“These universities are completely addicted to racial preferences”
My appearance on the Tony Katz show about how higher ed will try to evade the recent SCOTUS Affirmative Action ruling: “It is part of their core philosophy on life. It is part of their core being. It’s why diversity, equity, and inclusion has become a religion on campuses. They are not going to give this up.”
I appeared on the Tony Katz Show this morning to talk aboout the Supreme Court’s affirmative action decision.
It’s hard to believe the decision came down just last Thursday, it seems so long ago.
We touched on a lot of aspects of the decision, including the history of affirmative action and how it has changed over time from a remedial program in the 1970s meant to address then-recent segregation and denial of educational opportunities, to what now is a social agenda (and I should have mentioned, also a massive grift).
Ever since the decision I’ve been hammering the point that colleges and universities are not just gonig to give up racial preferences. From the moment of the decision much of higher ed, particularly Harvard, smugly suggested they will find a way around it.
Here’s the portion of the segment when I addressed the planned evasion:
(09:39): Anybody who thinks that affirmative [is going away], you see a lot of headlines – ‘Supreme Court ends affirmative action’ ‘ Affirmative action is dead’ etcetera – us kidding themselves. These universities are completely addicted to racial preferences. It is part of their core philosophy on life. It is part of their core being. It’s why diversity, equity, and inclusion has become a religion on campuses. They are not going to give this up.
Harvard, immediately after the decision, sent out a statement that indicates how they’re going do it. So the court drew a distinction. You cannot consider the race of an individual in admissions, but you can consider that person’s personal experiences with racism. And that was something that all the parties had said. You cannot stereotype students. You cannot say all black students get treated the same. All white students get treated the same. But you can, if somebody personally has overcome racism in their lives, you can consider that.
And that is the loophole through which Harvard and other universities are going try to drive a truck. Harvard was very smug about it. They quoted that sentence from the Supreme Court and then they say, of course we will comply with the court’s ruling, meaning that’s how they’re going do it. Of course, they didn’t quote the next sentence in the opinion, which says, these essays and these personal experiences can’t be used as a device to evade our ruling. But that’s exactly what they’re going do.
Anybody who thinks racial preferences are over is kidding themselves. The schools will do a workaround almost universally.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
It’s all about the marxism:
Race, Class, Gender has been the calling card of neo-marxism for decades, now. I first ran into these lunatics in school back in the early 90s. I didn’t think anyone was stupid enough to be a marxist anymore but, boy was I surprised. The social “sciences” (LOL) were all marxists. I was stunned. Truly. And they actually took it seriously. To them, everything in the world came down to … “Race … Class … Gender”.
The funny part is that their monster has gotten a little out of hand with all the power they found themselves holding and they have detonated the “Gender” part, but they have merely replaced it with “Gender Identity” – though it doesn’t really roll off the tongue.
Universities are suffering fatal infections of marxism (maoist seems to be the top strain, these days, since Barky). Marxists are the lowest of the low. They are the worst sorts of people you can find. ANd we have TONS of them. Too many for this society to be long for this world.
“I didn’t think anyone was stupid enough to be a marxist anymore”
When you’re too lazy and incompetent to earn survival wages, a social order where the competent and industrious have to give you free shit looks pretty attractive.
It is our collective fault. We allowed Communists take over our colleges and noir schools
Not too many to implement the Pinochet Solution. Just a determiantion to rid our society of these vermin once and for all.
It’s past time to make discrimination on the basis of race illegal and a felony with punishment of 10 years in prison. This should kill all affirmative action programs.
Blacks always had to deal with the side effects of AA, and the smart ones knew it. Black achievers always had a question mark next to their name, because AA is the effective opposite of merit based selection.
These universities are pulling the rug out from under their reputations and the worth of their degree programs by falling for this blatant racist quota system.
That is intentional. AA supporters do not want Blacks competing successfully with everyone else. They so fetishise the use of victim culture that they forbid their victim pets from trying like a grown up.
Looking at Harvard stats, one out of every 16 AA admits is actually qualified. They are destroying their reputation. Their degrees will not be worth the paper they print them on.
Only successful torts will stop them.
Erronius
They have become Marxist Seminaries and are not going to change.
Affirmative action always has been and always will be a joke. The kind that has no punch line but always prompts laughter.
I feel sorry for the ones who actually are qualified and motivated. Judging from the above conversation with Dimsdale, I suspect both he and JohnSmith100 have the same view point.
.
Leftism is their religion and their ‘Sharia’ is race, abortion and climate. Class war, gender war and culture war make up their ‘jihad’.
We can see the same smug sort of condescension in the Biden WH reaction here and more so with the student debt decision. They will keep trying to figure out a way to advance their policy preferences in spite of the rulings. The AA ruling closes the front door, an important first step. The backdoor and windows are less secure.
IMO, the bigger impact of the ruling is shifting to an explicit stance that race can’t be the determining factor in isolation nor can it be used as a proxy for overcoming obstacles. This moves us away from the prior stance that AA was questionable but necessary. This shift will have broader implications for hiring, retention and selection decisions outside academia.
This is also a huge problem in the corporate world. Once these pampered ones are graduated, there is a mad rush among blue chip companies to hire them. While most of them are of average intelligence or a little higher, it is not enough to cut it. So they are walled off and put through special programs where they are exposed to different positions in the company as special assistants and then quickly and showily accelerated into rather high managerial positions with a staff assigned to do their work. Everyone is exceedingly polite to them and praises their amazing work, while privately seething in an atmosphere of low morale and fear.
