Affirmative action: is it unjustified? A case of Singapore's reserved presidential election
In this paper, I argue that in the case of Singapore’s Reserved Presidential Elections, affirmative action is not unjustified. This paper will expand on ideas I have set forth in a previous paper of mine. My argument builds on current arguments for affirmative action (like Thomson and Nagel), but it...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nanyang Technological University
2023
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/165465 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | In this paper, I argue that in the case of Singapore’s Reserved Presidential Elections, affirmative action is not unjustified. This paper will expand on ideas I have set forth in a previous paper of mine. My argument builds on current arguments for affirmative action (like Thomson and Nagel), but it extends beyond compensatory accounts that defends affirmative action solely based on compensation for past injustices. My argument will thus instead be built on compensating for not just past discriminations (injustices), but also compensating for current discrimination and societal good. Therefore, in my account, affirmative action in the Reserved Elections thus serves to correct for the past injustice and current injustice that disadvantages minority races, and benefits the greater societal good, and these benefits to the society serve to override the potential unfairness of exclusion in reserved terms of the Presidential Elections. |
|---|