true or false?
affirmative action can be less divisive and more just if it is based on the socioeconomic background rather than race and gender. this way it would still include majority of African- Americans and women but it will also include many European-Americans IE; Irish who were also enslaved. some Africans(more so in Europe) were diplomats children who were sent overseas for education. affirmative action has become a tool to divide people who otherwise have more in common. white men who were born with a silver spoon in their mouth are already enjoying their version of affirmative action which is called connections or con-actions! like Bush senior who helped junior to get started by refering him to influential people! come on now it isn't what you know but who you know that really matters! if one doesn't have con-action then should be eligible for affirmative action!
Comments
it 's all a zionist ploy to increase social division and break down social cohesion in gentile nations. Just like open door immigrant ion which has been enabled by the Zionist neocons since they've come to power- coincidence?
I think you are right. I think it is time that Affirmative Action is changed for the better. One of the problems we have in this country is the fact that young white males are having trouble finding jobs that are above the poverty level. To help one race rise above poverty only to cast the other race into it is not the answer to the problem.
I don't know how to stop the Nepotism, however. At the moment, unless you have connections or a Suma *** Laud from Harvard, chances are any job open will go to the relative, friend or acquaintance of the boss. It's a problem that won't go away until there are more jobs than applicants.
I definitely think that affirmative action should be based moreso on socioeconomic background than race. I know that in the area I live in, there are plenty of minority families who have much more than I do, yet I am paying full price to go through college.
I think it's funny that you consider networking to be a form of affirmative action. Men that network are pulling strings behind the scenes to get what they want, that's smart, every race color and person does or should want to do that. And no one ever excluded minorities from doing this as well. No, networking is not affirmative action. Affirmative action is correcting the observed imbalance of employed minorities in various fields. Supposedly this is to correct racial bias, unfortunately it creates racial bias by imposing quotas on the employer. It demands equal looking representation of workforce, because it thinks that is a sign that racism doesn't exist. The employer MUST hire minorities, even if he finds none qualified for the position. Is that a good policy for a business? No, it's not. It's not fair to minorities either: they should rest assured that they get jobs on their own merit, not by decree of some antiquated and racist law.
A.A. is an attempt to undo the wrongs perpetrated on blacks and minorities. Driven by a guilt complex it has given many opportunities that otherwise would have taken decades to achieve.
How about we scrap the whole thing, and make advancement about what should be, ability. If it were about ability, George Bush would've flunked out of grade school, and he'd be living on daddy's ranch in Texas with a collapsed nose from all of the bugger sugar. Then we'd have someone with the ability to do the job they were elected to do.
I agree with you on this. Affirmative action in its current form tends to be tokenistic rather than addressing root causes of comunities being disenfrachised and underpriveliged.
Most simply put. affirmative action is just another form of discrimination. It doesn't matter what it is based on.
True
May be
True. I just guessed. 50% chance. Not bad. Will you give me best answer if I'm right?