I think any university should be able to discriminate against any applicant(s) they wish, for any reason they wish, at the low, low cost of losing all municipal, state, and federal funding.
That ;law school dean from Berkley said it all-we will continue to admit based on quotas-we just won’t leave behind a paper trail which creates a written record and smoking gun in discovery while claiming obediance to the law
People are policy and AA will be eliminated when people are eliminated one way or another.
We also need affirmative action in other areas banned, When companies bid on government contracts why do “minority-owned” companies get a 5% head start? The state loses millions because they give contracts to companies that are not the low bidder. Many companies hire a minority as “CEO” figureheads just for that 5% boost. Cha-ching.
This was demonstrated well by the fanaticism with which Oberlin defended its own stupidity and wrecked, perhaps beyond repair, its relationship with the community which hosts its campus. Even after so much legal action going back and forth, and you have to think that no matter how much the bakery spent on legal bills—Oberliin and its insurance/bond carriers spent easily twice that much (likely in the mistaken belief they could just get the “yokels” to exhaust themselves and go bankrupt) and the College lost in the end.
This is exactly the same underlying principle—leftists are deluded into martyrdom for a cause that none of them really believe in, but they are too dishonest to admit they are stuck in terminal stupidity mode and have to continue fighting on against what will inevitably be a torrent of lawsuits against these institutions stuck in the quagmire of that stupidity. State and public institutions can be constrained by action of their state legislatures—but private institutions? I look for them to start disappearing or living off their endowments until their bitter ends.
Here is the president of my own alma mater, quoted in the WaPo after the SCOTUS decision:
Elizabeth H. Bradley, president of Vassar College in New York, said she thinks colleges like hers will figure out how to maintain an inclusive environment. “It’s just so core to who we are,” Bradley said. “We will find a legal way in which that can be accomplished.”
So, “core to who we are” ? Never mind that it wasn’t in my day on campus, or the earlier 2/3 of Vassar’s illustrious history, from its founding in 1861 through the late 1960s. But her statement does sound like a religion, even particularly the term “core”. Doesn’t get any clearer than this, does it?
If only the Klan had thought of saying that “cross-burning is just so core to who we are”
I seen an analysis that says this ruling really only affects a small population of “elite schools” as this is mostly a non-factor in the majority of colleges and universities.
Your statement is probably correct, that the SCOTUS decision affects only a small number of “elite” institutions, and an even smaller proportion of total college students. However, those are the influential institutions that everyone wants to attend because they appear to offer a pathway to the “good life” and high income, so admission is almost considered a form of reparations..
Many institutions, especially local community colleges, offer open admission to just about anyone. These schools should not be affected by the decision.
What would really be useful would be a 5- or 10- or 20-year survey study
comparing outcomes for high schoolers
controlled for things like race, SAT scores, family circumstances, and so on.
And just look at how things stand for these kids at age 21 and 26 and 36 etc
Does the Cooke he name really matter? in terms of measurable outcomes?
Wouldn’t it be nice to have candid remarks from those who are helped by AA vs those who are harmed. Collected systematically and confidentially
Anybody familiar with Michael Apted’s “Seven Up” documentary?
Something along those lines
Everybody’s got opinions, but would it not be nice to also have systematically collected data?
Just a thought
College name
Professor Jacobson has precisely stated the problem. Evasion. It is a systemic problem with court decisions. The court hands down an opinion in a significant case. The litigant who loses doesn’t like it. The litigant devises a new policy, slightly different than the old one and dares its opponents to start all over again to litigate in the court system. Thus was “diversity” used as a label. Now it will be “life experience with racism”. The life experience of Asian students will continue to be considered less important than that of Black students. SCOTUS needs to come up with a new way to enforce its decisions, something like “continuing jurisdiction’ to instruct the lower courts when clarification of its decisions may be needed without having to invoke the whole years consuming process of starting anew in the courts.
“Universities Addicted to Racial Preferences”
Yes, but not as nearly much as Hunter Biden is to crack cocaine.
You say, “How many hours can he go between fixes?”
Wrong question—not measured in hours. Try minutes.
“Can he make it through the West Wing without snorting?”
You could ask the Secret Service, but they won’t say because it’s a secret.
Oh, it all makes sense when you realize what this higher-ed game is about.
Admissions’ job is to dole out limited largess they don’t create. These days, so are “college” and “the education system.” “College” n etc. being out of reach without “assistance’ from the dispensers is a feature, not a bug. It isn’t about providing that leg up, but who gets it; rather who gets kept down by not getting it. Can’t have just anybody getting the Good RightThinking seal of approval, so they can join the nomenklatura.
Besides, there’s cushy office jobs on the line. If there’s no picking and choosing in ways only the anointed can grok, what use are they? Plus, the graft, of course.
I’m waiting for some institution to ditch the quotas and declare they’re gonna preference admisssions based on “impact of discrimination”, which only they can discern or calibrate. Maybe so, BUT, I kinda like people to show me their Spidey-Sense works, and responding to it does some kind of good I can see.
The seasoned nerds round here have probably also had the experience of “That Spidey-Sense Guy.”{ You know, the guy who comes up with the problem, or solution, or knows what happened, or what’s gonna happen, and nobody can tell how. BUT, when he senses it, he’s always right.
If college admissions can demonstrate that they’re The Spidey-Sense Guy about who gets a shot, great. Of course, we’d have to decide what counts as good results from admitting someone to a selective college, and who wants to do that?