when hiring someone, by putting the aspect of race as the dominant factor. In a study conducted by Harvard University, they found that if they were to accept students based on merit solely, the Asian-American population would make up 43% of the population (Hartocollis).
As a result of all this, affirmative action can end up reinforcing stereotypes as well as promote racism. For example, by offering admission or job positions to specific groups under the pretext of affirmative action creates the assumption that the group is not qualified, and is consequently lazy or stupid, which perpetuates the disadvantaged race under the assumption that they are stupid and lazy. By basing affirmative action on race, it assumes that people of a particular skin color or ethnicity are inherently destitute or needy and that without the favors granted by affirmative action they would not be able to succeed and gain admission of their own merits. Additionally, this also builds on stereotypes by reinforcing them by entrenching them constantly into the system. Advocating for diversity in workplace or classroom does not necessarily mean that you will get a diverse opinion, as you are more likely to get more diverse opinions across a range of economic classes. People from the same ethnicity or race, are not always similar in culture and their opinions. To suggest so would be racist. This shows that affirmative action infrequently contributes to legitimate diversity (Harvard 2018.) Granting preferred treatment based on race is beneficial to a set of people, but disadvantageous to other individuals, even if they merit receiving admission, or qualify for positions, which does not line up with societal ideals.
In this day and age, race is no longer the discriminating factor. We can see that when we look at the data from college admissions all across the US. Women represent 50.8% of the population but are 57% of college students. Blacks make up 13% of the general population, but in colleges, they are 17% of the population. Moreover, we can see the reverse happening for whites, for example. Despite America being 76.9% white, white students only make up 58% of the population.
Asian students now have to score, on average, 450 points more than black students, to be seen as equal. (Wu )This perpetuates the dangerous myth that all Asians are all “inherently smart and rich” while we can see that Vietnamese, Cambodian, and Laotian students continue to be hurt by racist
policies, and especially discriminates against them. This image not only overlooks the diverse ethnocultural backgrounds of Asian groups but also attempts to silence Asians regarding their difficulties and discrimination experiences. Most Asians face language struggles and have to sacrifice a lot to get into college.
The new discriminating factor these days has become wealth inequality. SAT scores these days are directly linked to higher incomes (Goldfarb) Race is no longer the issue it was 30 years ago, and we can see that families who are well off can afford to send their kids to college prep classes, and to better schools. Thus setting them up for a better life of theirs, and so on. However, families who can not afford all the extra classes and prep courses are unable to provide those advantages for their children, which leads to them struggling to perform at the same levels as those who are wealthy. Those with better education are able to secure better jobs, ensuring that their children will receive the same advantages that they did. The wealth gap is far more significant and more extensive than the racial gap, and we should be focusing on how to balance that out.
Affirmative action equates to reverse discrimination of minorities and protected groups. A better and fairer solution would be to focus on reducing the wealth gap, which would, in turn, reduce the inequalities faced by minorities. While this debate has raged on for over 20 years now, the world has changed a lot in those 20 years, and affirmative action based on race has run its course. It is no longer significant in our society today, and it succeeded at disintegrating elements of it in our educational institutions. Affirmative Action infringes on the rights of others and is inconsistent on the principles of merit. Often, many people are punished for no reason. Affirmative action often rewards minorities on the incorrect perception that minorities equate to disadvantaged, making it reverse discrimination and unfair advantage.
