We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The racial gerrymandering of college admissions is a world unto itself, one which proceeds by an Alice-in-Wonderland logic. Everywhere other than the courts, the use of racial preferences is frankly acknowledged as a means of increasing the percentage of black and Hispanic students as a goal in its own right. But because the U.S. Supreme Court decades ago declared this form of racial favoritism illegal, the courts operate on an entirely different rationale. Drawing on Justice Powell’s opinion in the 1978 Bakke case, which was eventually turned into law by Justice O’Connor’s majority opinion in the 2003 Grutter case, the courts engage in the elaborate judicial fiction that racial preferences are employed solely to achieve the “educational benefits” of “diversity.”
This puts an enormous burden on an extraordinarily flimsy idea. “Diversity” has no particular educational benefits that anyone has been able to substantiate. We may well, for non-educational reasons, prefer to live in a racially diverse society, but the notion that college administrators are the best situated people in American life to decide the maximum educational mix of “more of these” and “fewer of those” on the basis of race and ethnicity convinces very few. It is just the pretense that the courts have foisted on higher education as the price of maintaining the racial spoils system of college admissions.
The Pequots of Connecticut vanished from history in the 1635 Pequot War
The Pequots may have vanished from Peter Wood's history, but they never vanished.
We may well, for non-educational reasons, prefer to live in a racially diverse society, but the notion that college administrators are the best situated people in American life to decide the maximum educational mix of “more of these” and “fewer of those” on the basis of race and ethnicity convinces very few.
Diversity is normally measured relative to the community served by an institution.
In any case, affirmative action was implemented to help reduce the effects of historical discrimination. Naïve 'color-blindness' was thought to allow the continuation of gross injustice.
Naïve 'color-blindness' was thought to allow the continuation of gross injustice.
It was a real conundrum, to be sure, and didn't have any easy answers. "Slowly, slowly" wasn't going to fly; at the time I probably would have supported affirmative action type measures as well. Up to a point I would argue such policies worked better than anybody had a right to expect, given how badly it could have gone in the short-term.
But at least, back then, in debate and court opinions, many pundits and jurists recognized they were using poison to fight poison. It used to be an issue of active concern among Liberals who advocated such policies, understanding that administering such policies was going to be very tricky and that there ought to be strict limits on how far they went. Because the problem with using state power to treat individuals differently on the basis of their race isn't what your intentions are, it's that you do it at all. It is inherently invidious; front-loaded with a very high degree of moral hazard and risk of abuse.
What may be the most naive today is for our various university administrators to imagine that they are wise enough to classify current and prospective students on the basis of their race in a way that will do substantial justice of any kind whatsoever; or that they are not in many places presiding over a mere racial spoils system that serves to entrench race as the determinative factor in a person's future rather than their ability or the content of their character.
Current diversity/affirmative action is nothing more then the punishing of the innocent to reward the undisadvantaged. It was wrong when it was first implemented and it is even more wrong in the current runaway massive institutionalized racist model it has morphed into. It has many supporters and beneficiaries who will say anything, tell any fairy tale, play any race card to maintain their advantage. Because, you see, some farm animals are more equal then others...
Sorry, there is no goal in the diversity racket other than to maintain the system of patronage from which so many earn their fortune. Oddly, most of those earnings go to a particularly undiverse group.
"Barbarism is diversity; civilization is unity. The human race is one, provided it is civilized, ..."
And the diversity that is so needed is rejected. My alma mater got rid of their last conservative a number of years ago. The one thing that leftists seem to agree on is that they don't like to be disagreed with. You will hew to the party line.
Besides if the matter of race was a matter of indifference, where would all those professors of Black Studies and Asian Studies go? (Is there a Hispanic Studies major?)
The Elephant's Child
Thank you for the substantive and thoughtful reply.
" or that they are not in many places presiding over a mere racial spoils system that serves to entrench race as the determinative factor in a person's future rather than their ability or the content of their character."
You seem to have missed the trees for the forest as it were. The character content of a certain color or people has already been assumed by the institutional left. Penitent members of that guilty color group can only earn favor only by agreeing with the bigots with whom they've decided to ally.
I disowned my three alma maters. Whenever I get a money solicitation with a postage paid return envelope, I send the PP envelope back with a request for a copy of their enrollment policies and speech code, if any. Have never heard back from any of them.