Class Not Race - Essay Example

section/# Not Race Even an individual that has a relatively small amount of information concerning disparity and inequality that exists within society would readily agree that African-Americans have experienced an untold level of hardship since coming to the United States as slaves. Irrespective of the advances inequality and social parity that has been achieved over the past several decades, the reader can and should consider the fact that these changes have only been the result of hard-fought battles against those that wish to maintain the status quo. In response to a history of hardship, slavery, and Jim Crow laws within the South, legislators within the United States government sought to implement what came to be known as “Affirmative Action”. Effectively, this particular approach was one that sought to consider race as a determining factor and necessary requirements for organizations and firms, as well as educational institutions, when selecting an individual for a job position or in other organizational settings. Although this federally and legislatively mandated program has created a great deal of fairness within the system, many detractors point to the fact that it is inherently unfair due to the fact that it still continues to perpetuate a system in which an individual’s overall worth is predicated upon racial characteristics. Furthermore, individuals that are specifically against affirmative action have pointed to the fact that at its core, it is not much different than the racial interpretations of an individual’s worth that were perpetrated during the Jim Crow era of the Deep South; albeit somewhat in reverse. One of the authors that specifically finds the issue with affirmative action is Richard Kahlenberg. Kahlenberg’s viewpoint is that the practice of Affirmative Action has in fact been more unfair than it has been fair. The rationale behind this seemingly extreme statement is predicated upon the fact that affirmative action only considers racial characteristics with respect to making determinations within the public sphere. However, according to Kahlenberg, a more root cause of disparity that exists between blacks and whites is not predicated upon skin color alone; rather, Kahlenberg argues that it is predicated upon class. Said Kahlenberg, “Race-based affirmative action tells the most disadvantaged whites that you have very little in common with African Americans, because you have white skin privilege”…“If the goal is to unite people of all races, this policy is a disaster” (Judis 1). According to Kahlenberg, the greater issue at hand has to do with the fact that disenfranchised individuals, regardless of skin color, continued to experience a litany of hardships. These hardships are oftentimes those that are not protected under law or otherwise are not considered as legitimate by the legislation that has thus far been enacted. As such, rather than merely disparaging affirmative action based upon the fact that it raises certain African-American candidate above whites, Kahlenberg instead promotes the understanding that the greatest issue facing the United States with respect to the quality is based upon a class understanding. Whereas this is necessarily a Marxist point of view, Kahlenberg does not promote Marxism actively; instead, it merely denotes that many of the same hardships that were faced by African-Americans over the past century have consequently been faced by lower classes in the white race and other races that comprise the United States population one specific problem with common birds view is predicated upon the fact that even though class certainly has a determining role with regard to the way in which an individual is understood by society, the United States has never had a history of barring service, human rights, or basic liberties to individuals based upon class alone. Thinking back as far as the revolutionary war, individuals were allowed to fight for freedom from the British Empire regardless of their social class. The landed aristocracy fought alongside what might be considered as “poor white trash”. By means of contrast in comparison, the African-American slaves at that time were viewed as subhuman and an affront to the battlefield if indeed they fought. Whereas it is true that there are a few outstanding examples of African American dream in who were able to engage in the battle for freedom against the British Empire, these were few and far between. The underlying purpose for reaching as far back as the revolutionary war is to paint a vivid image for the way in which class and race have been understood throughout the course of history; at least in the United States. Moving forward to the 20th century, it is also not the case that individuals were refused service and restaurants or barred from drinking from a certain water fountain based upon their social class. Instead, the Jim Crow laws and segregation in place throughout much of the United States was directly the result of racial interpretation. Finally, it must also be understood that it was in fact race and not class that determine whether or not an individual was likely to be a slave during the early 19th century. Whereas it is true that different classes within the United States had experienced undue levels of hardship and poverty, the overall unfairness that these groups have experienced pales in comparison to the level of unfairness that racial minorities have experienced. Taking the Kahlenberg approach one step further, the reader can note that the creation of a society that awards preferential treatment to one group or another based upon either race or class is creating something of a retroactive social experiment. What is meant by this has to do with the fact that the society which promotes one race over another, regardless of occurrences that might have taken place in the past, creates a new preferred race. By much the same token, the society that practices a similar approach with respect to raising another class above another, in terms of overall opportunities and benefits, creates a new preferred class. Although the basic rational for performing such levels of change is understood, the reader can aptly point to the fact that the same inherent logical failures that resulted in the failures of past society will likely be repeated again and again if such an approach is implemented and affected for generations. From the information that has thus far been presented, it is clear and apparent that neither affirmative action nor determinations based upon class alone should be seen as sufficient for correcting the ills that society has exhibited over the past decades and centuries. However, with this in mind, it is not the understanding of this author that the current system, as it exists, is worthy of perpetuating based upon fairness alone. Instead, a post-racial understanding of discrimination, equality, rights, class, and race must be expected. Obviously, this rather high-minded goal is one that can only be accomplished if and when stakeholders within society are held responsible for the decisions they make and the degree to which prejudice influences actions is reduced. Rather than merely blaming the creators of affirmative action or disparaging the remarks of Kahlenberg, it is the understanding of this particular author that all individuals involved have actively sought a means of making society more fair and equitable. Although these goals have sometimes been misdirected and created a situation in which society has stepped backwards in the fight for equality and fairness, the means by which individuals appreciate and integrate with these prescriptive changes is oftentimes positive. Finally, in judgment of Kahlenberg and his point, it is the belief of this author that both race and the class should be necessary determinants that are partially protected by the law. Works Cited Judis, John. "Richard Kahlenberg, Class-Based Affirmative Action Prophet." New Republic. N.p., 15 Apr. 2013. Web. 17 Apr. 2014. Read More