What do you think?
Rate this book
The Pursuit of Fairness: A History of Affirmative Action
Affirmative action strikes at the heart of deeply held beliefs about employment and education, about the concepts of justice and fairness, and about the troubled history of race relations in America. Published on the 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education , this is the only book
available that gives readers a balanced, non-polemical, and lucid account of this highly contentious issue. Beginning with the roots of affirmative action, Anderson describes African-American demands for employment in the defense industry--spearheaded by A. Philip Randolph's threatened March
on Washington in July 1941--and the desegregation of the armed forces after World War II. He investigates President Kennedy's historic 1961 executive order that introduced the term "affirmative action" during the early years of the civil rights movement and he examines President Johnson's attempts
to gain equal opportunities for African Americans. He describes President Nixon's expansion of affirmative action with the Philadelphia Plan--which the Supreme Court upheld--along with President Carter's introduction of "set asides" for minority businesses and the Bakke ruling which allowed the use
of race as one factor in college admissions. By the early 1980s many citizens were becoming alarmed by affirmative action, and that feeling was exemplified by the Reagan administration's backlash, which resulted in the demise and revision of affirmative action during the Clinton years. He
concludes with a look at the University of Michigan cases of 2003, the current status of the policy, and its impact. Throughout, the author weighs each side of every issue--often finding merit in both arguments--resulting in an eminently fair account of one of America's most heated debates.
A colorful history that brings to life the politicians, legal minds, and ordinary people who have fought for or against affirmative action, The Pursuit of Fairness helps clear the air and calm the emotions, as it illuminates a difficult and critically important issue.
available that gives readers a balanced, non-polemical, and lucid account of this highly contentious issue. Beginning with the roots of affirmative action, Anderson describes African-American demands for employment in the defense industry--spearheaded by A. Philip Randolph's threatened March
on Washington in July 1941--and the desegregation of the armed forces after World War II. He investigates President Kennedy's historic 1961 executive order that introduced the term "affirmative action" during the early years of the civil rights movement and he examines President Johnson's attempts
to gain equal opportunities for African Americans. He describes President Nixon's expansion of affirmative action with the Philadelphia Plan--which the Supreme Court upheld--along with President Carter's introduction of "set asides" for minority businesses and the Bakke ruling which allowed the use
of race as one factor in college admissions. By the early 1980s many citizens were becoming alarmed by affirmative action, and that feeling was exemplified by the Reagan administration's backlash, which resulted in the demise and revision of affirmative action during the Clinton years. He
concludes with a look at the University of Michigan cases of 2003, the current status of the policy, and its impact. Throughout, the author weighs each side of every issue--often finding merit in both arguments--resulting in an eminently fair account of one of America's most heated debates.
A colorful history that brings to life the politicians, legal minds, and ordinary people who have fought for or against affirmative action, The Pursuit of Fairness helps clear the air and calm the emotions, as it illuminates a difficult and critically important issue.
- GenresHistory
336 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2004
8 people are currently reading
89 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
November 9, 2017
This book traces the evolution of the idea of affirmative action from an idea to becoming a part of our social fabric which is still present today. The idea was not called affirmative action when it first hit the political and social scene. It evolved out of concern for the underprivileged, primarily black, to get them a more equal footing in society. The efforts escalated with the Johnson administration and the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. With the War on Poverty, the move to get blacks into the economic and educational mainstream accelerated. Such efforts led to the formation of the Equal Opportunity Commission and other agencies to help get minorities out of poverty. This led to laws and policies that aimed to get minorities the education, job opportunities and business experience needed to grow a middle class for minorities. Policies were adopted to require businesses and universities to admit minorities. Rules were passed abolishing discrimination in the hiring of minorities with businesses receiving government contracts.
By the 1980's a white backlash began to set in. Nixon began the movement but it wasn't until the Reagan presidency that the backlash really became evident. Republicans used the tactic that quotas had been set to favor minorities over whites. They claimed reverse discrimination.
The book follows the efforts to roll back affirmative action not only politically but also through the courts. The author describes the major court cases that dealt with the issue.
As we approached the new century, women and LBGT movements also entered the picture. The author concludes that despite the backlash of conservatives, affirmative action has become ingrained in our culture. However with our new political climate, it remains to be seen if the idea of fairness and equality of opportunity will survive.
