About thirty years ago, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banned employment decisions that discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. To avoid legal penalties, companies created affirmative action programs. These programs became highly controversial, for they were seen by some as a form of reverse discrimination. Both praised and condemned, affirmative action programs remain in effect. Since the passage of Title VII, the United States has undergone a major demographic shift. California will soon have a population of 50 percent Hispanic American and nonwhite. More than half of the nation’s work force now consists of minorities, immigrants, and women; white, native-born males, though still dominant, has become a statistical minority. In addition, about 80 percent of new workers are not white males. Affirmative action relied heavily on assimilation, the process by which minorities are absorbed into the dominant culture. Generally, assimilation involves abandoning distinctive cultural patterns of behavior in favor of those of the dominant culture. Two, three, four generations ago, people who immigrated to this country routinely changed their names to help them enter the mainstream as soon and as completely as possible. In contrast, the huge successes of the women’s movement and civil rights activism have helped Americans to appreciate their differences, even to celebrate them. This change is transforming the workplace, for people who are comfortable and proud of being different are much less amenable to assimilation. "You don’t have to aspire to be a white male or a member of the dominant group," says Thomas, "People are willing to be part of each, but they won’t jump into the melting pot anymore. " Diversity in the workplace is much more than skin color. Diversity also refers to gender, age, religion, social class, sexual orientation, and even to military experience. Realizing that assimilation is probably not the way of the future, companies as diverse as IBM, Ford, and 3M have begun programs called "Managing Diversity" or "Valuing Diversity. " The goals of these programs are threefold. (1) to uncover and root out biases and prejudices about people’s differences, (2) to increase awareness and appreciation of people’s differences, and (3) to teach people "skills," especially communication and negotiation skills, for working with diverse groups. From a functionalist perspective, we would say that programs in managing diversity are an adjustment in the economic system. They will help meet needs caused by changing demographics within the nation and new international relations that require American corporations to be more competitive. From a symbolic interaction perspective, we would say that these programs reflect a change in symbols—that they illustrate how being different from the dominant group now has a different meaning than it used to. These programs not only reflect that change, they also foster further change in the meaning of diversity. From a conflict perspective, we would say that the key term in managing diversity programs is not diversity, but managing. No matter what they are called, these programs are merely another way to exploit labor. The last paragraph is mainly about

A. how companies exploit their workers through managing diversity.
B. what companies expect of their affirmative action programs.
C. the implications of the affirmative action programs.
D. the national and international action against the exploitation of workers.