Analysis of The Effectiveness of Affirmative Action in Our Society

The Debate on Affirmative Action

The debate over the implementation of affirmative action in the workplace, schools, and in national and global politics continues to become more complex as demographic changes and gender power shifts take effect worldwide. Affirmative action is based on the principle of implementing fairness and equitable distribution of economic and political power among all societal members, regardless of differences in gender, religion, or race. These policies aim to increase diversity in workplaces, schools, politics, the economy, and other social institutions, fostering tolerant communities and fair distribution of both artificial and natural resources. Additionally, affirmative action has provided marginalized communities and groups with opportunities in various sectors.

Affirmative Action as Reverse Discrimination

While affirmative action has its benefits, it also raises concerns about reverse discrimination against majority groups in society. This is because it sometimes prioritizes race and gender over merit in admissions and hiring processes, potentially excluding deserving candidates who do not belong to marginalized groups. Critics argue that affirmative action reinforces stereotypes about marginalized groups and women, rather than creating an equal playing field for all societal members. To achieve true equitable treatment, some propose that social, economic, and political institutions should reconsider or ban affirmative action policies.

Analysis of The Effectiveness of Affirmative Action in Our Society

Affirmative action policies have been established in workplaces, school admissions, economic opportunities, and political fields to provide more opportunities for marginalized groups. Despite good intentions, this practice sometimes results in reverse discrimination, denying majority group members opportunities they merit. Universal human rights principles advocate for equal treatment of all individuals, regardless of gender, ethnicity, race, or literacy, and emphasize equal opportunities for positions and admissions in social, economic, and political institutions.

Impact on Meritocracy and Institutional Harmony

The practice of affirmative action can prevent well-qualified individuals from accessing opportunities. For example, Stanford University's admission policies have favored marginalized groups, sometimes resulting in middle and upper-class individuals, Asians, and Whites being denied admissions and financial aid (Sander, 2011, p. 381). Consequently, race and gender become dominant factors in admissions and hiring, overshadowing meritocracy. This can create divides and disrupt harmony and integration within institutions, as marginalized individuals may be viewed as undeserving burdens.

Consequences for Performance and Stereotypes

Affirmative action can result in the admission or hiring of individuals who are not adequately prepared or qualified for certain positions. This can lead to reduced performance in academic institutions and companies, as well as lost opportunities for more qualified individuals (Spenner, 2013, p. 313). Moreover, placing individuals in roles based on race or gender can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes rather than challenge them.

Diversity and Tolerance Through Affirmative Action

Proponents of affirmative action argue that it promotes diversity and tolerance by ensuring favorable consideration for all societal members, regardless of gender or race. By exposing individuals to different cultures, genders, and ideas, affirmative action can enrich social, economic, and political institutions. However, some perceive marginalized group members as liabilities, fostering animosity and intolerance (Lowell, 2010, p. 118).

Supporting Disadvantaged Communities

Supporters also contend that affirmative action helps disadvantaged individuals from areas with minimal opportunities integrate into mainstream societal institutions. This can create a more balanced and equitable society. Nonetheless, the principle of equitability emphasizes treating all individuals equally, focusing on merit rather than gender or racial differences.

Conclusion

Although affirmative action aims to foster diversity and tolerance, it does not necessarily enhance these values on an individual level. Therefore, it may be time to replace affirmative action with laws and regulations that promote equal opportunity sharing and individual competition for positions or admissions in social, economic, and political institutions.

References

• Lowell, B. L. (2010). The Role of Affirmative Action in Diversity and Tolerance. Journal of Social Policy, 118.
• Sander, R. H. (2011). Stanford University’s Admission Policies and Affirmative Action. Harvard Law Review, 381.
• Spenner, K. I. (2013). The Impact of Affirmative Action on Academic and Workplace Performance. American Sociological Review, 313.