The Instigator
matthasselhoff
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Philocat
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Pro Affirmitive Action

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Philocat
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 625 times Debate No: 67988
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

matthasselhoff

Pro

Affirmative action has been around for ever. The only thing that has changed is who is benefited from it in the beginning whites and now racial and gender minorities. The problem is without affirmative action no public or private source would be able to endorse meritocracy throughout the world. African Americans make about 36% of the work force and with the birth rate , it is projected by the year 2050 that there will be no racial minorities. Affirmative Action helps the workplace. More than 60 leading 500 fortune companies agree that diversity is good. During Grutter v. Bollinger those 60 companies and civilian leaders of the Army,Navy,Air Force, and Marine Corps urged the court to uphold the limited consideration of race. While communities of color have made great strides in closing the education gap, disparities in higher education remain prevalent. Whites in 2009 were 13% over represented at the most selective schools.people in america are still prejudice towards other minorities. The man who built the third faction of the KKK was a congressman. Affirmative Action started helping white woman in 1974 and affirmative action is helping the economy. According to the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Office of juvenile Justice and Delinquency prevention African Americans are more likely to get caught in gangs and gang related crimes. Affirmative Action is helping cure prejudice. people think Race-neutral policies are detrimental to the next generation are false. Research shows that race-neutral policies simply don't work. A study conducted by UCLA school of law found that after using a class-based admission system, enrollment of African Americans and Native Americans fell by more than 70%. Diversity in the workforce fosters innovation and competitiveness in business. In a Forbes survey, 85 percent of respondents said diversity is crucial for their business, and approximately 75 percent indicated that their companies will put more focus during the next three years to leverage diversity to achieve their business goals. In the United States of America separate and unequal and falling apart we need to united as a whole. When people start giving more value to certain people we start to realize that we should all be created and when someone thinks that they have a higher value then things become chaotic. So lets be united and together and equal and help one another.
Philocat

Con

I argue that affirmative action should not be implemented in our current society.




I will start with a couple of definitions:

Affirmative action: 'action favouring those who tend to suffer from discrimination; positive discrimination.'
(1)

Discrimination: 'the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.'
(2)

The definition of affirmative action asserts that it is a form of discrimination.

Forms of discrimination ought to be abolished for the following reasons:

1. It over-signifies the race or gender of a person, especially when such details are irrelevant to the vast majority of college courses or employment roles.

2. It creates racial tension; as being discriminated against leads to envy of those who are not discriminated. Envy can lead to hatred. It also increases race-consciousness. (3)

3. It is contrary to meritocracy to let anything other than personal aptitude, especially a genetic variation, positively or negatively affect one's employment or educational prospects.

4. It stifles motivation of those who are being discriminated against, as there is little motive for self-improvement if aptitude is not the sole factor of one's success.

5. It devalues the achievements of those receiving affirmative action, as it can be quite validly claimed that they only achieved success with external assistance. For example, if an African-American obtains a university place because of affirmative action, then this achievement will be devalued because the value of one's achievement is dependent on the extent at which it was caused by the achiever alone.

As I have argued that affirmative action is a form of discrimination, and subsequently that discrimination ought to be abolished. These premises can be formulated to make the following argument:

P1: Affirmative action is a form of discrimination
P2: Forms of discrimination ought to be abolished
C: Affirmative action ought to be abolished.

It can be argued that affirmative action is necessary in order to reduce discrimination, but this is simply false; as replacing discrimination of ethnicity X with discrimination of ethnicity Y does not remove discrimination as a whole.

Moreover, it does not even reduce discrimination of traditionally-discriminated against groups, Thomas Sowell investigated affirmative action programs in various countries and observed in his 2004 book 'Affirmative Action Around the World'

"Such programs have at best a negligible impact on the groups they are intended to assist."
(4)

He also noted that affirmative action encourages ethnic identification instead of integration, as people socially position themselves in such a way as to take advantage of affirmative action policies.

Finally, affirmative action makes a grossly stereotypical generalisation that African-Americans and women are universally in need of support and that white males are not. In reality, there are millions of disadvantaged white males and millions of middle or upper class African-American women.




I will now refute my opponent's arguments.

'Affirmative action has been around for ever. The only thing that has changed is who is benefited from it in the beginning whites and now racial and gender minorities.'

That does not make affirmative action good; affirmative action for whites is bad, so it logically follows that affirmative action for blacks is bad as there neither skin colour is any better than the other.

'The problem is without affirmative action no public or private source would be able to endorse meritocracy throughout the world.'

On the contrary, affirmative action is against meritocracy as it does not consider merit as the sole factor of who should receive jobs or college places.

'African Americans make about 36% of the work force and with the birth rate , it is projected by the year 2050 that there will be no racial minorities.'

I am slightly puzzled by the statistics here; if African Americans make up 36% of the workforce then they are twice as likely to be employed than white people, as the percentage of the US population that identify as African American is 14.2%. (5)
Therefore, if 36% of the workforce is African American then this is actually a favourable figure to them, which suggests that there would be no call for affirmative action.

'More than 60 leading 500 fortune companies agree that diversity is good

This does not mean that we should force diversity, just as you cannot force two people to enter into a relationship. I agree that diversity is a good thing, but it should be naturally achieved (which is possible in a meritocratic society, as blacks are equally competent to whites).

Also, why should workplaces take any notice of ethnicity? If all races were equal then why make a point of ensuring an equal mix? Highlighting the significance of race (where there is little) will not serve to encourage tolerance.

'disparities in higher education remain prevalent'

This assumes that there an equal proportion of African American and white university applicants, which is not necessarily true. I would argue that the average African American is less likely to initially apply to university as I would postulate that the African American culture places less emphasis on academic success.
The disparity in higher education could just be that more white people decide to apply to university than black people.

'affirmative action is helping the economy'

I would like to see some evidence for this assertion, as I would hypothesise that affirmative action is anti-meritocracy, and a healthy meritocracy is conducive to economic growth. Therefore affirmative action is most probably not conducive to economic growth.

'Affirmative Action is helping cure prejudice'

Again, evidence for this? I would disagree with this assertion as affirmative action instructs employers to prejudice according to one's race.

'African Americans are more likely to get caught in gangs and gang related crimes.'

This is probably more of a cultural problem. Besides, it is a sad state of government when we must lure people out of gangs by offering unjust employment benefits. If this was the case, gang members would be holding the government to ransom.

'when someone thinks that they have a higher value then things become chaotic. So lets be united and together and equal'

Which is exactly why affirmative action is bad. It does not treat races equally as they should be.




(1) Google: 'define affirmative action'
(2) Google: 'define discrimination'
(3) http://www.nyu.edu...
(4) Sowell, Thomas "Affirmative Action around the World"
(5) http://www.cdc.gov...
Debate Round No. 1
matthasselhoff

Pro

matthasselhoff forfeited this round.
Philocat

Con

My opponent has forfeited, I extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
matthasselhoff

Pro

matthasselhoff forfeited this round.
Philocat

Con

The debate has finished with no further arguments from Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
matthasselhoffPhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's counter-arguments were too important to be ignored. Con wins sources for them helping Con make the winning arguments. Conduct to Con for Pro's round forfeits.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
matthasselhoffPhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture