Spring Break
What is "Positive Discrimination" Anyway?
Michael Walsh (OJ), Viewpoints Editor
Issue date: 11/13/06 Section: Viewpoints & Humor
Two weeks ago Neil Mahapatra (NG) and Jonathan Kelly (OD) expressed some strong views on positive discrimination and political correctness. Until I read their articles, I hadn't heard the term "positive discrimination." What is it anyway?
As a starting point, it seems clear that there are inequalities in the U.S. and around the world that are highly correlated to race. And it seems clear that there is a lot that can be done to address the inequalities. For example, we could provide better public education, which could provide all kids, regardless of who their parents are, a chance to succeed in the world. And we could provide better public health care, which would provide all sick and injured people the support they need when they are most vulnerable.
Positive discrimination (or affirmative action, as I've heard it referred to before) is different. It goes further because it provides a particular group extra help. In Australia, an example is AbStudy, which provides Aborigines extra support to go to university. Another example, and perhaps the most internationally recognized, is Black Economic Empowerment in South Africa.
Neil and Jonathan debated positive discrimination passionately. But what is the debate all about with regard to the United States? I have only been in the United States a short time, but I have not seen many examples of positive discrimination. Harvard is an interesting case. My impression was that the encouragement of minorities to attend Harvard was due to the idea that diversity produces a better learning environment for all. I hadn't thought about it in terms of Harvard simply wanting to help minority communities, even if helping minority communities ultimately turned out to be a significant benefit. Harvard is also a private institution, which makes its actions different from the affirmative action practiced by the government.
A common argument against affirmative action is that affirmative action breeds dependence and a sense of entitlement. Moreover, it creates separateness between communities and resentment (particularly by people who are poor or suffering but are excluded from the programs). A common argument in favor of affirmative action is that it can correct deep inequalities. Certainly, in the case of South Africa, this argument makes a lot of sense. And arguably it also makes a lot of sense in the United States, but the situation is more complex given the huge mix of ethnicities and socio-economic situations in the United States.
As a starting point, it seems clear that there are inequalities in the U.S. and around the world that are highly correlated to race. And it seems clear that there is a lot that can be done to address the inequalities. For example, we could provide better public education, which could provide all kids, regardless of who their parents are, a chance to succeed in the world. And we could provide better public health care, which would provide all sick and injured people the support they need when they are most vulnerable.
Positive discrimination (or affirmative action, as I've heard it referred to before) is different. It goes further because it provides a particular group extra help. In Australia, an example is AbStudy, which provides Aborigines extra support to go to university. Another example, and perhaps the most internationally recognized, is Black Economic Empowerment in South Africa.
Neil and Jonathan debated positive discrimination passionately. But what is the debate all about with regard to the United States? I have only been in the United States a short time, but I have not seen many examples of positive discrimination. Harvard is an interesting case. My impression was that the encouragement of minorities to attend Harvard was due to the idea that diversity produces a better learning environment for all. I hadn't thought about it in terms of Harvard simply wanting to help minority communities, even if helping minority communities ultimately turned out to be a significant benefit. Harvard is also a private institution, which makes its actions different from the affirmative action practiced by the government.
A common argument against affirmative action is that affirmative action breeds dependence and a sense of entitlement. Moreover, it creates separateness between communities and resentment (particularly by people who are poor or suffering but are excluded from the programs). A common argument in favor of affirmative action is that it can correct deep inequalities. Certainly, in the case of South Africa, this argument makes a lot of sense. And arguably it also makes a lot of sense in the United States, but the situation is more complex given the huge mix of ethnicities and socio-economic situations in the United States.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
George Iliev
posted 12/30/06 @ 5:20 PM EST
The truth is over there!!!Here is what I saw about postive discrimination or affirmative action when I visited the University of Southern Mississippi web-site/http://www. (Continued…)
George606
George Iliev
posted 12/30/06 @ 5:26 PM EST
Sorry-Imade a mistake-I had a mind WHITE man.
Post a Comment