The Pro's and Con's of Affirmative Action Essay

The principle that all men are equal in rights and should be treated equally is the cornerstone of human rights theory, and is based on the dignity of every person. But this natural right to equality has never been fully available to all people, nor in the past nor at present. Discrimination in any form has always been a problem of humanity since the beginning of its existence. Discrimination can be against children who are abused and intimidated, against women, people infected by HIV or AIDS, people with disabilities, as well as against people of untraditional sexual orientation. In fact, discrimination is a denial of human dignity and human rights.
One of the aspects of discrimination, especially in employment, is the term “positive discrimination” or “affirmative action”, which are temporary special measures aimed at achieving de facto equality and overcoming various forms of discrimination. According to the official definition, “affirmative action” means positive steps taken to increase the representation of women and minorities in areas of employment, education, and business from which they have been historically excluded. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2009)
When employers speak about positive discrimination, they mean affirmative action, which include specific measures to eliminate the disadvantages associated with one of the protected criteria at the work place(such as gender and age), to prevent or compensate it, and to ensure full equality. Such measures may vary in nature and degrees of intensity, for example, they may take the form of diversity to improve the participation (the so-called “participatie”), but it can also ensure preferential treatment by members of underrepresented groups. Though many employers believe that affirmative action help the company to become more diverse. (Shaw, 2006)
But it is necessary to stress that measures of affirmative action can only be performed in accordance with the following conditions:
– There should be an explicit inequality;
– Affirmative action should be temporary and disappear once the desired objectives are achieved;
– The measures should not unduly limit the rights of others. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2009)
If any of these conditions are not met, then this is not an affirmative action but discrimination.
Measures of affirmative action are always very controversial, because they mean a temporary preference for a particular group over another in order to compensate for past inequalities, and the provision of equal opportunities to the targeted groups (for example, women, ethnic minorities) at present, for the realization of all fundamental freedoms, particularly in education, employment and business. It is necessary to take into account the fact that, since such “positive discrimination” is carried out only for a limited period of time, this kind of preferential treatment should not be considered as discrimination, but as a measure to combat it. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2009)
The essence of the positive discrimination is rather controversial. Proponents of affirmative action believe that it helps to increase the benefits of diversity in all sectors of society, as well as to compensate for damage caused discrimination. Thus, the basic idea of ​​positive discrimination is that a society that prevent or discriminate specific social, ethnic and other minorities, should compensate for damage caused in this way at the expense of the majority. Some argument for affirmative action are:
Compensatory justice demands affirmative action programs.
It is necessary to permit fairer competition. (Shaw, 2006)
The main objection is that positive discrimination, according to opponents, is in fact nothing more than a tool of infringing on the rights of the majority in favor of minorities. Opponents of affirmative action argue that it reduces the value of the achievements of the individual, assessing the achievement of the principle of membership in a particular social group, rather than his qualifications. For example, the achievement of minority representatives in the eyes of society are not significant, perceived as the result not of their own efforts, but only due to the provided benefits. So the Arguments against affirmative action are:
It injures white men and violates their rights.
Affirmative action itself violates the principle of equality.
Nondiscrimination alone will achieve our social goals; stronger affirmative action is unnecessary. (Shaw, 2006)