Affirmative Action Pros And Cons

Affirmative action came to be from discussions in the 1960s about how to overcome past wrongs done to minorities. Proponents of affirmative action believed that minorities that had been discriminated against had been so diminished that they needed a boost to match the benefits whites had enjoyed over time. During the 1970s, affirmative action became more prevalent in the higher education setting. A variety of cases, such as University of California Regents v. Bakke, addressed concerns that affirmative action was bring to light. Concerns such as, quotas and reverse discrimination.

While clearly critical of affirmative action, Jay Michaelson of The Daily Beast, explains clearly why affirmative action is a doomed practice. The article explains
that “strict scrutiny” must be applied to determine if this practice is necessary, and that no better method exists. The problem, however, is that affirmative action is legally quite ambiguous as it currently stands. The Supreme Court case Grutter v. Bollinger upheld racial bonuses for admission into college, but then struck down most cases of affirmative action in Fisher v. University of Texas. The need for a racially diverse educational experience is beneficial for everyone, but Jay Michaelson questions how affirmative action can get this done. Who sets the standards for what is racially diverse? How is this balanced with qualified white candidates who are disenfranchised? The rule of “strict scrutiny” can be argued to no longer be valid. Conflicting Supreme Court decisions show a need for a new system (Michaelson, J. (n.d.). Affirmative Action May Be Doomed—But It’s Already a Confused Mess).

I believe that affirmative action has no place in this modern day. Affirmative action is a form of reverse discrimination, and also diminishes the capabilities of minorities as well. It tells people that they aren’t as qualified as white people, and need artificial bonuses to level the playing field. While past injustices are a reality, affirmative action is not the fix. Allowing for grants, and scholarships for low income areas can help give the students a boost where it is needed. Larger investments into programs for Title I schools can help ensure the people achieve their place in society, without the “mulligan” the government gives them for placement in college, or their future careers. If we give the people the tools to achieve their own success, they will own it. If you simply give them their “success,” they will become dependent on outside help.