."affirmative action has not succeeded in ending discrimination" - That was not the intention of affirmative action.- the intention was to take a positive (affirmative) action in creating opportunity for different people to mix together and in the case of Stanford learn together. It's great being young, rich and still naive to the cultural history of the United States. Maybe some research in the underlying rationale for "Affirmative action" during the Richard Nixon years might be helpful. Your article reads like a rant at a country club wine party.
I am dissapointed that many of you have such a shortsighted opinion of the detrimental effects of affirmative action on our society. Kudos to the authors of this article as they present an informed and logical argument.
Affirmative Action programs can counteract this.
(In this sense it be "isolated" and relatively frequent.)Examples of routines that encourage or preserve racist or sexist impact in occupations are: job-irrelevant qualification requirements, hiring by personal connections, and seniority-based selection.
Discrimination and Affirmative Action - WKU
In fact, Affirmative Action programs are justified by the need to counteract the continuing effects of such discrimination against peoples of color or women.
Discrimination and Affirmative Action ..
To understand the strongest argument for Affirmative Action, you must understand the distinctions (1) between institutionalized and "isolated" discrimination and (2) between intentional and unintentional discrimination.
Are you an International Student whose native language is not English
(It is a sociological fact that Sunday is still the most segregated day in the United States.) Thus the names of the individuals given to the boss as candidates for the entry-level positions turn out to be all white, even if no consciously racist thought crosses anybody's mind.
English Language Center :: Online Academic Training
Now, the topic of affirmative action could not have arisen unless:
(1) we, as a society, grant that there has been a history of discrimination; (2) we affirm that the lack of proportion between (a) members of certain minorities and women in higher paying jobs or the workforce generally on the one hand and their (b) representation either in the community or in the job pool is, at least in many cases, a social injustice; (3) we reject the explanation that the disproportionality is caused by members of these groups being inherently incompetent or immoral or lazy.
Residential College in the Arts and Humanities
(To adopt this explanation would be to adopt a racist or sexist standpoint.) It seems to follow that the cause of statistically provable disproportionality, at least in many cases, is
(1) the social, political, economic, and cultural disadvantages suffered by women and minorities in the past OR (2) the operation of procedures which appear neutral but are actually skewed against minorities or women OR (3) the operation, on the individual level, of residual prejudices against women and minorities, Or (4) some combination of (1)-(3).Against this background, we can discuss the moral justification for Affirmative Action Programs (in particular, those with an element of Preferential Treatment).
Visit us this fall in Snyder-Phillips Hall on the campus of MSU
Affirmative Action programs are means to bring about equal justice in several ways:
(i) Prejudices which are not intentional but nonetheless widely shared and subtly institutionalized still operate to produce discriminatory results.