|
Affirmative action is a policy or a program which gives preference to a minority, or protected group of people with the stated goal of countering past or ongoing discrimination against them. It can take many forms including priority acceptance for government contracts, education, or employment and/or language training or vocational training.
Purpose Affirmative action began as a corrective measure for governmental and social injustices against demographic groups that are said to have been subjected to prejudice in areas such as employment and education. The stated goal of Affirmative Action is to sufficiently counter past discrimination such that a strategy will no longer be necessary: the power elite will reflect the demographics of society at large. Targeted groups may be characterized by race, gender, or ethnicity. In India, the focus has mostly been on undoing caste discrimination. In South Africa, the focus has been primarily race-based and, to a lesser extent, sex-based discrimination. When members of targeted groups are actively sought or preferred, the reason given is usually that this is necessary to compensate for advantages that other groups are said to have had (such as through institutional racism or institutional sexism or historical circumstances). The theory is that a simple adoption of meritocratic principles along the lines of race-blindness or gender-blindness will not suffice to change the situation for several reasons: Controversy Proponents of affirmative action generally advocate it either as a means to address past discrimination or to enhance racial, ethnic, gender, or other diversity. They may argue that the end result — a more diversified student body, police-force or other group — justifies the means. Many claim that it has unintended and undesireable side-effects and that it fails to achieve its goals. They argue that it can act as reverse discrimination, perpetrate new wrongs to counter old ones, and instill a sense of victimhood in the majority. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups (such as middle to upper class blacks) at the expense of the disenfranchised within majority groups (such as poor whites). In the British 2001 Summer Of Violence Riots in Oldham, Bradford, Leeds and Burnley, one of the major complaints voiced in poor white areas was alleged discrimination in council funding which favoured minority areas. There are also claims that the practice is itself racist and/or sexist. Finally critics and supporters disagree on the economic effects of affirmative action. Others believe that programmes may be motivated by political considerations. Affirmative action in international human rights law The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination stipulates (in Article 2.2) that affirmative action programmes may be required of states that have ratified the convention, in order to rectify systematic discrimination. It states however that such programmes "shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved". Positive discrimination, on the other hand, even if intended to improve the lot of disadvantaged groups, is considered illegal in international human rights law, as is any kind of discrimination. An in-depth examination of the legal status of affirmative action, and the different kinds of programmes that exist and their pros and cons, can be found in a paper written for the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights by one of its members, Marc Bossuyt. Implementation worldwide In some countries which have laws on racial equality, affirmative action is rendered illegal by a requirement to treat all races equally. This approach of equal treatment is sometimes described as being "race-blind", in hopes that it is effective against discrimination without engaging in reverse discrimination. In such countries, the focus tends to be on ensuring equal opportunity and, for example, targeted advertising campaigns to encourage ethnic minority candidates to join the police force. This is sometimes described as "positive action", as opposed to "positive discrimination". United States Main article: Affirmative action in the United States In the United States, affirmative action mostly applies at transition points—times when individuals are changing their employment or enrollment. Employers and universities often have policies favoring black, hispanic or female applicants. In states like California and New York, immigrants, both legal and illegal, receive affirmative action benefits as well. Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases, and has been contested on constitutional grounds. Writing in 1998, L. Anita Richardson commented that U.S. courts have generally accepted affirmative action as a remedy for actual present-time discrimination; rejected it outright for the goal of simply promoting diversity; and that "There is much debate… about dealing with the lingering, pernicious effects of past racial discrimination". India Main article: Reservation in India Affirmative action has historically been implemented in India in the form of reservation or quotas in government positions, employment and education for lower castes and minorities. The first records of these policies are seen in the late 19th century in the princely states of Mysore in South India and Baroda and Kolhapur in western India. Reservations in government jobs were introduced in 1918 in Mysore in favour of a number of castes and communities that had little share in the administration. In another instance, upon petition from the Muslim community, the British government at the time made provisions in the Government of India acts of 1909 and 1919 granting Muslims a share in the administration and other facilities. In the communal award of 1935, legislative seats were reserved for members of the Muslim, Sikh, Maratha, Parsi, Christian, European and Anglo-Indian communities. In addition seats were reserved for depressed classes within the Hindu community. The scheduled castes were given 8.5 reservation in central services and other facilities in 1942. In independent India, provision for reservation in legislature was made in the constitution until 1960, recently extended until 2010. Provision for public services was made at the same time with no time limit. More recently in 1990, the implementation of the Mandal commissions' recommendations have been in the social and political limelight. Despite widespread agitation (mostly among students), reservation for the backward classes were upheld to the extent of 27 per cent (this was in addition to the 22.5% already reserved for scheduled castes and tribes, bringing the total of 'open' seats to only 50%). * There have been recent attempts to introduce it into the private job sector and for Muslims. Many people disagree with affirmative action which has led to a lot of controversy. Consultations Another, more indirect form of affirmative action works through "consultations", whereby institutions such as schools or health-care facilities are viewed as centred on the majority culture, and therefore consultation with other ethnic groups are specified as a remedy. This can cause accusations of double-standards, as in practice representatives of all ethnic groups except the majority group receive consultation on institutional workings. Proponents discount this as being irrelevant, as they claim consultation with the majority group is pointless, as the institution's management is centered on their culture anyway.. Other countries See also Notes | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
 |
|
| |