By the 1980's a white backlash began to set in. Nixon began the movement but it wasn't until the Reagan presidency that the backlash really became evident. Republicans used the tactic that quotas had been set to favor minorities over whites. They claimed reverse discrimination.
The book follows the efforts to roll back affirmative action not only politically but also through the courts. The author describes the major court cases that dealt with the issue.
As we approached the new century, women and LBGT movements also entered the picture. The author concludes that despite the backlash of conservatives, affirmative action has become ingrained in our culture. However with our new political climate, it remains to be seen if the idea of fairness and equality of opportunity will survive.
August 8, 2017
An American history is a history of pursuing fairness. And a history of pursuing fairness is a history of seek the definition of "Affirmative Action". I learned a lot from this book. And there're many cases in there, making the history narrator just brisk and true. Like it! I may read it again sometime.
February 5, 2021
Decent history of affirmative action, but honestly quite full, took me a while to get through.
January 22, 2008
A less than qualified/under-qualified white person gets a job/college admission over a qualified/over-qualified black person. That is racial discrimination. A less than qualified/under-qualified black person gets a job/college admission over a qualified/over-qualified white person. That is Affirmative Action. Simply put, Affirmative Action is racial discrimination.
Will there ever be an end to Affirmative Action policies? Perhaps when all prejudice is eradicated? How could that be accomplished without mass mental reprogramming? As long as people are free they will use their minds freely. People will be free to develop prejudices. People will also be free to put away prejudices. A society of mentally free people is much better than a society full of mental slaves motivated by the crack of the government's whip.
Affirmative Action is defined as any action taken to enhance the "ethnic diversity" of a group, designed to increase employment and educational opportunities for a group through means of government coercion in the lives and activities of independent and supposedly free people. Ethnic diversity is merely racism in a politically correct disguise
“Diversity” in a work setting or educational setting should only involve a setting in which minds, views, and ideas greatly varied. A working environment, or educational environment, benefits most by "diversity" in this sense. It creates an environment that is creative and innovative. A "diversity" focused on the color of skin or sex only results in the stagnation of growth and innovation. A "diversity philosophy" based on color of skin is racist, counterproductive, and immoral.
Clearly there is a wildly disproportionate number of blacks playing NBA basketball. Should society demand that the NBA include a "desirable" number of whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans? Can you imagine what kind of an impact such policy would have on professional basketball? Why such an incredibly disproportionate number of blacks playing professional basketball? Merit, time, and hard work. To deny a black person, more skilled and talented, a spot on a basketball team to someone of another race, less skilled and talented, is immoral and counterproductive.
The aim of the diversity movement is to increase tolerance and end racism. Society cannot expect to create that society by teaching people that one's identity may be determined by race or sex. Yes, we should tolerate, embrace, and celebrate diversity. Diversity in thought. Diversity of intellect. Diversity of view points. The purpose of a university is to create an environment where people are able to improve their ability to reason, gain perspective, and build upon their knowledge. This is best accomplished by creating an atmosphere of intellectual diversity not racial diversity. A work place benefits from pooling together diverse thoughts and ideas for progress and innovation. It is intellectual diversity, the diversity of ideas, that benefits society. Not the diversity of race.
In practice, Affirmative Action means adopting racial preferences. It means giving preference in university admissions, job hiring, promotions, etc. If preference is given to one group, it is done so at the expense of some other group. In doing so, those in the other group become oppressed. It is the duty of good government to uphold the rights of individuals, not groups. A government that passes legislation, giving favor to one person at the expense of any other is corrupt. A precedent for enormous atrocities is set. A government that legitimizes the favoring of one group has infringed upon the rights of other individuals. In so doing, the government makes it clear that it is under no obligation to even uphold the rights of the group that it aims to assist. Groups are composed of individuals. By suppressing the rights of one group, to benefit another group, the government has infringed the rights of the individuals in that group. A government that finds it acceptable to infringe upon the rights of any individual no longer needs to uphold the rights of any individual. Your rights are no longer protected. Minority rights are not something to be taken seriously in this country. A minority has no rights that I should respect unless I share those same rights as well. For the government to provide a minority with special rights is to do so at my expense. It is not the duty of government to artificially elevate any person or group. It is the duty of government to ensure that rights are held equally amongst all individuals. If mistakes have been made in the past, then the government must do a better job of making sure that all rights are protected equally with respect to each individual regardless of race or sex. In the past, the U.S. government has made preferences in favor of whites. This was wrong. The government should make up for it, not by reversing its preferences, but by recommitting itself to equality.
