The Affirmative Actions And Drug Wars Politics Essay
The term affirmative action has been used to mean steps that have been taken to increase the representation of minorities in different areas, like education and employment, from which the minorities have been historically excluded. When such like steps involve preferential recruitment, then the issue of affirmative action generates a lot of controversies. This is based on the easy Not color Blind; Just Blind by Marshall and Katzebach. The two says that "the term "Affirmative action" was officially used in 1961 when President Kennedy strengthened an existing executive order prohibiting racial discrimination by government contractors in their employment practices."(13) The reason for making such like statement was to increase the participation of minorities particularly blacks who were discriminated from every contract and every desirable institution of the society. In most places at that time, the blacks were not allowed to enter, for instance, they would not enter restaurants, hotels or even library parts. Diversity din campuses improve the learning operations for everybody. The future of different nations relays upon individuals who have gone through a diverse training system to gain wider exposure. This essay analyses the effects that affirmative action would have on the student, faculty as well as staff, faculty and staff.
There are different ways through which affirmative actions programs can be used to ensure diversity in campuses. For instance in the U.S, only a few black individuals were allowed to enter public law schools in both California and Texas. There have been cases showing that affirmative action is an unfair program to the whites; however fair for diversity in campuses. In the essay Not Color Blind: Just Blind, the authors Burke and Katzenbach says: "In 1989, the Piscataway school board, faced with the need to lay off a single teacher, chose to lay off a white while retaining an African American of equal seniority and qualification." (Burke and Katzenbach, 11) The reason that led the board to make such like a decision is because they were according to the affirmative action policy as a decisive factor. Affirmative action was intended to level the racial playing field and give minorities chances in the workplace and the classroom that they would not have received in the absence of affirmative action. However, the minorities have had more opportunities. In so doing, diversity is attained in campuses; as the whites who appear to be majority are retrenched while the blacks who are minority are retained. On the other hand, the program is much painful to those fell as victims. For instance according to the essay, Affirmative action is it fair, the author Terry explains that, "the effort to regulate on the basis of race can have unanticipated consequenceâ€¦. For race has suffered discrimination."(4) This implies that, though affirmative action can ensure diversity in campuses, but the victims especially the whites will suffer more.
Another I dear is that, affirmative action programs have been used to increase the campus attendance for minority campus students. The administrators and educators have been encouraged to recruit minority students. As an effect, diversity increases. According to, not Color Blind: Just Blind, the authors Burke and Nicholas claim that, "some applicants are admitted on the basis of judgments about potential and predictions about future performances and predictions about future performances not unlike those used in employment decisions. A student from a poor school who qualifies might be seen despite a lower score, as having a higher motivation and aptitude." (15) this in one way or the other ensures that student coming from minority areas have a chance of joining universities. It is true that, such like students might have other talents, which when he would have been in big schools would have performed better. The authors were trying to explain the point that, there comes a time when qualification is not only based tests a lone, but on other qualities. On the other hand, the program though increases diversity in Universities, but According to, not Color Blind: Just Blind, the authors Burke and Nicholas claim that; it might have some negative effects on the minority students. This is based on the fact that, "an institutional need for qualified African Americans on the grounds that diverse student body contributes to educational excellence and prepares students to live in an integrated society." (16) No body has ever criticized the significance of diversity in education, though the perception of most critics might make its attainment much difficult. In addition, those African Americans who end up qualifying for the campus admission pool due to Affirmative action might end up not performing well. This is based on the fact that, they lack motivation and superior determination, this is because, the majority will not like associating with them, as they are looked upon as failures.
Another issue is that, affirmative actions have introduced remedial programs in most campuses, on the basis of ethnicity and race, as an effect, increasing diversity. According to the essay, Affirmative action is it fair it has explained that "whenever a formative action operates, such program leads some individuals to think that, every minority student or every minority employee would not have won the opportunity without the preferential treatment."(4) This explains the point that, there selection is not based on the on the ability, or the preparation level. As an effect, it communicates the tacit assumption that both blacks and Latino students are intellectual quality suspect regardless of their class or educational background. Diversity under such circumstances a rises, when such students never erase such like stigma, till he succeeds in non preferential environments like in sports, this is according to according to the essay, Affirmative action is it fair by Terry, who claims that;"no one receives preferential treatment in sports, so no one has self doubts induced by self affirmative action, no one has to transcend affirmative action." by ending affirmative action will lead to conditions under which individuals ends up shining, just as significantly as shining one ones own merits. When individuals keep on succeeding in other fields other than academics, such unique individuals tent to introduce the element of diversity. This means that, the campus will not only be made up with individuals who can succeed in academics, but also individuals who are in positions of succeeding in other fields like sports.
