The primary goal of affirmative action programs is to ensure that people of all colors, ethnicities, and political beliefs are able to sit at the table. However, if all you’re really looking for is the best seats in the house, there’s still plenty of room for you to get in on the action.
They were originally designed to make sure that kids of all backgrounds, gender, and sexual orientation are able to be part of the same team. Now, many of the rules and policies that affirmative action programs are founded on are nothing more than a way to keep from having to give the same seat to someone with a different ethnic background or sexual orientation.
Affirmative action programs actually do more harm than good. In some ways it creates a situation where people with certain backgrounds and sexual orientations are forced to compete against each other in an already crowded field. What happens when you have to take in someone with a different ethnic background or sexual orientation? You end up with a situation where you end up with the same person in the same seat.
I believe that affirmative action programs were originally intended to encourage people to become more successful. One of the most infamous examples of affirmative action was the “Equality Act” passed in 1954. This act would have prohibited discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, even for people who were white, male, and heterosexual. This act was later modified in the 1970s to extend to sexual orientation.
The ERA and the Civil Rights Act, the latter of which was signed into law in 1964, were not originally meant to protect anyone. The Equal Rights Amendment was proposed only in 1982 and was rejected by the U.S. Senate in 1983. But that didn’t stop those who wanted to see it passed. In the early 1990s, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.
Congress passed the Equal Rights Amendment in a special session in 1990 after being unable to come up with a solution for the problem of same-sex marriage. A new amendment was proposed after the last amendment expired. The new one was to be a “provision for the protection of rights under the federal Constitution,” which seemed innocuous enough.
You would think we would have been more inclined to reject it before we were able to get through the first half of the 1980s. But that was a small thing. If a few of us were doing the “no” thing and we stopped doing the “no” thing, we’d probably have been a small step back in the direction of the big thing.
In the 1970s, affirmative action was supposed to help poor inner-city kids get into college. The idea was that if you were born to a wealthy family and your parents were college graduates, you would get into college without having to wait for affirmative action. If you were poor and your parents were not college graduates, affirmative action was supposed to help you get into college.
Since the 1980s, though, there’s been increasing evidence that affirmative action is actually harmful to students. Affirmative action programs are often seen as a way to “push” people into certain fields. But as we’ve seen in the recent years, many of those people get into college through affirmative action programs even though they didn’t apply for them.
In America, affirmative action programs (and other programs meant to encourage racial discrimination) often fail to provide the best education for students because they are not designed to help minority students succeed. The idea is that you want to reduce the gap between minorities and whites, but as a group, minorities are generally treated unfairly.