【摘要】： 美國(guó)內(nèi)戰(zhàn)雖然將黑人從奴隸制的束縛中解放出來(lái),但并沒(méi)有給他們帶來(lái)真正的平等。黑人爭(zhēng)取平等權(quán)利的斗爭(zhēng)使美國(guó)人,尤其是美國(guó)政府認(rèn)識(shí)到種族歧視給黑人帶來(lái)的痛苦以及對(duì)社會(huì)造成的危害。20世紀(jì)60年代中期,為了緩和國(guó)內(nèi)緊張的種族關(guān)系,平息大規(guī)模黑人騷亂,美國(guó)政府啟動(dòng)了肯定性行動(dòng),在就業(yè)、教育及政府合同等領(lǐng)域?qū)ι贁?shù)種族及女性等社會(huì)不利群體給予某些優(yōu)待和照顧,以期消除種族歧視、性別歧視及其影響,促進(jìn)真正的種族平等和性別平等。 由于沒(méi)有一部專門(mén)的法律對(duì)肯定性行動(dòng)作出全面而權(quán)威的闡釋,40多年來(lái),人們對(duì)肯定性行動(dòng)的理解一直隨社會(huì)環(huán)境和政治環(huán)境的變化而變化。歷屆總統(tǒng)及其政府根據(jù)自身需要理解肯定性行動(dòng),并推動(dòng)或阻撓其實(shí)施,各級(jí)法院尤其是最高法院也通過(guò)一個(gè)個(gè)案例對(duì)肯定性行動(dòng)作出了不同的解釋。 肯定性行動(dòng)的初衷主要是補(bǔ)償歷史上的種族歧視給少數(shù)種族造成的傷害,幫助所有遭受歧視的公民獲得平等的機(jī)會(huì),從而改善其社會(huì)地位和經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況。這一政策帶有一定的強(qiáng)制性并取得了實(shí)質(zhì)性的效果。大批少數(shù)種族成員和女性進(jìn)入了傳統(tǒng)上由白人男性壟斷的行業(yè)和職業(yè),并更多地接受了高等教育�？隙ㄐ孕袆�(dòng)對(duì)緩解種族矛盾和幫助弱勢(shì)群體擺脫困境起到了積極的作用。但這種針對(duì)特定對(duì)象的優(yōu)待與照顧同美國(guó)人“機(jī)會(huì)均等”的價(jià)值觀相沖突,因而40多年來(lái)關(guān)于肯定性行動(dòng)存在和實(shí)施的必要性的爭(zhēng)論從未間斷過(guò)。支持者認(rèn)為僅僅消除歧視無(wú)法彌補(bǔ)長(zhǎng)期歧視給弱勢(shì)群體造成的傷害,無(wú)法為其帶來(lái)真正的平等,因而有必要對(duì)其進(jìn)行補(bǔ)償,通過(guò)提供特殊的優(yōu)待和照顧增強(qiáng)其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力,使他們能夠與其他公民在同一起點(diǎn)公平競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。為了實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目的,即使是配額制(quotas)或預(yù)留制(set asides)等措施,即在就業(yè)、入學(xué)、合同授予等方面按照其在一定范圍內(nèi)總?cè)丝谥兴嫉谋壤秊樯贁?shù)民族、女性等保留一部分名額或預(yù)留一部分合同的做法也是可以采取的。他們還認(rèn)為肯定性行動(dòng)能夠促進(jìn)種族多樣化,從而為人們創(chuàng)造更加有利、輕松的學(xué)習(xí)環(huán)境。在經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的背景下,種族多樣化還可以使人們通過(guò)與不同種族人群的接觸增強(qiáng)其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力,并進(jìn)一步消除種族歧視,促進(jìn)種族和諧,創(chuàng)造良好的社會(huì)環(huán)境。然而反對(duì)者認(rèn)為這種以種族和性別為基礎(chǔ)的優(yōu)待與照顧有悖于美國(guó)憲法的平等保護(hù)原則,也是1964年民權(quán)法案所不允許的。以種族和性別為依據(jù),對(duì)部分原本在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中處于劣勢(shì)的人給予照顧,而把一些有競(jìng)爭(zhēng)實(shí)力的人拒之門(mén)外的做法與美國(guó)民主、平等的原則相背離,是對(duì)非照顧群體成員的反向歧視。另外,反對(duì)肯定性行動(dòng)的人還認(rèn)為,由于許多少數(shù)種族成員已經(jīng)成為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)甚至上層階級(jí),同時(shí)未曾受過(guò)種族歧視傷害的新移民不斷進(jìn)入美國(guó),僅僅基于種族因素的肯定性行動(dòng)實(shí)際照顧了大批不再需要照顧或者不具備受補(bǔ)償條件的人。這對(duì)非照顧群體、貧困白人以及處于社會(huì)最底層的少數(shù)種族成員都是不公平的。這些爭(zhēng)論日趨激烈,特別是90年代中期以來(lái),有的州已經(jīng)部分或全部取消了以種族和性別為基礎(chǔ)的肯定性行動(dòng)計(jì)劃。 無(wú)論是支持者還是反對(duì)者都希望能找到更加可行的替代性措施。有人認(rèn)為應(yīng)該以社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位作為衡量是否給予照顧的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。由于黑人等少數(shù)種族在貧困人口中的比例較高,因而支持者和反對(duì)者都認(rèn)為這種基于經(jīng)濟(jì)地位或貧困狀況的肯定性行動(dòng)不僅能使少數(shù)種族受益,同時(shí)還可以避開(kāi)種族和性別等極易引發(fā)爭(zhēng)議的因素。但是,由于根深蒂固的種族偏見(jiàn)和性別歧視,處于同等社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的少數(shù)種族成員很可能難以同白人競(jìng)爭(zhēng),女性也不太可能同男性公平競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。所以這種基于社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)地位的肯定性行動(dòng)方案很難從根本上解決美國(guó)社會(huì)中的種族歧視與性別不平等的現(xiàn)狀。 在一些已經(jīng)取消肯定性行動(dòng)的州,為了保持少數(shù)種族及女性等弱勢(shì)群體成員的入學(xué)比例,大學(xué)招生過(guò)程中推行了百分比計(jì)劃。即各有資質(zhì)的中學(xué)里,成績(jī)排名在班級(jí)前X%的畢業(yè)生自動(dòng)獲得其所在州某些大學(xué)的入學(xué)資格。由于處于弱勢(shì)群體的少數(shù)種族學(xué)生往往就讀于教學(xué)質(zhì)量差的中學(xué),因而人們希望百分比計(jì)劃能幫助他們降低入學(xué)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)壓力,增加其入學(xué)機(jī)會(huì),從而整體保持或提高該群體在大學(xué)新生總?cè)藬?shù)中的比例。然而研究表明,結(jié)果恰恰相反。