Does the U.S.A strive for equality?

The readings for this weeks topic, Our Unique Experiment, covered everything from what the definition of democracy is to John Locke’s social contract. We learned that our class definitions for democracy were more in line with popular sovereignty in that we thought of a democracy as a government by the people for the people. We read about the truths of that definition, but also, the necessary additions of political equality and liberty. The readings continued to discuss about philosophical benefits to our democracy, including the importance of pooled knowledge and the legitimacy of officials. The readings then continued to lay out the foundations by explaining the types of democracy and the conditions of popular sovereignty. Our class session concluded with the explanation of a Locke’s social contract and its effectiveness in our society.

The topic that I would like to delve deeper into is the philosophical benefits portion of the reading. The part of that topic that really stood out to me was the section regarding equality or the, “recognition of the intrinsic worth and equality of human beings”. The question I want to ask and also attempt to answer is if our government is actually working at ensuring equality for our citizens. After further research on this topic, I have concluded that the current government is always attempting equality, but has many missteps along the way.

To begin, I want to establish my standard for evaluation which is simply public opinion and the way government publicly handles issues of equality. I want to first talk about ways in which the government is successful in ensuring equality and worth of all human beings. One federal program in the works in our government was created for the exact purpose of ensuring equal treatment for all races, gender, ethnicities, etc, in the workplace. This program titled, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), was created by President Nixon in the 1960’s and is still present today. Their website explains that as a federal program they are, “responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability or genetic information.” But, that is just one of many ways that our government is effective through their work to ensure equality as was promised by the founders of our country.

A second piece of evidence that I have to support the success of our government in combating inequality is affirmative action. Affirmative action was an executive order passed by JFK in 1961 as a law with an ultimate desire of eliminating discrimination among applicants for higher education or employment. “In a comparison study between the 1999-2000 school year and the 2009-2010 school year, roughly 36% more whites received their master’s degree, while both black and Hispanic rates of graduation more than doubled.” The success for minorities has risen dramatically since the implementation of affirmative action, furthering equality for all americans. All in all, both the EEOC and affirmative action are just two of the many ways that our government is successful in ensuring equality and the intrinsic worth of all human beings.

On the other hand, there are many examples of which our government is not effectively working to combat inequality and where we must take a second look. The first, and most recent, action of government that prohibits the equality of all humans is President Trump’s ban of transgender men and women from participating in the military.

President Donald Trump announced he was banning transgender people from serving in the military in a series of tweets Wednesday, July 26, 2017. (Images via Twitter)

This ban discriminates against humans who don’t have a particular gender identification and is not beneficial towards encouraging equality in America. President Trump argues that transgenders are a distraction and a financial cost to our military; however, regardless of those possible reasons, it doesn’t take away root of discrimination of humans. A second example of failure to ensure equality from our government is another executive order but by our current President Trump. This executive order, as explained by the white house, is an order protecting the nation from foreign terrorists. However, the ban targets six middle eastern countries (Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Iran, Sudan, Libya) who also happen to be all majority muslim countries. This coincidence caused many to question whether this ban was constitutional because of its target of muslim countries and President Trump’s past harsh criticism of those who are muslim. This question of constitutionality of Trump’s ban has reached two separate courts in which they have both decided to block trumps travel ban.

Overall, the government is both effective and ineffective in ensuring equality and human rights among our nation’s citizens. There are limitations on preserving equality in that we have to allow for freedom of speech and value our trust in leaders to decide what is best for our country; however, it can be very well seen through government laws and orders, and through public opinion, that our government ultimately does strive to prevent inequality. The continued block of the travel ban, EEOC, affirmative action, and much more are ways in which our government successfully recognizes and enforces our deep rooted value of equality for all citizens.

Sources:

McGowen, Ernest. Lecture. Sep 4. 2017.

“Overview.” About the EEOC: Overview, eeoc.gov/eeoc/index.cfm.

“11 Facts About Affirmative Action.” DoSomething.org | Volunteer for Social Change, www.dosomething.org/facts/11-facts-about-affirmative-action

“Memorandum for the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security.” The White House, The United States Government, 6 Mar. 2017, www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/memorandum-secretary-state-attorney-general-secretary-homeland-security.

“Colorado Officials Tear into Trump’s Tweets Announcing Ban on Transgender Military Service.” Colorado Politics, 27 July 2017, coloradopolitics.com/colorado-officials-tear-trumps-tweets-announcing-ban-transgender-military-service/.

