3.4.3. Affirmative Action

Affirmative action is based on the idea that it is not sufficient to establish formal equality by law. When we wish to eliminate inequalities that are deeply rooted, it is necessary to take some more positive measures to minimise and eliminate entrenched forms of social inequalities. Most policies of affirmative action are thus designed to correct the cumulative effect of past inequalities.

Affirmative action refers to proactive measures taken to address historical inequalities faced by certain groups in society. Formal equality, which means treating everyone the same under the law, may not be enough to create a level playing field when some groups have been systematically disadvantaged. Therefore, affirmative action aims to counter those past injustices by introducing measures that provide support or advantages to these groups in various areas, including education and employment.

Imagine a race where some competitors start far behind the starting line because of barriers they've faced in life, like poverty or discrimination. If we simply say everyone should run the same distance without help, the ones starting behind will struggle to catch up. Affirmative action acts like giving those behind a head start or a faster path to the finish line, allowing for a more equitable race.

Affirmative action can however take many forms, from preferential spending on facilities for disadvantaged communities, such as, scholarships and hostels to special consideration for admissions to educational institutions and jobs.

Affirmative action is not just one policy; it can be implemented in various ways. This includes financial support for education like scholarships specifically aimed at students from disadvantaged backgrounds, funding for hostels that cater to these students, or setting aside a certain number of seats in educational institutions and job applications just for individuals from underrepresented communities. These interventions are designed to help ensure that everyone has a fair chance to succeed regardless of their background.

Think of a community garden where some families have more access to sunlight and water due to their location, while others are in shadowed areas. To make the garden fair, garden planners might choose to plant extra flowers in the shadowed area or build a small water catchment system for those plants. This is similar to how affirmative action provides extra resources or opportunities to those who need them most to thrive equally.

In our country we have adopted a policy of quotas or reserved seats in education and jobs to provide equality of opportunity to deprived groups, and this has been the subject of considerable debate and disagreement.

In India, the government has put in place a system of reservations, meaning that a certain percentage of seats in educational institutions and jobs are reserved for individuals from specific social and economic backgrounds, like Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. This policy is aimed at ensuring these historically marginalized groups have better access to opportunities. However, the use of reservations has led to debates about fairness: some people argue that it is essential for leveling the playing field, while others believe it may disadvantage those from non-reserved categories.

Consider a classroom where only a few students get all the attention and resources because they excel. To ensure that everyone can learn, the teacher might reserve extra resources like tutoring sessions for those struggling, even if it means others perceive it as unfair. In this sense, reservations or quotas can be likened to distributed resources aimed at helping everyone reach their potential.

Although policies of affirmative action are supported for making the society more equal, many theorists argue against them. They question whether treating people differently can ever lead to greater equality.

Critics of affirmative action often argue that it can create its own forms of inequality. They claim that by treating some individuals differently based on their background—like their caste or ethnicity—it can reinforce the very divisions society tries to overcome. They maintain that equality means treating everyone the same and that any preferential treatment, like reservations, undermines this principle by possibly disadvantaging others unfairly.

Imagine a sports team that decides to allow only players from certain neighborhoods to join, thinking it will help improve their skills. While this might help those players, it could also discourage talented players from other neighborhoods who feel unfairly excluded, thus leading to resentment and division within the team instead of unity.

Special assistance in the form of affirmative action is expected to be a temporary or time-bound measure. The assumption is that special consideration will enable these communities to overcome the existing disadvantages and then compete with others on equal terms.

The underlying philosophy of affirmative action is that it should not be a permanent solution. It's envisioned as a way to provide temporary support so that marginalized groups can gain the necessary skills and opportunities to eventually compete on an equal footing with others. The goal is to eventually phase out such measures, as the need for them should diminish as equality is achieved in society.

Think of a scaffolding used when constructing a building. The scaffolding is essential during construction to support growth and progress but is removed once the building is stable and stands upright. Similarly, affirmative action is like that support structure that should ideally be dismantled once a fair competitive environment is created.

Ultimately the policies that we choose would have to be justified in terms of their success in making the society more egalitarian and fair to all.

The effectiveness of affirmative action policies must be continuously evaluated. It's crucial that the decisions made regarding who receives assistance and how much are effective in genuinely improving equality. If policies do not result in tangible progress towards a more equal society, they need to be re-examined and possibly restructured to ensure they fulfill their purpose.

It's similar to a community needing to decide whether a community meal is benefiting everyone or just certain groups. If the meal isn't fostering community growth and support for all, it's time to change the way the meal is prepared or served.

--