ink barely had time to dry on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, before
a new Ethnocrat generation had Emerilized the civil rights movement.
Granted, this new civil rights law fulfilled the civil rights
movement's stated goal, the one expressed so eloquently by Dr.
King in his famous "Content of their character" quote because
it, belatedly, bestowed racial justice on 'American's of color'.
Supreme Court Justice Harlan, although a bit less eloquent, echoed
Dr. King's views when he opined, "(the) Constitution is colorblind,
and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens." ("Segregation
in America". Encarta Online 2002). Noble sentiments, but with
racial justice enshrined in law, Je$$e Jackson and a second Ethnocrat
wave 'kicked it up a notch'. Quickly retooling their movement,
these new breed Ethnocrats, deftly, switched from racial justice
to racial equality, sending themselves on a Quixotean quest for
an equality of results.
1965, President Lyndon Johnson laid the foundation for Je$$e and
company when he perpetrated his Executive order 11246. It 'augmented
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, committing the federal government
to seek not "just equality as a right and a theory but equality
as a fact and equality as a result." ("African America History".
Encarta Online, 2002). Two years later, he added gender equality
to the mix, essentially presenting Amerikan feminists with every
male's nads on a silver platter. The popular name of this Presidential
brain-fart is Affirmative Action, a policy that continues to segregate
Amerikans based on irrelevant, immutable characteristics.
has Affirmative Action been more divisive than it is on Amerika's
college campuses. In order to understand why it causes so much
turmoil, we must consider three relevant factors: college-based
Affirmative Action's goals; college-based Affirmative Action's
underlying assumptions; college-based Affirmative Action's unpleasant
realities (a.k.a. results).
Based Affirmative Action's Goals
principle, racial justice in higher education should be a simple
matter. Colleges must end all discrimination in college enrollment
that is based on the applicant's race, ethnicity, or gender, because
it violates the Constitution's equal protection under the law
guarantee as set out in the 14th Amendment which reads in part:
"...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States:
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property,
without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction
the equal protection of the laws." If we implemented Affirmative
Action based on Dr. King's racial justice, few would contest it,
because all Amerikans should have the opportunity to acquire a
college education. Evoking the 'level playing field', a racial
justice-based Affirmative Action requires that all applicants
be measured against a single, objective entrance criteria. (An
objective criteria must, by definition, ignore essentially irrelevant
factors such as race, ethnicity and gender.).
monkeywrench that jammed the gears, bringing justice-based Affirmative
Action to a grinding halt is a little goodie called 'diversity'.
It reared its ugly head in 1978, during a U.S. Supreme Court challenge
to collegiate Affirmative Action. Justice Lewis Powell did the
evil deed when he opined that although the University of California's
racial quotas were a no-no, a "diverse student body" is a "compelling
interest" for higher Educrap. This simple-minded dose of Shyster-eze
opened Pandora's box and unleashed an "equality of results"
on college-based Affirmative Action. Thanks to Justice Powell,
colleges must increase the minority group college student population,
because a diversity of skin pigmentation, automatically, magically,
enhances the learning experience. More than anything else, this
is the goodie that turned racial justice into this irrational,
census-driven quest for equal results.
Based Affirmative Action's Underlying Assumptions
it comes to assigning blame for racial injustice - racial inequality
- the brass ring goes to unhyphenated white males. At the pinnacle
of the underlying assumptions pyramid is this crowning jewel:
American colleges have too many white males. Ask any Ethnocrat
and they'll insist, with table pounding fervor, that the properly-hyphenated
are entitled - due to ongoing, white male oppression - to a spot
in America's top universities, regardless of their academic ability
and/or accomplishments. Blacks, in particular, should be given
access to higher Educrap because they endured relentless, white
male oppression for 300 years (slavery, Jim Crow, etc.). In order
to collect on this overdue bill, blacks require greater access
to higher Educrap, by any means necessary. This underlying assumption
can be summed up quite easily: white males need not apply.
Asians get tarred with the same brush that Ethnocrats use to 'black
out' Whitey. To the intellectual flat-liners driving the short
bus called 'Affirmative Action', Asians are a privileged minority
who do not qualify for Affirmative Action. For all practical intents
and purposes, Asians are white males in disguise and should be
treated accordingly. In reality, this Asian exclusion is based
on Asian students' great success in higher Educrap, a fact that
might explain why, to date, no Ethnocrat has come close to this
touchy subject. Even those race card warriors know that there
is no way, logically or historically, to tie Asians to slavery,
Jim Crow or centuries-long black oppression. Taking all this into
account, we must modify our underlying assumption to read: white
males need not apply and you Asians move to the back of the line.
produces the most pernicious assumptions. A diversity based on
immutable human traits reigns as the be-all, end-all, for an enhanced
learning environment. Skin-deep diversity exterminates individualism-based
notions perpetrated by white males...outdated notions that venerate
an individual's knowledge, experiences, talents, deficiencies,
beliefs and interests. Instead, race-based diversity proclaims
that all (fill -in-the-name of any minority group) are intellectually
and philosophically identical. That's why a diverse student population
is achieved in a 'one from column black, one from column brown'
manner that ignores everything except the desired immutable human
trait. This is a blatantly racist attitude. This makes as much
sense as claiming that all size twelve shoe wearers think alike,
but are vastly different from all size eleven's. This mindset
proclaims that all the important elements for each human are issued
at birth, and that nothing that individual has done since birth
contributed to who or what that individual is. In its minority-focused
advertising literature, one prominent Amerikan University comes
right out and spews this 'all blacks think alike' drivel, by including
the phrase "the expression of black ideas and goals". Black ideas?
