Affirmative Action Essays (3610 words) - Social Inequality

Affirmative Action Thesis: Although many people believe that affirmative Action is a form of racism, it is actually used to help minorities find employment in an otherwise racist world. ?In the United States, equality is a recurring theme. It has flared into a fervent moral issue at crucial stages of American history: The revolutionary and Jacksonian Period, and the New Deal. In each era, the legitimacy of American society is challenged by some set of people unhappy with the degree of equality? (Verba and Orren). Following the Civil War, Congress passed a number of laws designed to put former slaves on an equal level with white people. The Fourteenth Amendment made the freedmen citizen and prohibited states from enforcing any law which took away the privliges of any citizen, depriving men of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law, or denied men equal protection of the laws. In 1875, Republican majority in Congress, aware that reconstruction would soon end, passed a civil right act to secure by law semblance of equality for Black Americans (Urofsky 19). Many white Americans really did not like the idea of equality for the Black Freedmen. ?Gideon Welles, who had been prevailing sentiment when he wrote in 1871: ?Thank God slavery is abolished, but the Negro is not, and never can be the equal of the white man. He is of an inferior race and must always remain so'?(Urofsky 23). The supreme court agreed and in 1883 passed the Civil Rights act which diluted much of th! e protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Joseph Bradely interpreted the enforcement provision of the amendment as strictly remedial; ?congress has the power to remedy a discriminatory state law, but could not take affirmative steps to protect blacks from other forms of prejudice? (Urofsky 21). As a result of this decision, the federal government took no action to combat racism in the country until the second world war (Urofsky 22). Because resentment continued to increase within the black communities and because of the threat of a march on Washington, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an executive order on June 25, 1941. This order directed African Americans to be accepted into job-training programs in defense plants. The order also stated that discrimination would not be excepted by employers holding defense contracts. It also set up a fair employment practice commissions to investigate charges of racial discrimination. Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower continued to enforce fair employment legislation after Roosevelt's policies because Congress was unwilling to do so. In 1954, the supreme court decision Brown v. Board of Education pressured both houses of Congress and the executive office to take some positive steps on behalf of civil rights. In January 1961, John F. Kennedy took office. Almost immediately Roy Wilkins of the NAACP called for action to promote employment opportunities for African Americans. John F. Kennedy responded with executive order 10925, which created a presidential commission on equal employment opportunity; it also mandated federal contractors to take ?Affirmative Action? to ensure that there would be no discrimination by ?race, creed, color or nationality.? This was not the first time that the government ordered it own contractors not only to avoid discrimination, but to take positive steps to redress the effects of discrimination in society. In some cases contractors were asked to pay employees doing similar work, the same amount of pay. Without congressional action an executive order could only last so long, and in 1963 Kennedy secured passage of the Equal Pay Act. The Equal Pay Act prohibited employers from paying women less than men for the same work. ?A short time later due to the assassination of kennedy Lyndon B. Johnson called for the passage of the Civil Rights Bill as a memorial to the late president kennedy. Lyndon B. Johnson skillfully guided and expanded versions of kennedy's proposal through the house and senate. The Civil Rights Act was signed into law July 2, 1964. Title VII of the act banned employment discrimination based on ?race, color, sex, and nationality,? it also created a permanent equal employment opportunity commission to enforce its provisions. The act also for the first time included obligations not to discriminate to private employees, labor unions, and governmental agencies.(Urofsky

To What Extent Does Britains Welfare System Provide for the Needs of Its People Essays

