Discrimination is Affirmative Action in favor of White Males

When readers see the title of today’s article they will probably respond, “Right On”, or “Rifkin has really gone off the deep end today”. The central purpose of today’s iteration is to showcase how our country has been built on minority diversity, and why diversity has been beneficial to our country. I also will contrast why some groups have fared much better than others. Unless we are White heterosexual male Protestant Christians from Anglo Saxon backgrounds, we are all members of minority groups. “Minority” is a loose subjective term that is relative to a segment of history, geography, a cultural reference, or a convenient method for the majority to define and oppress the minority.
Unless we have walked in the shoes of the oppressed, how can we have a deep and broad emotional empathy for and an intellectual comprehension of what that oppressed person or group has endured? It is very easy for those of us who have not been discriminated against based on gender, sexual orientation, religion, or ethnicity to scapegoat, label, demonize, or not look at our own individual shortcomings and cavalierly say, “Why don’t they just get on with their lives and forget the past”. The pain and suffering of an oppressed group may become a sub-conscious and conscious imprint on the emotional and cultural DNA of an individual. Women are the consummate example of a historical sub-class. When women were literally treated as personal property of a man, could not vote, had no property rights, reproductive rights, limited entry to formal education and professions, many women through societal conditioning actually believed that their gender was inferior.
Some out of touch people assert, “Well Jews, Asians, other ethnic minorities who came to this country were able to progress and become affluent, why can’t Afro-Americans do the same”? The answer is that Jews and Asians were not brought here as slaves, had their family units split up, or literally deprived of educational and employment opportunities. As slaves, for 245 years, looking at a book or attempting to educate oneself was punishable by death or severe beatings. In addition, Jews and Asians built close, or what some people derogatorily refer to as “Clannish” family or community units that supported and reinforced hard work, education, and mercantilism.
I believe there is no plausible, or absolute argument for the total inclusion or abolition of affirmative action in a society that has been based on some degree of oppression, or that needs to survive and prosper, based on a relative degree of excellence. It is very easy for governments to pass laws that attempt to right the wrongs of previous societal norms, but until people can culturally and emotionally embrace tolerance and acceptance, we will not have harmony in society.
My position is that the problem of discrimination is not something that needs to be corrected by the oppressed, but rather the oppressor. A case in point is the military position on DADT that was repealed by congress and signed by the president. Why should a qualified group of fully functional and skilled gay group of personnel be removed as a positive asset to the military mission? It is totally incumbent on the military as an employer to either attempt to educate those troops who are ignorant and embrace mythical attitudes about gay troops, or to eliminate those troops who refuse to embrace a degree of reasonable tolerance and acceptance. President Truman integrated the military over 60 years ago, met with resistance, but today most military personnel have no real issues with the racial integration of the military, and respect their black counterparts. Colin Powell is a shining example of a man of color who was universally accepted for his ability and has risen to the highest level of authority
and respect in the military. “Powell” credits part of his opportunity to have succeeded to affirmative action.
Our country has had an ongoing problem with some working class and even some upper class white males who have felt emotionally and economically threatened by various minorities. Members of the Klu Klux Klan and “Skin Heads” are primarily represented by working class white males who are traditionally programmed in their thinking, of limited education, feel economically threatened have been mono cultural, and who possess low self esteem and poor self confidence. These fearful ignorant men, many times have resorted to violence and brutality in a fearful attempt to assert their inferior feelings of masculinity and threatened economic status.
My definition of Affirmative Action is giving favored status to an oppressed group in order that they have some degree of benefit to reach parity in society. The question is to what degree do we want to use Affirmative Action programs as a method of balancing the past wrongs of society? If a white male and a black women are competing for the same job, have equal abilities and performance, and the percentage of minorities is under represented, then I would say that society would benefit from the priority being given to the minority candidate. On the other hand, for example I have heard personal stories of people in law enforcement and fire fighting who told me that they were passed up for hiring or promotions do to a bias from Affirmative Action. The next question is where is tipping point for the benefits to society by being inclusive and lifting people up, or hurting society by eliminating those in the majority who may have been more qualified.
I have a problem with those of minority status who use their uniqueness as a method of covering up for their lack of job performance or professional ability. I have a relative, who I know to be very tolerant and liberal minded, but he had a difficult time dismissing a women with disabilities, employed by the government who was clearly not performing her job. This women threatened discrimination lawsuits and was continually shuffled from one government department to another so that the potential of litigation could be avoided. Society does not benefit when mediocrity and inferior job performance is tolerated.
We are moving rapidly into a Global Economy and a New World Order. In order to stay technologically and educationally competitive, it is important that our country give all of its people’s equal access to all opportunities. Those countries that hold back members of their societies because of minority status will have foreclosed out those members who would possibly make a great contribution to the advancement of their societies and institutions. The rural US South is an example of a region of this country that did not progress relative to the rest of the country because of its draconian religious, racial, cultural, and educational attitudes.
For example orthodox Muslim, Christian, and Jewish religious groups that place women and homosexuals on an inferior plane with heterosexual men will fall behind in their ability to compete in a Global Economy. Extreme religious groups also impede scientific research, funding, and collaboration. Women have been the largest group of minorities, whose talents have been denied to society. For many years women were denied entry into the building trades, law, medicine, engineering, science, business management, and other fields where insecure men felt threatened.
In conclusion it is paramount for a society that wishes to remain competitive, to give every member of that society entrée to all educational and vocational opportunities. It is important for us to support those individuals without condemnation, who have intolerant attitudes, in order that they be educated
and released from the shrouds of fear and ignorance that causes them to bring a cancerous attitude to a functioning society.