Affirmative Action: undermines meritocracy and fosters division

Affirmative action has been heralded as a beacon of progress in the fight for equality, a supposedly noble effort to correct the historical wrongs of discrimination. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that this policy is riddled with contradictions, unfair practices, and unintended consequences that do more harm than good. In a world where merit should be the defining factor of success, affirmative action often distorts the playing field in ways that undermine its purpose.

A Pernicious Form of Reverse Discrimination

At its core, affirmative action claims to combat discrimination by, ironically, institutionalising a different form of discrimination. The policy, intended to level the playing field for historically disadvantaged groups, does so by disadvantaging others—typically those who belong to the so-called majority group. This practice of favouring one group over another based on race, gender, or other identity markers is a thinly veiled form of reverse discrimination. How can a policy that claims to promote equality do so by actively creating inequality?

Imagine two candidates, one from a minority background and another from the majority, both equally qualified for a position. Affirmative action may give preference to the minority candidate simply because of their background, disregarding the fact that both candidates are equally deserving based on merit. This raises a fundamental question: is it justifiable to prioritise one person’s identity over another’s qualifications? The policy seems to suggest that it is, which is a troubling notion for any society that claims to value fairness.

The Undermining of Meritocracy

One of the most cynical aspects of affirmative action is how it undermines the principle of meritocracy. In a true meritocracy, individuals succeed based on their abilities, hard work, and achievements. Affirmative action, however, introduces an extraneous factor—identity—into the equation. This dilutes the value of merit and sends a dangerous message: that success can and should be influenced by factors beyond one’s control, such as race or gender.

This distortion is not only unfair to those who may lose out despite being more qualified, but it also devalues the achievements of those who benefit from affirmative action. When a person is selected for a position or admitted to a prestigious institution under affirmative action policies, there is always the lingering doubt: did they earn this on their own merit, or were they a diversity hire? This is not only demoralising for the individual but also perpetuates the stereotype that people from minority backgrounds cannot succeed without special assistance.

The Tyranny of Low Expectations

Affirmative action is often defended on the grounds that it helps those who have been historically marginalised or disadvantaged. However, this well-meaning intention has a sinister side: it perpetuates the idea that these groups are inherently less capable and therefore need extra help to succeed. This is the tyranny of low expectations, a patronising notion that assumes people from certain backgrounds are not capable of achieving success on their own.

Rather than empowering individuals, affirmative action can trap them in a cycle of dependency. It suggests that they cannot compete on an equal footing without special treatment, which can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Instead of challenging individuals to rise to the occasion, it lowers the bar for them, which is not only condescending but also damaging in the long run. By treating people as victims rather than as capable individuals, affirmative action infantilises those it aims to help.

Unintended Consequences: Division and Resentment

Another critical flaw in affirmative action is the division it creates within society. By categorising people based on race, gender, or ethnicity, and then treating them differently, affirmative action reinforces the very divisions it seeks to eliminate. It fosters resentment among those who feel they have been unfairly passed over in favour of less qualified candidates, leading to a sense of injustice and grievance.

Moreover, it exacerbates tensions between different groups, creating a zero-sum game where one group’s gain is perceived as another’s loss. This can lead to a toxic environment where people are pitted against each other based on their identity, rather than working together as equals. Instead of promoting unity, affirmative action often sows discord, driving a wedge between people who might otherwise find common ground.

The Masking of Deeper Issues

Perhaps the most cynical aspect of affirmative action is that it often serves as a Band-Aid for much deeper societal problems. The focus on identity-based preferences allows institutions and governments to claim they are addressing inequality, without tackling the root causes of that inequality. Issues such as poverty, inadequate education, and systemic discrimination are far more complex and difficult to solve than simply instituting a policy of preferential treatment.

Affirmative action allows society to feel good about itself, to believe that it is making progress, while in reality, it is merely papering over the cracks. The real issues are left unaddressed, as the focus remains on superficial solutions that do little to effect lasting change. In this way, affirmative action is not only ineffective but also a convenient excuse to avoid the hard work of genuine reform.

Conclusion: Time to Rethink Affirmative Action

In theory, affirmative action might seem like a noble endeavour, a necessary step towards correcting historical wrongs. However, in practice, it is a deeply flawed policy that often creates more problems than it solves. By institutionalising reverse discrimination, undermining meritocracy, perpetuating low expectations, fostering division, and masking deeper societal issues, affirmative action does more harm than good.

It is time to rethink this approach to equality and to find solutions that truly level the playing field for everyone, regardless of their background. Instead of focusing on identity, we should focus on creating opportunities for all individuals to succeed based on their talents, efforts, and merits. Only then can we build a society that is truly fair and just, where equality is not just a slogan, but a reality.