Affirmative Action: Executive Order 11246

The Webster†s New World Dictionary defines affirmative action as â€Å"a policy or program for correcting the effects of discrimination in the employment or education of members of certain groups. † President Lyndon Johnson issued executive Order 11246. This required federal contractors to take â€Å"affirmative action† to increase the number of minorities that they employed. President Johnson†s order he put in place has since been twisted and turned around to what it is today. Such twists and turns include the hiring of unqualified workers, the causing of problems for groups it originally set out to help, and the reverse discrimination that results in unfair standards into higher education and the work force. Affirmative action creates an equal opportunity for people in the work force and for students seeking higher education. However, while affirmative action creates equal opportunity to for some individuals, it discriminates against others, primarily white males. Take for example some police forces. If a member of a minority group is hired over a more qualified person and they are forced to be in a situation they cannot handle then that is a major problem of affirmative action. Therefore, affirmative action uses reverse discrimination to solve the problem of discrimination. In â€Å"Assessing Affirmative Action†, an article by Harry Holtzer and David Neumark , says that â€Å"many firms where more likely to hire women and minorities with lesser qualifications, but also to give them remedial training, thus erasing the differences†(Holtzer1). In many cases you see that affirmative action helps most minorities and women but has its obvious drawbacks. In another article by George Gurin, â€Å"Sizing Up Affirmative Action†, he say†s that â€Å"To many colleges and businesses are being almost to open on who they let in and who they don†t only because they are trying too hard†(Gurin3). In my opinion I think that affirmative action is a great thing to have in today†s society, our nations development is credited to many different cultures coming together to form one great one. We will forever have the fight of discrimination, but there is not in my opinion one-way to satisfy everyone. As mentioned earlier affirmative action does hurt some of the people it set out to help. Consider an employer who hires a member of a certain minority group on the basis of skills alone. Many of the employees may automatically assume that the individuals appointment to that job is resulted from affirmative action. Therefore, an employee who does benefit from affirmative action may bear the brand of â€Å"not being the best pick, but the best pick of a limited group(Pasour). † Another part of affirmative action that is commonly brought up is women in the government. In earlier times people wouldn†t even consider having a woman in positions where they would be making decisions for men. In this day they were almost treated like the slaves that they owned. One of the only jobs that women did was to work in factories and low income jobs. Today women hold the top positions in some jobs. Companies are hiring and promoting women the same is they do men. Is this a result of affirmative action? When women were given their rights it was. Today it is easy to see that women are just as qualified as men at what they do. The question of having a woman president is still up for grabs. I think that it will still be a long time before society feels comfortable with a woman controlling their nation. That in it†s self would be another consideration. Would other countries take us seriously and treat us with the same respect they do now. In time affirmative action may be the winner in that a woman president is closer than everyone may think. Another heated issue with affirmative action is the issue of African Americans. America has been a racist country from the start. But as time has passed and people have accepted other races as their own. This was not until recently when people thought like this. In the case of the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978), a special admission program setting aside 16 places in the medical school class for disadvantaged students, chiefly racial minorities, violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment and title VI of the civil rights act of 1964(Regents2). All in all today†s society is growing towards the acceptance of different races and minorities. And one stepping-stone to that acceptance is the issue of affirmative action.

Environmental and Ecological Issues in Robyn Eckersley’s Perspective Essay

Robyn Eckersley, a renowned environmentalist believes that ecocentric theorists do not claim that anthropocentrism is the sole or original cause of the ecological crisis. She also reflects that environmental crisis is the outcome of humanity’s joyful and spontaneous instincts due to repressive social and psychic division of labor. As a matter of fact, she contends to the idea that it is the rise of material paradigms that people are in need of reconciliation with nature. She notes that utilitarianism in its very state undermined the essence of the environment which is why the veil of knowledge worn by the society is covering them thus colonizing the life-world. Eckersley examined the deontology of ethics inclined with the aim of making the recent topographical shifts within the field that are less â€Å"unknown to us (Eckersley). † To note, she states â€Å"utilitarian and eudaimonistic or therefore theological moral philosophy derives difference between good and evil from the effects which actions and attributes by nature have for the form of life of the actor and his environment (Louden). † In further illustration, she meant that the good deeds can conveyed as those that are considerably favorable effects for human welfare, while those that bring about the opposite are otherwise. Hence, this connotation also falls on the deliberative state of intuitive and formalistic ethics. Although Eckersley favors a rights discourse as a way to include the natural world in a liberal system, she admits that, â€Å"†¦the rights discourse becomes considerably strained (in all its dimensions) when we come to consider ecological entities (Eckersley). † She defines multiple human activities to be the cumulative result of the ecosystem’s components and that today’s approach towards this epidemic will not ensure sustainability. In essence, she is not against any form human-driven doings; however, she is not favor of the manner that it handles the resources that in the light provides for the very existence of human beings. The harvesting of the planet’s resources is seen to be detrimental to the future of the ecosystem and if such is prolonged, survival will be provided only for the few. Socialist critique of liberalism in comparison with the ecological state will differ in terms of morality and the deontology of ethics. It is apparent that not all deeds are the same when it comes to utilitarianism, sometimes, the ecosystem, being unable to air its share of sentiments, id reprimanded and oftentimes taken for granted (Rice). Humans are subject to care for those of its kind and the environment is not considered to be a part of it. In consequence, such is an irony, given that the human beings live and survive with the help of a healthy ecosystem—without the ecosystem, the members of the society will not be able to live. Policies, regulations and management may have changed over time. If compared to the previous century where not all are aware of the threat and the challenge of sustainability, the contemporary era now gives regard to narrowing the problems and eradicate or at least moderate in the utilization of resources provided that there is a massive chance that it may no longer be available in the next 100 years. The signs of climate change is a proof that laws would need to focus on combining good deeds not only for the people that it serves but also to detain the precautionary measures that may possibly harm the humanity.Accordingly guidance is considered necessary on the position of ecosystem mechanism that may be at risk (Rice). Works Cited Eckersley, Robyn. â€Å"Liberal Democracy and the Rights of Nature: The Struggle for Inclusion. † Environmental Politics 4. 4 (1995). Louden, Robert B. â€Å"Toward a Genealogy of Deontology. † Journal of the History of Philosophy 34. 4 (1996). Rice, Jake. â€Å"Can We Manage Ecosystems in a Sustainable Way? † A symposium on Sustainable Management of Marine Living Resources 60. 1-2 (2008). .