In “The Justification for Reverse Discrimination in Hiring,” Tom Beauchamp shows the statistics of underrepresented races and genders in institutions. The inequality is due to persistent underlying racism that originated decades ago. It has been pervasively executed despite federal equality laws. The expectation of a level playing field is not a reality, as underrepresented African Americans statistically show (1. Beauchamp, CC2011, p 0228). Beauchamp points out that at first glance, reverse discrimination appears immoral, because it creates a prejudice in favor of one race over another. However, he states that this deduction is not applicable in the real world where ubiquitous bias still exists, as indicated by statistics. Since we do not currently have a level playing field, humans are morally obligated to do whatever is necessary to achieve it if they aspire to an ideal equal society (2. Beauchamp, CC2011, p 0226). To free itself from discriminatory practices, society must practice reverse discrimination, as it is ultimately morally justified for the common good. Once a level playing field is achieved by adding minorities through preferential treatment, reverse discrimination becomes unnecessary. James Rachels bases his moral reasoning for reverse discrimination on what people deserve. Although he is aware that reverse discrimination appears unfair towards those directly involved, he believes that fairness depends on merit. What an individual deserves lies in the effort and willpower to achieve results (3. Rachels, CC2011, p 0201). Therefore, it is morally acceptable to give preferential treatment to a deserving individual if he or she puts in more effort. Rachels' moral reasoning for support...middle of paper...reinforces the negative stereotype that incoming minorities have an unfair racial advantage. Therefore, reverse discrimination has even worse consequences that arise from the glorified end result that Rachels suggests with role models. Furthermore, I would argue that effort is too subjective to quantify when both parties have distinct unearned disadvantages. Caucasians face different types of obstacles, such as psychological pressure to succeed and increasing competition at top schools, which make it more difficult to get good grades. Rachels' argument is not universal for all situations. This makes reverse discrimination morally wrong when it generalizes Caucasians from disadvantaged backgrounds, to inherently possess advantages. Justice is not yet satisfied if politics cannot extend to all circumstances, making even the moderate form of reverse discrimination unjust..