Paste your essay in hereStrengthening Affirmative Action
Can a society be considered more evolved and functional if it promotes and secures equality for all its individuals? For colonized regions of the world, the answers to this question fade into the long years of citizen inequality, where the majority of the population has existed in the margins of a world full of opportunity. Very few individuals know a life of academic possibilities, professional careers and political power. Moreover, unequal access to opportunities comes at a collective level, since historically marginalized groups live more oppressed and less advantageous lives than those historically privileged by race, sex or culture. The colonizing mentality of the human species dates back a very long time, and helps us understand why Latin American societies, for example, are so unequal today.
But this past analysis also brings about understanding of our hierarchies and the search for equality. Our human nature has experienced a hierarchical paradigm in a desire to contain and control its very own diversity. These hierarchies have been getting more ineffective because the socio-economic system functions through polarizing opposites. So, this mentality has given rise to unimaginable wealth and poverty, privilege and abuse, engendered both by noble consciousness and socio-economic reforms. After Independence from ethnocentric rule, Latin American societies kept the hierarchies which the colonial system had imposed.
After the historic 2003 Supreme Court decision regarding affirmative action it was defined, etymologically speaking, as the steps taken to increase and protect the constitutional rights of minorities in representation within the areas of employment, education and culture. However positive these implements may seem, they have continuously caused controversy and intense debate in many nations which have sought to implement them. In the words of Lyndon B. Johnson: “You do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say you are free to compete with all the others, and still just believe that you have been completely fair.” And precisely “fairness” or the lack of it, for that matter is what lies at stake. A woman who is denied access into the military, a Latino which is rejected from an Ivy League university, or even an African American who is paid less compared to his equally competent White-male coworkers. Ideas such as these are why humanitarians and affirmative action advocates have for decades demanded changes.
Affirmative action was originally instituted prior to the 1960s Civil Rights Movement with an intention to provide similar opportunities to minority group members. President John F. Kennedy was the first person to implement the term ordering government contractors to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin”. Creating the Equal Employment Opportunity Act which focused on outlawing African American segregations from universities.
The other side of the page, although, is that of the critics. Condemning affirmative action and declaring it an outdated reform and a way of reversely discriminating against the ethnic groups not included in zed laws. Neglecting the centuries of racial, social and economic oppression. However clear it is that competition must be based on merits and intellectual advantages, disparities such as socioeconomic brackets cannot be set aside. Precisely confusions such as that is why affirmative action in education rewards merit rather than a mere and pathetic view of race and gender. It is the thin line between qualification and biased preference which bother critics the most.
Despite what critics might say, Latin America has begun to implement affirmative action as a means to create more inclusive democracies. The legal and constitutional terminology of this policy hasn't changed in Spanish, since many countries like Mexico, Colombia, Peru, and Argentina use “Acción afirmativa” when referring to their efforts to provide equal opportunity for women and racial minorities in education and subsequent spheres of social life (Abellán,1996). Another Hispanic term is “discriminación positiva” (positive discrimination), which describes the political preferential treatment given to a social, ethnic or minority group have suffered historic discrimination (CIESAS Fondo Indígena: 2014). Both these terms allude to a State´s campaign to improve the lives of unfavored population groups by compensating some of their members with easy access to schools, jobs and political podiums.
Latin America countries both adopted and adapted this term in their constitutional reforms. According to a New York Times online article: “notably part of the growing Latin American discussion about income inequality has been the observation that the social exclusion of persons of African and indigenous ancestry has inextricably linked race and class in ways that impede economic growth”. However, implementation efforts and rhetoric have varied from country to country. Like a study about the subject by EQUITAS states, “although this term departed from rhetoric in the US, it was made with a different sense, since it became more about amending a paternalistic relationship than recognizing a right” (Equitas, 2014).
So why has the issue of Affirmative Action laws not been implemented successfully in Latin America, while compared to a well-established viewpoint in the US? Although many nations in this region have made constitutional efforts in their society regarding affirmative action, Ecuador has fallen behind on implementing these amends. I strongly believe our country needs to strengthen affirmative action policies in education, the job market, and politics.
