ABSTRACT
Violence against minorities (by whichever definition) is neither country nor culture specific. Take the latest example of the town Meiktila in Myanmar (previously Burma)—a country of nearly 135 ethnic groups. In March 2013, the Muslim community, which goes back generations in that country, was targeted. Ironically, it is the majority Buddhists professing a religion known for pacifism and compassion who are the perpetrators of discrimination and violence. The most noteworthy (or notorious) of them all is a monk named Ashin Wirathu of Mandalay, who gained the opprobrium of “Burma’s Ben Laden.” Living in a monastery, he started his hate campaign against the Muslims in support of the Buddhists in Rakhine state. What he claims as his right to free speech in fact is incendiary, leading to incitement. “When you leave a seed, from a tree, to grow in a pagoda,” he provided an allegory, “it seems so small at first. But you know you must cut it out before it grows and destroys the building.”*
That the suffering of minorities is ubiquitous is not an argument to tolerate it, or worse, ignore it. The effort should be how to combat it. The argument in particular is how to deal with deliberate public policies aimed to perpetuate this kind of behavior, either overtly or covertly, and offset the disadvantages suffered by the minorities in the past, and continue even now. In this context, it is not enough to argue for equality. For it pays no heed to fairness and justice, which is assured by the term equity. In this endeavor several nations are trying different ways of offering preferential treatment to minorities. As already noted in the Prologue, the most commonly accepted expression is Affirmative Action (AA). This chapter explores the pros and cons of AA in general. It is necessary to offer a note of caution, as these arguments largely tend to be highly emotive and irrational, thus muddling or even masking the real issue. The arguments fly fast and furious, and the dialectic never abates. To quote Robert K. Fullinwider:
Given that, it is necessary to provide a cogent discussion, which follows, in different sections. To start with, one needs to dwell on the changing role of bureaucracy, and definition of merit. This is followed by an examination of the philosophical underpinnings of AA, and the contrary arguments.
