Discrimination During The 1960's
Introduction During the 1960’s, there was a significant disparity between the amount of minority and female representation in the workforce versus the amount in the American population. In an attempt to correct this disparity, President John F. Kennedy enacts Executive Order 10925 which causes for an aggressive hiring of minorities by the federal government (Chrisman, 2013). Consequently, over-time, the civil rights movement as well as current laws and Supreme Court decisions greatly expand the idea of affirmative action well beyond the idea of what President Kennedy had envisioned it to be. For the minorities of America, affirmative action came to be known as a struggle against racism and racist practices (Chrisman, 2013). While on the other
…show more content…
Univ Court case, a Supreme Court victory quickly swung in their favor. In 1980, another Supreme Court case known as Fullilove v Klutznick has set precedent that modest quotas were reasonable (American Anthropological Association, 2007). By making this decision, the Supreme Court had upheld a federal law that 15 percent of public work funds needed to be set aside to fund minority contractors that were qualified for the job. At this time, emphasis was placed on how qualified an employee was. The Supreme Court wanted to shift the mindset of simply being diverse and “giving” away positions to making the work force an equal playing field. For minorities, this meant also being equally capable as Whites for completing the same …show more content…
It became an effective instrument for winning over voters by creating an image that the opposite party was against minorities and a diverse American working environment. However, in some states fighting against affirmative action was a favorable platform. For example, in 1991, former Klansman David Duke gave a message that said “Why do reporters and politicians pick on me and say hateful things about me when anyone can see I’m a nice guy and reasonable fellow? Besides, even if I did say and do extreme things once or twice that’s all over with now. The real reason they pick on me is that they are afraid of my message on the issues, which is that affirmative action has gone too far and become racism in the reverse, the Black underclass is dragging us down, we can’t afford welfare, and it’s time White people had some rights again” (Swain,
Univ Court case, a Supreme Court victory quickly swung in their favor. In 1980, another Supreme Court case known as Fullilove v Klutznick has set precedent that modest quotas were reasonable (American Anthropological Association, 2007). By making this decision, the Supreme Court had upheld a federal law that 15 percent of public work funds needed to be set aside to fund minority contractors that were qualified for the job. At this time, emphasis was placed on how qualified an employee was. The Supreme Court wanted to shift the mindset of simply being diverse and “giving” away positions to making the work force an equal playing field. For minorities, this meant also being equally capable as Whites for completing the same …show more content…
It became an effective instrument for winning over voters by creating an image that the opposite party was against minorities and a diverse American working environment. However, in some states fighting against affirmative action was a favorable platform. For example, in 1991, former Klansman David Duke gave a message that said “Why do reporters and politicians pick on me and say hateful things about me when anyone can see I’m a nice guy and reasonable fellow? Besides, even if I did say and do extreme things once or twice that’s all over with now. The real reason they pick on me is that they are afraid of my message on the issues, which is that affirmative action has gone too far and become racism in the reverse, the Black underclass is dragging us down, we can’t afford welfare, and it’s time White people had some rights again” (Swain,