Will there ever be an end to Affirmative Action policies? Perhaps when all prejudice is eradicated? How could that be accomplished without mass mental reprogramming? As long as people are free they will use their minds freely. People will be free to develop prejudices. People will also be free to put away prejudices. A society of mentally free people is much better than a society full of mental slaves motivated by the crack of the government's whip.
Affirmative Action is defined as any action taken to enhance the "ethnic diversity" of a group, designed to increase employment and educational opportunities for a group through means of government coercion in the lives and activities of independent and supposedly free people. Ethnic diversity is merely racism in a politically correct disguise
“Diversity” in a work setting or educational setting should only involve a setting in which minds, views, and ideas greatly varied. A working environment, or educational environment, benefits most by "diversity" in this sense. It creates an environment that is creative and innovative. A "diversity" focused on the color of skin or sex only results in the stagnation of growth and innovation. A "diversity philosophy" based on color of skin is racist, counterproductive, and immoral.
Clearly there is a wildly disproportionate number of blacks playing NBA basketball. Should society demand that the NBA include a "desirable" number of whites, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans? Can you imagine what kind of an impact such policy would have on professional basketball? Why such an incredibly disproportionate number of blacks playing professional basketball? Merit, time, and hard work. To deny a black person, more skilled and talented, a spot on a basketball team to someone of another race, less skilled and talented, is immoral and counterproductive.
The aim of the diversity movement is to increase tolerance and end racism. Society cannot expect to create that society by teaching people that one's identity may be determined by race or sex. Yes, we should tolerate, embrace, and celebrate diversity. Diversity in thought. Diversity of intellect. Diversity of view points. The purpose of a university is to create an environment where people are able to improve their ability to reason, gain perspective, and build upon their knowledge. This is best accomplished by creating an atmosphere of intellectual diversity not racial diversity. A work place benefits from pooling together diverse thoughts and ideas for progress and innovation. It is intellectual diversity, the diversity of ideas, that benefits society. Not the diversity of race.
In practice, Affirmative Action means adopting racial preferences. It means giving preference in university admissions, job hiring, promotions, etc. If preference is given to one group, it is done so at the expense of some other group. In doing so, those in the other group become oppressed. It is the duty of good government to uphold the rights of individuals, not groups. A government that passes legislation, giving favor to one person at the expense of any other is corrupt. A precedent for enormous atrocities is set. A government that legitimizes the favoring of one group has infringed upon the rights of other individuals. In so doing, the government makes it clear that it is under no obligation to even uphold the rights of the group that it aims to assist. Groups are composed of individuals. By suppressing the rights of one group, to benefit another group, the government has infringed the rights of the individuals in that group. A government that finds it acceptable to infringe upon the rights of any individual no longer needs to uphold the rights of any individual. Your rights are no longer protected. Minority rights are not something to be taken seriously in this country. A minority has no rights that I should respect unless I share those same rights as well. For the government to provide a minority with special rights is to do so at my expense. It is not the duty of government to artificially elevate any person or group. It is the duty of government to ensure that rights are held equally amongst all individuals. If mistakes have been made in the past, then the government must do a better job of making sure that all rights are protected equally with respect to each individual regardless of race or sex. In the past, the U.S. government has made preferences in favor of whites. This was wrong. The government should make up for it, not by reversing its preferences, but by recommitting itself to equality.
January 4, 2015
This book comprehensively covers the history of affirmative action. It shows why affirmative action was needed to combat widespread and ingrained racial discrimination. It does an excellent job of describing the extent of that discrimination and the shocking and devastating effects of Jim Crow. It raises but leaves open the question of its fairness going forward (from the date of its publication). I consider this book essential reading, along with Sheryll Cashin's recent "Place not Race," for anyone considering the proper role of affirmative action today.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews