Another way that employers avoid charges of discrimination is through preferential hiring schemes justified by affirmative action. However, such schemes run the risk of being labeled as reverse discrimination; creating a situation that is best characterized as “between a rock and a hard place.” In the end, this …show more content…
People that do not think beyond Flatland may assume that anti-discrimination laws, social organizations, and government intervention reduce discrimination regardless of the level of discrimination; however, our analysis shows that the incentives and constraints generated by such institutions can either increase or decrease opportunity for minority groups on a net basis. In other words, the current vocabulary in usage consistently confuses differences in individual internal qualities such as skills or experience, with external imposed barriers to opportunity such as college admission or employment. Therefore, those that do not qualify for particular privileges are said to have been denied access on the basis of discrimination, when in fact, they may have had equal opportunity but lacked the necessary qualifications. This being said, one could argue that the very fact of lacking the proper qualifications is evidence of discrimination due to the nature of the social context in which an individual was raised. In many ways, such an argument would be accurate. However, this recognition in itself implies that anti-discrimination laws, social organizations and government intervention do not necessarily improve outcomes or inclusion for victimized groups. It also implies that a possibly better way of fostering inclusion is by improving the underlying social context for said