This process is done usually by institutions of giving preference to racial minorities or women when hiring, giving awards, or deciding whom to admit. Preferential treatment, instead of doing justice: violates right; the right of an applicant “to equal consideration”, the right to maximally competent to an open position, and the right of everyone to equal opportunity. Affirmative action is reverse discrimination it does the same injustice that the Jim Crow discrimination did, by violating the public equality which defines citizenship. Colleges may soon have to revamp the decades old efforts to promote racial diversity after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to reconsider the constitutionality of affirmative action in admissions. But no matter how the court acts, recent history shows that when courts or new laws restrict affirmative action, colleges try to find other ways to increase minority admission.
The one thing that separates whites from these other groups besides skin color is the fact that for each minority group, there are several scholarships that pertain to each. As a nation we have placed a great deal of emphasis on making sure the minorities are getting equal opportunities, but we forget that there are members of the Caucasian decent that need assistance as well. Most times minorities are the ones that need financial assistance in a college situation, but we have forgotten that there are white families that have grown up in the same neighborhood as these individuals, who also need financial assistance. This is why the idea of a white-only scholarship is not so unrealistic. A group of students attending Roger Williams University have created a Whites-only scholarship to initially protest affirmative action.
Color Blind Racism In Bonilla-Silva's piece the The Central Frames of Color-Blind Racism he explains in detail the four frames of color-blind racism: abstract liberalism, naturalization, cultural racism, and minimization of racism. Bonilla-Silva believes that although most whites have abandoned the idea that blacks are in part to blame for their own oppression and lower class status, racism still exists. Color-blind racism has replaced the formerly established idea of racism, but this does not mean hope for the oppressed. Bonilla-Silva does agree that minorities are much better off today, but he believes that because blacks have become so far behind in the order of society it might be impossible for them to catch up to the whites. Color- blind racism is contemporary way of thinking about race that justifies and rationalizes racial inequalities.
Johnson contends that this allows Universities to artificially argue that they are keeping pace with Affirmative Action policies, while in reality doing very little to even the playing field between certain minority groups and their better-represented counterparts. Similarly, Clarence Kleiter in his article “A Measurement Perspective on Affirmative Action,” notes that despite the presence of existing Affirmative Action laws and policies, the reality is that African Americans are still underrepresented in the medical field and in the number of graduates who successfully complete the MCAT exam. He writes: Scores from the
Special Privileges Are a Disadvantage to All Despite the fact that the Affirmative Action has been over for decades, tensions still exist over the issue of giving special consideration to underrepresented minorities. Affirmative action programs were established in order to increase the diversity and representation of minorities in the employment, education, and business areas that they were previously excluded from. The debate among race-based preferences continues to ignite animosity when distinctions between racial and social equality become blurred. In the past, schools granted a higher chance of admission and set quotas for minorities, primarily consisting of African-Americans and Hispanics. Today, these quotas have long since been banned, but some argue that special considerations toward minorities are still apparent and disrupt their rights for equal opportunity.
It cannot be argued that in American history there have been many cases of discrimination imposed on people of different race, creed, color, ethnic background, and of course gender differences. However, it is an incorrect assumption that these members, of either group, deserve to be over compensated in professional business settings or even the in the judicial system. America was not built on equal opportunity, that point cannot be argued, however it is still discrimination to allow preferential treatment to those who feel they deserve it due to past behaviors. The articles clearly state that impoverished white Americans suffer many if not all the
an individual who can compete with whites on the same level,’” (Benjamin). The negative and downbeat jab at minorities’ abilities and potentials called Affirmative Action is supposed to be a program designed to end racism; instead, it really just lowers the standards for minorities. The term affirmative action refers to policies intended to promote access to education or employment typically aimed at minorities. The motivation for it is to redress the effects of past and current discrimination and to encourage public institutions to be more representative of the population. However, the faulty scheme actually lowers the bar for minorities consequently causing reverse discrimination that gives
To sum—The law’s “disparate treatment” character demands that no employer discriminate in employment and promotion practices based on “race.” The “disparate impact” provision demands that an employer be held liable if any employment practice, whether transparent or hidden, results in discrimination. It is a noble, but flawed, attempt to reconcile circumstances where employers once used insidious, opaque methods to continue old habits of discriminatory hiring and promotion practices. The problem presented by Ricci v. DeStefano is: What happens when the targets of discrimination are “white”? Again, there are many who make the emotional argument that such a circumstance is impossible. ‘Whites are the majority,’ they contend.
In an ideal world, this might work, however, for the most part in the United States; whites automatically have a leg up in society. People of color need more assistance than whites because they are automatically a step down from white people. If I walked into a store and applied for a job, even if I was very poor and had no experience, there is a good chance I would be more likely to get it than a black or latina girl of the same situation. This is unfair but true, and speaks of an inequality that our country is still struggling with and that we need these government programs to help balance out. Also, I find issue with his statement that “Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin
Institutional racism ensures that people of different races receive different treatment and opportunities in public services within the society and it also denied other things such as benefits, rewards that other individual might be entitle to in normal cases. People in powerful positions can use their race based stereotypes and conditioned behaviour to develop procedures and practices that put some racial groups at a disadvantage (Parekh, 2000) Institutional racism in the labor market is seen by the way companies, organizations and public institutions offer services, hire, promote and treat people of races to be considered inferior. Companies and organizations in the UK have proved that race plays a vital role in the provision of services to the public (Bloch, 2010). Culture, colour, and ethnic background remain a very fundamental factor in treatment of different people in the society. Focusing on the main essay,One institution that has remained controversial in offering services to the public is the police (Young and Mooney, 1999).