在得克薩斯、加利福尼亞、佛羅里達(dá)等實(shí)行百分比計(jì)劃的州,黑人等少數(shù)種族成員進(jìn)入大學(xué)的人數(shù)并不能有所增加,尤其是同90年代中期相比,他們?cè)诖髮W(xué)新生中所占的比例甚至有所下降。此外,對(duì)于在教學(xué)質(zhì)量高的中學(xué)就讀的學(xué)生來(lái)講,雖然他們的成績(jī)超過(guò)其他學(xué)校的優(yōu)等生,但因?yàn)楸拘８?jìng)爭(zhēng)激烈,排名低于前X%,因而無(wú)法進(jìn)入理想的大學(xué),甚至連公平競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的機(jī)會(huì)都沒(méi)有。這對(duì)他們來(lái)講是極不公平的。 在當(dāng)今的美國(guó)社會(huì),種族歧視和性別偏見(jiàn)依然存在,解決這些問(wèn)題的路還很長(zhǎng)。簡(jiǎn)單地取代以種族和性別為基礎(chǔ)的肯定性行動(dòng)無(wú)法從根本上消除這些社會(huì)問(wèn)題。作為一項(xiàng)政府性的措施,肯定性行動(dòng)在40多年的過(guò)程中起到了一定的積極作用,但在具體的貫徹執(zhí)行過(guò)程中也的確存在一些問(wèn)題,需要進(jìn)一步完善和改進(jìn)。目前還沒(méi)有更加成熟的、能更好地解決社會(huì)歧視和社會(huì)不公正的替代性措施,因而美國(guó)暫時(shí)還不能取消肯定性行動(dòng),而是要如克林頓總統(tǒng)所言,對(duì)其進(jìn)行“修正”,使之能夠更好地服務(wù)于弱勢(shì)群體,服務(wù)于美國(guó)社會(huì),從而更快地實(shí)現(xiàn)種族平等。
[Abstract]:Although the American Civil War liberated the blacks from the bondage of slavery, it did not bring them real equality. The struggle for equal rights made Americans, especially the American government, aware of the suffering of racial discrimination and its harm to society. In the mid-1960s, to ease domestic tensions. In order to eliminate racial discrimination, sexism and its influence, and promote genuine racial equality and gender equality, the United States government launched affirmative action to give preferential treatment and care to minorities and disadvantaged groups in the fields of employment, education and government contracts.
In the absence of a specific law providing a comprehensive and authoritative interpretation of affirmative action, people's understanding of affirmative action has been changing with the social and political environment for more than 40 years. The high court has also made different interpretations of affirmative action through various cases.
The primary purpose of affirmative action is to compensate for the damage caused by racial discrimination in history, to help all citizens who suffer from racial discrimination get equal opportunities, and thus to improve their social and economic status. This policy is mandatory and has achieved substantial results. Large numbers of ethnic minority members and women enter Affirmative action has played a positive role in alleviating racial conflicts and helping disadvantaged groups get out of their predicament. But this preference and care for specific targets conflict with the American value of "equal opportunity," and thus has been relevant for more than 40 years. Supporters argue that eliminating discrimination alone does not compensate for the damage caused by long-term discrimination and does not bring about real equality for vulnerable groups, so it is necessary to compensate for it and enhance its competitiveness by providing special preferences and care. Other citizens compete fairly at the same starting point. To achieve this goal, even quotas or set asides are used to reserve a part of the quota or a part of the contract in terms of employment, enrollment, contract award, etc., in proportion to the total population within a certain range. They also believe that affirmative action can promote racial diversity and thus create a more conducive and relaxed learning environment for people. In the context of economic globalization, racial diversity can also enable people to enhance their competitiveness through contacts with different racial groups, and further eliminate racial discrimination and promote race. Harmony creates a