DISCRIMINATION IN REVERSE - IS TURNABOUT FAIR PLAY?

• NCJ Number: 59728
• Author(s): B R GROSS
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 184 pages
• Corporate Author: New York University Press
• Sale Source: New York University Press
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

ALONG WITH A CATALOG AND AN ANALYSIS OF EVERY ARGUMENT OFFERED IN FAVOR OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION, THE CONCEPT OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES ARE DISCUSSED PHILOSOPHICALLY.

Abstract

ACCORDING TO THIS ANALYSIS, ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION SHOULD BE OPPOSED BY SHOWING THAT (1) THEY ARE UNSOUND, (2) SOME OF THEIR PREMISES AND CONCLUSIONS VIOLATE THE PRINCIPLES WHICH MAKE POSSIBLE A LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY, AND (3) THE SUBSTANTIVE OUTCOME REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IS SUPPOSED TO YIELD IS UNLIKELY TO OCCUR. DIFFERENT KINDS OF DISCRIMINATION ARE DEFINED, SUCH AS REVERSE DISCRIMINATION AS IT CONFLICTS WITH 'POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION,' THE POLICY CURRENTLY USED IN ENGLAND TO PROVIDE UNEQUAL DISTRIBUTION OF GOVERNMENT FUNDS FOR SOCIAL SERVICES; E.G., COMPENSATORY EDUCATION. ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION ARE PROPOSED, IN LIGHT OF SOCIETY'S INABILITY TO PRODUCE KNOWN AND WANTED SOCIAL OUTCOMES. SIMILARLY, ARGUMENTS FOR REVERSE DISCRIMINATION ARE PRESENTED, QUESTIONS ARE RAISED ABOUT THE PREMISES OF SOME, AND COMMENTS RANGE FROM POSITIVE, WHEN ARGUMENTS FAVOR OVERALL SOCIETAL BENEFIT, TO NEGATIVE, WHEN ARGUMENTS TURN ON MERE RUMOR. IN ADDITION, SOME ARGUMENTS FOR REVERSE DISCRIMINATION FOR GROUPS RATHER THAN FOR INDIVIDUALS ARE ANALYZED. IT IS A NECESSARY CONDITION OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION, ACCORDING TO THE TEXT, THAT IT BE DIRECTED TO GROUPS, THUS DISTINGUISHING IT FROM PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT, WHICH IS NOT SO DIRECTED. MAJOR QUESTIONS RAISED CONCERNING THESE ARGUMENTS ARE LISTED, AND ARGUMENTS AGAINST REVERSE DISCRIMINATION ARE PRESENTED. NO ARGUMENT FOR OR AGAINST REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IS BY ITSELF DECISIVE. HOWEVER, THE BALANCE OF ARGUMENT IS HEAVILY AGAINST REVERSE DISCRIMINATION AND PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT BOTH FOR MORAL AND FOR PRACTICAL REASONS. FINALLY, COMMENTS ON THE JUSTICE OF REVERSE DISCRIMINATION AND ITS ADMINISTRATION ARE NOTED. NUMEROUS CASES ARE CITED ON REVERSE DISCRIMINATION, INCLUDING DEFUNIS V. OGEDAARD AND BAKKE V. BOARD OF REGENTS. REFERENCE NOTES AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE INCLUDED.