Search results

Affirmative action before Kennedy -- Kennedy and Johnson -- Affirmative action spreads-and mutates -- Nixon and the Philadelphia plan -- Prejudice persists, affirmative action grows -- Marco Defunis, Allan Bakke, and Brian Weber -- Changing academia -- Backlash and defense -- Blacks and Jews divide -- Women and affirmative action -- The Reagan presidency -- The Court changes its mind -- Mend it, don't end it-or not -- Prop 209 -- Affirmative action and elections -- Seeking diversity in higher education -- Women and affirmative action II -- Other groups, here and abroad -- Bush, Obama, and Fisher -- Yes...and no...and Trump.

THIS ARTICLE CONSIDERS THE VARIOUS ARGUMENTS ATTACKING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PRORGAMS AS WELL AS SOME SUGGESTIONS FROM THE LEFT THAT RACIAL PREFERENCES BE REPLACED BY CLASS-BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION (CBAA). IT ARGUES THAT THE LONG-TERM STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN THE AMERICAN ECONOMY SEVERELY LIMITED THE POTENTIAL OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS. NEVERTHELESS, SWITCHING TO CBAA WILL DO LITTLE TO SOLVE MANY OF THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH RACIAL PREFERENCES SUCH AS STIGMATISM, RESENTMENT, AND LIMITED EFFECTIVENESS. THE ARTICLE CONCLUDES WITH A PLEA FOR A MORE REASONED CONSIDERATION OF CURRENT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAMS ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, AND FOR THE PUBLICIZING OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SUCCESS STORIES.

An attempt is made to explain why affirmative action need not be feared as a "quota system," with its implied injustice precisely against minorities. Among the issues discussed are: (1) the fallacy of likening "numerical goals" to "quotas," (2) student admissions lists at Us, (3) the nonexistent threat to levels of excellence through numerical goals, (4) setting goals for recruitment at all levels of education, (5) "victims" of affirmative action, (6) undeserved abrogation of rights & privileges, & (7) the pros & cons of reshaping the opportunity structure. J. Shiffer.

Attempts to achieve the stated aims of affirmative action programs through establishment of goals &/or quotas for an entire minority group have: (1) discriminated in reverse against those least responsible for past situations, (2) benefited those least affected by past discrimination, & (3) benefited single individuals in the name of a group. Justified goals & mechanisms of valid compensation include: (A) elimination of discrimination in areas relevant to determining/achieving competence, (B) reverse discrimination for those who previously experienced job discrimination, (C) remedial programs or 'handicapping' for those discriminated against at lower levels, & (D) reverse discrimination for the chronically- deprived if such does not cause severe deprivation for others. Affirmative action should seek to redress through: (a) establishing & advertising objective merit criteria, (b) an administrative complaint & enforcement agency, (c) remedial & child-care programs, (d) active recruitment of minority members, & (e) a neutral government official overseeing recruitment & hiring procedures. Modified Author's Summary.

The 1960s was a decade of racial progress in the US, but also of anger that not more was achieved. One response to the civil unrest in America's cities was an executive order issued by President Johnson requiring firms contracting with the federal government to implement affirmative action to increase the employment of African Americans. In recent years, the Court has approved a new theory of affirmative action, which should not be based on past behaviour, rather on the promotion of diversity for the future. It applied it to college and university admissions. However, in 2007, it refused to apply it to voluntary actions by states and school boards, which wanted to set policies to promote racial desegregation below college level. Looking to the future, other alternatives are, or should be, on the table. One is the possibility of substituting economic integration for race-based policies. This is being tested in a few school systems, and in some post-secondary contexts. The challenge for America more broadly is to commit to ending the continuing and disproportionate poverty amongst African Americans, and other minority communities. This is denoted the affirmative-action challenge of the twenty-first century.

MOST UNIVERSITY AFFIRMATIVE ACTION MEASURES TODAY ARE MERELY FORMS OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION, WHICH ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE LONG-STANDING THEORY AND PRACTICE OF MERIT HIRING. REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IS JUSTIFIED FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN THE PAST, AND THEY SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIRECTLY.