Image 01 Image 03

College Republicans Hold Affirmative Action Bake Sale in Response to New Law

College Republicans Hold Affirmative Action Bake Sale in Response to New Law

“generated controversy and even a rebuke from the school’s president”

This is an effective form of protest because it offends progressives with a policy they support.

The College Fix reports:

‘One of our best events’: College Republicans hold affirmative action bake sale in response to new law

College Republicans at the University of Washington held an “affirmative action bake sale” last week, voicing their opposition to a new law that allows affirmative action policies at public universities in the state. The bake sale generated controversy and even a rebuke from the school’s president.

The Washington state legislature last week reversed a decades-old anti-discrimination law, revoking a ban on affirmative action and once more permitting schools to factor race and sex into their admission policies.

Initiative 1000 overturns a 1998 law, Initiative 200, which prohibited “government entities from discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin.” The text of the now defunct I-200 legislation clarifies that public universities and colleges were included under these regulations.

Affirmative action is the process by which officials consider factors like skin color and sex when making admission and hiring decisions. Initiative 200 insisted on blind admissions policies for public entities; now, under the new rule, schools may admit individual students in part because of the color of their skin…

The Stranger reported that the Republicans priced the baked goods according to an ethnic hierarchy of sorts. Native Americans, for instance, were charged nothing for cookies; all women, meanwhile, got 25 percent off. Asians had to pay $1.50 for their snack, the highest of the prices.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


One of the stated goals of this initiative is that race, sex, etc. can be the deciding factor in hiring, so long as the minority person meets the minimum qualifications for the job.

So let’s say you’re hiring a Dean at the UW, and the requirements are a Doctorate and some administrative experience. You could legally hire a minority with a Ed.D. from Podunk College with experience as the diversity coordinator of Pigsknuckle Junior College, over a white male with a MD/PhD from the University of Chicago who was Dean of the medical school and PI for a dozen major NIH grants.

The other perverse result of this initiative is to reinforce the suspicion that minority faculty and administrators are products of affirmative action, and are not as good as the others. Since affirmative action involves hiring less-qualified applicants, this process hurts the reputations of those who were hired on their qualifications rather than their race.

These days, it’s all about sowing division, so the voting blocks are influencable. Adding suspicion to then mix just makes it work that much better. Same with micro-aggressions, and reparations.