Affirmative action in Latin America's education system.
The biggest and most important sector from which affirmative action policies revolve around is education. When faced with potential applicants to an institution, the admissions office is to make sure its cultural diversity of students is met. The Equal Opportunity Group at NC State (2015) puts it this way: “The primary purpose of affirmative action in education has been to involve qualified students of all backgrounds in our nation’s most rigorous educational offerings.” They further discuss how unfortunate it would be, for example, to divide minority groups from the privileged group, and lose the multicultural experiences which most universities in the US have to offer. And that is precisely what makes studying in the United States distinct to anywhere else in the world. The presence of so many different cultures, backgrounds, and races which makes students get a larger sense of what the world around us is like. It makes them metropolitan people, rather than isolated ones.
Moreover, affirmative action in education is famous for providing scholarships and grants, which benefits those individuals who haven’t had optimum socioeconomic opportunities. It creates engineers, teachers, mathematicians, scientists, and even doctors which are the backbone of our economy. As Justice Powell wrote in the Bakke case: “Diversity in our colleges and universities improve the learning process for everyone. . .the nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to the ideas and mores of students as diverse as this nation of many peoples.” This “nation of many peoples” is what precisely what characterizes the American educational system. Both in higher and lower education.
Countries such as Honduras and Uruguay have fallen behind on implementing these amends; Brazil, however, is viewed as “the Pioneer” (Hernandez, 2013) with Colombia in line with Brazil’s innovative action. One of the South American countries to actually institute zed policies was Colombia. The Colombian Constitution (1991) directly mandated that in order for welfare and equality to be real and effective, the state would adopt measures in favor of those groups being marginalized from society. Prior to these orders, in 1996, the Programa de Créditos Educativos para Comunidades Afro Colombianas was created. A program which “…awards university credits to Afro-Colombians for community service, whether social or academic. To qualify for the program, students must be certified members of an Afro-Colombian community, must demonstrate academic excellence and limited socioeconomic resources, and must present a project aimed at solving a local community need”. In addition, by August 2010, at least 80 public universities in Brazil had adopted affirmative action policies. The structures of the current programs vary.Some only target Afro-Brazilian students from public secondary schools as a way of reaching the neediest Afro-Brazilian students; other programs set aside seats for public secondary school graduates of any race and then establish proportional slots by race according to demographic percentages in that state.
On the other hand, the educational implements in our country continue to be meaningless. No form of legislation or policy has been firmly set in regard to instituting and fomenting the deserved education Ecuador's minorities are pleading for. What has happened although is the famous “intention”, which the current government of Ecuador has us used to, to reform constitution for what actually matter. The government has since 2008, been planning to declare a 10 percent quota from Indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorian students in public and private secondary education. As a response to the Ecuadorian Constitutions’Article 11.2: “The state will adopt affirmative action measures that promote equality in favor of those who find themselves in a situation of inequality”, zed policies are vastly being sought for. But a quest is mediocre in the eyes of the Ecuadorian people. Change is what feeds the people, a change for the better. Men, women, and children receiving education, in a country such as ours, no matter where they come from. Falling politically behind and not taking the post compared to Ecuador’s’ neighboring countries is what lies at stake.
Affirmative Action in Latin America’s Job Market
Affirmative action laws have also sought to redefine the job market. Implementation of people with different ethnicities, backgrounds, or genders within the different sectors of work have risen exponentially in developed countries since the Roaring 20’s when women were “presumably” given the rights everyone is born with. Although the fact that a few decades ago women were denied from job opportunities based on male-over-female dominance, discriminating and primitive events in the workplace continue to happen today. Afro-descendants, immigrants, and minorities in general are denied job opportunities. Not only in the US, but rather in Latin America, multiple cases of discrimination and xenophobia are presented when hiring a possible worker. From small businesses to large multinational corporations, affirmative action laws should be primordial in the process of hiring prominent employees.
