Suchergebnisse

A series of questions & answers about affirmative action are presented in an effort to correct misconceptions & discuss the reality of affirmative action policies & their value in promoting equal opportunity. In this context, it is asserted that affirmative action does not mean hiring or promoting unqualified minorities or women, imposing quotas, or engaging in reverse discrimination. Affirmative action is still needed because of the unequal opportunities that exist between whites & people of color; women & Asian Americans (popularly seen to have succeeded without it) also benefit from affirmative action policies. It is concluded that affirmative action is not a stigmatizing force, but a necessary tool to combat the preferential treatment that whites have historically received. M. Greenberg

Examines the history of affirmative action & the underlying values & ideological assumptions represented by attacks on it in the context of racism's persistence in US society. The roots of affirmative action are contained in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, with the initial focus to eliminate discrimination in federal & private hiring policies, later extended to include education; federal contracts; & discrimination against other people of color, women, & disabled persons. Since discrimination was not explicitly defined in Title VII, the courts defined three types: disparate treatment, present effects of past discrimination, & adverse impact. Myths are used to justify the attacks on affirmative action; eg, everyone in the US has an equal opportunity to succeed; & the opposite of a race-based policy is a race-neutral policy. It is concluded that racism is as integral a part of US institutional & private life as it ever was; affirmative action must continue as part of a redistributive chain that needs reinforcement if black poverty is to be eliminated. 32 References. M. Greenberg

This article, written in 1989, goes to press immediately following the 1990 election—Nicaragua's second such election; the 1989-1990 campaign itself is not covered in detail. While the election was held under siege from the U.S. and resulted in the victory of the anti-Sandinista opposition, the electoral process owes its integrity to the Sandinista revolution, which has been committed to the construction of democracy since 1979. In the words of President Ortega one week after the election, "Of course, the FSLN as a political party fought with all its strength and organizational capacity. But the most global objective of the FSLN has not been simply to win elections as a party, but to open up political space which has never before existed in Nicaragua, to enable the people of Nicaragua to choose between different options. So the great victory of the FSLN, of the revolution, of the people of Nicaragua, is that with these elections we are reaffirming democracy for Nicaragua. " It is to be hoped that the democratic guarantees established by the Sandinista revolution and institutionalized in Nicaragua's constitution will not be violated by the new government and its U.S. sponsors.

The purpose of this article is to analyze the construction of democracy as part of the broader process of carrying out a social revolution in Nicaragua. While noting the effects of US policy, it focusses primarily on the internal process of Nicaraguan politics, shaped first and foremost by the particular alliance of class forces emerging from the nation's history to make the revolution

National and international perspectives; 8 articles. Partial contents: Violence against women as a violation of human rights, by Jane Roberts Chapman; Murdered mothers, missing wives: reconsidering female victimization, by Drew Humphries and Susan Caringella-MacDonald; Community of women organize themselves to cope with the AIDS crisis: a case study from Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, by Judy Clark and Kathy Boudin.