Yes

by Adam Mcculley

Created on: November 05, 2010   Last Updated: November 06, 2010

One would think this a no-brainer, but this issue is definitely contested.  Well, I guess we will create a chain of logic, and follow it.........care to come along? Discrimination is, as a simple definition; A person, group, organization, showing preference for people of a certain sex, race, creed, religion, etc. In showing said preference, other people of different characteristics are denied favor and advancement, denied services, harassed, or otherwise put into unjust and counter-productive circumstances. I think we can all agree upon that, and move on without citing the obvious examples.

The notion of affermative action is to provide a built-in system to counteract, and defeat descrimination in the work place. Put simply, it means requiring certain buisnesses to fill "diversity quotas". In otherwords, it means a supervisor/employer is required to employ/promote a certain amount of diverse peoples; women, minorities, etc. It is a sort of centrally planned, self-regulating system that takes decision making out of the hands of......well anybody involved. One can see the humanitarian basis of such an idea.

One can also see affermative action as a product of the bureaucratic, central planning 'a la soviet Russia style of regulation that has grown and bloated exponentialy over the years, and almost completely choked our ability to get anything done in both government and the private sector. It is an outdated idea, born of a failed buisness model. It doesn't only promote descrimination, it IS descrimination. It is a policy created out of fear that only serves an organizations ability to nominally escape lawsuits. And in todays litigation-happy society, it stays around simply because wealthy buisness executives care less about the competantcy and character of their workforce, than they do about bad PR and sticky, expensive lawsuits, regardless of substance.

How is affirmative action discrimination? Like I said, a no-brainer. Going back to our definition, that we all so amicably agreed upon, (well...we did, in my head....) we see the word PREFERANCE jumping out at us. Discrimination is preference based on cultural identity, not ability or productive status. Affirmative action is a built-in syatem of preference, it is a guarentee that a certain cultural group will have a protected status, before personal evaluation even begins. It is rigging the game. So, it is a safe assumption, that the actual act of sanctioned, established descrimination......does indeed promote discrimination as policy.

Aside from these facts, there are the workplace results: If ones peers know a person has only attained their professional status as the result of affirmative action, one might not feel to inclined to have professional respect for such a person. One may question, and rightfully so, said persons professional legitimacy. Anyone in the professional world will agree, the workplace is a minefeild of hostility and resentment. Most water-cooler talk revolves around which of our co-workers are, and are not towing the line, and endless speculation and gossip. This is an ugly condition, but it is near universally pervasive. The point being, a woman, or minority, will have a miserably tough time proving his/herself when their co-workers know they only got their position because of affermative action. One would think a self-respecting individual would want to suceed based on personal merit, not resultant of a PC handout. And yes, such resentment will inevitably lead to descriminatory behavior.

Telling a percentage of our working population, that they need special rules and regulations in order to suceed can easily be construed as descrimination. It conjurs images of a self-assured, and self-righteous missionary of old, and their professed "love" for "the savage races", tearing away their cultural identity, in an effort to save them from themselves........no thanks. I hope women can stand on their own, and suceed by personal merit and tenacity, not because some man decided to throw "those silly ladies" a bone. And I hope minorities can compete, and suceed without whitey feeling sorry for them and hiring a token or two.

Following logic to it's end we see that affirmative action is a tool to protect big buisness from civil-rights related litigation, not a program to help minorities. It creates a system of preferance, and disproportionate entitlement, it can lead to alienation of the very groups it is designed to help, and it is a grave insult to all peoples, struggling for equal footing in our society. It'sbenifites are short-term, it's benefits serve individuals, doing nothing that even comes close to serving minorities and women. As I earlier stated. It is an outdated policy, that still places minorities at the whims of rich white men. Maybe it's time to create a new model. Maybe it's time to put those old missionaries out to pasture.

Learn more about this author, Adam Mcculley.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.