good social environment. Opponents, however, argue that this racial and gender-based preference and care is contrary to the principle of equal protection in the U.S. Constitution and is not allowed under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In addition, opponents of affirmative action argue that many ethnic minorities have become middle-class or even upper-class, and that new immigrants who have not been harmed by racial discrimination are constantly entering the United States. This is unfair to non-caregivers, poor whites, and members of the lowest ethnic minority. These arguments have intensified, especially since the mid-1990s, when some states have been partially divided. Or the abolition of affirmative action plans based on race and gender.
Supporters and opponents alike want to find more viable alternatives. Some argue that social and economic status should be used as a measure of whether or not care is given. The affirmative action not only benefits minorities, but also avoids controversial factors such as race and gender. However, due to deep-rooted racial prejudice and gender discrimination, ethnic minorities with equal social and economic status are likely to have difficulty competing with whites and women are unlikely to compete fairly with men. So this affirmative action program based on socio-economic status is hard to fundamentally address racial discrimination and gender inequality in American society.
In some states that have abolished affirmative action, in order to maintain minority and female enrollment, universities have introduced percentage schemes. In secondary schools with different qualifications, graduates with a score of X% in the top class automatically qualify for admission to certain universities in their state. Minority students tend to attend low-quality secondary schools, so it is hoped that the percentage plan will help them reduce competitive pressures and increase their chances of enrollment, thereby maintaining or increasing the overall proportion of this group in the total number of College freshmen. But research shows the opposite. In states such as Florida, where percentage programs are in place, there is no increase in the number of black and other ethnic minorities entering universities, especially when compared with the mid-1990s, their percentage of freshmen is even lower. In addition, for students in high-quality secondary schools, though their grades are higher than those in the mid-1990s Excellent students from other schools, but because of the fierce competition and ranking below the top X percent, are unable to enter the ideal university, or even the opportunity to compete fairly. This is extremely unfair to them.
In today's American society, racial discrimination and gender prejudice still exist, and there is still a long way to go to solve these problems. Simply replacing affirmative action based on race and gender can not fundamentally eliminate these social problems. At present, there are no more mature alternative measures to better address social discrimination and social injustice, so the United States can not cancel affirmative action for the time being, but as President Clinton said, to "fix" it. It can serve the vulnerable better, serve the American society, and realize racial equality more quickly.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)人民解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2006
【分類號(hào)】：K712

