cracy as they define it was truly fair and served the needs of society, then they would be correct that affirmative action programs are harmful and should be eliminated. However, if this is not the case, then affirmative action programs may indeed by the solution to the social problem of unfairness in the workplace, in education, and so on.
Louis Pojman presents the argument that affirmative action is opposed to a merit-based system by noting that traditionally Americans believe that the highest position in society should be awarded to those who are best qualified. We reward excellence because it seems just to the individuals who show excellent capabilities and because it is an efficient way to allocate resources. Pojman refers to the case of Jackie Robinson in the 1940s, which he says was done in the right way so that merit was the reason for his promotion to professional baseball. Had Robinson not delivered, he would have been sent back to the minors and would have deserved just that (Pojman 251).
This reference raises several issues that show the falsity of the meritocracy argument. The fact that Jackie Robinson had to achieve a certain level in order to remain in baseball is clear, but to extrapolate from that fact that the system was simply merit-based and that this was preferable to an affirmative action structure which would seek out black applicants leads to a false conclusion. If we look at professional sports today, we see many black players, including a large number of black baseball players. However much affirmative action may have changed society at large, it has not changed the basic fact that players on a professional baseball team must perform at a certain level of excellence or they are tossed from the team. This is true whether they are white or black. Yet, there are many black players, whereas in the 1940s there was only one near the end of the decade, Jackie Robinson. It is absurd to assume that h...