English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 49641/84944 (58%)
Visitors : 7698693      Online Users : 60
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/30964


    Title: Affirmative action : an American policy dilemma
    Other Titles: 種族優待措施 : 美國政策困境
    Authors: 方淑娟;Fang, Shu-chuan
    Contributors: 淡江大學美國研究所碩士班
    崔馬吉;Trimarchi, Anthony G.
    Keywords: 種族優待措施;affirmative action
    Date: 2006
    Issue Date: 2010-01-11 00:06:09 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 「種族優待措施」係為矯正美國歷史上的種族歧視問題,而諭令聯邦機關在僱用有色人種時應採取積極的補償措施,以改善黑人困境。之後其概念漸漸擴張,泛指美國政府為彌補少數族裔或弱勢族群過去所遭受的歧視傷害,而在求職或申請入學時提供特別優惠措施,以提高其競爭力之政策。本論文旨在探討優惠待遇在美國高等教育、就業和勞動市場等領域內的運作、它所造成的結果以及此項措施有無繼續存在的價值,究應加以終結或以其他可行方案代替之。
    有關於種族優待措施所引起的爭議,本論文主要在三個問題上反對此項政策:第一,配額制。本論文認為種族優待措施認可了配額制,由於配額制的存在,使原本不符合條件的人得以被錄用提升。第二,反向歧視。種族優待措施給予少數種族、婦女優先照顧,以歧視來糾正歧視,使一個群體的成員優於另一個群體的成員,這是與美國個人主義精神格格不入的。第三,種族優待措施分裂了美國。不符合條件的人成為首選者,其他人自然會產生怨恨情緒,這種怨恨情緒造成了美國的分裂,即美國的巴爾幹化。
    此外,本論文亦探討美國最高法院有關於種族優待措施的案件,其中以一九七八年的「加利福尼亞大學評議會訴巴基案」和兩千零三年「古特訴包林傑案」最具代表性,透過進一步檢視最高法院對此二招生歧視案件中所做出的劃時代判決,筆者認為在招生政策中採取種族優待措施,不論是希望彌補少數族裔以提高其競爭力亦或促進學生組成的多元化,皆是違憲而且違反美國個人機會均等精神的做法。
    最後,筆者認為美國聯邦政府在處理公共就業、公共教育、或公共合約上應拋棄種族優待措施,並且恢復法律平等保護原則,不基於種族、性別、膚色、族群、或民族來源而歧視或優待任何個人或群體。
    “Affirmative action” means positive steps taken to increase the representation of women and minorities in areas of employment, education, and business from which they have been historically excluded. When those steps involve preferential selection — selection on the basis of race, gender, or ethnicity — affirmative action generates intense controversy. Advocates of affirmative action argue that some form of preferential treatment is essential to break down long-standing patterns of discrimination against minorities and women so that employment patterns will more accurately reflect the pluralistic nature of American society. On the contrary, critics of affirmative action claim that it is “reverse discrimination” and a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution for seeing people in terms of groups and not as individuals.

    This thesis aims to analyze how affirmative action has functioned in the field of higher education and employment in the United States, what consequences it has caused, and whether its principles can be justified. This study also shows how judicial rulings of the Supreme Court in two important cases, Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978) and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), have transformed the noble ideal of equal opportunity for all individuals into the much more problematic goal of equal results for all groups.

    Finally, the study comes to a conclusion with a ringing call for all Americans to end affirmative action and to reclaim the nation’s shared values of equal protection under the law, without reference to race, color, gender, or national origin.
    Appears in Collections:[美國研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    0KbUnknown822View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - Feedback