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 黃崇珍;;淺析伊麗莎白·亞歷山大《贊美這一天》的歷史性[J];作家;2011年16期

2 邵楊;;論李安外語(yǔ)片中中國(guó)文化形象的隱性存在[J];當(dāng)代文壇;2011年04期

3 ;[J];;年期

4 ;[J];;年期

5 ;[J];;年期

6 ;[J];;年期

7 ;[J];;年期

8 ;[J];;年期

9 ;[J];;年期

10 ;[J];;年期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前2條

1 包茂宏;;北京大學(xué)非洲研究中心部分成員論著索引[A];北大非洲研究叢書(shū)——中國(guó)與非洲[C];2000年

2 張忠祥;;艾周昌先生引領(lǐng)我們走上非洲研究之路(五) 艾周昌先生——我治學(xué)的引路人[A];中國(guó)非洲史研究會(huì)三十年[C];2010年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 韓云川;加拿大如何處理種族關(guān)系[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2010年

2 ;南非 市場(chǎng)慎處種族關(guān)系[N];廠長(zhǎng)經(jīng)理日?qǐng)?bào);2001年

3 田聯(lián)剛;新加坡是如何構(gòu)建和諧種族關(guān)系的[N];中國(guó)民族報(bào);2007年

4 楊晴川邋王薇;美民調(diào)：種族因素仍影響選民投票傾向[N];新華每日電訊;2008年

5 毛相麟;和諧的古巴種族關(guān)系[N];中國(guó)民族報(bào);2007年

6 高初建;由“啤酒門(mén)”聯(lián)想法治與金錢(qián)[N];中華工商時(shí)報(bào);2009年

7 尹孟修(MatthewErie);種族、美國(guó)總統(tǒng)大選與憲法[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

8 王柱國(guó) 王愛(ài)輝;平等與反向歧視[N];人民法院報(bào);2004年

9 王學(xué)玉 山東大學(xué)歐洲研究中心;經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)后果頻現(xiàn) 歐洲恐陷動(dòng)蕩泥沼[N];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2011年

10 姬虹;美國(guó)人口構(gòu)成的變化[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2002年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 馬存利;憲法平等權(quán)司法適用研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2005年

2 周小進(jìn);從滯定到流動(dòng)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2006年

3 呂耀中;英國(guó)學(xué)校多元文化教育研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2008年

4 石毅;從家長(zhǎng)制到自由放任[D];中央民族大學(xué);2003年

5 黃虛鋒;美國(guó)南方轉(zhuǎn)型時(shí)期社會(huì)生活研究（1877—1920年代）[D];華東師范大學(xué);2003年

6 馮廣林;美國(guó)少數(shù)人受教育權(quán)法律保護(hù)研究[D];中央民族大學(xué);2012年

7 張宛;美國(guó)大學(xué)教師知識(shí)分子向度的歷史考察（二戰(zhàn)后～1990年代）[D];華東師范大學(xué);2012年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 李國(guó)霞;美國(guó)肯定性行動(dòng)：歷史演變與爭(zhēng)論[D];中國(guó)人民解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院;2006年

2 曾一璇;肯定性行動(dòng)的合法性爭(zhēng)論：贊成與反對(duì)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2010年

3 李爽;論肯定性行動(dòng)[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

4 潘莉莉;試析奧巴馬當(dāng)選總統(tǒng)對(duì)美國(guó)種族關(guān)系的影響[D];外交學(xué)院;2011年

5 趙全全;美國(guó)種族關(guān)系研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2012年

6 李曉亮;美國(guó)肯定性行動(dòng)的憲法爭(zhēng)議[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

7 王巧平;美國(guó)“肯定性行動(dòng)”大爭(zhēng)論[D];解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院;2001年

8 霍敬;種族歧視背景下關(guān)于“肯定性行動(dòng)”的研究[D];上海外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2010年

9 樊凌衡;美國(guó)“肯定性行動(dòng)”計(jì)劃及其對(duì)中國(guó)教育政策的啟示[D];華中科技大學(xué);2008年

10 苗華偉;肯定性行動(dòng)興衰原因初探[D];外交學(xué)院;2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2244375