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
Based off this definition the Anna Todd Jennings scholarship is not being racist. Yes the scholarship is only for white people, but not because Caucasian is the superior race. Daniels says, “The Anna Todd Jennings scholarship is a subtle but nonetheless dangerous expression of racism”. This statement is false because if every race specific concept was addressed as racism, the world would turn mad. Most races have scholarships offered just to them, so having one for white people should not cause a problem.
In the midst of attempting to reconcile the inherent contradiction between “disparate treatment” and “disparate impact,” Ginsberg carts out emotional baggage her opinion is obviously contained in—She uses weighted, dramatic language, noting, for instance, “firefighting is a profession in which the legacy of racial discrimination casts an especially long shadow.” She trumpets the old concerns over disparity in scores between “whites” and “minorities,” conjuring the ghost of Griggs v. Duke Power Co., where it was ‘determined’ that “African-Americans…failed…aptitude tests at a significantly higher rate than whites.” Once again, no mention of African-Americans who did not fail the tests, despite her own admission, earlier in her dissent, that in the New Haven fire department, “on earlier tests…a few minority candidates had fared well enough to earn promotions.” Justice Ginsberg’s entire dissent is based on her opinion that in the case of Ricci v. DeStefano, the city would have suffered a possible lawsuit based on the “disparate impact” of awarding promotions to firefighters who studied for and passed the standardized tests in question. Reading Justice Ginsberg’s dissent, the
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
Evaluate a claim against American Dream The American Dream promises equality between races and religion; as well as a job and a good income of wealth. Yet despite this promise, immigrant minorities travel to America only to find injustice to their people. They are oppressed and discriminated against in the streets they live on. Also live in poverty and having no control over these things was nowhere in the promise the American Dream makes. That’s why I agree with the prosecuting argument of the American dream that Minorities, and women, were discriminated against.
Affirmative Action vs. Diversity Cara Graham 05/24/2012 Eng 308J Affirmative action is trying to accomplish the diversity of college students admitted. But diversity and affirmative action aren’t the same. Affirmative action is centered on moral and social responsibility to modify wrongs done in the past to those Americans who were not of the majority population. It focuses on taking positive steps to get individuals into the organization. Diversity works to change the culture of that organization.
They feared Richard, and some of the white people felt it necessary to act out their racist feelings in order to cover up their fear. White coworkers beat Richard because his boss was kind to him. Richard later had to leave a good job because those racist co-workers would “kill” him. When the principal at Richard’s school had asked Richard to give a speech to a large audience of white and black people, Richard refused to read the principal’s prepared speech. By reading the principal’s speech, Richard was saying what the white power wanted him to say and to Richard this would be giving in to the very thing he hated so much.
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
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. On the one hand, they argue that qualifications should be based on merit rather than race or gender, and that it implements reverse discrimination. One the other hand, those who support the concept of Affirmative Action insist that equal opportunity is reached by helping those races faced with disadvantages and that it compensates for discrimination in the past. My own view is that special consideration should not be given to minorities because it is contradictory in their intent to create equal opportunity, therefore increasing racial tensions instead of promoting it. By protecting and giving preference to minorities, Affirmative Action unwarily discriminates against the majority, therefore contradicting its own intent for equal opportunity.
The pacifists guided King by showing him the alternative of nonviolent resistance, arguing that this would be a better means to accomplish his goals of civil rights than self-defense. King stated that African-Americans, as well as other disadvantaged Americans, should be compensated for historical wrongs. In an interview conducted for Playboy in 1965, he said that granting African-Americans only equality could not realistically close the economic gap between them and whites. He posited that "the money spent would be more than amply justified by the benefits that would accrue to the nation through a spectacular decline in school dropouts, family breakups, crime rates, illegitimacy, swollen relief rolls, rioting and other social evils"(Haley). Martin Luther King heled develop the Fifteenth Amendment and other major government decisions that helped get African-Americans and minorities “equal