Affirmative Action Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Affirmative Action - Essay Example The phrase â€Å"affirmative action† was introduced by Executive Order 10925. EO 10925 was issued by U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1961, which urged employers to actively adopt policies and safeguards against discriminatory practices in their workplace. Four years after, EO 11246 made it mandatory for federal contractors and subcontractors to: (1) identify underutilized minorities, (2) assess availability of minorities, and if available, (3) to set goals and timetables to fill vacancies with minorities with the aim of reducing such underutilization. In 1967, EO 11375 extended the benefits of AA to women. The further expansion of the application of AA was made possible by the U.S. Supreme Court when it promulgated the Bakke decision. In this case the Court was asked to rule whether or not it was unconstitutional for universities to give preference for blacks and minorities in admitting applicants for placement, because it violated the doctrine of â€Å"equal protections of the laws.† The Court ruled that â€Å"racial preferences are permissible if their purpose is to improve racial diversity among students, and if they do not stipulate fixed minority quotas but take race into account as one factor among many (Dworkin, 79). Today, AA is more widely observed, but as employment prospects and educational placements become more competitive, more people are raising questions about the propriety and fairness of AA. In defense of affirmative action According to the study by Bowen & Bok (cited by Dworkin, 79), the success of racial integration is attributable to AA in education, because it has enabled a higher rate of graduation among African American students, which led to more African American leaders in industry, professionals, community leaders, and subsequently a more sustained interaction and lasting friendships among the races than would have been otherwise expected. The benefits of AA are not in themselves the moral argument; the argument is th at where for past centuries racial minorities have been constrained to live in conditions of extreme social and economic disadvantage, it is but right that AA provide for them now an advantage over the majority to make up for the adverse conditions they have been subjected to. The implications are more than merely symbolic, and the effects referred to are more than just economic. Present-day descendants of slaves and people of color start life from a position of disadvantage in institutionalized society as a result of the limitations imposed on their ancestors. This is known as the â€Å"stigma theory† (Soni, 581). Parents denied an education because of their race will provide little inspiration for their children to conceive of and aspire for such education. The moral precept that all people are created equal, to be applied with effect, refers to enabling individuals be perceived and regarded the respect of equals. AA not only provides reparation for the past, but more pragm atically speeds up the slow process of transforming social perception. An African American, or woman, or a person with a disability, are persons who, in aspiring for the opportunities provided by the equality clause, struggle under the weight of social perception which, while not discriminatory per se, tends to manifest in subtle ways of stereotyping that renders the â€Å"equality† superficial. In this manner, AA provides an active catalyst to accelerate the social transformation to true equality. Critique of affirmative action Detractors of AA point out that the policy has been implemented by positive and aggressive action â€Å"

Leadership and battle strategy in the Persian War Essay

Leadership and battle strategy in the Persian War - Essay Example The thesis statement encompassing this paper is the "leadership and battle strategies in Persian Wars". The Persian wars started with a series of battles within the Greek states, predominantly on the part of Persia against several Greek cities in view of the Persian King's strategy of expanding his kingdom and rule. The Persians waged a war against the Athens and Erectia because of the support these states provided to Ionians and other Greek cities in their fight against Persia. The Persian leader at that time was King Darius I, the Great King of Persia who succeeded in seizing control of almost all the Greek states other than the Athens and Strata (Pomeroy 187-188). The preeminent of all the battles fought in the Persian war was the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC that shaped the destiny of Greek empire. This war not only determined the extent of influence exerted by Persia or Athens politically, but also the prevalence of democracy in Greece. The history of Greece would certainly have been different had the Persians won the battle of Marathon against the Athenians. The Athenians were not as strong as Persians with regard to the infantry, war resources and weapons. The Persians were great in number as compared to the Persians, but were endowed with war discipline and an effective military system along with an efficient leadership. Weir propounds that the strategy Greeks employed in their war with Persians was to evoke insurgency among the people who were inside the Persian Empire so as to subvert their strength. The Athenian commander, Miltiades, had also once remained a Persian commander who betrayed the King of Persia. The Greeks, at that time, also excogitated an effective military system that enabled their soldiers to move about the narrow mountains swiftly. They had also developed in terms of weapons, shields and armors that were used by the fighters in the course of war. The primary weapons that the Greek army mostly carried were spears while short swords were also kept as secondary weapons of war (11). The use of traitors in a battle against the enemy seems to be the most eminent strategy engaged by leaders even in the ancient Greece. Miltiades who once happened to be a tyrant in Greek states and also a commander of Persian army, joined hands with Athenians after his partition with the King of Persia. He proved to be one of the prominent leaders in the series of Persian wars who played an effective role in motivating the Athenians to drive the Persians out of the state. When faced with the dilemma of attacking the powerful Persian army, the Athenian leaders had different opinions as to risk a fight or not. Some leaders were in favor of fighting the Persians in an open attack while others were reluctant of taking the risk. The thing that was at stake was not only the lives of Athenians, but also more importantly, the emerging democracy that had the ability to free the Greek world from the claws of tyranny. Miltiades, who was strongly against the Persians, incited the commanders to attack the Persian infantry so as to defend the democracy of Athens (Weir 10). Miltiades also persuaded the other Athenian leaders to go in the favor of attack in order to save Athens from the tyrannical rule of the King Darius as in Persia. Persians had to confront the two strongest opponents of all the Greek States viz. Athens and Strata as a consequence of attacking Athens. Darius, the Great