4 Responses to "Does the U.S.A strive for equality?"

Katherine Fell says:

September 8, 2017 at 7:28 pm

I thought that your points on how the government’s work on equal rights in America is a work in progress. Equal rights in America has been a longstanding fight for minority groups, and even when a progressive piece of legislation is signed in to law, oftentimes the problem does not immediately go away. For instance, the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964. It was a revolutionary piece of legislation for racial equality in America, and it is widely considered as a huge victory for the Civil Rights Movement. The government, in this case, was incredibly helpful in creating equality in America. However, racial injustice is still very prevalent in todays society, shown by the Black Lives Matter movement. This trend in the American political system demonstrates how society follows the law. The Civil Rights Act, on paper, resolved the issues of racial injustice and protected the rights of all African Americans. However, the de facto rules and behaviors of Americans today state otherwise. This raises the question of whether or not the government should pass more legislation for the sake of equality, considering it takes so long for the American public to follow the law’s true intentions.
Lotte Elfering says:

September 10, 2017 at 5:44 pm

A very interesting piece, which raises some important questions about an issues that is about fundamental human rights for all, which lays at the foundation of any state that wants to call itself a democracy. I believe the United States is on a good path, passing these legislations that ensure equal rights for all, but I do recognize your argument about the direction of the current administration and Katherine’s point about the implementation of these rights in the behavior of the people.

However, the difficulties encountered bringing these laws into effect does not counter the importance of them being made and passed. The more pressing issue I see in this piece is the fact that these people’s rights seem to change according to which party is in office, while I believe human rights and the overall acceptance of people as being human, should not depend on who is in office, but rather the mere fact that they are human. Human rights should be fundamentally assured to all, no matter what race, gender, or sexual identity you possess, and not be subject to the impulses of one man’s administration.

Thankfully, there are many systems of checks and balances in place that have blocked various efforts to remove the so called “travel ban” and the ability of transgender people to serve in the military. While the “travel ban” was still installed, closing the armed services to transgender soldiers has not been implemented yet, and hopefully never will, as these brave men and women have served this country with as much dedication as those who are not transgender.

Overall, I would like to raise the issue to those who are not opposed to the implementation of these two “bans”, as I would like them to imagine themselves in this very same position, where it might be their rights, which are taken away next.
Reid Chenault says:

September 10, 2017 at 11:07 pm

I think there are many solid points of emphasis in your argument that the government does strive for equality between citizens. Since the start of the United States of America, inequality has been one of the most controversial topics throughout the people of the country, and as stated in previous comments multiple acts and laws have been laid out to prevent unfair treatment to minorities.

I believe that there can be multiple sides to the argument when speaking of President Trump’s recent actions in office. His main goal in the “travel ban” is to prevent terrorism in the country. Unfortunately, recent terrorist attacks have caused this to be a provision that is brought up today, however I see this as an attempt to better protect the current citizens of the United States. I do not agree with every detail of this ban as it does violate basic human rights, but as many can see there must be something done to end terrorism in this country and in the world. Equality of the people is one of the most important things in a democracy, but where is the line drawn when the safety of millions is in jeopardy? This question seems to be the debate many Americans struggle with when dealing with President Trump’s “travel ban.”

When this question can be answered thoroughly I believe many will have a better understanding of the reasoning behind this ban. Provisions must be made to this idea, which is why it has not fully gone into effect.
Austin Liptrot says:

September 11, 2017 at 1:07 pm

In class we talked about how representative democracy can suppress political minorities as a breaking of the give-take proposition endowed by democracy. When a group of people are in the political minority, but that minority is perpetuated by their race, religion, or a number of other potential factors, it can be a serious danger to their political power. Here government might look over these groups. Those in power examining issues that could lead to a change in their power and ignore those that don’t. If it never actually serves these politicians to aid the minorities, political power could be consolidated which might pose a serious danger to other groups. Dahl explains this when he talks about a group being “heard.” However, Dahl says, in favor of the equality of democracy, that indeed the system is created to allow these minorities to have political power. He explains that small groups have an uncharacteristically large amount of power proportional to other large governments, therefore, playing that the political system will always push for equality. Your essay mentions two great examples of success for equality, but the fight for equality in America will need many more, because as you pointed to later in your essay, shortcomings still abide. It may require these groups to make more noise for politicals or for more people to become involved in the political system because as is, there remains a large percentage of Americans not registered to vote. It will take many more years before this question can be answered completely.

Comments are closed.