How Is Affirmative Action Relevant Today
I do not think affirmative action is appropriate for the United States today. Affirmative action had an important role back in the 1960's, in the midst of the civil rights era. It was intended to promote equal opportunities to work and to education for minority groups (at that time African Americans). That was almost sixty years ago. Our culture has evolved since then, with each passing generation, racism and prejudice dies a little more. As a nation, we will continue to evolve, and the challenges we face will change with the times.
Professor Obasohan's main argument is that affirmative action results in reverse discrimination, and, therefore, should be illegal because discrimination of any kind is illegal. He also argues that affirmative action
devalues personal accomplishments. When a person is chosen because of their minority status instead of their qualifications, affirmative action becomes counter-productive. Instead of promoting equality, it can foster resentment and racial tension in places of employment and education; thus setting a person up for further discrimination and failure to succeed.
Professor Reece argues that a minority needs affirmative action to equal the playing field; that it is harder for the minority to reach the finish line because they didn't receive the same education and they had to deal with discrimination and other obstacles. Affirmative action is supposed to compensate for the persecution and or exploitation of the past. The problem with his argument is that it addresses the past, not the present day. While there is still racism today, it is markedly less than in the past.
As I said earlier, racism and prejudice die more with each generation, change is slow but steady. For today, equal opportunity is a more appropriate practice than affirmative action quotas and percentages. Affirmative action should be illegal because it does not treat everyone equally.
Professor Obasohan's main argument is that affirmative action results in reverse discrimination, and, therefore, should be illegal because discrimination of any kind is illegal. He also argues that affirmative action
devalues personal accomplishments. When a person is chosen because of their minority status instead of their qualifications, affirmative action becomes counter-productive. Instead of promoting equality, it can foster resentment and racial tension in places of employment and education; thus setting a person up for further discrimination and failure to succeed.
Professor Reece argues that a minority needs affirmative action to equal the playing field; that it is harder for the minority to reach the finish line because they didn't receive the same education and they had to deal with discrimination and other obstacles. Affirmative action is supposed to compensate for the persecution and or exploitation of the past. The problem with his argument is that it addresses the past, not the present day. While there is still racism today, it is markedly less than in the past.
As I said earlier, racism and prejudice die more with each generation, change is slow but steady. For today, equal opportunity is a more appropriate practice than affirmative action quotas and percentages. Affirmative action should be illegal because it does not treat everyone equally.