Affirmative Action: Benefits and Consequences

As we read in Sandel's Justice, there are many arguments for and against affirmative action. Justifiable moral arguments abound on both sides of the discussion. I would like to take a consequentialist look at the benefits as well as the ramifications of affirmative action.

First off, affirmative action does work. It is certainly preferable to the absence of affirmative action programs in that regard. And the goal of affirmative action is a lofty one. Equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, sex, gender, or religious persuasion, is important to the success of a democratic society. It is even more important to the foundation of a just society.

The arguments against affirmative action usually come from those who feel that they have been discriminated against due to affirmative action programs. Those opposed to affirmative action are generally residents of the majority demographic of a society, and receive no immediate personal benefit from these programs. If you're interested in reading an article from the anti-affirmative action side, I found one that basically sums up this position. Opponents of affirmative action in the United States often cite the founding documents of our country as evidence for the injustice of such programs. For instance, the article listed above begins with Jefferson's famous quote from the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

Ignoring the fact that relying solely on centuries-old documents for our moral judgments is likely a bad idea, this quote and others like it bring to light an important value in American society.  We value equality to an extensive degree.  So, when we feel that equality is not being upheld, or when we feel that discrimination is taking place, we are upset by it.  This indignant response to inequality is further complicated by the rather inflated issues of race and gender in our society.  I say "inflated" because these attributes are given far too much importance as separative features in our society.  Race or gender should not determine our moral judgments of a person.

There is no doubt a legacy of discrimination in the United States.  Affirmative action seeks to correct the aftereffects of this legacy by favoring certain individuals over others.  The trouble with this is that many members of the unfavored group under affirmative action policies now feel discriminated against, as well.  Whether this feeling is legitimate or not is another debate entirely.  Illustrating the conflicts between the pro- and anti-affirmative action camps in this manner serves to obscure an even more severe consequence of affirmative action.

This consequence is that affirmative action policies, through their virtuous goal of promoting equality, actually proliferate the illusory divide between those with certain racial, religious, etc. attributes.  By maintaining race, gender, etc. as factors in selecting individuals for certain positions, these attributes remain unnecessarily divisive.

This argument is sometimes used to discredit affirmative action programs altogether, which is, in my opinion, a totally ridiculous moral position.  Affirmative action is in reality necessary to the creation of a truly equal society, where race, sex, gender, and religion are not given arbitrary positive or negative identifications.  We should understand, however, that affirmative action alone cannot eliminate these prejudices in our society.