|
|
Affirmative action programs are considered by many to be the hallmark of a system that supports equal opportunity for all. Yet, these very programs are often the recipients of harsh criticism by proponents of an idealistic and non-discriminatory society. They assert that these programs effectively deny members of a dominant group the chance to procure what should be available to them via a purely merit oriented selection process. These accusations of encouraging reverse discrimination are legitimate to a degree. Reverse discrimination is manifested in affirmative action initiatives.
To begin with, it is essential to define the term reverse discrimination. According to the US federal government, reverse discrimination is the practice of excluding members of a majority or privileged group from anything that that ought to be equally available to everyone. The word discrimination by itself implies prejudiced behavior directed toward groups of people who are differentiated from the mainstream, usually because of predetermined characteristics that, ideally, should not be used as a measure of a person's worth. When used in conjunction with the adjective, reverse, it should signify something quite the opposite of its original meaning.
Subsequently, affirmative action must be examined in the context of reverse discrimination. Affirmative action is the term employed to describe the procedures that are utilized to increase the participation rate of minority or disadvantaged groups in activities that have beneficial consequences. The nature of the relationship between affirmative action and reverse discrimination appears to be one of cause and effect. Nevertheless, while affirmative action is a potential cause of reverse discrimination, reverse discrimination can spring from other sources as well.
The overlap between the two is expansive enough to warrant an investigation into the ways in which reverse discrimination can be depicted by affirmative action campaigns. The concepts and ideologies that form the basis for affirmative action are strongly tied in with the perceptions behind reverse discrimination and the emotions it arouses.
It is obvious, therefore, that programs designed to promote affirmative action result in what can only be described as discrimination against the majority. The mere fact that this sort of discrimination is targeted at a very worthwhile objective does not mean that it can be excluded from being classified as discrimination. Whether or not affirmative action will change the popular view of the meaning of the word discrimination, remains to be seen. However, in the mean time, the dictionary definition of discrimination includes the strategies that compose affirmative action. Upon further analysis, it becomes evident that the issue under discussion here is one that is plagued by the intricacies of semantics. Hence, it hardly seems possible to reach a definitive verdict on the implications of affirmative action.