RESERVATION OF PLACES FOR IDENTITY QUOTAS: ANALYSIS OF (FORMER) INCLUSION

Abstract

This work investigates the central position that work occupies in contemporary social organization, influencing everything from personal satisfaction to access to consumption. In this scenario, the debate about meritocracy emerges. Although there is a consensus that individuals should reap the rewards of their effort, there is a profound divergence about how this is realized in practice. On the one hand, it is argued that individual effort is self-sufficient, citing examples of overcoming challenges such as those of Benjamin Carson and Joaquim Barbosa. On the other hand, it is argued that inequality of opportunity — evidenced by factors such as childhood malnutrition and cognitive impairment — makes these success stories rare exceptions and not the rule.

The relevance of the topic is accentuated by the current political polarization, often fueled by social media algorithms that isolate individuals in thought bubbles, hindering dialogue about Law and social justice. Citing Norberto Bobbio, the text reinforces that Law is dynamic and must adapt to historical changes. In Brazil, this adaptation involves recognizing a historical debt. The country lived through centuries of slavery where the Black population was prevented from accumulating wealth, while contributing to the richness of their masters. The end of the slave regime, marked by laws such as the Golden Law, was not accompanied by reparation policies, perpetuating social divides through inheritance law.
This reality is illustrated by the metaphor of former US President Lyndon B. Johnson: it is not fair to put someone who has been chained on the same starting line of a race without considering their history of deprivation. It is in this context that identity quotas (racial, for people with disabilities, trans, among others) emerge as an object of legal analysis. The study aims to understand whether such quota reservations are forms of discrimination or instruments of inclusion.

By analyzing the principles of Law and the current legal landscape, the work concludes that quotas constitute a measure of inclusion and promotion of material equality. The answer to the question of whether "inequality can generate equality" is affirmative: a pre-existing and historical inequality can — and should — be compensated by a corrective inequality. By allowing historically marginalized groups to occupy prestigious spaces, such as universities and public office, the quota system combats structural prejudice and promotes the dignified recognition of these individuals before society.