Social Policy

Affirmative Action and Racial Preference: A Debate (Point by Carl Cohen

By Carl Cohen

Racial personal tastes are one of the such a lot contentious matters in our society, concerning basic questions of equity and the correct function of racial different types in executive motion. Now modern philosophers, in a full of life debate, lay out the arguments on either side. Carl Cohen, a key determine within the college of Michigan ultimate proceedings, argues that racial personal tastes are morally wrong--forbidden via the 14th modification to the structure, and explicitly banned by means of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. He additionally contends that such personal tastes damage society typically, harm the colleges that use them, and undermine the minorities they have been meant to serve. James P. Sterba counters that, faraway from being banned via the structure and the civil rights acts, affirmative motion is admittedly mandated by means of legislation within the pursuit of a society that's racially and sexually simply. an identical Congress that followed the 14th modification, he notes, handed race-specific legislation that prolonged relief to blacks. certainly, there are many different types of affirmative action--compensation for earlier discrimination, remedial measures aimed toward present discrimination, the warrantly of diversity--and Sterba stories the splendid proceedings that construct a constitutional starting place for every. Affirmative motion, he argues, favors certified minority applicants, now not unqualified ones. either authors provide concluding touch upon the college of Michigan circumstances made up our minds in 2003. part a century after Brown v. Board of schooling, matters referring to racial discrimination proceed to grip American society. This penetrating debate explores the philosophical and criminal arguments on each side of affirmative motion, but additionally finds the passions that force the problem to the vanguard of public existence.

Show description

Read Online or Download Affirmative Action and Racial Preference: A Debate (Point Counterpoint) PDF

Best social policy books

The European External Action Service and National Foreign Ministries: Convergence or Divergence?

In response to broad empirical paintings through a cross-European crew of researchers, this publication assesses the impression of the production of the eu exterior motion carrier (EEAS) at the nationwide overseas policy-making strategies and associations of the european member states. As such, the contributions conceal either the involvement of the nationwide diplomatic and overseas coverage actors in shaping the outlook of the EEAS and its project, in addition to the adjustments (or no longer) it has produced for these actors of the member states.

A Culture of Corruption: Coping With Government in Post-Communist Europe

Dependent upon surveys and interviews with executive officers and electorate, this booklet specializes in concerns equivalent to bribery, corruption, inefficiency and freedom of knowledge in Ukraine, Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. The authors transcend an research of public perceptions and behavior and think about public attitudes in the direction of proposals for reform.

Corruption and Anti-Corruption in Policing—Philosophical and Ethical Issues

Excessive degrees of police corruption were a continual old tendency in police providers through the international. whereas the final region of outrage during this ebook is with police corruption and anti-corruption, the point of interest is on definite key philosophical and moral matters that come up for police firms confronting corruption.

Additional info for Affirmative Action and Racial Preference: A Debate (Point Counterpoint)

Sample text

When the state favors white skins over black skins—a common practice for centuries—we are now properly outraged. Such categories cannot determine desert. This matter is morally settled: in dealings with the state, persons may not be preferred because of their race, or color, or religion, or sex, or national origin. ) in their private lives. But private opinions, however detestable, are not public business. Under rules to be enforced by our body politic, bigotry is forbidden. Persons of all colors, religions, and origins are equals with respect to their rights, equals in the eyes of the law.

18 Why Race Preference Is Wrong and Bad and remains far smaller than the proportion of those minorities in the population at large. The needed qualifications were and remain very far from being distributed proportionally, and no court orders or federal marshals can alter their actual distribution. The invidious segregation of the races was no longer the chief hindrance to the racial integration of institutions. By the late 1960s, discrimination against minority applicants in higher education had long ceased to be the rule.

S. 5 percent. This difference of one-tenth of one percent is reported by HUD as a “manifest imbalance” that justifies explicit hiring preference for Asians. But white males constitute just 5 percent of the technical employees at HUD, while the proportion of white males in the larger technical work force is 36 percent. This 31 percent discrepancy does not trigger preferences—plainly because the preferences would then go to the “wrong” group. Surely, if manifest imbalance is to trigger preference (a principle not obviously correct), it must at the very least be considered for all ethnic groups equally.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.06 of 5 – based on 10 votes