This is a question that has
been turning in my head since I read our chapter on affirmative action. I can most definitely see both sides of the
argument but after much reflection I have to agree with LaFollette in that
affirmative action is the only way that we can level out the playing field, he
states “affirmative action is one weapon in the battle to overcome that
disadvantage” (LaFollette, 2007, p.
92).
I think one of the most predominant arguments I have heard when I
ask for people’s opinion on affirmative is that it is reverse racism. First of all, let’s look at what reverse
racism means. When an employer decides
to implement affirmative action in their company and chooses a qualified black
candidate, in an effort to create more diversity within the workforce, they are
not acting through the lens of racism.
They are not looking at the other white candidates and thinking “I am
not hiring this person because they are white”.
That is not what is going through their minds. Instead, they are making a conscious decision
to diversify their workforce by introducing more qualified non-white
employees. It would be preposterous to
assume that racism is at hand.
LaFollette (2007) makes an excellent point when he argues that:
Whites have subjected blacks to decades of
systematic and widespread discrimination.
In contrast, affirmative action is not part of a network of
discrimination against whites. Whites
are not thought to be inferior to blacks.
Indeed, whites’ interests have been – and continue to be – well
protected by political, legal, economic, and social institutions. (p. 88).
Another argument from opponents of affirmative action is that
people of today shouldn’t have to pay for the crimes of their ancestors. I can understand the logic in this but
LaFollette (2007) brings up another valid point. He states:
Affirmative action does not punish sons for the
sins of their fathers. Rather it holds
that the children and grandchildren of those who wronged blacks should not
continue to benefit from those ancient wrongs, and that the progeny of wronged
blacks should not continue to suffer effects of those wrongs (p. 89).
This makes perfect sense to me. If my grandfather killed your grandfather and
stole all his wealth leaving your grandmother to raise all of her children in
poverty and with no opportunity to an education which means no opportunity for
a good job. Now their children also are
born in poverty with the same lack of resources. In the meantime my grandfather capitalized on
his wealth and passed that wealth on to his children and then on to me. Now I am reaping the benefits of what really
is blood money. I may not have been
responsible but what I have inherited, whether it be money or opportunities, but
it exists because of a crime that was committed against your family two
generations ago. Affirmative action is
not saying that the debt has to be paid, it is only saying that compensation of
some sort is warranted. If not, what
kind of people are we? What kind of
examples are we setting for our children and for society if we cannot assume responsibility
for the crimes of our ancestors? When I
child breaks a neighbors window, who pays for it? The parent does. You do not see the parent shrugging his
shoulders and telling the neighbor “it’s not my problem, my kid did it”. Someone has to assume responsibility.
Another argument
against affirmative action is that it stigmatizes blacks. But there is a flaw in this thinking. Stigma is only another form of discrimination. If a black person is stigmatized by their
white counterparts due to a gained opportunity through affirmative action, then
that particular perspective or attitude is racist to begin with. A stigma is “a mark of disgrace or infamy; a stain
or reproach, as on one's reputation” ("Stigma,", n.d.). To automatically assume that a black person
has been hired or admitted to college due to affirmative action is a racist
behavior to begin with and completely contradicts the argument.
But I think one of the strongest arguments for affirmative action
is that it fosters cultural diversity and “helps create tolerant communities
because it exposes people to a variety of cultures and ideas that are different
from their own” (Mount Holyoke
College, n.d.). Dontigney (n.d.) states
that by adding diversity to the workplace you also have access to many more
resources and an array of perspectives. “Companies
that embrace a multi-cultural employee roster are better positioned to serve
multi-cultural communities, by overcoming language and cultural barriers” (Dontigney, n.d.).
I think before someone refutes affirmative action they really need
to reflect on why the idea upsets them. Is it because the person is black? Is it because they got the job and not you? Is
it because you feel they are less qualified? And if so, how do you know this? What evidence do you have? It’s easy to yell “reverse discrimination” but
you have to make sure your intentions are justified or you are just exhibiting
a less overt form of racism.
References
Stigma. (n.d). Dictionary.com. Retrieved from http
No comments:
Post a Comment