Pro vs. Con: affirmative action is necessary in 2006

By John O'Riordan
Collegian Reporter
October 4, 2006

As we are college students in a diverse demographic, the issue of affirmative action, specifically whether it is effective, or not, could not be more relevant. Since its inception in 1961, affirmative action has been a life source for controversy, ultimately and inevitably transforming itself into the current racial and political debate it is today. Though affirmative action is prevalent in other walks of life besides the college acceptance process, there is no subject in which its presence is felt more.

Affirmative action is effective and morally necessary in our society, which wishes to improve its future by educating its youth. Contrary to the belief of the general conservative community, individuals from less than affluent backgrounds, minorities or not, actually have a place in our country’s future. Affirmative action levels the playing field between the over-privileged and the under-privileged. The most common argument against affirmative action is that an individual who gains entrance to an institution with help of affirmative action did not earn his/her spot, and more qualified individuals are denied because of their race or social status. Essentially, this argument insinuates that it is an individual’s fault that they do not have the same advantages as more privileged competitors.

In the current state of college acceptances, people seem to believe that it matters not if you go to college, but where you go to college. If a student gains acceptance to Boston College, people wonder why he wasn’t accepted to Harvard. American society today stresses perfection, and seems to forget people can be happy and still have flaws. More and more students attend colleges that have prestigious names, but they aren’t necessarily suited for them – or happy, for that matter.

This may seem irrelevant to the topic at hand, but if you consider how many people were forced to attend a different school than that of their first choice, and how this forces a student to go outside of a protective box, it is extremely beneficial. I find it particularly nauseating when somebody complains about not getting into a school because “somebody stole their spot” and then that individual has to “settle” for a different school, often having the privilege of choosing from several fine institutions. People need to stop being selfish and realize that the significance of your college experience should not be translated by the name of your school, but instead by what you make out of your time wherever you are.

I honestly believe that the majority of opposition towards affirmative action is fueled by the selfishness of those who have had opportunities served to them on a silver platter. It is very easy to oppose affirmative action when you haven’t grown up in a rough neighborhood or when you are not a minority in this country. Is it really a bad thing to give individuals who have been dealt a bad hand in the past a boost into the future?

The most common problem with affirmative action is that Joe Shmoe of Sunny Town, USA is forced to attend Villanova instead of Penn because somebody in the admissions office at Penn decided to give somebody who didn’t have it so easy as a kid a shot at a great future. If affirmative action in this nation is wrong, then I certainly do not want the country to be right.

oriordanj1@lasalle.edu