The use of race as selection criteria in most universities jobs has made most blacks in university jobs in the United States to lose some of these jobs for the consideration of Hispania's community which seem to be underrepresented. At this time, diversity has to be used as criteria of giving room for the discrimination against minority group members. In his essay Affirmative Action: is it Fair, Terry explains that, "Even president Clinton has said that he would support laying off black teachers in place of white teachers if doing so will promote diversity."(8) It is true that by using racial and ethnic criteria in the name of affirmative action, it has encouraged individual s especially the Americans always think of themselves in terms of ethnic and racial groups. However, if applied well, without discrimination, it can be used to encourage diversity in most universities. For instance, going with the essay, not Color Blind: Just Blind, written by Burke and Nicholas, "to hire or promote an African American is often viewed as risky. Will he or she be accepted by the fellow whites?" (14) This explains that, at the workforce only whites are in a position of being taking control, as they are perceived to be self minded. So basing on such ideas, ethnic and racial factors can not encourager diversity in institutions, but just encouraging the recipe for the resentments and chauvinism, as neither of them has an objective of promoting the good health of institutions democracy.
In conclusion, according to the analysis done, affirmative action has a lot of effects on the students, faculty and staff as a whole. To every group in the campus fraternity, affirmative action programs have been used to achieve diversity in the campus. Though diversity in education system is a positive element, it has also lead to some individuals to pass through had times for the sake of others; however, it is the majority who suffers for the sake of minority. On the hand, a formative action has also negative impacts on the minority, as the majority assumes that all minorities do not qualify to be where they are, but they are there just because of affirmative action. The analysis has sown that, both positive and negative impacts of affirmative action contributes to diversity in campuses in one way or the other.
There have been several methods of fighting the war on drugs; however, according to different studies that have been carried out, there is no single method that has been proposed by all researchers, as being the most effective way of fighting the war. This essay tries to examine different methods of drug war fighting methods, with the aim of suggesting the best method.
The two opposing methods that have been identified are legalization and illegalization. There are individuals who have been proposing to the law makers to set up policies that legalize drugs while others want policies that illegalize the drug use as a way of fighting drugs. Most national policies and intellectuals are against the drug use. For successful drug policies complex questions concerning politics and policies need to be addressed and resolved. It is much clear that, though drug has been put on the forefront, but the problem is not drugs, the problems include poverty and other social phenomenon, as these are the causes of drug use. As stated in Drug: Should Their Sale and Use Be Legalized? Document by William that: "if we want to eliminate drug problem, these people say we must first eliminate "root causes" of drug." (Barnet and Bedau, 96) This is based on the fact that, if the causes of drug use are not going to be identified and resolved, then regardless of the method used, the war will never be won. for instance, long time ago, individuals never used to talk about the causes of racism. William in his Essay, Drug: Should Their Sale and Use Be Legalized? Say that: "But at the same time, and again along with these experts, and with the American people. I believe it is not a lost cause but a solvable one." In this statement, William was stating that, that the drug war is much difficult to handle, but if scientists, drug experts and the American fraternity can all join hands together, they can easily find the solution to drug war. If the fraternity comes together, on what methods should be used in dealing with drug war.
Either legalizing or illegalizing drug use, are the methods that have brought a lot of debates in the country. Those proposing drug legalization claim that, individuals will engage in drug business hence get some profits. However, those who are against drug legalization claim that, rarely does the drug business have huge sums of money. This is based on the fact that, most individuals taking part in this business are low level runners, they don't have enough money. This is the reason as to why William in his essay Drug: Should Their Sale and Use Be Legalized? Explain that: "most of them work as prostitutes or small time criminals to supplement their drug earnings" (Barnet and Bedau, 96). These explanations indicate activities that individual undertaking business that brings in huge sums of money do not engage in. it is only lowly earned individuals who can engage in such business. In most of the times, sellers end up smoking more as compared to what they sell.
