My lifetime has seen the last vestiges of institutional racism banished. Individual racism can never be eradicated but we have progressed to where it is impossible for a public entity to discriminate based on race, right?
Admissions data recently obtained from the University of Michigan show that race and ethnicity play a huge role in determining who gets in.
In last year's entering class, a Michigan native with neither parent a U-M alum, a cumulative SAT of 1240 and a 3.2 high school grade-point average had a 9-out-of-10 chance to be admitted as an undergraduate to the University of Michigan -- if the applicant was black or Hispanic.
For whites or Asians, the chances were 1-in-10.
Wrongo! It is actually commonplace, but the discrimination is against whites and Asians in favor of blacks and Hispanics. This is OK since white people are evil, but that doesn't explain why Asians are getting the shaft too. Is their melanin somehow less worthy or could some other element be in play?
The bag of excuses available to the racial victimologists on the left is pretty empty and fortunately the baby-boomer activists who did good work to level the playing field are ready for a pasture field themselves. You won people! Accept it and MoveOn. We no longer hate groups of people as a rule, but please stop meddling with our social fabric.
Universities discriminate because a merit-based entrance system would not match the rainbow diversity required by the left. Once you accept that as fact, there are two paths you can take. One is the current system of using racial preferences to elevate chosen victim groups until the rainbow is duplicated, the second is the much tougher choice to admit that racism is not the reason there are too few qualified black and Hispanic applicants, poverty and single parent households are.
The left enjoys the current system as it allows them to mother the victims who need their assistance to overcome the racism inherent in the patriarchal, pale preeminence. It fulfills their belief that unequal outcomes are caused by unfair systems or rules. So they feel justified in elevating those underperforming above the level they achieved and fail to notice that they really haven't done them much of a favor.
a liberal UCLA law professor, Richard Sander, has concluded that -- because mismatching students and law schools results in more classroom failures, dropouts and bar-exam failures -- there are actually fewer African-American lawyers today than there would have been without racial preferences in law-school admissions.
I wrote about Professor Sander's study here.
Affirmative Action is one of the few forms of institutionalized racism still tolerated in this country; its praises are shouted from citadels of academia and enshrined as gospel in corporate America. The problem is that it doesn't work. Artificially elevating people to a competitive pool they are unequipped for, leads to their getting eaten by the bigger fish or starving. I have known this intuitively, from personal experience and anecdotally for years, but now a law professor from UCLA named Rick Sanders has published a peer-reviewed study in Stanford Legal Review with a huge data set showing the inefficacy of racial preferences in admission to law schools.
Before you start huffing and puffing about a right wing hatchet job this gentleman is of left, liberal persuasion and has done work about racial disparities in the economics of housing. He was more or less surprised by his results, he really just set out to see if preferences work, and his data show they sure don't
So in failing to deal with the "root causes" of poverty and single parenthood, the left cheers itself for standing up for the downtrodden, when they are standing in the way of any actual progress. But the nice thing about diversity is that since it is simply a feelgood emotional salve for liberal guilt it needn't accomplish anything substantive. When the Supreme Court ruled a year or two back on the two U of Michican race discrimination cases, they said that race could be used as one of many criteria for admission. but not the sole determining one. Well it was the main factor then, and is far and away the determinative factor now. Let's see what the Roberts court has to say about the legality of institutional racism.