Since when does skin pigmentation confer a specific set of ideas
on all those born with it. I seriously doubt that Maxine Waters
and Larry Elder have an identical set of 'black ideas'.
Tower based diversity dimwits, apparently, believe that academic
ability/achievement is not volitional; it is evenly distributed
across racial, ethnic and gender lines. Since academic aptitude
is, in a universe free from white male oppression, distributed
among the college applicants in exact, U.S. Census data proportions,
a properly diverse student body matches exactly, to as many decimal
points as you want to measure, the population at large. A student
population that deviates from census proportions proves, conclusively,
the college's institutional racism. If, for reasons known only
to them, a critical mass of melanin-enriched denizens of a given
state picked up their toys and left for another state, does that
require the same percentage of melanin-enriched students to quit
school? Enquiring minds want to know.
bleat that standard tests, grades and all other objective academic
criteria are intrinsically racist. They are, according to Ethnocrat
zealots, a plot perpetrated by those dastardly white males to
deny the properly-hyphenated their rightful place in Amerika's
colleges and universities. Although they cite the SAT and other
standardized tests as 'inherently racist', Ivory Tower based Educrats
- many of them lily white - infer that black and brown Americans
are, inherently, inferior so they require a relaxed entrance criteria.
Since they can't achieve academic excellence on their own merit,
these tragically-deficient minority applicants require 'special
consideration'. Undeterred by the fun fact that, to date, nobody
has found a shred of racial bias in the SAT...any standardized
test...the Ethnocrats continue to dumb down the college application
process, reducing it to what an objective observer must deem:
Ivory Tower perpetrated racial profiling.
Based Affirmative Action's Unpleasant Realities
from the very top of their Ivory Towers that a diverse student
body enriches the learning experience for all the students, minority
and 'majority' alike, college administrations do everything in
their power to encourage their minority students to 'self segregate'.
According to a September 2002 report by the New York Civil Rights
'...Through color-coding, today's institution of higher education
have done a disservice to both minority and majority students.
Segregated housing, course, and programs disseminate poisonous
stereotypes and falsehoods about race and ethnicity. They limit
interaction between minority and majority students and reward
separatist thinking. By discouraging whites and, sometimes,
Asians from minority-specific programs, they deny equal interaction
on campus. Although they claim to have minorities' interest
at heart, these colleges in fact take the civil rights movement
giant steps backward.' ("The Stigma of Inclusion: Racial
Paternalism/Separatism In Higher Education" NYCRC September
Tower self-segregation is widespread, entrenched on virtually
all Amerikan campuses. The most common forms include:
Separate freshmen orientation for each minority group;
graduation for each minority group;
Separate, racially-exclusive housing, cultural centers,
fraternities, sororities and student groups for each minority
Certain minority group-specific courses, overtly exclude anyone
from a different group. Students are even assigned 'color-coordinated'
adult and student advisors, matching up a black student with a
black upperclassman and a black faculty advisor. Try any of this
crap for Whitey and you could hear their screaming on Jupiter.
that the law of unintended consequences even works on campus,
the big winner in the Affirmative Action sweepstakes turns out
to be females - especially white females. According to U.S. Department
of Education data, male college enrollment plunged to 40% nationwide,
and it will continue to fall for the foreseeable future. That's
why MBA programs, law schools and medical schools are predominantly
female. These educationally deprived NO-NAD's receive 151 college
diplomas for every 100 dudes. White males are 37% of the population
and 32% of Amerikan college students, making them slightly 'underrepresented'
on Amerikan campuses, not that anyone gives a flaming rip. Whoever
said 'It's a man's world' hasn't visited his local college campus
most telling result stemming from all this well-intentioned Ivory
Tower imposed racial profiling is a sad fact that nobody wants
to discuss. Minority students who - despite less than stellar
test scores - were 'fast tracked' into top universities drop out
in alarming numbers, because they can't cope with the demanding
course material. This is an avoidable tragedy, especially when
it happens in a crushing academic environment like Berkeley, Stanford
or any other top school. That same minority student might thrive
at a school better matched to his/her academic standing. A degree
from Berkeley or Stanford isn't, invariably, the fast track to
success any more than a similar degree from a mainstream college
dooms you to obscurity. If you've got what it takes, you'll succeed,
no matter which Ivory Tower's name appears on your diploma.
one final unpleasant reality lurking out there, in the not so
distant future. Some predict that Affirmative Action will lead
to an unbridgeable racial chasm. Perhaps, but nobody can say that
with any meaningful degree of certainty. On the other hand, based
on prevailing enrollment trends, a white male child born in 2003
will be denied access to a college education, when he graduates
from high school. By the time this white male comes of age, colleges
will be well over 80% female, with the remainder made up from
what Uncle Sam calls 'recognized minorities'. Despite this, the
specter of the 'great white bigot' will continue haunt the properly-hyphenated
whiners, because there's no such thing as enough payback when
it comes to perceived oppression.
come a long way from Dr. King's bold vision of colorblind racial
justice, a vision in which one is judged by the content of his
character, not the color of his skin. We've come a long way, in
the wrong direction. Dr. King's 20th century 'dream' has become
our 21st century nightmare.