To What Extent Does Britains Welfare System Provide for the Needs of Its People Essays To What Extent Does Britains Welfare System Provide for the Needs of Its People Essay To What Extent Does Britains Welfare System Provide for the Needs of Its People Essay A welfare state is a concept of government where the state plays the primary role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life. The general term may cover a variety of forms of economic and social organization. 1] There are two main interpretations of the idea of a welfare state: ? A model in which the state assumes primary responsibility for the welfare of its citizens. This responsibility in theory ought to be comprehensive, because all aspects of welfare are considered and universally applied to citizens as a right. ?Welfare state can also mean the creation of a social safety net of minimum standards of varying forms of welfare. ?Explanatory Notes? ^ [1] Encyclop? dia Britannica A Brief History of the British Welfare State The primary idea underlying the platform of the British Labour Party was the rather obvious idea that it was part of the governments responsibility to help find solutions to the major social problems facing its citizens. The questions surrounding the possibility of successful Implementation of these solutions at been at the core of the the contention that existed between the opposing political ideologies. The onslaught of German aggression in World War II forced Britain into a situation where it no longer had any choice but to give in to ideological pressures and put them into practice. By the conclusion of the war pretty much all doubt had evaporated in the clouds of bombs as to whether a welfare state policy was practical. Upon the somewhat surprising sweep by the Labour Party into the halls of power in 1945, the United Kingdom underwent a wholesale change in ideology. The Labour Party wasted precious little time in mandating a series of programs aimed directly at revolutionizing every aspect of British society. It initially accomplished through an aggressive agenda involving the nationalization of various systems such as power industries and the the health care and insurance systems, among others. The aim of these moves by the Labour Party was nothing less than full employment throughout the country with the most basic needs to be provided by the government. The intention was certainly good, but the economics failed to take into account the changing nature of the world. England was able to burst out of the post-war gate quicker than many others, especially the losing side, but eventually had to face its own lack of resources, which required borrowing money that was to be paid as the post-war boom continued. That boom, in fact, did not continue and rather than quick repayments, the country fell deeper into debt. Meanwhile the costs of running government programs continued to rise far beyond the capacity to maintain them. Psychologically, the welfare state contributed to the rise of a certain type who expected to be taken care of without contributing. This type is often overdrawn by those opposed to socialist programs, but it nonetheless carries a poisonous strain that must be dealt with. With the rising debt and the subsequent unemployment, however, England failed miserably at dealing with this element. As a result, the Conservative party seized the concept of a nation that succeeded only in producing lazy citizens who expected the government to take care of all their needs. As the economics of the world changed, the architects of the welfare state failed to make adjustments, setting the stage for the deep divide and miserable governance of the 1970s. The Conservative leaders capitalized on the deepest fears about socialism and as a result the Thatcher era was ushered in with a mandate to take any steps necessary to fix the problems. Although deemed a socialist policy of governance, the failings of the British welfare state may rest in that it wasnt socialist enough. Rather than fully commit to a true socialist state, the Labour Party attempt to create a hybrid of socialism and capitalism and as a result the worst aspects of each economic theory served to undo the better aspects. Britains welfare system now needs urgent reform Britains welfare system now needs urgent reform The National Health Service is considered to be one of the best healthcare systems in the world by the World Health Organization. But in recent years, administrative difficulty has become a big problem for fulfilling the need of the British people. Britains benefits bonanza has been laid bare as it emerged 100,000 households rake in more than the average wage in welfare every year. They collect ? 30,899 (Dh182,304) before tax, while many workers an only aspire to an average wage of ? 23,422. Meanwhile 50,000 of those households are entitled to more than ? 500 a week - which adds up to more than ? 26,000 a year. Officials at the Department for Work and Pensions highlighted the figures after the coalition pledged an overhaul of the welfare system to make work pay. Employment Minister Chris Grayling said: Yet again we see more evidence for why reform is so desperately needed. The current wel fare system is not fit for purpose. After a decade of economic boom there are 2. 5 million people on incapacity benefit. It is the whole society’s job to face up to this challenge and take on those who say recession is a convenient excuse to do nothing. We cannot afford to do nothing. We need a robust welfare system able to withstand every twist and turn of the economic cycle. A strong welfare state will help everyone, be flexible enough to adapt to changing circumstances and offer real financial incentives to get people into sustainable work. Bescides this,the British prime minister David Cameron stressed his commitment to cutting the country’s deficit and said an overhaul of the welfare system would soon begin.