Here´s when affirmative action has proven useful to eradicate what scholars are calling the discriminatory effect. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, United States´ courts defined structural discrimination in the workplace “as any exclusionary practice not necessary to an institution's activities”. At the time, most institutions were likely to reject minorities and women in greater proportion than white men; therefore, hiring institutions from the region were forced to reassess their practices to look for, and correct, this discriminatory effect. Since this acknowledgement, the job market has become more dynamic while hiring human resources has been more attentive to diversifying their staff. These efforts have been carried out to avoid both social scrutiny and legal reprehension for their lack of minority groups in their offices.
An exceptional case regarding affirmative action in the job market, is that of Brazil. In 1999 the municipal government of Porto Alegre executed that 5% of the publicly funded contractors of African descent. This was a historic event for Latin America, being the first bill of “discriminación positiva” to pass. Moreover, Brazil began working on federal politics regarding affirmative action as well. In 2001, Raul Jungmann, the former Brazilian Minister of Agrarian Development, issued a mandate that 20% of the ministry and staff of firms working with the agency be black, and that another 20% of staff within firms be female. What this meant for Brazil and for Latin America at the time is the following: social, economic, and judicial laws finally being implemented into a humanitarian society. Innovative and pioneering actions such as Brazil’s are precisely why they are the biggest economy in Latin America. Local states within Brazil have also reformed their labor laws and implemented movements to increase minority job occupancies. Their raw mentality of growth through the implementation of human rights and the vastness of their culture within the workforce, pushes them forward never mind the issues every nation goes through. An economy must be multicultural and mediate through affirmative action policies.
In the case of Ecuador, little has been done regarding the incentive of minorities between laboring environments. According to the CODAE (Corporación de Desarollo Afroecuatoriano), the Ecuadorian government instituted a policy that grants an additional 2.5 points on civil service employment examinations for applicants of Indigenous or African ancestry. Apart from that no other actions have been taken regarding policies such as the ones taken forth in Brazil and many other countries in South America. Our country must strive to implement our native peoples, our afro descendants, and our minorities in general into workplaces. Our environment must be multicultural so we can grow socioeconomically as a country and not depend on our exports, but rather on our people. On the intellectual talent of the citizen of our country. Start thinking as a major economy in the world and transcend, through our affirmative action policies.
An important realm of affirmative action worth mentioning in the Ecuadorian case is the effort to include people with disabilities. A clear example is called “Ley orgánica de personas con discapacidades” (Organic law for people with disabilities). This document states in article 45 that, “people with disability, deficiency or a disabling condition have the right to access a salaried job, in conditions of equality, concerning relative practice of job employment, both in public and private sectors”.The law continues outlining the different legal actions that should be taken into account to guarantee inclusion in the workplace. Constitutional documents such as these, evidence Ecuador's efforts to affirm their commitment to foment an inclusive society. Nevertheless, it also evidences that some historically marginalized groups have been taken more into account than others. Why do some groups become more included in legal instances than others? The answer has to be analyzed through political instances.
Affirmative Action in Latin America’s politics
Political struggle has historically led the way for civil rights. Minority groups have fought for decades to emancipate themselves from marginal positions in society, and enter the privileged spheres of school, jobs and even political power. Thus, affirmative action is intrinsically connected to the political movements of minorities against discrimination. Like Hugh Davis Graham states in this historical analysis of affirmative action, the development of inclusive agencies demonstrates the tensions between two regulatory traditions: a discriminating status quo and a rising rupture in favor of minorities. This tension sets an evolution into motion, “from non-discrimination to minority preferences under the rubric of affirmative action”.But have Latin American countries had a similar experience with the rise of affirmative action through political movements? Has there been a strengthening of affirmative action in education and job markets thanks to an inclusion of minorities in politics?
During the beginning decades of national development, these countries didn´t include indigenous, afros or women when attempting to consolidate political rights and positions across their territories. However, that gradually began to change during the 20th century, when in Ecuador, the most powerful indigenous movement arose at the end of the 1960s. Since then, a conflictive process has been evidenced between national popular projects and the political demands of indigenous groups, historically searching for constitutional and territorial independence.
Affirmative action in Latin American politics could be analyzed from two standpoints: intercultural dialogues and social justice movements.
Regarding the meaning of interculturalism, an expert explains the following: “Interculturalism is a government policy regarding the relationship between a cultural majority and cultural minorities, which emphasizes integration by exchange and interaction.” He explains that it arbitrates within a nation the relationship between a cultural majority and cultural minorities (by emphasizing) integration and promoting exchange and interaction. These are particularly very common in Latin America regarding the immense socioeconomic gap between the high and mid-low classes.
The other standpoint is that of social justice. The Center for Economic and Social Justice (CESJ) explains that social justice encompasses economic justice. Social justice is the virtue which guides us in creating those organized human interactions we call institutions.In turn, social institutions, when justly organized, provide us with access to what is good for the person, both individually and in our associations with others. Social justice also imposes on each of us a personal responsibility to work with others to design and continually perfect our institutions as tools for personal and social development. The CESJ explain that “social Justice” is the “feedback” principle that detects distortions of the input and/or out-take principles and guides the corrections needed to restore a just and balanced economic order for all. This principle is violated by unjust barriers to participation, by monopolies or by some using their property to harm or exploit others.
A case that stands out in Ecuador is that of Dolores Cacuango, nicknamed “Mama Dulu”, and Transito Amaguana, who were probably, after the 40s, the first indigenous educators to be part of schools and center made for and run by indigenous peoples. (Palacios, 2014) They managed to create a potent social cohesion in different indigenous communities north of Ecuador; whose objective (besides bilingual alphabetisation), was to strengthen and protect the “kichwa” identity. In the cases of Azuay and Cañar, the institutionalization of indigenous education was being run by an important number of women (indigenous and non-indigenous) who besides the different obstacles of social, political and even idiomatic order, managed to represent their communities and territory in the best way possible. Even though President Leon Febres Cordero directly order to close and terminate every project related to indigenous education on a national level, advocates continued their mission and strived for what was rightfully theirs.
Conclusion
Historically speaking, through struggle and through repression people stand up for themselves and fight for their born rights. From the African American citizens at Lincoln Memorial, to middle class citizens in the streets of Venezuela. When presented with the opportunity to advocate for what people believe in people will stop at nothing to get what they rightfully deserve. When referring to affirmative action, and specifically in Latin America, regardless of whether the sector its supporters are trying to include, affirmative action policies will continue to flourish.
The idea that equalitarian rulings are still be written in Latin America is a barbarous thought. Social justice is still to be restored in our countries. Mediated through the education of each and every citizen, from rich to poor, men to women, old and young. No one must be denied the right of education, the necessity of going to school or to college. It provides equal opportunity in the fairest sense. Let us not forget that these policies must also be taken into scrutiny in the job market.
Affirmative Action when it comes to seeking implementations to manage and locate the structural injustices and racial and discriminatory situation must be generated through plans and state programs destined to relinquish these intrinsically social practices. It is not possible to talk about freedom, equality and solidarity if the need to confront and resolve the issues of discrimination and inequity, which are so frequent in our society, are resolved. Every governmental activity which seeks to avoid or mediate the discriminatory conducts which still exist, and plan mechanisms which permit and prevent politics that in any way attempt against equality of rights and guarantees, deserves the backing of all the Ecuadorian people.
Nondiscrimination laws and diligences of affirmative action must be sustained in the frame that adequate perspective and the judiciary seal of international legislation, so no biased contradictions are present. For this, it is necessary to have the legal elements in reference to what is actually vital and a subject of matter. In other words, that affirmative actions are built to remediate, improve, amend and overshadow: Historical injustices, social and racial discrimination, inefficiency of justice, the omission of economic, social, and cultural vindication of cities and nationalities. Without forgetting, although, the projection of model roles that deliver the things necessary to erase every stereotype and prejudice that facelessly attempt against minority groups, such as laziness, vices, and social pathologies. That even serve as subject to social-media or even TV and radio series. In the words of sociologist Boaventura de Sousa Santos: “We have the right to be equals each and every time our difference embraces us, we have the right to be different each and every time equality decharacterizes us.”
...(download the rest of the essay above)