Racial discrimination

At the risk of raising the ire of some, I am compelled to comment upon the punditry  regarding today's Supreme Court ruling on  Fisher v. University of Texas, plus the Court's 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger that held that undefined educational “diversity” is a compelling interest that justifies racial discrimination, provided the discriminatory program is “narrowly tailored.”

Two main comments.

Number 1:  Using state sponsored and endorsed racism, under the guise of "affirmative action," is simply wrong.  In a rush to feel good about itself, Congress attempted to correct problems, but in the wrong way.  Racism, whether to deny access or equality of any type, or to provide preference to any minority group, cannot be allowed to stand.  Because if it is, then as our nation's demographics shift in the not too distant future to the point where Caucasians are the minority, then they should be able to demand preferential treatment.  Preferential treatment based upon one's race or ethnicity is state sponsored racism.  State sponsored racism against or for any racial or ethnic group is just as wrong today as it was in 1850, 1890, 1920, 1960, or 1965.

Number 2:  Using the word "diversity" in any context associated with public institutions of higher education is patently absurd.  While academic liberals and progressives mouth commitment to diversity, they fail to define it.  In practice, "diversity" is code for providing preference to minorities and liberals, while acting in a prejudicial manner against Caucasians and conservatives.  The much mentioned academic freedom and pursuit of free speech on university campuses exists only for those from the minority and liberal/progressive communities.  Speech and other activities from conservative, Christian, male, straight, and the "right" side of the political spectrum are not only discouraged, they are actually punished.  Moreover, freedoms for those in these groups, which are actually the numerical minorities on most pubic campuses, are denied and repudiated in the name of the pursuit of the undefined goal of diversity.

In sum, our public universities are exactly what Martin Luther King, Jr. railed against in his "I have a dream" speech, because on these campuses, students, faculty, and staff are most certainly "judged by the color of their skin," not "by the content of their character."  To believe otherwise is to ignore reality, as did the Supreme Court.