In addition, proponents of drug legalization have claimed that, legalization risk is much lower as supposed by individuals. This is based on the fact that, over 20,000,000 youth in America have used cocaine, but only 3% uses them daily. As an effect, Wilson in his essay, Against the Legalization of Drugs, says: "The implication is clear: make drug legal, and only have to worry about 3% of our youth" (Barnet and Bedau, 109). On the other hand, it has been agued that, legalization will remove that incentive of staying away from a life of drug. This is because, after legalizing, it will no longer be a forbidden fruit which is much sweeter, especially to most youth; hence they will tend to stay a way from it. However, oppossers have disagreed, saying that, whether legal or illegal, there are individuals who will abuse drugs. In addition these drugs are much more addictive hence the principle of forbidden fruit might not apply. Due to this fact, drug legalization will just increase the number of consumers due to pleasure, regardless of the cost; this is because the drug will be legal.
Those proposing legalization have agued that due to tax imposition, drugs will be expensive, hence consumers will be only few, in addition such taxes will act as revenues to the government. However, there are still the issues of black markets which might not be affected by tax imposition. However, if such drugs are sold much cheaper with the reason of eliminating the black market, then the price will be manageable to many, hence increasing the number of drug users. Nevertheless, the effects of having large number of drug users, is as explained by Wilson in his document; Against the Legalization of Drugs. The author explains that; "cocaine use leaves the user neither helpless nor harmless." As a matter of fact, with availability of drugs due to legalization make the user desire to repeat the act. Individual who continue using drugs, latter becomes addicted hence become more devoted to it so much, hence excluding all other considerations- may it be occupation, family, food and even sex, which when not cared for, might lead to family breakages.
There those claiming that, legalization will reduce government expenditures. For instance, for the years that the united state has dealt with drugs, it has been shown that, around 11 million shillings are spending during law enforcing. In addition, illegality of drugs in one way or the other increases violence and crimes to a certain percentage. This is based on the fact that, users have no choice a part from turning to crime activities to settle bills for their daily habits; this is especially because some users get stimulated by some drugs, to act violently or ruthlessly. In addition, there are criminal organizations that tent to control the supply and sale of drugs, as an effect they employ violent behaviors to control their markets. These are also serious costs but no individual can estimate by how they might reduce after legalization of drugs. However if all these individuals are caught by the police, they ends up being locked in jail. In the essay; A Policy on Drugs, the author Currie explains that: "by 1989, there were roughly 20, 000 drug offenders on any given day in the New York state's prison, but there were an estimated 200,000 to 250 heroin addicts in New York City alone." (Elliott, 123) this figures mean expansion of prisons, this also mean more costs on the government. It is not known how much will be needed to accomplish such like projects.
Secondly, the paper deals with the analysis of education as a mean of fighting drug war. Drug education programs need to be introduced in schools. The problem is that, the credibility of such like program is not well known, as the programs will be dissuading kids from doing things that are legal. Drug education can be treated as smoking education. There are some drugs which might be easy to handle, but others are never easy. For instance, tobacco smoking is not good; such like effect is openly known. However, dealing with crack has proved to be much difficult. This is based on the fact that, though there is pleasure in it, but one's devotion on much pleasure is not good. In addition, when drugs are legalized, there will be effective drug prevention methods, for instance Wilson explains in his; Against Legalization of Drugs; "explains that Now that it could be sold by same individuals making aspirin, its quality would have been assured." (104) this will mean that, drugs will now be much pure, as there will be no addition of poisons.
In conclusion, though there are many methods of fighting drug war, but there seem to be no single method that can be termed as most effective. Most of the methods that might seem somehow effective involve the combination of either two or more. For instance as longer as more drugs can easily be found on streets, and every corner in town due to legalization, neither education nor treatment can be applied in such a situation and succeed. As an effect, both treatment and education works well in the presence drug illegalization. As an effect, it is high time that, politicians, experts and American fraternity to come together to look for the best combination of methods to deal with drug war.
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal: