This paper will examine affirmative action through the lens of the Bakke case, and the effect that the battle over the issue has had and is having on the state of ethnic and race relations in the U.S.
Affirmative action is designed to help eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, gender, and national origin, particularly in employment and education. The policy seeks to create more opportunities for women and minorities by giving them special consideration in decisions involving hiring, firing, promotion, college admissions, and government contracts. In all of these areas, women and minorities traditionally have been underrepresented. Companies, government agencies, and universities use recruitment, set-asides, and preferences to achieve these goals.
Though the goal of affirmative action is equality, many challenge such programs precisely on those grounds. Opponents say that choosing one person over another because of their race, gender, or national origin is always wrong, no matter how noble the goal. The policy has created bitter divisions that often run along racial and ethnic lines, and it has created fractures among the members of those groups.
Proponents of affirmative action argue that the policy is necessary because women, African-Americans, and other minorities have been excluded from public life. Bringing them into public life not only ends the discrimination, it benefits society because it allows them realize their potential. If employers and colleges used a personÆs race, gender, and national origin against them in the past, then it is only fair that such characteristics work for them today (Urofsky 29).
Opponents counter that although these groups have suffered because of discrimination, quotas disadvantage individual white males. This is inherently unfair. Why should only a handful of white males have to pay the price for all of society? This sense of unfairness drives much of the op...