Analysis: Was I Entitled Or Should I Apologize?

Introduction This essay will outline Pojman’s argument “against Strong Affirmative Action” (Pojman, 1998, p. n.p.). Pojman argues that “this form of Affirmative Action, as it is applied against White males, is both racist and sexist.” (Pojman, 1998, p. n.p.) and is therefore not an appropriate response to the persistence of racial prejudice. I will outline and evaluate “The Argument for Compensation from Those who Innocently Benefitted from Past Injustice” (Pojman, 1998, p. n.p.).

In the controversial realms of affirmative action, the largest issue staunchly fought over is whether minorities should be given preferential treatment in the workplace and in the schools. One side declares that those in the minority group need and deserve governmental aid so that they will be on equal footing with the majority group. Opponents of affirmative action point out that setting apart groups based on their race or ethnicity is purely racism and can lead to reverse discrimination. I am against affirmative action for the aforementioned reasons, and would not consider such racism as necessary for creating a healthy society, as proponents would insist. It is my belief that affirmative action today is out of date and is

Summary: This paper is based on an article called "I'm Black You're White Who's innocent" by Shelby Steel. The article takes a position that is against affirmative action because it takes the independence away from people of color.

On May 13, 1990, an eager yet serious Shelby Steele claims that affirmative action is “reformist and corrective, even repentant and redemptive”, in the New York Times. Despite the different political views, Steele does not want to insult these sincere intentions despite the conflicts that will arise once these policies take effect. Steele believes that affirmative action is similar to a “...Faustian bargain” as it creates more moral problems rather than fixing them. Shelby Steele points out the flaws of affirmative action and hopes to bring awareness to affirmative action by using appeals to logic, credibility, emotion, and other canons of rhetoric. Steele’s plan is to persuade the readers into believing the harmful effects of the policy.

The academic debate over affirmative action has become a bitter stalemate. Opponents consider affirmative action to be reverse discrimination, while supporters say that the relationship between blacks and whites is hardly symmetrical. The sterility of this debate suggests that it is time for a fresh perspective, and an analysis considers affirmative action in light of critical race theory (CRT). One of CRT’s tenets is that conventional civil rights scholarship has limited application to current racial problems. Because of the practical and political limits on affirmative action, disputes about its legitimacy are likely to fade as attention shifts to other problems and remedies.

Even though affirmative action does not entail direct payments for past discrimination, most supporters view it as a compensatory program; the greater economic opportunities it affords its beneficiaries do constitute a kind of reparations and are intended as such. After more than 30 years of affirmative action -- and my work on a comprehensive article on this subject in 20 Yale Law & Policy Review 1 (2002) -- several effects seem clear. (Many other effects, both good and bad, are more debatable).

Affirmative Action has become of the most controversial social policy issues to be discussed in recent years. It is controversial because it challenges fundamental American beliefs. As Seymour Martin Lipset put it: "Affirmative Action policies have forced a sharp confrontation between two core American values: equality and individualism."(Dudley7) This values oriented approach, which pervades popular discussion and derives from functionalist sociology, fails to explain why similar challenges to our core values did not in the past result in the kind of spite surrounding Affirmative Action today. As the popular lore and written history of urban politics in America

One of the controversial topics and philosophical questions that really sparked my interest was affirmative action. The author of text that I will be drawing connections from is Tom L. Beauchamp and his publication is titled “In Defense of Affirmative Action”. The theme behind his work is self-explanatory from the title. Beauchamp states the strong arguments as to why people want to abandon affirmative action, but also gives his own insight and support to defend its existence and continued implementation. He understands that there is flaws with affirmative action, but the policy does more good than bad, thus it should be continued.

Discrimination against race, gender, religion, or other social characteristics is occurring in all parts of the United States almost every day. Unfortunately, the U.S. has a history of extreme case of discrimination, which has evoked controversy and in worse cases, violence. To discourage any more of adverse discernment towards certain individuals, the Federal government has imposed legislation called affirmative action. According to At Issue: Affirmative Action, “Affirmative action is designed to promote access to opportunities in education, employment, housing, and government contracts among certain designated groups, such as women and minorities“ (At Issue). This law is necessary in today’s society in order to maintain equality and

Among the citizens of America affirmative action is a sensitive subject with some seeing it as a necessity to help those who have been repressed and others seeing it as reverse racism. Many Americans may also be conflicted about affirmative action, because it is such a complex issue. People fervently debate affirmative action, because it is a complex issue revolving around one’s own race, experiences, and desires.

Chace (2012) continues to state the various disconnect that the comments made by President Johnson has on current practices by once advocating the intent to give back to a race that had lost so dearly, is now not viewed the same. After these past fifty years, today’s realties are quite different. Restitution seems much less the focus of such affirmative action policies than in the past.

Many critics of affirmative action believe it has failed to achieve its stated goal of equal employment opportunity. A few even believe that it has done more harm than good. A review of the statistics, however, shows

When addressing legal issues of diversity in the modern day era, one main topic is brought to discussion, affirmative action. It was put into place by the federal government in the 1960’s and was initially developed to close the gap in relation to the privileged majority and the unprivileged minority in America (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). While it has been controversial since its origin, it remains controversial as critics argue it tries to equalize the impact of so many

A major controversy encompassing the country is the issue of affirmative action. Many believe that the abolition, or at least restructure, of affirmative action in the United States will benefit the nation for many logical reasons. Originally, affirmative action began as an attempt to eliminate discrimination and provide a source of opportunity; affirmative action did not begin as an attempt to support just minorities and women. In addition, affirmative action naturally creates resentment when the less qualified are preferred instead of the people actually deserve the admission or job. Another reason that has existed since the abolition of slavery is the myth that women and ?minorities? cannot compete

Affirmative action supporters make one large assumption when defending the policy. They assume that minority groups want help. This, however, may not always be the case. They fought to attain equality, not special treatment. To some of them, the acceptance of special treatment is an admittance of inferiority. Some would include me. I believe I can become successful on my own. I don’t need laws to help me get a great job. I along with many others who are against affirmative action want to be treated as equals, not as incompetent. Although discrimination is not placed in a well-distant past, affirmative action is an unneeded and drastic remedy for today’s world (Farron, Steven, 2005)